pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.04494 · v1 · pith:WLS63FHBnew · submitted 2019-07-10 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.SY

Controlling Power and Virtual Inertia from Storage for Frequency Response

Shuchang Yan This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 23:59 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.SY
keywords energy storagevirtual inertiafrequency responsemodel predictive controlpower systemsdistributed controloptimization frameworkrenewable integration
0
0 comments X

The pith

A generalized optimization framework lets storage supply both active power and virtual inertia to stabilize grid frequency after large disturbances.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a method for energy storage to help restore power balance in systems with high renewable penetration by contributing both immediate power and emulated inertia during frequency events. It introduces a generalized optimization framework that uses model predictive control in both centralized and distributed forms to compute the best control signals. This matters because traditional generators are being displaced, increasing the need for alternative sources of frequency support. The approach is tested in a case study that shows the controls can be computed and applied effectively. Readers would care if it offers a scalable way to maintain stability without adding more physical rotating mass to the grid.

Core claim

This work provides a generalized optimization framework to analyze how to control power and virtual inertia from storage to participate in frequency response when a large disturbance happens. Centralized and distributed model predictive control is employed here, and case study verifies the effectiveness of our optimization framework.

What carries the argument

Generalized optimization framework using centralized and distributed model predictive control to jointly optimize power output and virtual inertia from storage devices.

If this is right

  • Storage units can be scheduled to provide both energy shifting and immediate frequency support from the same device.
  • Distributed MPC allows multiple storage units to coordinate without requiring a single central controller.
  • The same framework can be re-run for different disturbance magnitudes to produce tailored control policies.
  • Case-study results indicate that the optimized actions keep frequency within acceptable bands after the disturbance.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Virtual inertia from storage could substitute for some of the physical inertia currently supplied by retiring synchronous generators.
  • The distributed version may scale to large numbers of storage assets if communication delays remain modest.
  • The framework might be combined with existing primary frequency control loops to create a layered response.
  • Testing the same optimization on networks with different renewable penetration levels would reveal how much storage capacity is needed.

Load-bearing premise

The mathematical models inside the MPC accurately represent real system dynamics, disturbance sizes, and storage limits so that the optimized actions remain stable and effective when applied to the actual grid.

What would settle it

Running the computed MPC control actions on a high-fidelity grid simulator or hardware testbed during a large disturbance produces frequency deviations that exceed limits or become unstable.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.04494 by Shuchang Yan.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: 2-bus test system. For MPC on this two-bus system, the discretization time step Ts=0.01s, and the looking-ahead time interval is Th=0.1s [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Frequencies of two buses. 0 5 10 15 t (s) 0 5 10 15 Virtual inertia (s) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Virtual inertia change of storage. It also can be seen that the virtual inertia has a decrease at the initial stage and climbs to the maximum value (15s) for the following time to hinder the frequency increase. 4) Variant Virtual Inertia & Variant Power: In this case, virtual inertia and power from storage can be changed, and the frequencies of this two-bus system are shown as follows, 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 3… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Frequencies of two buses. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 t (s) -3.5 -3 -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 Virtual Inertia (s) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Frequencies of two buses. Comparing Fig.7 with Fig.2, it can be seen that when power and virtual inertia from storage can be controlled, the fre- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Power change of storage. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 t (s) 0 5 10 15 Virtual inertia (s) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Virtual inertia change of storage. In this case, we can see that only controlling virtual inertia of storage will significantly influence the frequecies of the two buses by comparing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Virtual inertia change of storage. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 t (s) -15 -10 -5 0 5 Power (p.u.) P 4 e (t) P 8 e (t) P 12 e (t) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Power change of storage. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 t (s) -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 Energy (p.u. s) E 4 (t) E 8 (t) E 12(t) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Energy change of storage. task, because model predictive control can be implemented for the different system models. For the 2-bus system, centralized MPC is employed, and for the 12-bus system, distributed MPC is employed. For the future work, authors want to give a optimization framework to secure the frequency stability of power system where the transmission grid and distribution grid are operated toge… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Nowadays, power imbalance happens more frequently due to the more integration of renewable energy sources. Energy storage is a kind of devices that can charge energy at one time and discharge energy at another time. This function makes that storage is widely envolved into promoting power balance of power system. Besides this function, storage can also emulate virtual inertia to respond to frequency deviations in the system. This work provides a generalized optimization framework to analyze how to control power and virtual inertia from storage to participate in frequency response when a large disturbance happens. Centralized and distributed model predictive control is employed here, and case study verifies the effectiveness of our optimization framework.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a generalized optimization framework to control both active power and virtual inertia from energy storage systems for frequency response following large disturbances. Centralized and distributed model predictive control (MPC) formulations are employed, with effectiveness asserted via a case study.

Significance. If the MPC models are shown to be accurate and the case study includes quantitative validation with appropriate baselines, the work addresses a relevant problem in frequency stability under high renewable penetration by combining power and inertia services from storage. The inclusion of both centralized and distributed variants is a constructive element for assessing scalability.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that 'case study verifies the effectiveness' provides no model equations, swing-equation parameters, disturbance sizes, storage ratings, performance metrics (e.g., frequency nadir, RoCoF), or comparison against existing droop or virtual-inertia methods, preventing any assessment of whether the central claim holds.
  2. [Case study] Case-study description (wherever presented): effectiveness is asserted without evidence that the prediction model inside the MPC was tested against plant-model mismatch, unmodeled nonlinearities, or parameter drift; when the internal model is identical to the simulation model the verification is circular and does not support real-grid applicability.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract contains grammatical and spelling issues ('envolved' should be 'involved'; 'promoting power balance of power system' is awkward).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback. We address each major comment below and indicate where revisions will be made.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that 'case study verifies the effectiveness' provides no model equations, swing-equation parameters, disturbance sizes, storage ratings, performance metrics (e.g., frequency nadir, RoCoF), or comparison against existing droop or virtual-inertia methods, preventing any assessment of whether the central claim holds.

    Authors: We agree the abstract is insufficiently specific. In the revised version we will expand the abstract to summarize the swing-equation model, list the key parameters (inertia constants, damping, storage ratings), state the disturbance sizes, report quantitative metrics (nadir, RoCoF, settling time), and include explicit numerical comparisons against droop-only and fixed-virtual-inertia baselines. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Case study] Case-study description (wherever presented): effectiveness is asserted without evidence that the prediction model inside the MPC was tested against plant-model mismatch, unmodeled nonlinearities, or parameter drift; when the internal model is identical to the simulation model the verification is circular and does not support real-grid applicability.

    Authors: The referee correctly notes that the presented case study employs the same linearized swing-equation model for both MPC prediction and closed-loop simulation, rendering the validation circular with respect to model mismatch. We will add an explicit limitations paragraph acknowledging this and, where data permit, include supplementary simulations that introduce parameter drift and mild nonlinearities (e.g., governor dead-band) to illustrate sensitivity. Full experimental validation against unmodeled dynamics lies outside the scope of the current theoretical framework. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper proposes a generalized MPC-based optimization framework (centralized and distributed) for storage control of power and virtual inertia during frequency response, with effectiveness verified via case study. No equations, parameter fits, self-citations, or uniqueness theorems appear in the abstract or description that reduce any claimed prediction or result to its own inputs by construction. The work is self-contained as a modeling and control proposal without load-bearing steps that equate outputs to fitted or redefined inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract supplies no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; assessment is limited to the high-level description.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5621 in / 1063 out tokens · 20866 ms · 2026-05-24T23:59:07.136804+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Mitigation of wind power inter- mittency: Storage technology approach,

    T. Ayodele and A. Ogunjuyigbe, “Mitigation of wind power inter- mittency: Storage technology approach,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 44, pp. 447–456, 2015

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    Impact of low r otational inertia on power system stability and operation,

    A. Ulbig, T. S. Borsche, and G. Andersson, “Impact of low r otational inertia on power system stability and operation,” IF AC Proceedings V olumes, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 7290–7297, 2014

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    On the inertia o f future more- electronics power systems,

    J. Fang, H. Li, Y . Tang, and F. Blaabjerg, “On the inertia o f future more- electronics power systems,” IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics , 2018

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Using ner 300 and the energy recovery plan to renew the energy sector,

    B. Delpech, “Using ner 300 and the energy recovery plan to renew the energy sector,” European Association for Storage of Energy , Tech. Rep., 2013

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    Frequency response from autono mous battery energy storage,

    E. Hsieh and R. Johnson, “Frequency response from autono mous battery energy storage,” in Cigr´ e Grid of the Future Symposium, 2012, pp. 1–7

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    Dynamic freq uency control support by energy storage to reduce the impact of wind and sol ar generation on isolated power system’s inertia,

    G. Delille, B. Francois, and G. Malarange, “Dynamic freq uency control support by energy storage to reduce the impact of wind and sol ar generation on isolated power system’s inertia,” IEEE Transactions on sustainable energy, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 931–939, 2012

    work page 2012

  7. [7]

    Frequency dynamics co nstrained unit commitment with battery energy storage,

    Y . Wen, W. Li, G. Huang, and X. Liu, “Frequency dynamics co nstrained unit commitment with battery energy storage,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 5115–5125, 2016

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    Enhanced secu rity- constrained opf with distributed battery energy storage,

    Y . Wen, C. Guo, D. S. Kirschen, and S. Dong, “Enhanced secu rity- constrained opf with distributed battery energy storage,” IEEE Transac- tions on Power Systems , vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 98–108, 2015

    work page 2015

  9. [9]

    Demonstration of virtual inertia emulation using energy s torage sys- tems to support community-based high renewable energy pene tration,

    T. Kerdphol, F. S. Rahman, V . Phunpeng, M. Watanabe, and Y . Mitani, “Demonstration of virtual inertia emulation using energy s torage sys- tems to support community-based high renewable energy pene tration,” in 2018 IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC ). IEEE, 2018, pp. 1–7

    work page 2018

  10. [10]

    The relevance of inertia i n power systems,

    P . Tielens and D. V an Hertem, “The relevance of inertia i n power systems,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews , vol. 55, pp. 999– 1009, 2016

    work page 2016

  11. [11]

    Tube-based model predictive control of energy storage systems for enhancing transient stability of power systems,

    I. Kiaei and S. Lotfifard, “Tube-based model predictive control of energy storage systems for enhancing transient stability of power systems,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid , vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 6438–6447, 2018

    work page 2018

  12. [12]

    Scalable coordinated cont rol of energy storage systems for enhancing power system angle stability ,

    M. Rostami and S. Lotfifard, “Scalable coordinated cont rol of energy storage systems for enhancing power system angle stability ,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy , vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 763–770, 2018

    work page 2018

  13. [13]

    Study of frequency respo nse in power system with renewable generation and energy storage,

    A. Adrees and J. V . Milanovic, “Study of frequency respo nse in power system with renewable generation and energy storage,” in Power Systems Computation Conference (PSCC), 2016 . IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–7

    work page 2016

  14. [14]

    Op- timizing der participation in inertial and primary-freque ncy response,

    S. Guggilam, C. Zhao, E. Dall’Anese, C. Chen, and S. Dhop le, “Op- timizing der participation in inertial and primary-freque ncy response,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems , 2018

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    Controlling Time-Variant Virtual Inertia from Storage by Dynamic Programming and PROPT

    S. Y an, “Controlling time-variant virtual inertia fro m storage by dynamic programming and propt,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.03790 , 2019

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1903

  16. [16]

    Messac, Optimization in practice with MATLAB R⃝: for engineering students and professionals

    A. Messac, Optimization in practice with MATLAB R⃝: for engineering students and professionals . Cambridge University Press, 2015

    work page 2015

  17. [17]

    A review on the forecasting of wind speed and generated power,

    M. Lei, L. Shiyan, J. Chuanwen, L. Hongling, and Z. Y an, “ A review on the forecasting of wind speed and generated power,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews , vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 915–920, 2009

    work page 2009

  18. [18]

    One- hour-ahead load forecasting using neural network,

    T. Senjyu, H. Takara, K. Uezato, and T. Funabashi, “One- hour-ahead load forecasting using neural network,” IEEE Transactions on power systems, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 113–118, 2002

    work page 2002

  19. [19]

    J. B. Rawlings and D. Q. Mayne, Model predictive control: Theory and design. Nob Hill Pub. Madison, Wisconsin, 2009

    work page 2009

  20. [20]

    Di stributed model predictive control,

    E. Camponogara, D. Jia, B. H. Krogh, and S. Talukdar, “Di stributed model predictive control,” IEEE control systems magazine, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 44–52, 2002

    work page 2002

  21. [21]

    Distributed mpc strategies with application to power syst em automatic generation control,

    A. N. V enkat, I. A. Hiskens, J. B. Rawlings, and S. J. Wrig ht, “Distributed mpc strategies with application to power syst em automatic generation control,” IEEE transactions on control systems technology , vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 1192–1206, 2008

    work page 2008

  22. [22]

    A structure preserving mode l for power system stability analysis,

    A. R. Bergen and D. J. Hill, “A structure preserving mode l for power system stability analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, no. 1, pp. 25–35, 1981

    work page 1981

  23. [23]

    Discretization of sdes: Euler methods and be yond

    C. Bayer, “Discretization of sdes: Euler methods and be yond.” At PRisMa 2006 Workshop, 2006

    work page 2006

  24. [24]

    Dis- tributed model predictive control: A tutorial review and fu ture research directions,

    P . D. Christofides, R. Scattolini, D. M. de la Pena, and J. Liu, “Dis- tributed model predictive control: A tutorial review and fu ture research directions,” Computers & Chemical Engineering , vol. 51, pp. 21–41, 2013

    work page 2013

  25. [25]

    Model pre- dictive control for distributed microgrid battery energy s torage systems,

    T. Morstyn, B. Hredzak, R. P . Aguilera, and V . G. Agelidi s, “Model pre- dictive control for distributed microgrid battery energy s torage systems,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology , vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 1107–1114, 2018

    work page 2018

  26. [26]

    Hierarchical distributed model predictive control of int erconnected microgrids,

    C. A. Hans, P . Braun, J. Raisch, L. Gr¨ une, and C. Reincke -Collon, “Hierarchical distributed model predictive control of int erconnected microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy , vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 407–416, 2019

    work page 2019

  27. [27]

    Multi-agent distrib uted opti- mization via inexact consensus admm,

    T.-H. Chang, M. Hong, and X. Wang, “Multi-agent distrib uted opti- mization via inexact consensus admm,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 482–497, 2014

    work page 2014

  28. [28]

    A proximal dual consensus admm method for multi-agent constrained optimization,

    T.-H. Chang, “A proximal dual consensus admm method for multi-agent constrained optimization,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing , vol. 64, no. 14, pp. 3719–3734, 2016

    work page 2016

  29. [29]

    Kundur, N

    P . Kundur, N. J. Balu, and M. G. Lauby, Power system stability and control. McGraw-hill New Y ork, 1994, vol. 7

    work page 1994

  30. [30]

    Effects of rotatio nal inertia on power system damping and frequency transients,

    T. S. Borsche, T. Liu, and D. J. Hill, “Effects of rotatio nal inertia on power system damping and frequency transients,” in Decision and Control (CDC), 2015 IEEE 54th Annual Conference on . IEEE, 2015, pp. 5940–5946

    work page 2015