## 4 Results
### Single Electric Vehicle Connection
#### 4.2.1 Active and Reactive Power of Loads  
Figure 5a-f shows the active power consumption versus time of six loads in the microgrid when EVs are connected at different times and nodes considering the six events presented in the previous subsection. All figures compare the active power supplied to loads L1-L6 when using the control strategy based on fixed and variable virtual impedances. Hence, Figure 5a presents the active power behavior for Event 1; Figure 5b shows the active power behavior for Event 2; Figure 5c presents the active power behavior for Event 3; Figure 5d shows the active power behavior for Event 4; Figure 5e presents the active power behavior for Event 5; and Figure 5f shows the active power behavior for Event 6. These figures show that the system responds to load variations by delivering active power to each load because of the events that occurred in the microgrid. Both control strategies respond to the changes and share the active power from generation to each load. Figure 3: Microgrid used to study the strategy control. During the different periods evaluated, each node presents active power variations that are considered by each inverter according to the control strategy applied. However, the control with the fixed virtual impedance has difficulties in sustaining the power delivered to the load with different power variations presented in the same node plotted and the power variations of other nodes of the microgrid. On the other side, the control with variable virtual impedance is much more effective at maintaining a sustained active power in all the load nodes according to the power variations presented in the same node that are plotted and the power variations of other nodes. Therefore, the proposed control strategy using variable virtual impedance allows maintaining the active power regulated in the different nodes of the microgrid, allowing less power reduction after considering different power variations. Now, as the reactive power is of great interest in this work, the control strategy must also maintain the power supply to the loads during the power variations. Thus, Figure 6a-f shows the reactive power consumption versus time of the same six loads in the microgrid when the EVs are connected at different times and nodes considering the same six events previously stated. All figures compare the reactive power supplied to loads L1-L6, when using the control strategy based on fixed and variable virtual impedances. Figure 4: Events considered for the first test related to a single electric vehicle (EV) connection. Figure 5: Active power supplied to loads considering control strategies based on variable and fixed virtual impedances for six power variations: (**a**) Event 1, (**b**) Event 2, (**c**) Event 3, (**d**) Event 4, (**e**) Event 5, and (**f**) Event 6. Figure 6: _Cont._  
Hence, Figure 6a presents the reactive power supplied to L1 for Event 1; Figure 6b shows the reactive power behavior of L2 for Event 2; Figure 6c presents the reactive power behavior for Event 3; Figure 6d shows the reactive power behavior for Event 4; Figure 6e displays the reactive power behavior for Event 5; and Figure 6f shows the reactive power behavior for Event 6. These figures show that there are variations in the reactive power delivered to each node due to the events that occurred in the microgrid. Both control strategies respond to the changes and share the reactive power from generation to each load. During the different periods evaluated, each node presents reactive power variations that are considered by each inverter according to the control strategy applied. These six figures show that the reactive power increases to supply loads, but the reactive power is better improved when the variable virtual impedance is used.