Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

42 views

37-06

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- Course Outline
- Term Paper Maths
- Analysis of Structural Member Systems
- Project Control 2010
- Operatii operatii pe matrici javaPe Matrici Java
- Notas de Optimizacion
- Linier Ship Dynamic paper
- Gird Systems Intro to Music Esprit
- matrix Transformations
- Medical Image Super Resolution Based On Dual Tree Complex Wavelet Transform
- A General Unified Approach to Modelling Switching-converter Power Stages
- ENCH 225 Spring 2015 Course Packet
- Ejercicio 2
- Tarea 4 ALA
- Aplication Analisis Multivariado
- 1DOFTORSION
- lec8 (1)
- C8BD2C3Cd01
- Setpoint Tracking
- Stabilization of Nonlinear Processes With Input Constraints

You are on page 1of 6

optimization techniques

Constantinos Parisses and Nikolaos Asimopoulos Prokopis Fessas

Technological Educational Institute Of West Macedonia Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

Koila Kozani 501 00,Greece Thessaloniki 541 24, Greece

{kpar,asimopou}@kozani.teikoz.gr fessas@vergina.auth.gr

Abstract-In this paper we consider the decentralized iterative scheme gives a solution to the near-optimum

load-frequency control (LFC) of a two-area power system. decentralized control problem. In section V, first the

The model of the power system is determined, and is viewed model of the system is analytically developed. Then, the

as an interconnected system (A, Bd), for which the methods system is stabilized with the proposed method, based on

of the decentralized control are applied; these are based on linear programming, which gives also an admissible

the intercontrollability matrix D(s), its kernel U(s), and the stabilizing matrix for the traditional method of the

equivalent system {M(s), I2} in the operator domain. Based

decentralized optimization techniques, as given in the

on this, a decentralized control via linear programming works of Geromel and Bernussou ([12]). Several

methods, and with decentralized optimization techniques is

responses are given and compared.

determined. Several responses are given and compared.

frequency control, Linear programming, Optimization

techniques, Static local feedback. A. Form of matrices A and Bd

We consider the interconnected system (A, Bd)

I. INTRODUCTION

defined by

The problem of designing a feedback gain matrix x = Ax + Bd u (1)

for load-frequency control in electrical power systems where x is the n-dimensional state vector of (A, Bd), u is

has received considerable attention. Several decentralized the 2-dimensional input vector, A is the nxn system

load-frequency controllers have been developed since the matrix, and Bd is its nx2 input matrix. Matrices A and Bd

1970s ([5],[6], [7], [11], [12], [17], [20]). admits the following partitioning:

In this paper, we propose a decentralized LFC

controller based on the stabilization problem with static

⎡A A12 ⎤ 7 n1 ⎡b 11 0 ⎤

feedbacks of the local state vectors in an interconnected A = ⎢ 11 and B d = ⎢ (2)

power system. It is examined for an interconnected ⎣ A21

⎥

A22 ⎦ 7 n2 ⎣ 0 b 22 ⎥⎦

(global) system (A, Bd), consisting of two local scalar

subsystems, under the very general assumptions of the with n=n1+n2. System (A, Bd) consists of the

global and the local controllability. Only the case of two interconnected ni- dimensional subsystems (Aii, bii) -

interconnected subsystems is examined, since only in this i=1,2- of local state vectors x1and x2, with x=[x1' x2']', u1

case the global system will have no decentralized fixed

and u2 being, respectively, the scalar inputs of these

modes when local feedbacks are applied ([18], [4], [1],

[2], [9], [10]). Without loss of generality ([4], [18]), we subsystems, with u=[u1 u2]'. We further assume that the

assume that both input channels of system (A, Bd) are global system (A, Bd), as well as its two subsystems

scalar. (Aii,bii) -i=1,2- are controllable. In that case, subsystems

In the next section we present some preliminary (Aii, bii) are supposed to be in their companion

results needed in the main development. They concern

controllable form [13]. It is obvious that when the various

the form of matrices A and Bd, the intercontrollability

submatrices of (A, Bd) are in the above form, system (A,

matrix D(s) and its kernel U(s), and -based on this- an

equivalent, to (A, Bd), system, defined in the operator Bd) is called Canonical Interconnected Form, CIF [8].

domain. The existence of linear, local, state-vector Finally, with the elements of rows n1 and n1+n2 (=n) of A,

feedbacks (LLSVF), which stabilize the system, is we form matrix Am:

formally proven in section III. In this context, and based ⎡ a′ a12′ ⎤

Am = ⎢ 11 (3)

′ ⎥⎦

on linear programming methods, their computation is

′

⎣ a21 a22

presented ([15]). Section IV provides an algorithm

proposed by Geromel and Bernussou, which based on

B. The intercontrollability matrix D(s) and its kernel D(s) x(s) = 0 (9a)

The following (n-2)xn polynomial matrix is the (sE - Am ) x(s) = u(s) (9b)

intercontrollability matrix of system (A,Bd) In these equations, D(s) is as in (4), E is a 2xn (constant)

⎡ s −1 ⎤ matrix, of the form:

⎢ ⎥

⎢ . . ⎥ E =diag{e1' e2'}, the ni-dimensional vector ei being equal

⎢ . . − A 12 0 ⎥

⎢ ⎥ (4) to : ei = [0...0 1]' -for i=1,2-, and Am is the matrix defined

s −1

D(s) = ⎢ ⎥

in (3). From (9a) it follows that x(s) must satisfy the

⎢ s −1 ⎥

⎢ ⎥ relation:

⎢ . . ⎥

⎢ − A 210 . . ⎥ x(s) = U(s) ξ(s) (10)

⎢ ⎥ where U(s) is the kernel of D(s), and ξ(s) is any two-

⎢⎣ s −1⎥⎦

dimensional vector. It follows that ξ(s) must satisfy the

equation: M(s) ξ(s) = u(s) (11)

As the following lemma indicates, D(s) expresses the

The matrix M(s) appearing in (11) is termed characteristic

conditions for the controllability of (A, Bd):

matrix of the interconnected system (A, Bd) [8], and is

Lemma 1 System (A, Bd) is controllable if and only if rank

defined by the relation:

D(s) = n-2 for all complex numbers s. M(s) = (sE - Am) U(s) (12)

For the proof, see [2].

The three systems defined respectively (i) in the state

Thus, the matrix D(s) of a controllable system is a

space by the pair of matrices (A, Bd), (ii) in the operator

full-rank matrix. Its kernel U(s) is an nx2 polynomial

matrix of rank 2, such that D(s) U(s) = 0. The analytical domain by {sI-A, Bd}, and (iii) by the polynomial matrix

determination of U(s) is as follows: P is the matrix description (PMD):

representing the column permutations of matrix D(s), M(D) ξ(t) = u(t) (13a)

which brings it to the form of the matrix pencil: x(t) = U(D) ξ(t) (13b)

D ( s ) = D(s) P =[s In-2 - F | G] (5) are equivalents [13], [9], [3]. It is noted that in (13) ξ(t) is

the pseudo state vector of the system, and is related to the

In (5) G is an (n-2)x2 (constant) matrix, consisting of

state vector x(t) of (A, Bd), by the relation

columns n1 and n1+n2=n of D(s), F is an (n-2)x(n-2)

x(t) = U(D) ξ(t) (14)

constant matrix, and In-2 is the unity matrix of order n-2.

(in the relations (13), (14), the symbol D denotes the

Since D(s) is a full rank matrix, the pair (F, G) is differential operator d/dt).

controllable, and can be brought to its multivariable

controllable form (MCF) [13], [19] (F , G ) by a similarity III. COMPUTATION OF THE LOCAL FEEDBACK

transformation T; let d1, d2 be the controllability indices STABILIZING MATRIX Kd VIA LINEAR

of (F, G), S(s) be the associated structure operator, δ(s) be PROGRAMMING METHODS.

the characteristic (polynomial) matrix of F , and (in case

We first present a result, as lemma (3), which will

rank[G]=2) let Gˆ m be the 2x2 matrix consisting of rows d1 be needed in the proof of the Main Theorem (3).

and d1+d2=n-2 of Ĝ . The precise form of U(s) is the Lemma 3. Let h(s) be a polynomial of the form:

h(s)=r(s)p(s)+q(s), for which the following assumptions

content of the following lemma: hold: (i) The polynomials r(s), p(s), q(s) are monic (ii) r(s)

Lemma 2 Let D(s) be the intercontrollability matrix of (A, is arbitrary, (iii) degree r(s)p(s) > degree q(s) (iv) p(s) is a

Bd) as in lemma (1), and suppose that rank[G]=2, for G stable polynomial. Then, the arbitrary polynomial r(s) can

as in (5). Then the kernel U(s) of D(s) is equal to be chosen so, that h(s) is stable.

⎡ TS(s) ⎤ For the proof, see [16].

U (s) = P⎢ −1 ⎥ (6) Theorem 3 Consider the interconnected system (A, Bd) as

⎣− Gm δ (s)⎦

in (1), and suppose that the global system (A, Bd), and the

where P, T, S(s), G , and δ(s) are as previously

m

local ones (Aii,bii) -i=1,2- are controllable. Then, there

explained.

exists static LLSVF of the form u=Kdx, so that the

C. An equivalent system defined by a PMD. resulting closed-loop system is stable.

Consider the interconnected system (A, Bd), with A Proof. For the proof we consider the equivalent system

and Bd as in (2). In that case, the corresponding {M(s), I2} and examine the stability of the polynomial

differential equation in the state space is: matrix Md(s)=(sE-Am-Kd)U(s), by examine whether its

x ( t ) = Ax( t ) + Bd u( t ) (7) determinant is a stable polynomial. We assume that the

In the operator domain, this equation corresponds to the feedback matrix Kd has the form:

equation (sI - A) x(s) = Bd u(s) (8)

this, in its turn, is reduced to the equations:

⎡α1 . . α n1 0 . . 0 ⎤ ⎡α ′ 0 ⎤ Step2 Write the polynomial r(s) in the following form:

Kd = ⎢ ⎥=⎢ ⎥ (15) r(s) =sn-1+kρ(s)=sn-1+k(sn-2+k1sn-3+...+kn-2).

⎢⎣ 0 . . 0 β1 . . β n2 ⎥⎦ ⎣ 0 β ′⎦

By viewing the degrees of the polynomials α(s) and

where αi (i=1,...,n1), and βj (j=1,...,n2) are some β(s), it is seen that k -the leading coefficient of the

unknown, real numbers. We shall deal with the case where polynomial ρ(s)- contains only the parameters βn2

rank[G]=2, which is the usual one for the matrix G. and αn1. It follows that by giving a value to k, we can

Without loss of generality, and in order to simplify the

notation, we assume Am=0 (see also Remark 3.1 after the also compute αn1.

end of the proof). Then the matrix Md(s) takes the form Step3 Form n-2 inequalities with the n-2 unknown

feedback parameters, by setting positive the

⎡ TS(s) ⎤ coefficients ki of the polynomial ρ(s) (ki>0, for i=1,

Md(s)=(sΕ-Am-Kd)U(s)=(sΕ-Am-Kd) P ⎢ −1 ⎥=

⎣− G m δ(s) ⎦ n-2).

Step4 Solve the linear programming problem , by putting

= ⎡⎢ − ( s − α n1 )[11] − α ( s ) − ( s − α n1 )[12] − α 1 ( s ) ⎤

⎢⎣ − ( s − β n 2 )[21] − β 1 ( s ) − ( s − β n 2 )[22] − β ( s ) ⎥⎥⎦ an objective function with unity weighting

coefficients, and find all feedback parameters αi

⎡ M11(s) M12 (s) ⎤ (i=1, n1-1) and βj (j=1, n2-1).

=⎢ ⎥ (16)

⎣ M21(s) M 22 (s) ⎦ Step5 Evaluate the polynomial ρ(s), and check if it is

stable. If it is not, go back to Step 1, and select

where α(s) = [ α1... αn1-1 0 0 ] TS1(s) another βn2.

α1(s) = [ α1... αn1-1 0 0 ] TS2(s) Step6 Evaluate the polynomial r(s), and check if it is

β(s) = [ 0 ... 0 β1 ... βn2-1 ] TS2(s) stable. If it is not, go back to Step 2, and select

β1(s) = [ 0 ... 0 β1 ... βn2-1 ] TS1(s) another k.

Step7 Evaluate the polynomial h(s), and check if it is

are scalar polynomials, not monic, stable. If it is not, go back to Step 2, and select

TS1(s) = T [ 1 s ... sd1-1 0 ... 0 ]' another k.

TS2(s) = T [ 0 ... 0 1 s ... sd2-1 ]' Step8 The feedback matrix Kd can be evaluated from steps

(i.e., TS(s)=TS1(s) TS2(s)] ,and [ij] -for i,j=1,2- are the 1, 2 and 4.

END OF THE ALGORITHM

entries of the polynomial matrix Gˆ m −1δ ( s) . Then the REMARKS

matrix in (16) is equivalent to the following matrix: Remark 3.1 : When Am≠0, the proof follows exactly the

same lines, since the orders of the various polynomials

⎡ M11(s) + M 21(s) M12 (s) + M 22 (s) ⎤ remain the same. Now, however, the notation is more

⎢ M 21(s) M 22 (s) ⎥ complicated, since the elements of Am appear in the

⎣ ⎦

polynomials α(s), β(s), and, additionally, multiply the

The determinant of this matrix is actually a monic matrix TS(s).

polynomial of the form h(s)=r(s)p(s)+q(s), of degree n, by Remark 3.2: This iterative method probably will give

identifying r(s) as the polynomial [22][M11(s)+M21(s)], large parameters of the feedback matrix Kd. These

which is of degree (n-1), arbitrary and monic, p(s) as the parameters can be changed, by applying an optimization

polynomial (s-βn2), which is stable by choice of βn2, and algorithm, as the one described in paragraph IV.

Remark 3.3: The linear programming problem was solved

q(s) as the polynomial:

via the revised simplex algorithm [14], which is contained

[M12(s)+M22(s)]M21(s)-[M11(s)+M21(s)]β(s)

in the DLPRS subroutine of the IMSL/MATH Library.

of degree (n-1). Then, according to lemma (3), the

arbitrary polynomial r(s) can be chosen so that the IV. DECENTRALIZED CONTROL BY

polynomial h(s) is stable. Q.E.D. PARAMETRIC OPTIMIZATION

Next, we propose an iterative method, in order to

compute the feedback coefficients [15]. The central idea is This section provides an algorithm [12], based on

to compute the feedback parameters by solving a linear iterative scheme, for designing ‘optimal’ decentralized

programming problem, corresponding to choosing control. It is to be emphasized that the algorithm needs to

positive the coefficients of the polynomials that should be be initialized with a stabilizing control, which is the

stable. A set of such polynomials (with positive feedback matrix Kd of the proposed previously method

coefficients) is generated. They are then examined based on linear programming.

whether they are stable or not.

The problem is to find a feedback matrix Kd such

ALGORITHM

Step1 Choose the feedback parameter βn2, so that a stable that the global system as (2) is stable and that the classical

p(s) results. quadratic cost function C = ∫ ( x ′Qx + u ′Ru)dt is

minimized, where Q and R are weighting matrices of For the two area system, the states and the control

appropriate dimensions, positive-semi definite and variables are chosen as:

positive define, respectively.

Geromel and Berussou [12] proposed a gradient

[

x ′ = ∆f1∆x E1∆Pg1∆Ptie1∆f2 ∆x E 2 ∆Pg2 ] (21)

method which is summarized below: u ′ = [ ∆Pc1∆Pc2 ] (22)

Step1 Determine the gradient matrix ∂ C ( K d )/ ∂ K d and The basic objectives of the P-f control are zero steady-

the feasible direction D=diag{D1, D2 }. state error in the deviation of the frequency and the tie-

Step2 Test of convergence -if |{dpq}i|<ε for all p=1; line power. In order to achieve them, it is essential to

q=1,...,ni; i=1, 2; where {dpq}i is the (p, q) entry of consider an integral of the area control error (ACE =

B∆f+∆Ptie) as a feedback signal. The state vector in (21)

the matrix Di , stop, if not go to Step 3.

is augmented with two additional state variables, which

Step3 Update on Kd (Kd← Kd-αD), where the step size

are defined by: x5 = ∫ ACE1dt , x9 = ∫ ACE2 dt

α≥0 must selected such that C(Kd-αD)<C(Kd) and

go back to Step 1. and which satisfy the equations:

.

x 5 = ACE1 = B∆f 1 + ∆Ptie1

V. A TWO-AREA ELECTRICAL POWER SYSTEM

.

We consider the P-f control of a two-area power x 9 = ACE 2 = B∆f2 + ∆Ptie2 = B∆f2 + a12 ∆Ptie1

system. The system model was derived in ([6], [11]), and P

its block-diagram is given in Fig. 1 (disregard, for the time ∆Ptie2 = a12 ∆Ptie1, a12 = − r1

being, the portions of the diagram marked with dotted Pr 2

lines). The model is based on the equations for the power We substitute the definition of the states and the controls

equilibrium, the equations for the incremental tie-line into the nine differential equations that define the two-area

flow, the equations for the change in generation, and the system. This place the system equations into the form:

equations for the position of the speed governor. These .

equations are as follows: x = Ax + Bd u + Γd ∆PD . The matrices A, Bd and Γd of

2Hi d∆fi

+ Di ∆fi +2π ∑ Tij0 ( ∫ ∆fi dt −∫ ∆f jdt) = ∆Pgi − ∆PDi ⎡ f 0 D1

⎢− 0

f0

−

f0

0 0 0 0 0⎥

⎤

f 0 dt j≠1 ⎢ 2 H1 2H1 2H1 ⎥

⎢ 1 1 ⎥

(17) ⎢− − 0 0 0 0 0 0 0⎥

⎢ Tg 1 R 1 Tg1 ⎥

⎢ ⎥

∆Ptiei = ∫ 2πT12

0 1 1

( ∆f i − ∆f j ) dt ,i ≠ j;i, j =1,2 (18) ⎢ 0

Tt 1

−

Tt 1

0 0 0 0 0 0⎥

⎢ ⎥

d∆Pgi 1 1 ⎢ T12 * 0 0 0 0 − T12 *

0 0 0⎥

=− ∆Pgi + ∆x Ei (19) A=⎢ B 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0⎥

⎥

⎢ 1

dt Tti Tti ⎢ a f0 f 0D2 f0 ⎥

⎢ 0 0 0 − 12 0 − 0 0⎥

d∆x Ei 1 1 1 ⎢ 2H 2 2H 2 2H 2 ⎥

=− ∆x Ei + ∆f i + ∆Pci (20) ⎢ 1 1 ⎥

dt Tgi Tgi R i Tgi ⎢ 0 0 0 0 0 −

Tg 2 R 2

−

Tg 2

0 0⎥

⎢ ⎥

The meaning, and the values, of the various coefficients of ⎢

⎢ 0 0 0 0 0 0

1

−

1

0⎥

⎥

(17-20) can be found in the Appendix, at the end of the ⎢ Tt 2 Tt 2 ⎥

⎢⎣ 0 0 0 a 12 0 B2 0 0 0⎥⎦

paper.

⎡ 1 ⎤

⎢0 Tg1

0 0 0 0 0 0 0⎥

′

Bd = ⎢ ⎥

⎢ 1 ⎥

⎢0 0 0 0 0 0

Tg 2

0 0⎥

⎣ ⎦

⎡ f0 ⎤

⎢− 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0⎥

2 H1 ⎥ (23)

Γd ′ = ⎢

⎢ f0 ⎥

⎢ 0 0 0 0 0 − 0 0 0 0⎥

⎢⎣ 2H2 ⎥⎦

whereas the vector

∆P D = [ ∆PD1 ∆PD2 ] (24)

Fig. 1. A two-area power system is the disturbance vector. We redefine the states in terms

of their steady-state values, i.e. xi*=xi-xiss for i=1...9.

This change of variables puts the system into the form

x *=Ax*+Bdu with x*(0)=-xss The matrices A and Bd ⎡−047 . −297

. 103 . 18 . −059

. 0 0 0 0 ⎤

Kdn = ⎢

remain unchanged. ⎣ 0 0 0 0 0 −031

. −385

. 326

. − . ⎥⎦

059

In order to prevent unnecessary complications in The eigenvalues of closed-loop system, (i.e. the

the notation, we drop the superscript (*) in the sequel. eigenvalues of A+BdKd) are now: -62.95; -1.03; -0.35;

The eigenvalues of A as in (23) (for the numerical values -0.6±j0.45; -0.54±j11.03; -0.20±j2.51. The frequency and

which are given at Appendix) are: -13.29; -13.26; -1.62; the generated power responses, to a load change of 1%,

-1.3±j2.5; -0.5±j3.5; 0; 0. The system is unstable, since it are shown in Fig. 3, which satisfy all the static and

has two zero eigenvalues, due to the integrators of the dynamic specifications.

secondary control loops. In order to compute a stabilizing

Kd matrix as in (15), we apply the linear programming

method. The static feedbacks are shown in Fig. 1, in the

portion of the figure marked with dotted lines, with k1i=αi

for i=1...5, and k2i=βi for i=1...4. The method described in

paragraph III results into the following values:

⎡−25

. −25

. −25. −25. 39. 0 0 0 0⎤

CIFKd = ⎢

⎣0 0 0 0 0 −193 . −25 . −017 . ⎥⎦

. 119

It is remarked that the above values of CIFKd are in the

transformed system of coordinates (used to apply the

method based on the linear programming), whereas in the

initial system of coordinates CIFKd has the values:

⎡−006 . −038

. 031 . −002

. 006 . 0 0 0 0 ⎤

Kd = ⎢ ∆Pg1(t) and ∆Pg2(t)of areas 1 and 2 to a load increase ∆PD1=0.01 pu, with

⎣ 0 0 0 0 0 −001 . −097

. 095 . ⎥⎦

. −002 the new decentralized stabilizing feedback Kdn .

The system is now stable, since its eigenvalues (i.e. the

to be large or the dynamic and static behavior is not so

eigenvalues of A+BdKd) are: -8.3; -2.13±j1.35; ‘‘good’’, we make use of the decentralized optimization

-1.23±j3.71; -0.48±j6.25; -0.018; -0.017. The responses of algorithm as in paragraph IV.

the frequencies ∆f1 and ∆f2, of the change in the tie-lie We define the Q and R matrices, necessary in the

power ∆Ptie and of the generated powers ∆Pg1 and ∆Pg2, to optimization algorithm [12], by defining a set of

a 1% increase of the load, are shown in the Fig. 2 requirements which the system should satisfy:

1. The static frequency deviation ∆fistat and the static

change in the tie-line power ∆Ptie, following a step load

change, must be zero.

2. The transient frequency deviation should not exceed

±0.02Hz under normal conditions, and the time error

should not exceed ± 3 seconds.

Expressing all this in mathematical form, we must

have the sum of following terms:

( ) ( )

2 2

( ∆f1 ) 2 + ( ∆f2 ) 2 + ( ∆Ptie1 ) 2 + ∫ ACE1dt + ∫ ACE2dt

are penalized by adding the terms: ( ∆Pc1 ) 2 + ( ∆Pc2 ) 2 . This

Fig. 2. Frequency responses ∆f1(t), ∆f2(t) and the generated powers requires that the matrix R -corresponding to the term u'Ru-

∆Pg1(t) and ∆Pg2(t) of areas 1 and 2 to a load increase ∆PD1=0.01 pu, is the 2x2 unity matrix. The cost function is defined as

with the decentralized stabilizing feedback Kd.

C = ∫ ( x ′Qx + u ′Ru)dt

The settling time of these responses is out of the Since Af=A+BdKd is stable, we apply the decentralized

specifications. So, in step 3 of the proposed algorithm, by optimization technique [12] by selecting properly the

changing the constraints limits of the revised simplex entries of Q and R matrices for achieving ‘‘better’’

method, we achieve a new feedback matrix Kd (referred in responses. This results in an optimal CIFKdopt matrix, with

the initial system of coordinates): the values in the original system of coordinates equals to:

⎡−003 . −133

. 029 . −047

. 131 . 0 0 0 0⎤ full load): R=2.4 Hz/pu MW

Kdopt = ⎢

. ⎥⎦

Load constant (1 percent increase in load, for 1 percent

⎣ 0 0 0 0 0 −001

. 039

. −045

. −06

frequency increase): D=8.33 x10pu MW/Hz

Time constant of a non-reheat turbine generator: Tt= 0.3s

The eigenvalues of A+BdKdopt are now: -6.31; -5.08±j6.32; Time constant of speed-governing mechanism: Tg= 0.08s

-1.86; -1.10 ±j3.31, -0.99±j0.45; -0.73. The frequency Tie-line capacity: Pmax12= 200 MW

and the generated power responses, to a load change of Nominal tie-line power angle: δ10- δ20=300

1%, are shown in Fig. 4. Synchronizing coefficient: T12*=2πT120

T120= P120cos(δ10- δ20)=0.545 / 2π = 0.087,

Frequency bias parameter: B=0.425 pu MW/Hz

Load disturbance parameter: ∆PD= 0.01 pu MW.

REFERENCES

[1] B.D.O. Anderson, and D.J. Clements, ‘‘Algebraic characterizations of

fixed modes in decentralized control’’, Automatica, vol. 17, no. 5,

1981, pp. 703-712.

[2] J. Caloyiannis, and P. Fessas, ‘‘Fixed modes and local feedbacks in

interconnected systems’’, Int. J. Control, vol. 37, no. 1, 1982, pp. 175-

182.

[3] C.T. Chen, Linear System Theory and Design, New York: Holt,

Reinhard and Winston, 1984.

[4] E.J. Davison, and U. Ozguner, ‘‘Characterizations of decentralized

fixed modes for interconnected systems’’, Automatica, vol. 19, no. 2,

1983, pp. 169-182.

Fig. 4. Frequency responses ∆f1(t), ∆f2(t) and the generated powers ∆Pg1(t) [5] O.I Elgerd, Electric Power Systems: An Introduction, New York: Mac

and ∆Pg2(t) of areas 1 and 2 to a load increase ∆PD1=0.01 pu, with the Graw Hill, 1974.

optimal decentralized stabilizing feedback Kdopt. [6] O.I Elgerd, and C.E. Fosha, ‘‘Optimum Megawatt-Frequency control

of Multiarea Power Systems’’, IEEE Transactions on Power

From a comparison of the responses as in Fig. 3 Apparatus Systems, PAS-89, 1970, pp. 556-563.

and 4 it seems that the responses in the last are "better" than [7] D.P. Iracleous, A.T. Alexandridis “A multi-task automatic generation

in the other, since they have less oscillatory behavior and control for power regulation”, El. Power Sys. Research 73, 2005, pp.

275-285.

settling times. It should be also noted that in the last (where [8] P.S. Fessas, ‘‘Stabilization with LLSVF: The State of the Art’’,

the optimal decentralized feedback is applied to the system), Report Nr. 82-04, AIE/ETH, 1982, Zurich, Switzerland.

the feedback coefficients are indeed smaller i.e. easier to [9] P.S. Fessas, ‘Stabilizability of two interconnected systems with local

realization. state-vector feedback’’, Intern. J. of Control, vol. 46, 1987, pp. 2075-

2086.

VI. CONCLUSION [10] P.S. Fessas, ‘‘A generalization of some structural results to

interconnected systems’’, Int. J. of Control, vol. 43, 1988, pp. 1169-

In this paper we considered the decentralized 1186.

control of a power system, resulting from the [11] C.E. Fosha, and O.I Elgerd, ‘‘The Megawatt-Frequency control

problem’’, Power Apparatus Systems, PAS-89, 1970, pp. 563-576.

interconnection of two local power systems. After the [12] J.C. Geromel and J. Bernussou, ‘‘An algorithm for optimal

system model was determined, it was viewed as an decentralized regulation of linear quadratic interconnected systems’’,

interconnected system (A, Bd) for which the methods of the Automatica, vol. 15, 1979, pp. 489-491.

decentralized control of interconnected systems were [13] T. Kailath, Linear systems, NJ: .Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs,

1980.

applied (intercontrolability matrix D(s), its kernel U(s),

[14] D. Luenberger, Linear and Non-linear Programming, Addison-

equivalent system {M(s), I2} in the operator domain, Wesley Publ. Company. 1984.

stabilization with local state feedbacks via linear [15] C.E. Parisses, and P.S. Fessas “Numerical computation of the local

programming methods and optimization techniques). feedback stabilizing matrix via linear programming”, IEEE Trans. on

Automatic Control, vol. AC-43 (8), 1998, pp. 1175-1179.

Several responses of the simulated system were finally

[16] M.E. Sezer, and O. Huseyin, ‘‘Stabilizability of Linear Time

determined and analyzed. Invariant Systems using linear state feedbacks’’, IEEE Transactions

on Systems Man and Cybernetics, vol. SMC-8, 1978, pp. 751-756.

APPENDIX [17] D. Rerkpreedapong, A. Hasanovic, and A. Feliachi “Robust load

frequency control using genetic algorithms and linear matrix

inequalities”, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, vol. 18 (2), 2003,

The two identical control areas have the following system pp. 855-861.

data (the method is also applicable to systems that are not [18] S.H Wang, and E.D. Davison ‘‘On the stabilization of the

identical): decentralized control systems’’, IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control,

Nominal frequency: f0= 60 Hz vol. AC-18, 1974, pp. 473-478.

[19] W.A Wolovich, Linear Multivariable Systems, New-York: Springer

Total rated area capacity: Pr=2000 MW Verlag, 1974.

Nominal operating load: PD0=1000 MW [20] T.C. Yang, H. Cimen, Q.M. Zhu, ‘‘Decentralized load-frequency

Inertia constant: H=5.0 s controller design based on structured singular values’’ IEE Proc.

Regulation (4 percent drop in speed between no load, and Gener. Trasm. Distrb., vol 145 (1), 1998, pp. 7-14

- Course OutlineUploaded bygui0381
- Term Paper MathsUploaded bytejas
- Analysis of Structural Member SystemsUploaded bykhiettrth
- Project Control 2010Uploaded byHMaSN
- Operatii operatii pe matrici javaPe Matrici JavaUploaded byBogdan Mates
- Notas de OptimizacionUploaded byRaul Mijares Egueguiguren
- Linier Ship Dynamic paperUploaded byAjib Setiawan
- Gird Systems Intro to Music EspritUploaded byMiltes Mpasi
- matrix TransformationsUploaded byPablo Alejandro
- Medical Image Super Resolution Based On Dual Tree Complex Wavelet TransformUploaded byGRD Journals
- A General Unified Approach to Modelling Switching-converter Power StagesUploaded byFernando Botteron
- ENCH 225 Spring 2015 Course PacketUploaded byCharlie CB Portner
- Ejercicio 2Uploaded byHenry Rojas
- Tarea 4 ALAUploaded byEsteban Villa Restrepo
- Aplication Analisis MultivariadoUploaded byrotero_pujol
- 1DOFTORSIONUploaded bydhineshp
- lec8 (1)Uploaded byKuthe Prashant Gajanan
- C8BD2C3Cd01Uploaded byItalo Chiarella
- Setpoint TrackingUploaded byNor Rochmad Hadi P
- Stabilization of Nonlinear Processes With Input ConstraintsUploaded byAnhTu NT
- DUploaded byHam Kam
- bsebtUploaded byDeyna Quiroz
- Homework AssignmentUploaded byKunal Patel
- Modul Spm Set 8 (Latih Tubi)Uploaded bynizafz
- cover letter personal growth quarter 2Uploaded byapi-343647683
- Gird Systems Intro to Music EspritUploaded byppeng
- hinfcontrol.pdfUploaded bykkkprot
- State Space a to NPGMV ControlUploaded bySohibul Hajah
- gauesUploaded bychitra
- OOPS fileUploaded byAnkit Chatterjee

- Load-Frequency Regulation Under0-06Uploaded bykodandaram
- Plc Fundamental TheoryUploaded bykodandaram
- Fundamental Plc Trg ScheduleUploaded bykodandaram
- Mrp Lvsgr 15 Dec 08[1]Uploaded bykodandaram
- Motor StandardsUploaded bykodandaram
- Microprocessor Based Overload Relay 3RB12Uploaded bykodandaram
- Motor Maintenance FoliosUploaded bykodandaram
- Basics of AC Motors 2Uploaded bykodandaram
- Contactor BasicsUploaded bykodandaram
- Handbook of AC Servo SystemsUploaded bykodandaram
- Basics of CBsUploaded bykodandaram
- Basics of AC Drives 3Uploaded bykodandaram
- Basics of AC Drives 4Uploaded bykodandaram
- AC motorsUploaded byDamodharan Chandran
- Basics of AC Drives 2Uploaded bykodandaram
- Basics of AC Drives 1Uploaded bykodandaram
- Baba ResumeUploaded bykodandaram
- kodanda pjt-06Uploaded bykodandaram
- ge_-06Uploaded bykodandaram
- fp480-06Uploaded bykodandaram
- -06Uploaded bykodandaram
- kothariapp2000-06Uploaded bykodandaram
- Abstract, N_ Kishor-06Uploaded bykodandaram
- Zahn MagneticFluidandNanoparticleApplicationstoNanotechnology2001JofNanopartResvol3p73Uploaded bykodandaram
- Resume(Core)[1]Uploaded bykodandaram
- NanoUploaded bykodandaram
- f127Uploaded bykodandaram

- Short AnswersUploaded byvivektrips77
- Stress RecoveryUploaded byVipin Nair
- Laser Beams and ResonatorUploaded byMahdi Movahedi
- How to Study Engineering Mathematics for GATE GATE Guru by KreatryxUploaded byMukulGarg
- POWER SYSTEM ANALYSISUploaded byMelwin Jay Porras Asturias
- Non linear analysis of pile groupsUploaded bysicorar
- CagUploaded byWillimSmith
- Lower-Upper Symmetric-Gauss-Seidel Method for the Euler and Navier-Stokes EquationsUploaded byJaeHeung Gill
- Sim Ular User ManualUploaded byLuis Alberto Izarra
- Gegenbauer Collocation Integration Methods: Advances In Computational Optimal Control TheoryUploaded byGeorge Papazafeiropoulos
- A Class of SEC-DeD-DAEC Codes Derived FromUploaded byThahsin Thahir
- Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR)Uploaded byDeepika Sirisha
- Doyle Stein (Ieee Tac) [1981]Uploaded bykorsair
- CHEMICUploaded byRajan Chidambaram Siva
- 6Uploaded byAna Paula Romeira
- RProg.pdfUploaded byVarun Tomar
- hp39gs-manual.pdfUploaded byMatheus Paes Peçanha
- Maths SyllabusUploaded byTanha Mobi
- IO AnalysisUploaded byNikhil Kasat
- B.tech.Aerospace Engineering SyllabusUploaded byRobin Johny
- CE catalogue.pdfUploaded byssn
- Computational Form-finding Methods for Fabric StructuresUploaded byrigasch
- Analysis and design of guyed transmission towers—Case study in Kuwait.pdfUploaded byParth Gondalia
- Matlab Image ProcessingUploaded byAmarjeetsingh Thakur
- 567 Public AdministrationUploaded byScarmaker
- The Network of Global Corporate ControlUploaded bySorg84
- eth_biwi_00562-1Uploaded byJobin Varghese
- FEM - 6 Isoparametric ElementsUploaded bywiyorejesend22u.info
- STAAD.pro Staadpro at HomeUploaded bycbler
- Line Arvs Nonlinear BucklingUploaded byjnsm2098