SCIENCEBRING   /   HAMBURG, GERMANY
International Journal of Advance Scientific Research SCIENTIFIC IDEAS. INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES.
ISSN 2750-1396 12 issues per year · Monthly
Crossref DOI: 10.37547/ijasr

Search the Journal

Articles Published:

Real-Time Adaptive Virtual Inertia Control of Grid-Forming Battery Energy Storage Using Safe Reinforcement Learning

Vol. 6 No. 03 (2026): Volume 06 Issue 03 Pages 240-249
DOI 10.37547/ijasr-06-03-11 ↗
RESEARCH OVERVIEW

Abstract

Reinforcement learning (RL) can adapt the virtual inertia and damping of grid-forming battery energy storage systems (BESS) in real time, but an agent that optimizes performance alone may violate frequency-security limits, and a safety filter added to it may simply be exploited. This paper proposes a safe-RL controller that updates the virtual inertia H_v and damping D_v of a virtual synchronous machine every 20 ms. The constrained Markov decision process is solved by a Lagrangian evolution strategy, and a model-based shield enforces analytic lower bounds on H_v and D_v derived from an online estimate of the disturbance. A second Lagrange multiplier penalizes shield interventions, so that the agent learns to be safe by itself instead of relying on the shield. Domain randomization of the inertia estimate is used during training. On 500 test scenarios of a low-inertia system (inverter-based share 40–85 %, disturbances 3–12 %), the proposed controller produced no violation of the 0.5 Hz/s RoCoF and 49.5 Hz nadir limits for any of three training seeds. It used 32 % less BESS energy than a fixed VSM, which violated the limits in 3.2 % of scenarios, and 17 % less than a rule-based adaptive law, and the shield had to intervene in only 6.4 % of control steps. Unconstrained RL violated the limits in 80 % of scenarios, Lagrangian RL without a shield in 4.3 %, and a shielded agent without the intervention cost relied on the shield in 64 % of steps. Under out-of-distribution conditions with larger disturbances and ±20 % inertia-estimation error, the proposed controller had the lowest rate of frequency-limit violation (2.1 % against 3.3–19.0 %). The policy requires about 3 µs per decision.

Keywords

SOURCES & CITATIONS

References

1. F. Milano, F. Dörfler, G. Hug, D. J. Hill, G. Verbič, "Foundations and challenges of low-inertia systems," in Proc. Power Systems Computation Conference (PSCC), Dublin, 2018, pp. 1–25.
2. F. Dörfler, D. Groß, "Control of low-inertia power systems," Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems, vol. 6, pp. 415–445, 2023.
3. Q.-C. Zhong, G. Weiss, "Synchronverters: Inverters that mimic synchronous generators," IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 1259–1267, 2011.
4. U. Tamrakar, D. Shrestha, M. Maharjan, B. P. Bhattarai, T. M. Hansen, R. Tonkoski, "Virtual inertia: Current trends and future directions," Applied Sciences, vol. 7, no. 7, art. 654, 2017.
5. J. Alipoor, Y. Miura, T. Ise, "Power system stabilization using virtual synchronous generator with alternating moment of inertia," IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 451–458, 2015.
6. X. Hou, Y. Sun, X. Zhang, J. Lu, P. Wang, J. M. Guerrero, "Improvement of frequency regulation in VSG-based AC microgrid via adaptive virtual inertia," IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 1589–1602, 2020.
7. M. Glavic, "(Deep) reinforcement learning for electric power system control and related problems: A short review and perspectives," Annual Reviews in Control, vol. 48, pp. 22–35, 2019.
8. X. Chen, G. Qu, Y. Tang, S. Low, N. Li, "Reinforcement learning for selective key applications in power systems: Recent advances and future challenges," IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 2935–2958, 2022.
9. W. Cui, Y. Jiang, B. Zhang, "Reinforcement learning for optimal primary frequency control: A Lyapunov approach," IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 1676–1688, 2023.
10. J. García, F. Fernández, "A comprehensive survey on safe reinforcement learning," J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 16, pp. 1437–1480, 2015.
11. E. Altman, Constrained Markov Decision Processes. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC, 1999.
12. J. Achiam, D. Held, A. Tamar, P. Abbeel, "Constrained policy optimization," in Proc. 34th Int. Conf. Machine Learning (ICML), 2017, pp. 22–31.
13. A. Ray, J. Achiam, D. Amodei, "Benchmarking safe exploration in deep reinforcement learning," OpenAI Technical Report, 2019.
14. M. Alshiekh, R. Bloem, R. Ehlers, B. Könighofer, S. Niekum, U. Topcu, "Safe reinforcement learning via shielding," in Proc. AAAI Conf. Artificial Intelligence, 2018, pp. 2669–2678.
15. K. P. Wabersich, M. N. Zeilinger, "A predictive safety filter for learning-based control of constrained nonlinear dynamical systems," Automatica, vol. 129, art. 109597, 2021.
16. A. D. Ames, S. Coogan, M. Egerstedt, G. Notomista, K. Sreenath, P. Tabuada, "Control barrier functions: Theory and applications," in Proc. European Control Conference (ECC), 2019, pp. 3420–3431.
17. P. M. Anderson, M. Mirheydar, "A low-order system frequency response model," IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 720–729, 1990.
18. P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994.
19. T. Salimans, J. Ho, X. Chen, S. Sidor, I. Sutskever, "Evolution strategies as a scalable alternative to reinforcement learning," arXiv:1703.03864, 2017.
20. J. Tobin, R. Fong, A. Ray, J. Schneider, W. Zaremba, P. Abbeel, "Domain randomization for transferring deep neural networks from simulation to the real world," in Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2017, pp. 23–30.
DISCOVER RELATED RESEARCH

Similar Articles

Continue exploring the collection ↗
11-20 of 411