Under Frequency Load Shedding in Power Systems with Active

Distribution Networks

Nokhum Markushevich

1. ADAPTATION OF UNDER FREQUENCY LOAD SHEDDING TO CASCADING

DEVELOPMENT OF GENERATION DEFICITS.

Practically all major power outages in the modern power systems included cascading events,
when different critical components of the power system sequentially reacted on the changing
operating conditions in a detrimental way [1]. With the emerging Active Distribution Systems,
there will be a significant increase of the number of components that are highly sensitive to
emergency changes of operational parameters.

An Active Distribution Network consists of high penetration of Distributed Energy Resources

(DER), including Energy Storage (ES) and Demand Response (DR). It may also include Micro-
grids (μG), Plug-in-Vehicles (PEV), Power Electronics (PE), distributed Remedial Action
Schemes and Protection (RAS), and other devises and entities controllable by local energy
management system and controllers, as well as by advanced Distribution Management Systems
(DMS).

The reactions of these components to the emergency changes of the operating conditions may
include disconnection of DERs due to frequency and/or voltage protection (including ride-
through functionalities with a wide range of possible settings [2]), , separation of microgrids
with load-rich or generation-rich balance [3], [4], discharge of ES, activation of demand
response, and other unpredictable activities. Changes of real power injections by the DERs may
also happen during the emergency due to their dependency on ambient conditions. Some of these
reactions may reduce the impacts of the original emergency disturbance, while other may
aggravate the situation.

The above-mentioned reactions are different at different times and under different ambient
conditions and involve a high degree of uncertainty. This suggests a need in adaptive
methodologies of the mitigating means of the power systems. One aspect of such adaptation for
load shedding methodologies is addressed in [5].

In this paper, we address another aspect of adaptation of Under Frequency Load Shedding
(UFLS). This adaptation relates to the uncertainty of possible developments of a major
generation deficit in large electrical islands. The uncertainty will significantly increase, when
substantial Active Distribution Networks are included in the deficit island.

An electric island of a bulk power system may be created as a result of an intentional or

unintentional separation of the power system due to a wide-scale contingency. The sizes of the
islands and their composition of loads and generation are often unpredictable. Therefore, one of
the assurances of adaptation of the UFLS to the island conditions is that the amount of load
connected to the UFLS is sufficient for any possible size and composition of the islands. This
may be a challenge, because different loads are not equally available for the UFLS.

Another significant uncertainty amplified by the presence of Active Distribution Networks is the
unpredictability of the development of the generation shortage. The development of the same
total generation shortage may range from a one-time event to a chain of small events during a
prolonged time interval. The UFLS should properly operate under any of these extreme
conditions and any conditions between them.

In the one-event cases, the frequency drops monotonically (let us call it “vertical” development).
In these cases, the reducing frequency activates the groups of the UFLS that are distinguished by
their frequency settings. Let us call these groups of UFLS – UFLS-1[6]. The amount of load
connected to UFLS-1 should be sufficient to stop the drop of the frequency above a given low
frequency limit [7], if the maximum possible deficit happened as one event. The level of the
frequency stabilized after the operations of UFLS-1 may be lower than the desired restoration
frequency. In this case, the groups of UFLS with high frequency settings and longer time delay
settings bring the frequency to the restoration level. Let us call these groups of UFLS – UFLS-2
[6].

In another extreme case of the development of the generation shortage, when the process consists
of a chain of small events, the frequency may not reach the levels that activate many groups of
UFLS-1. In these cases, the frequency stalls above the settings of UFLS-1 and should be brought
to the restoration level by UFLS-2. It means that the amount of load connected to the groups of
UFLS-2 should be sufficient to mitigate significant portion of the total generation deficit. Hence,
to accommodate both conditions of the development of the deficit, the total amount of the load
connected to the UFLS should be larger than the maximum possible deficit. There may be not
enough loads available for the UFLS to meet this requirement.

Even when the frequency is above the restoration level before the island is reconnected with the
bulk power system, the development of the deficit can continue. The DERs running the Watt-
Frequency function will reduce the real power injection, some DERs and microgrids can still
disconnect due to voltage swings or other reasons, some uncoordinated load restoration may
happen, etc.

In order to minimize the needed amount of load connected to the UFLS, a combined design of
the UFLS was introduced [6]. In this design, the groups of UFLS have the settings of both
UFLS-1 and UFLS-2. Let us call this design UFLS-Comb. In this case, if the frequency does not
reach the settings of UFLS-1, the same load can be shed later under the settings of UFLS-2. The
total load connected to the UFLS should be sufficient to mitigate the maximum available deficit
regardless how the deficit is developed. The advantage of this design in comparison to the
separate UFLS-1 and UFLS-2 is the smaller amount of load needed to be connected to UFLS.
To avoid significant over shedding of load by the UFLS the UFLS is divided in many groups.
When there are many groups of UFLS-2, the time settings of the different groups should differ
by a significant time interval to avoid over shedding when the frequency increases. This may
lead to longer restoration times and to violations of the low frequency limit curve. This curve
elevates with time, providing a “triangle” frequency-time safety zone [7]. The UFLS-Comb does
not guarantee a “triangle” shape of frequency restoration. The frequency, in this case, may go
beyond the “triangle” limit curve.

In order to guarantee the “triangle” shape of the frequency restoration by the UFLS, an UFLS
design with frequency settings changing in time was introduced [8], [9]. In this case, the initial
settings are similar to the settings of UFLS-1. When the frequency drops to a given level that
indicates that there is a significant generation deficit, the settings start rising in time toward the
dropping frequency. The frequency settings should rise in time slower than the rise of the system
frequency, when the system frequency can reach the restoration level, to avoid the over
shedding. If the system frequency is not going to reach the restoration level, the settings of the
UFLS meet the frequency below the level, and additional load is shed. The change of system
frequency is typically, exponential. Therefore, it makes sense to change the settings of the UFLS
also in an exponential manner. Let us call this design UFLS-Exp.

The above-discussed designs of the UFLS, provided that sufficient load is connected to the
UFLS, adapt to any development of the generation deficit without involvement of central
control. However, the performances of these three designs are different, as is shown in the
examples below.

2. ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES

The following is assumed in these examples:

 The maximum expected deficit is 50%

 The deficit gradually (exponentially) evolves from an initial one-event deficit to the
maximum deficit
 The initial deficits range from 15% through 45% (see Figure 1)
 50

45

40

35
Deficit, %

30

25

20

15
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Time, sec

Figure 1. Development of the cascading deficits

1. Separate UFLS-1 and UFLS-2

In this example, the total load connected to the UFLS is 70%. The load connected to UFLS-
1 is 50%, to provide for the one-event case, and the load connected to UFLS-2 is 20% to
adapt to the cascading portion of the deficit. There are 16 groups of UFLS-1 (to minimize
the over-shedding) and 10 groups of UFLS-2. The amount of load connected to each group is
presented in Figure 2

5 5 5
5

4 4 4 4
Load connected to UFLS, %

3 3 3 3
3

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
2

1 1 1
1

0
group11
group12
group13

group15
group16
group17
group18
group19

group21
group22
group23
group24
group25
group26
group27
group28
group29
group14

group110
group111
group112
group113
group114
group115
group116

group210

Groups of UFLS

Figure 2. Amount of load connected to the groups of UFLS

The frequency setting of the groups of UFLS-1 ranges from 57.25Hz through 59.5Hz in 0.15Hz
increments. The time delay for each group of UFLS-1 is 0.1sec, and the breakers’ clearing time
is also 0.1sec. The frequency setting for each group of UFLS-2 is 59.5Hz. The time delays for
the groups of UFLS-2 range from 15sec through 60sec in 5sec increments.

Figure 3 presents the change of frequency and the activations of the groups of UFLS in the case
of a single-event generation deficit of 50%. The “vertical” drop of frequency activates 13 groups
of UFLS-1. After that, the frequency starts increasing and on its way up activates two groups of
UFLS-2 bringing the frequency to the restoration level.

The situation is different, when the same deficit of 50% is developing gradually.
61.5 4.5

61 4

60.5 3.5

Load disconnected by UFLS-2, %

60 3
Frequency, Hz

59.5 2.5

59 2

58.5 1.5

58 1

57.5 0.5

57 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Time, sec

UFLS11 UFLS12 UFLS13 UFLS14 UFLS15 UFLS16 UFLS17

UFLS18 UFLS19 UFLS110 UFLS111 UFLS112 UFLS113 UFLS114
UFLS115 UFLS116 Frequency Low limit High limit gen-trip2 UFLS-2

Figure 3. Dynamics of frequency with UFLS-1 and UFLS-2 for the single-event devicit 50%

Figure 4 presents the case when the deficit develops gradually starting from 25% and the size of
UFLS-2 is the same as it was activated in the previous example. As seen in the figure, despite of
the activation of 11 groups of UFLS, the frequency stalls below the restoration level, because the
frequency does not reach not activated groups of UFLS-1, and there are not enough groups of
UFLS-2.
 61.5 4.5

61 4

60.5 3.5

Load disconnected by UFLS-2, %

60 3

Frequency, Hz
59.5 2.5

59 2

58.5 1.5

58 1

57.5 0.5

57 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Time, sec

UFLS11 UFLS12 UFLS13 UFLS14 UFLS15 UFLS16

UFLS17 UFLS18 UFLS19 FREQUENCY UFLS110 UFLS111
UFLS112 UFLS113 UFLS114 UFLS115 UFLS116 Frequency
Low limit High limit gen-trip2 UFLS-2

Figure 4. Dynamics of frequency with UFLS-1 and limited UFLS-2 for the initial devicit 25%

Figure 5 presents the dynamics of frequency when the deficit changes from 25% through 50%
for the UFLS that consists of UFLS-1 and extended UFLS-2. As seen in the figure, in this case,
only eight groups of UFLS-1 are activated, and UFLS-2 plays a greater role with eight activated
groups to bring the frequency to the restoration level. The timing of activation the groups of
UFLS-1 and UFLS-2 is presented in Figure 6.
61.5 18

61 16

60.5 14
Load disconnected by UFLS-2, %

60 12
Frequency, Hz

59.5 10

59 8

58.5 6

58 4

57.5 2

57 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Time, sec

UFLS11 UFLS12 UFLS13 UFLS14 UFLS15 UFLS16

UFLS17 UFLS18 UFLS19 FREQUENCY UFLS110 UFLS111
UFLS112 UFLS113 UFLS114 UFLS115 UFLS116 Frequency
Low limit High limit gen-trip2 UFLS-2

Figure 5. Dynamics of frequency with UFLS-1 and UFLS-2 for the initial devicit 25%
 60

50

40

30
% of Load

20

10

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

-10
Time, sec

SUM_UFLS Deficit ` UFLS-2 UFLS-1

Figure 6. Dynamics of the deficit and UFLS-1 and UFLS-2 for the initial deficit 25%

Similar calculations were performed for different initial deficits. The dynamics of the frequency for these
cases are overlapped in Figure 7 to show the frequency-time area that encloses the possible changes of
frequency during the mitigations of the differently developed deficits. As seen in the figure. In many
cases, the frequency remains below the restoration level up to 400 sec. In some cases, the frequency
exceeds the 60.5Hz, which indicates over-shedding.

61.5

61

60.5

60
Frequency, Hz

59.5

59

58.5

58

57.5

57
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Time, sec

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

Figure 7. Dynamics of frequency with UFLS-1 and UFLS-2 for initial deficits from 15% through 45%

2. Combined UFLS (UFLS-Comb)

The example settings of the Combined UFLS are presented in Figure 8. Of the 16 groups of
UFLS, the load connected to the 10 groups with the lower frequency settings is also
 connected to the UFLS-2 groups. The distribution of load among the groups of UFLS-Comb
is the same as for the UFLS-1 only in the previous example (see Figure 2). The total load
connected to the UFLS-Comb is 50%, while in the previous example it is 70%.

59.75 70
59.5
59.5 59.35
59.2
59.25 59.05 60 60

59 58.9
55
58.75
58.75 58.6
50 50
58.45
58.5 58.3 45
58.25 58.15
Frequency, Hz

58 40 40

Time, sec
58 57.85
35 57.7
57.75 57.55
30 30
57.5 57.4
57.25
25
57.25
20 20
57
15
56.75
56.5 10

56.25
56 0

Groups of UFLS-Comb
UFLS-1-Settings, Hz UFLS-2-Settings, sec

Figure 8. Settings of UFLS-Comb

The dynamics of the frequency in the case of UFLS-Comb is similar to the dynamics in the
case of UFLS-1 + UFLS-2 (see Figure 5 and Figure 7). However, it is achieved by having
50% of the load connected to the UFLS instead of 70%. In both cases, the frequency drops
below 58.5Hz in many instances, and some instances it exceeds 60.5Hz, which indicates over
shedding.

3. UFLS with changing settings (UFLS-Exp).

The example settings of the UFLS-Exp for the generation deficit of 25% are presented in
Figure 9. The frequency settings of UFLS-Exp start increasing when the system frequency is
below the trigger frequency of 59.5Hz. When the frequency is above 59.5Hz, the settings
return to the initial values similar to UFLS-1. A more adaptive design would adjust the initial
settings depending on the number of crossing the trigger frequency. As follows from the
above, the settings of the UFLS-Exp are different for different dynamics of the system
frequency. This can be seen in Figure 10.
 60.25
60
59.75
59.5
59.25
59

Frequency, Hz
58.75
58.5
58.25
58
57.75
57.5
57.25
57
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Time, sec

Exp-16 Exp-15 Exp-14 Exp-13

Exp-12 Exp-11 Exp-10 Exp-9
Exp-8 Exp-7 Exp-6 Exp-5
Exp-4 Exp-3 Exp-2 Exp-1
system frequency

Figure 9. Settings of UFLS-Exp for the initial deficit 25%

61.5

61

60.5

60
Frequency, Hz

59.5

59

58.5

58

57.5

57
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Time, sec

Exp-16 Exp-15 Exp-14 Exp-13 Exp-12 Exp-11 Exp-10

Exp-9 Exp-8 Exp-7 Exp-6 Exp-5 Exp-4 Exp-3
Exp-2 Exp-1 Frequency Low limit gen-trip

Figure 10. Dynamics of frequency with UFLS-Exp for the initial devicit 25%

A comparative illustration of the ranges between the lowest and the highest frequencies for
set of initial deficits in the range of 15% through 45% for the above three examples is
presented in Figure 11. As seen in the figure, the frequency-time area occupied by the curves
of the system frequency in the case of UFLS-Exp is narrower than in the previous examples.
There are, practically no over shedding, and the lowest frequencies are slightly lower than
59Hz.
 61.5

61

60.5

Max-Min frequency, Hz
60

59.5

59

58.5

58

57.5
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Time, sec

MAX-Comb MIN-Comb MAX-1&2 MIN-1&2 MAX-Exp MIN-Exp

Figure 11. Ranges between the maximum and minimum frequencies for the three examples of the UFLS designs.

The comparative statistics for these three designs of the UFLS are presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Statistics for the example UFLS designs

Parameter UFLS- UFLS

UFLS1+UFLS2
Comb Exp
Total (Hz x sec) below low limit [7] 42 131 0
Total (Hz x sec) above high limit [7] 1.8 0 0.1
Connected load, % 70 50 50
Standard Deviation of frequencies for the set of initial
0.56 0.49 0.25
deficits, Hz

4. Conclusions

1. The high penetration of Active Distribution Networks presents benefits and

challenges to the power system operations. One of the significant challenges is the
increased uncertainty of the operations of the Active Distribution Networks in cases
of emergency separation of the bulk power system into large electric islands.
2. The load-shedding remedial action schemes should be made adaptive to the
unpredictable developments of the generation deficits in load-rich islands.
3. Three conceptual designs of the Under Frequency Load Shedding are addressed in the
paper: the conventional design consisting of separate UFLS-1 and UFLS-2 portions, a
design, which includes the settings of UFLS-1 and UFLS-2 for the same group, and a
design, in which the frequency settings increase in time during the emergency.
 4. The conventional design of UFLS requires an excessive amount of connected load to
be able of mitigating both the one-event and cascading development of the generation
deficit.
5. The combined design of UFLS needs less of connected load, but may either prolong
the restoration, or increase the over shedding.
6. The design with changing settings has the potential for shorter restoration times,
smaller over shedding and fewer violations the established frequency limits.
7. With the approaching high penetration of active distribution networks, it is worth
considering an upgrade of the conventional UFLS to more adaptive designs.

5. References

1. Final Report on the August 14, 2003 Blackout in the United States and Canada.
Available: http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/oeprod/DocumentsandMedia/BlackoutFinal-
Web.pdf
2. Recommended Settings for Voltage and Frequency Ride-Through of Distributed Energy
Resources, EPRI’s White Paper prepared by Jens C. Boemer, May 2015. Available:
http://www.epri.com/abstracts/Pages/ProductAbstract.aspx?ProductId=00000000300200
6203
3. Use Case #1: Information Support for Coordination of EPS and Microgrid Load
Shedding. Available: http://smartgrid.epri.com/Repository/Repository.aspx/ and
https://members.sgip.org/kws/groups/sgip-pap24wg/documents?folder_id=0
4. Nokhum Markushevich, Information Exchange between Advanced Microgrids and
Electric Power Systems. Available:
https://www.scribd.com/document/376567099/Information-Exchange-between-
Advanced-Microgrids-and-Electric-Power-Systems
5. N. Markushevich, Automatic Load Shedding in Active Distribution Networks. Available:
http://www.energycentral.com/c/iu/automatic-load-shedding-active-distribution-networks
6. G. D. Boutin, N. S. Markushevich, M.G. Portnoy, et al, Automatic Frequency Load
Shedding in USSR Power Systems, , CIGRE, Paris, 1972
7. Standard PRC-006-2— Automatic Underfrequency Load Shedding. Available:
http://www.nerc.com/_layouts/PrintStandard.aspx?standardnumber=PRC-006-
2&title=Automatic%20Underfrequency%20Load%20Shedding&jurisdiction=United%20
States
8. Nokhum Markushevich, An Under-frequency Relay with Time Delay, USSR Certificate
of Invention # 201504, 1964;, Available:
http://www1.fips.ru/fips_servl/fips_servlet?DB=RUPAT&rn=3118&DocNumber=20150
4&TypeFile=html
9. N. S. Markushevich, Under Frequency Load Shedding in Power Systems (from
Experience of the Latvian Power System), Moscow, 1975 (Russian)
10. R. S. Rabinovich, Under Frequency Load Shedding in Power Systems, Moscow, 1989
(Russian)