by Deepak Divan,
Rohit Moghe, and
Electronics
©istock photo.com/jgroup
at the Grid Edge
The key to unlocking value from the smart grid
U
tilities implementing diverse grid modernization
initiatives are observing greater volatility at the
grid edge that cannot be managed using tradition-
al electromechanically switched centralized com-
mand and control solutions. The decentralized,
distributed, and dynamic capabilities required can only be
achieved with semiconductor-based power electronics solu-
tions that are deployed appropriately along the grid edge. The
key control objective is the fast and granular control of volts
and vars at hundreds of points along the feeder, a functional-
ity typically associated with static synchronous compensators
(STATCOMs) and unified power flow controllers (UPFCs), al-
beit in a distributed manner and at lower voltage levels. Sev-
eral companies are now offering grid-edge power-electronics
solutions to solve this new set of challenges, with substantial
data from the field validating the benefits that such solutions
can provide. This article discusses the challenges, solutions,
and some of the results that point to the benefits that power
electronics at the grid edge can provide for utilities.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MPEL.2014.2360811
Date of publication: 18 December 2014
16 IEEE Power Electronics Magazine z December 2014
Anish Prasai
Power
Power Electronics on the Distribution Grid
Power electronics, in the form of high-voltage dc systems
and, more recently, flexible ac transmission system
devices, have played a visible and key role in power-grid
control for over 60 years, mainly on the transmission side
for the management of bulk power flows [1], [2]. The use
of power electronics on the distribution grid has been
much more limited. In the area of generation, wind and
solar energies have seen explosive growth, with inverters
providing the controlled interface to the grid. However,
these inverters are typically not utility-owned-and-oper-
ated resources, but they have a primary function of deliv-
ering energy/power to the grid. In recent years, as the pen-
etration of renewable resources has grown, key require-
ments have emerged for grid support, such as detection
and disconnection during islanding, low-voltage ride-
through, and dynamic voltage support [3], [4]. However,
distributed photovoltaic (PV) inverters today still cannot
be effectively used for dynamic voltage support [3].
There is an emerging need for dynamically controllable
utility-owned assets to help meet the new challenges that
utilities are facing as a result of grid modernization initiatives
2329-9207/14©2014IEEE
such as energy conservation, peak demand management, grid rents while delivering voltage within a specified band [the
integration of distributed PV, and improved service reliability American National Standards Institute (ANSI) specifies
and quality. +/-5%] to many consumers. As loads vary, the voltage
A review of the literature shows several common drops across the line, and transformer reactance and
themes, including solid-state transformers (SSTs), en- resistance also change, causing voltages along the net-
ergy-storage devices, and distribution STATCOMs and work to vary in turn, as shown in Figure 1.
UPFCs,  with many of these targeted at distribution volt- Grid operations require a continuous balance of genera-
age levels of 4–24 kV [5]–[9]. The SST based on the dual- tion–load as well as controlled injection of vars to maintain
active bridge converter is the most voltage levels all along the network
widely discussed and is being investi- and at the thousands of served loads.
gated  as a replacement for the 60-Hz Several companies are This has to be done with a few control
distribution transformer—a device levers—the only analog control in the
that costs US$25/kVA (US$1,250 for now offering grid-edge system is the generator excitation and
50 kVA at 13 kV/240 V), has 1% losses, power-electronics governor control, which, in turn, con-
and lasts for 40 years in ambient tem- trols vars and watts. In recent years,
peratures from -40 cC to +55 cC with-
solutions to solve this electromechanical controls with load
out any service or maintenance in the new set of challenges. tap changers (LTCs), line voltage regu-
field. In addition, it can handle a 100- lators (LVRs), and switched capacitor
kV basic impulse insulation level (BIL) banks have augmented the control ca-
and manage 4,000  A (240-V  base) of pability to support grid operations. It
fault current to coordinate with downstream protection. is a testament to power systems engineers that such a com-
Rather than starting from the available power-con- plex system with extremely limited controls has worked as
version technology approaches and forcing them to fit well as it has, but it is now beginning to fray at the edges.
into a perceived application, it is perhaps more useful to Utilities currently face a number of new initiatives
understand the requirements from the grid level and then that are changing the way they view and operate their
to develop a solution concept. This article looks at the networks. Advanced metering infrastructure (AMI), at
behavior of the grid at the grid edge, identifying that it the heart of many modernization initiatives, automates
represents a major constraint for key grid modernization billing and provides a lever to effect time-of-use rates and
objectives, and shows how power electronics can provide load-demand management as well as data to help with di-
a critical piece of the overall solution. verse applications, including energy conservation, reduc-
tion of nontechnical losses, and outage management. It
Issues on the Grid Edge also provides an unprecedented visibility to the edge of
Grid design principles were established over 100 years the network. The rapid growth of renewable resources,
ago. Volt and var control are the basic tools used by plan- particularly distributed solar, changes the paradigm of
ning engineers to design distribution feeders that operate unidirectional power flow on distribution feeders and
over a specified range of source voltages and load cur- introduces rapid variability linked to cloud cover. The

Substation Line Drop

Transformer
Power Flow

Line Drop
Leakage Drop Leakage Drop
VSub

z XLILcosz Vs1 Vs2

XLILsinz
VLoad
IL Time-Varying Time-Varying
Service Service
Simplified Phasor Loads Loads
Transformer Transformer
Representation

fig 1 A typical feeder with time-varying loads with changing power factor (PF), load level indicated by current I L, and voltage drop
along lines and distribution transformer impedance.

December 2014 z IEEE Power Electronics Magazine 17

need for higher reliability is driving fault-location iden-
tification and system restoration, allowing autonomous
decisions on changing the network topology following a
fault, thereby putting volt–var control assets in nonopti-
mal locations. Overall, this has created a very complex
operating environment, triggering massive investments
in integrated volt–var control, where network topology,
predicted load and sunshine, and grid assets, along with
their operating constraints, are all integrated into a mas-
sive optimization program, providing actionable com-
mands to LTCs and capacitor banks. This has still been
treated as a centralized command and control problem
where AMI or other data drive complex nonlinear opti-
mization computation, resulting in commands to switch
assets to achieve an overall cost function.
It is interesting to note that almost without exception,
this has been treated as a primary-side problem. How-
ever, the real goal is to manage the secondary-side volt-
age for thousands of customers to be within ANSI limits.
The AMI data are revealing an unexpected surprise. The
voltage drop DV across distribution transformers, always
assumed to be minimal, is unexpectedly high (2–13 V on
a 240-V base—more than half the ANSI band), mainly
245
13 V 2V
240
Volts
235
230
5 10 15 20 25 30
Nodes
(a)
245
10 V 6V
240
Volts
235
230
5 10 15 20 25 30
Nodes
(b)
fig 2 (a) The minimum voltage occurs at node 13 at 10 p.m.
(b) The minimum voltage occurs at node 29 at 11 p.m. The
green line shows an estimate of the primary-side voltage, and
the dark blue line shows the measured secondary-voltage pro-
file along an actual feeder with 33 nodes.
18 IEEE Power Electronics Magazine z December 2014
because of the drop across the transformer leakage reac-
tance. Further, this voltage varies continuously and rapidly
with load current ^ I Lh and power factor (PF), as per the
equation below, and is not aligned with the average loading
or PF measured at the feeder:
DV . I L X L 1 - PF 2 + I L R L PF,
where DV = line and leakage drops, I L = line and load cur-
rent, X L = line and leakage inductance, PF = power factor,
and R L = line and transformer resistance. For real trans-
formers, as the PF decreases below 0.98–0.99, the voltage
drop across X L becomes dominant. For a 25-kVA trans-
former at 1-pu loading and PF = 0.8, the voltage drop
across the transformer is >10 V. Figure 2(a) and (b) show
the real measured secondary-side voltage data for a typical
feeder at 10 p.m. and again at 11 p.m., showing that the low-
est-voltage node is not at the end of the feeder and that it
moves continuously with local load. Further, it can be seen
that the drop across the distribution transformer keeps
changing over time and has a large range of 2–13 V, depend-
ing on transformer loading and instantaneous power factor.
Figure 3(a) shows the actual measured voltage profile
along a feeder over an 8-h period, when the substation volt-
age is set at 1.035 pu, a normal practice that allows utilities
to keep low-voltage points within the ANSI band. The node
voltages are generally within-band, only infrequently going
below the ANSI band. Figure 3(b) shows the same feeder
on a similar day, where the substation voltage is reduced
by 3% for energy conservation. More than 50% of the mea-
sured nodes now see persistent low voltages, well below
the ANSI band.
The data show high variability and completely uncor-
related behavior from node to node. If centralized com-
mand and control were to be used for ANSI compliance,
the substation voltage would have to be raised to a1.04
pu, completely defeating the energy-conservation objec-
tive and raising the possibility of overvoltage for a lightly
loaded feeder with high PV penetration. This is a highly
distributed problem that centralized command and
control based on electromechanical controls with slow
response time and limited actuation life cannot fully
solve. What is needed is an additional layer of control
at the grid edge that acts in a distributed, decentralized
manner to decouple local secondary-side voltage issues,
allowing the overall centralized command and control
assets to achieve the targeted system-level objectives, as
shown in Figure 4.
Grid-Edge Control Using Power Electronics
A near-term need for utilities is a cost-effective distributed
voltage control at the grid edge. The dynamics of subcycle
voltage volatility and continuously varying correction sug-
gest that an electromechanical solution may not work and
a power electronics solution is needed. Distribution trans-
formers in North America are rated 15–100 kVA for
 Substation Voltage on 240-V Base
Secondary Voltage at 24 Locations
LTC Tap at 1.035 pu ANSI Low Limit LTC Tap at 1.0 pu

250 250
245 245
240 240
Voltage

Voltage
235 235
230 230
225 225
220 220
215 215
.

.
m

m
p.

a.

a.

a.

a.

a.

a.

a.

p.

a.

a.

a.

a.

a.

a.

a.
00

00
00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

00
:

:
:

1:

2:

3:

4:

5:

6:

1:

2:

3:

4:

5:

6:
11

11
12

12
Time of Day Time of Day
(a) (b)

fig 3 (a) With the LTC tap at 1.035 pu, infrequent ANSI violations are observed. (b) With the LTC tap taken down to 1.0 pu, more
than half of the 24 monitored locations have a persistent low-voltage issue.

single-phase loads and could

be rated higher for three- Primary Distribution Network
phase loads, giving an idea of — LTC, Capacitor Bank, LVR, End of Line
Sensor, etc. V
the rating for the power con-
verter needed. However,
these transformers can oper- Supervisory
ate at 150% loading for ex- Control and
Data
tended periods of time and Acquisition Service Transformer
will source thousands of am-
peres of fault current for
downstream faults, which the
converters will need to man-
Grid-Edge
age. The transformers isolate Controllers Secondary-Side Assets
Meter Provide Control at the Grid
the converter from the 100-kV Head End Edge
BIL rating, but normal light-
ning-strike protection is still
Rooftop Solar PV
required. To ensure reliability,
the converter must operate in
fig 4 A distribution feeder single-line schematic showing where distributed grid-edge control-
a fail–normal mode, ensuring lers could be used.
that service to the load is not
interrupted in case of a con-
verter failure. Outdoor installation near the transformer
Dual-Active
also suggests that the unit must be able to operate over an Bridge
ambient temperature range of -40 cC to +55 cC with no
planned service or maintenance over the life of the convert-
er. This suggests the use of passive thermal management
and poses severe challenges for the size, weight, and cost MVAC MVDC LVDC LVAC
of the required power converters. The installation and com-
fig 5 An example of a single- or three-phase SST with a rectifi-
missioning should be achieved without service interruption er stage, followed by a high-frequency galvanically isolated dc–
for the customers. Furthermore, diagnostics and communi- dc step-down or step-up conversion stage, typically realized
cations are critical to manage a fleet of distributed assets. with a dual-active bridge, and an inverter stage.

December 2014 z IEEE Power Electronics Magazine 19

 Vs Vs

Shunt
Shunt Series Converter
Converter Converter Load Load
(a) (b)

fig 6 A typical diagram of low-voltage (a) series and (b) shunt devices used for voltage regulation.

ENGO-V

Smart Smart Smart

f

Smart Switch Command

Input Switch Switch Switch

and Health Status

Power
Terminal

Setpoint Input Controller

Historical Data
Output ENGO-V10
Communication Module

(a) (b)

fig 7 (a) The internal architecture of the ENGO-V10 device. (b) The distributed shunt var injection device realized with an ENGO-V10
device capable of injecting up to 10 kvar of vars on a single-phase basis at 240 V. (Image courtesy of Varentec.) ENGO-V10 is install-
able on a pole-top next to the service transformer.

In addition, this must all be compatible with specific utility

With ENGOs processes and must happen at a price point that provides
LTC Tap at 1.0 pu an attractive return on investment for the utility.
Many in the research community have proposed the
250 use of SSTs that can provide the ultimate level of grid-
245 edge control. Figure 5 shows a block schematic of an
exemplary galvanically isolated SST system for a sin-
240
gle-phase 12-kV–120/120-V application.
Voltage

235 Even without the cost constraint of US$25/kVA, the

230 aforementioned SST specifications are extremely chal-
lenging. The wide-bandgap high-voltage semiconductor
225
devices necessary for the front-end converter are begin-
220 ning to be commercially available but are still too expen-
215 sive, except in certain niche applications. Meeting the
.

00 .

.
m

thermal-management, fault-current, and no-field-service

p.

a.

a.

a.

a.

a.

a.

a.

a.
0

00

00

00

00

00

00

objectives is very challenging using the current design

:0

:0

1:

2:

3:

4:

5:

6:

7:
11

12

Time of Day approaches. As a result, even though the concept of the

SST continues to be very appealing and is the focus of
Substation Voltage on 240-V Base much research, its translation into real products has not
Secondary Voltage at 24 Locations yet occurred [10]. Finally, the need to conform to the
ANSI Low Limit 100-kV BIL requirement dramatically impacts the size
and cost of low-power converters (under current technol-
fig 8 The impact of a fleet of 24 ENGO devices on a single
ogy) to impractical levels.
phase of a feeder with a voltage set point of 240 V and LTC tap At the system level, distributed control poses a unique set
set at 1 pu. of challenges. Most power converters are designed with the

20 IEEE Power Electronics Magazine z December 2014

goal of delivering conditioned power
to the end user. In this case, the cus-
tomer is the utility, and the objective LTC Tap at 1.0 pu
is not only to improve the voltage at a ENGOs OFF 250
specific end point but also to improve
the voltage profile across the entire 245
245
feeder. Conventional wisdom suggests
that series power electronics solutions 240
that can inject or absorb voltage [Fig- 240
ure 6(a)] are the best solutions to fix the 235
end-use voltage problems [2], [11]. How- 235
ever, series solutions make the voltage 230
profile worse for the rest of the feeder,
230
as they draw additional power in the 225
shunt to achieve instantaneous power
balance, impacting all other customers 225
220
negatively. Power losses of 2–4% of the 7
5:0 6:00 :00
3 4:
5
load kilovoltamperes appear as addi- 1:0 2:00 :00 00 a 0 a. a.m a.m 220
10
1 1 2
1:0 :00 0 a a. a .m m. . .

15
Nodes .
0 p a. .m. m. m. .

20
tional technical losses for the utility .m m. y
and must be factored into the total cost . of Da
Time
of ownership. (a)
A better solution may be to use
secondary-side shunt var injection, as
LTC Tap at 1.0 pu
shown in Figure 6(b), to improve the
voltage profile both locally and across ENGOs ON
the entire feeder. Again, conventional
245 245
wisdom suggests that a high level of
reactive vars (as high as 100 kvar/V/
240
phase) may be needed to raise the 240
feeder voltage even modestly. However,
235
secondary-side shunt vars act locally
235
to offset the voltage drop across trans-
230
formers that are seeing high loading
levels or poor power factor. Analysis 230
225 DV = 7 V
and field data validate that significantly
lower control effort (2–3 kvar/V) may be 225
220
sufficient to correct sagging voltages at
a specific low-voltage node. Shunt vars 6:0 7:00
5

4 5:
2:0 3:00 :00 00 a 0 a.m a.m
10

also flow onto the primary side and 1 : 220

11: 12:0 00 0 a a.m a.m .m. .
15

Nodes .
20

manage to improve the overall voltage
profile for the entire feeder. A challenge,
of course, is to prevent a large number of
such shunt connected units from fight-
ing each other. fig 9 The impact of fleet of ENGO-V10 devices on the voltage profile of a real utility
Figure 7 shows an example of an feeder when (a) these devices are turned off and (b) when they are turned on over
LVR built around a distributed shunt two similarly loaded days.
var-injection device: the ENGO-V10
from Varentec. The ENGO-V10 unit is built using capacitors
controlled with smart switches for injecting varying levels
of reactive power in the grid. The ENGO-V10 device takes
a voltage set point as an input and dynamically injects the
right amount of reactive power to achieve voltage regula-
tion. The device is rated at 0–10 kvar (single phase) and is
directly connected at the grid edge on the secondary side
of distribution transformers [12], [13]. Featuring subcycle
response, the unit corrects 2–13 V at an individual node,
00 0 a a.m .m . .
p.m .m . .
. y
. of Da
Time
(b)
features low loss (35  W) and low weight (35 lb), and is
designed with a long life (15 years).
A swarm of these devices can be operated with a simple
broadcast of a voltage set point, requiring no peer-to-peer
communication to achieve multiple control objectives at
the feeder level. Figure 8 shows the same feeder as Figure 3
on a similar loading day with a substation voltage reduced
by 3% for energy conservation but with ENGO-V10 units
operating to maintain the feeder voltage at 240 V.

December 2014 z IEEE Power Electronics Magazine 21

 The voltage profile at each node is dramatically
improved, with all the ANSI violations eliminated. In fact,
an additional 7-V margin has been created that allows
an unprecedented level of control for the feeder voltage,
enabling high value in diverse applications.
The typical deployment of such distributed shunt var
units ranges from 20 to 100 units per feeder, providing sur-
gical correction of voltage problems as well as correction
of voltage profiles across the entire feeder. This ability to
correct local and feeder-level voltage and var profiles has
been demonstrated over many different utility feeders, as
shown in Figure 9, along with the ability to enhance pro-
grams such as conservation voltage reduction (CVR), peak
demand management, and integration of high-penetration
distributed solar.
Conclusions
A case has been developed for the use of distributed power
electronics along the grid edge to augment and enhance the
operations of conventional primary-side electromechanical
control assets. This may provide a more practical and viable
method for adding dynamic and distributed control to the
existing grid. Critical new concepts have been introduced,
such as fail–normal operation, decentralized control with no
peer-to-peer communications, and a shunt mode of connec-
tion that utilizes key parasitics, such as distribution trans-
former leakage reactance, to improve the local and feeder-
level performance. The grid-edge approach was shown to
realize unprecedented levels of volt–var control in real
feeder-scale deployment to enable key value streams such as
CVR, peak-demand management, and grid integration of dis-
tributed solar.
We believe that grid-edge control using distributed
power electronics solutions can transform the way the grid
is planned, built, and controlled. Several companies are
now offering grid-edge solutions, with the number expected
to grow in the years ahead.
About the Authors
Deepak Divan (ddivan@varentec.com) is an IEEE Fellow
and past president of the IEEE Power Electronics Society.
He is the cofounder, president, and chief technology officer
of Varentec, a company focused on grid-edge control and
funded by the green-tech venture capital firm Khosla Ven-
tures and investor Bill Gates. Prior to launching Varentec, he
was a professor at the Georgia Institute of Technology from
2004 to 2011. He has published more than 250 papers and
holds 50 issued and pending patents. Varentec was his third
start-up company. His research interests are in dynamic grid
control, sustainable energy, and advanced power electronics.
Rohit Moghe (rmoghe@varentec.com) received his
bachelor of technology degree in electrical engineering
from the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, India, in
2007, where he was awarded the Institute Silver Medal. He
completed his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical and com-
puter engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology in
22 IEEE Power Electronics Magazine z December 2014
2010 and 2012, respectively. Since 2012, he has been work-
ing as a principal engineer at Varentec. His research inter-
ests are power electronics converters for utility applica-
tions, sustainable energy, smart sensors, and grid analytics.
Anish Prasai (aprasai@varentec.com) received his
Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the Georgia
Institute of Technology in 2011, specializing in power elec-
tronics for utility and industrial applications. Prior to that,
he received his B.S. and M.S. degrees in electrical engineer-
ing from Virginia Tech in 2004 and 2006, respectively, with
a focus on power electronics, while working at the Center
for Power Electronics Systems. He is currently with Varen-
tec, leading hardware development for existing and next-
generation products.
References
[1] C. Adamson and N. G. Hingorani, High Voltage Direct Current Power
Transmission. London: Garraway, 1960.
[2] C. Schauder, E. Stacey, M. Lund, L. Gyugyi, L. Kovalsky, A. Keri, A. Meh-
raban, and A. Edris, “AEP UPFC project: Installation, commissioning and
operation of the ±160 MVA STATCOM (phase I),” IEEE Trans. Power Deliv-
ery, vol. 13, pp. 1530–1535, Oct. 1998.
[3] IEEE Standard for Interconnecting Distributed Resources with Electric
Power Systems, IEEE Application Guide for Standard 1547.2-2008, Apr. 2009.
[4] T. N. Preda, K. Uhlen, and D. E. Nordgard, “An overview of the present
grid codes for integration of distributed generation,” in Proc. Conf. CIRED
Workshop, May 2012, pp. 1–4.
[5] X. She, A. Q. Huang, and R. Burgos, “Review of solid-state transformer
technologies and their application in power distribution systems,” IEEE J.
Emerging Select. Topics Power Electron., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 186–198, Sept. 2013.
[6] A. Prasai, H. Chen, and D. Divan, “Dyna-C: A topology for a bi-directional
solid-state transformer,” in Proc. Applied Power Electronics Conf. Expo.,
Mar. 2014, pp. 1219–1226.
[7] E. Alegria, T. Brown, E. Minear, and R. H. Lasseter, “CERTS microgrid
demonstration with large-scale energy storage and renewable generation,”
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 937–943, Mar. 2014.
[8] S. Kincic, X. T. Wan, D. T. McGillis, A. Chandra, B. T. Ooi, F. D. Galiana,
and G. Joos, “Voltage support by distributed static VAr system (SVS),” IEEE
Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 20, no. 2, pt. 2, pp. 1541–1549, Apr. 2005.
[9] R. W. DeDoncker, M. H. Kheraluwala, and D. M. Divan, “Power conver-
sion apparatus for dc/dc conversion using dual active bridges,” U.S. Patent
5 027 264 A, June 25, 1991.
[10] M. K. Das, C. Capell, D. E. Grider, R. Raju, M. Schutten, J. Nasadoski, S.
Leslie, J. Ostop, and A. Hefner, “10 kV, 120 A SiC half H-bridge power MOSFET
modules suitable for high frequency, medium voltage applications,” in Proc.
Conf. IEEE Energy Conversion Congr. Expo., Sept. 2011, pp. 2689–2692.
[11] Resources—Gridco Systems. (2014, Aug. 12). Intelligent power manage-
ment. [Online]. Available: http://gridcosystems.com/resources/#whitepapers
[12] ENGO-V: Varentec. (2014, Aug. 12). Dynamic grid edge control. [Online].
Available: http://www.varentec.com/static/uploads/2014/01/14-01-Varentec-
Dynamic-Grid-Edge-Control-0127.pdf
[13] ENGO-V: Varentec. (2014, Aug. 12). Managing low voltage pockets on
distribution feeders. [Online]. Available: http://www.varentec.com/static/
uploads/2013/10/13-09-Varentec-TechBrief-Low-Voltage-Pockets-on-Distribu-
tion-Feeders-0930.pdf