Robust Decentralized Controller Design Via Ai To Enhance Power System Dynamic Performance

Zagazig University
Faculty of Engineering
Electrical Power and Machines Department

ROBUST DECENTRALIZED CONTROLLER
DESIGN VIA AI TO ENHANCE POWER
SYSTEM DYNAMIC PERFORMANCE

Prepared by

EHAB SALIM ALI MOHAMMED SALAMA
M.Sc. & B.Sc. in Electrical Engineering, Faculty of
Engineering ,Zagazig University

A Thesis
Submitted to the Faculty of Engineering in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements For The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in
Electrical Engineering

Supervised By:

Prof. Dr. M. E.Mandour Prof. Dr. Z. S. El-Razaz
Prof. of Electrical power Prof. of Electrical power
Zagazig university Zagazig university

2006

__|] __|] j|] __

" j|] _] ]g_ _j_ _g _ ] _j_ _
]___ __j_ "

____|] j|] __
,]__|] ]__ , _] ||[ ,
Zagazig University
Faculty of Engineering
Electric Power and Machines Department

ROBUST DECENTRALIZED CONTROLLER DESIGN
VIA AI TO ENHANCE POWER SYSTEM DYNAMIC
PERFORMANCE

Prepared by

EHAB SALIM ALI MOHAMMED SALAMA

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Degree of Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering.

Approved by the examining committee

Prof. Dr. M. M. El-Metwally

Prof. Dr. F. M. A. Bendary

Prof. Dr. M. E. Mandour

Prof. Dr. Z. S. El-Razaz

2006

Acknowledgement

First of all, I would like to express all thanks to God and I look forward for his
assistance.

My deep appreciation goes to Prof Dr. M. E. Mandour and Prof. Dr. Z. S. El-
Razaz for their valuable guidance, suggestions, continuous encouragement during the
progress of this work Moreover, my thanks go to the staff of the electrical power and
machines department.

My special thanks are for my mother for her prayers for me, which were a great
help to me to complete this work. And I am really grateful to my wife for her great
help and co-operation.
I
ABSTRACT

Power systems are modeled as large-scale systems composed of a set of small-
interconnected subsystems. It is generally impossible to incorporate many feed back
loops into the controller design for large scale interconnected systems and is also too
costly even if they can be implemented. These motivate the development of
decentralized control theory where each subsystem is controlled independently on its
local available information.

On the other hand, the operating conditions of power systems are always varying to
satisfy different load demands. Control systems are therefore required to have the
ability to damp the system oscillations that might threaten the system stability as the
load demand increases. However, as power systems are large-scale nonlinear systems
in nature, the applications of conventional power system stabilizer (PSS) are limited.
There is thus a need for controllers, which are robust to changes in the system
operating condition. Robust controllers based on control theory are particularly
suited for this purpose.
H

This thesis proposes two robust decentralized controllers for multimachine power
system instead of using a complex centralized controller. The first one is based on
theory, and results in high order controller. The second controller is a
proportional integral (PI) type, and is tuned by a novel robust performance as the first
one, but it is more appealing from an implementation point of view. In more detail,
the second control design is first cast into the robust
H control design in terms of

linear matrix inequalities (LMI) in order to obtain robustness against system operating
conditions. An additional constraint is that the structure of the controller is predefined
as a PI type, which is ideally practical for industry. In order to obtain the optimal
controller parameters with regards to the
H and controller structure constraints,

genetic algorithms (GAs), a powerful probabilistic search technique is used to find the
control parameters of the PI controller.

II
To treat the problem of possible adverse interaction between multiple decentralized
controllers, three global control strategies are introduced in this thesis. The first,
which is a multi-input multi-output (MIMO) centralized with effective
communicated information. The second is the reduced centralized based on the
balanced truncation method. While the third is based on two level PSS. The
simulation results show that the proposed controllers ensure adequate damping for
widely varying system-operating conditions.
H

III
Abbreviations

AI

Artificial Intelligence
ANN

Artificial Neural Network
ASVC

Advanced Static Var Compensator
FACTS

Flexible AC Transmission System
GA Genetic Algorithms

LFC

Load Frequency Control
OC

Optimal Control
PI

Proportional Integral Controller
PID Proportional Integral Differential Controller

PSO

Particle Swarm Optimization
PSS

Power System Stabilizer
LMI

Linear Matrix Inequalities
LQ Linear Quadratic
SA

Simulated Annealing
SAPSS

Simulated Annealing Based Power System Stabilizer
SMIB

Single Machine Infinite Bus
SSV

Structure Singular Values
STATCOM

Static Compensator
SVC

Static Var Compensator
TCSC

Thyristor Controlled Series Capacitor
TS

Tabu Search
UPFC

Unified Power Flow Controller
Vref

Reference Voltage

IV
List of Symbols

Angular speed.
The deviation from nominal values.
V Infinite bus voltage.

t
V Generator terminal voltage.
e
jX
e
R + Transmission line resistance and inductance.
fd
E Exciter voltage.
a
T
a
K ,
Gain and time constant of the excitation system.
f
T
f
K ,
Gain and time constant of the field system.
m
T Mechanical input torque.
e
T Electrical torque.
d
I
,
q
I
d-and q-axis terminal current respectively.
I
do
, I
qo
d -and q-axis nominal current respectively.
j
Inertia coefficient, H
j
2 = .
Vqo Vdo, The nominal voltage in d and q axes in p.u.
q
E
'

Internal voltage behind in p.u.
d
X
'
qo
E Q axis voltage.
Torque angle in rad.
do
` Time constant of excitation system in sec.
B

Rated angular speed.
d
X ,
q
X d-and q-axis reactance of the generator respectively.
'
d
X The d- axis transient reactance of the generator.
H Inertia constant.
D
Q A state weighting matrix.
D
R A control weighting matrix.
K Controller.
D C B A , , ,
The state space equation.
V
r
D
r
C
r
B
r
A , , ,
The state space equation of reduced-order model.
k
D
k
C B
k
A
k
, , ,
The state space equation of controller.
cl
D
cl
C
cl
B
cl
A , , ,
The state space equation of closed loop system.
C
A = coupling block matrix A.
ij
A
D
A = decoupling block matrix A.
ii
A

C
B = coupling block matrix B.
ij
B

D
B = decoupling block matrix B.
ii
B
C
C = coupling block matrix C.
ij
C
D
C = decoupling block matrix C.
ii
C
l
u
Local control signal.
g
u
Global control signal.
t x ) (
Denote the state vector.
t W ) (
The vector of input disturbance.
t u ) (
The vector of control input.
t y ) (
The vector of measured variables.
t Z ) (
The vector of error signals.
) (s
ZW
T The closed loop transfer matrix from the disturbance W to the
regulator output Z .
(gopt) The norm of the transfer function . ) (s
ZW
T
S
T ,
d
T The change in the synchronizing and damping torque
component respectively.
s
K ,
d
K The synchronizing and damping torque coefficient respectively.
Kp, Ki PI controller gains.
w
T Washout time constant.

VI
Contents

Contents

page

Acknowledgment

Abstract

Abbreviations

List of Symbols

Contents

List of Figures

List of Tables

I

II

IV

V

VII

X

XIV

Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Power System and Robust Control Technique. 1
1.2 Power System Modes of Oscillation. 2
1.3 Power System Stabilizers. 3
1.4 Decentralized Control. 4
1.5 Conflict Between Centralized and Decentralized
Controller in PSS Design.
6
1.6 Thesis Objectives. 7
1.7 Outline of The Thesis. 8

Chapter 2 Review of Literature
2.1 Introduction. 11
2.2 Previous Work. 11
2.3 Contributions of This Thesis. 24

Chapter 3 Modeling of Power Systems
3.2 System Equations. 26
3.3 Block Diagram Simulation. 28
3.4 State Space Formulation. 32
3.5 Formulation of The System Model. 35
3.6 System Under Study. 39
3.7 State Space Equations. 42

VII
Contents

Chapter 4 Centralized and Decentralized Controllers
4.2 Large Scale Controllers. 46
4.3 System Representation. 48
4.3.1 State and Output Feedback 49
4.4 Design of The Optimal Decentralized Controller. 50
4.5 Design of The Sub optimal Decentralized Controller. 52
4.6
H Robust Controller. 53
4.6.1 Linear Matrix Inequality (LMI). 56
4.6.2 Robust
H Control Design Via LMI. 58

4.7 Robust Controller Design Via Reduced Order Model. 60
4.8 Limitations and Shortcomes of Previous Mentioned
Controllers.
62
4.9 Proposed Robust Control Design Via GALMI. 63
4.9.1 An Overview of Genetic Algorithms. 64
4.9.2 An Overview of Particle Swarm Optimization. 66
4.10 Global Controller Design. 68
4.11 Proposed Two Level PSS Controller Design. 71

Chapter 5 Robust Controller Design for Single Machine Infinite
Bus

5.2 Dynamic Model of SMIB. 73
5.3
Implementation of
H Controller.
76
5.4
Balanced Truncation

H Controller Implementation.
78
5.5 Implementation of GALMI Controller. 85
5.6 Recommendation for Multimachine System

93

Chapter 6 Robust Decentralized Controller Design for
Multimachine System

6.2 Evaluation of Multimachine System. 96
6.2.1 System Modes Classification. 96
6.2.2 Block Diagram Simulation of Multimachine
System.
98
6.2.3 Response of The System Without Controller. 100
6.2.4 Effect of Loading on System Dynamic. 101

VIII
Contents
6.3 Implementation of Optimal Controller. 102
6.4 Implementation of Sub optimal Controller. 107
6.5 Fixed Modes Problem Formulation. 111
6.6 Centralized and Decentralized Controller Design Via
.
H
113
6.7 Dynamic Model of Multimachine System 120
6.8 Simulation and Evaluation of GALMI 122
6.9 Implementation of Global Controller 125
6.10 Implementation of The Proposed Two Level Controller 131

6.11 System Performance With Two Subsequence
Disturbances
135

Chapter 7 Conclusions and Recommendations

7.1 Conclusions of This Thesis. 137
7.2 Recommendations for Future Work. 138

References 140

Appendix A 147

IX
List of Figures

List of Figures

Figure (1.1) Block diagram of PSS. 3
Figure (1.2) Schematic diagram of centralized controller. 5
Figure (1.3) Schematic diagram of decentralized controller. 6
Chapter 2 Review of literature

Figure (3.1) Machine-infinite bus. 26
Figure (3.2) The block diagram of a single machine adopted to
be used in Simulink Toolbox.
31
Figure (3.3) Conversion from machine axes to common frame
axes.
35
Figure (3.4) Block diagram representation of a single machine
connected to the network.
39
Figure (3.5) System under study. 40
Figure (3.6) Matrix Q
1.
42
2.
43
Figure (3.8) Matrix A
0.
44
Figure (3.9) Matrix G
xs.
45

Chapter 4 Decentralized and Centralized Controllers

Figure (4.1) Flow chart of the controllers 47
Figure (4.2) Generalized block diagram of
H . 54
Figure (4.3) Flow chart of the GA optimization 65
Figure (4.4) Flow chart of the PSO optimization 67
Figure (4.5) Flow chart of the local and global controller 70
Figure (4.6) Proposed two level PSS design 72

Chapter 5 Robust Controller Design for Single Machine
Infinite Bus

Figure (5.1) Response of for 0.1 p.u step in Vref for tested
operating point
77
Figure (5.2) Response of for 0.1 p.u step in Vref for tested
operating point.
78

Figure (5.3) Response of for 0.1 p.u step in Vref for first
operating point
80
operating point
80
Figure (5.5) Change in control signal for 0.1 p.u step in Vref 81
Figure (5.6) Bode plot of the transfer function for first
operating point.
82

X
List of Figures
Figure (5.7) Response of for 0.1 p.u step in Vref for
second operating point.
83
second operating point.
83
Figure (5.9) Response of for 0.1 p.u step in Tm for second
operating point.
84

operating condition
85
Figure (5.11) change in control signal for 0.1 p.u step in Vref 86
Figure (5.12) Variations of objective function 87
Figure (5.13) Variations of Kp 87
Figure (5.14) Variations of Ki 88

Figure (5.15)
Response of for different values of
(gopt)
for P=1.0, Q=0.4
90

second operating condition.
91

Figure (5.17) Response of for 0.1 p.u step in Tm for second
operating condition.
92
Figure (5.18) Bode plot of the transfer function. 92

Chapter 6 Robust Decentralized Controller Design For
Multimachine System

Figure (6.1) System under study. 96
Figure (6.2) The block diagram of the system under study. 99
Figure (6.3) Response of
12
to 0.1 p.u step in Vref. 100
Figure (6.4) Response of to 0.1 p.u step in Vref.
12
100

Figure (6.5) Open loop poles (mechanical modes) for the 9
bus, 3 machine system.
102

13
w for 0.1 step in Vref of Gen. (1) 106
23

12
for 0.1 step in Vref of Gen. (1) 110
13

Figure (6.10a) Schematic of centralized output feedback
controller.
114
Figure (6.10b) Schematic of decentralized output feedback
controller.
114

XI
List of Figures
Figure (6.11) The response of
12
w for light load condition. 115
23
w for light load condition. 115

12
w for normal load condition. 116
23
w for normal load condition. 117

12
w for heavy load condition. 119
23
w for heavy load condition. 120

12
for light load condition with
three PI local decentralized controllers.
123

12
for normal load condition with
124

23
w for heavy load condition with
125
13
for light load condition due to
different robust global controllers.
126
13
w for light load condition due to
127

13
for normal load condition due
to different robust global controller.
128
12
w for normal load condition due
to different robust global controllers.
128

13
for heavy load condition due to
130
13
w for heavy load condition due to
131

Figure (6.26) Region in the left hand side of a vertical line 131

Figure (6.27) Comparison of
13
response for normal load
condition with different robust damping global
controllers.
132
12
w response for normal load
controllers.
133

XII
List of Figures

12
w response for heavy load
controllers.
134
13
w response for heavy
controllers.
134

12
w under two subsequence
disturbances.
135
13
w under two subsequence
disturbances.
136

XIII
List of Tables

List of Tables



Table (3.1) Bus data for the base case (Load flow) on the 100
MVA Base.
40

Table (3.2) Transmission lines and transformer data all values
are in p.u. on 100 MVA base.
41
Table (3.3) Generator data: Reactance values are in pu on a
100-MVA base.
41

Chapter 4 Decentralized and Centralized Controllers

Chapter 5 Robust Controller Design for Single Machine
Infinite Bus

Table (5.1) Eigenvalues of closed loop system with different
controllers.
79
Table (5.2) Comparison between three controllers for first
operating point
89
Table (5.3) Comparison between GA and PSO. 89

Chapter 6 Robust Decentralized Controller Design For
Multimachine System

Table (6.1) A part of the participation matrix corresponding to
the mechanical modes.
97
Table (6.2) System modes after classification. 97
Table (6.3) The eigenvalues, and frequencies associated with
the rotor oscillation modes of the system.
98
Table (6.4) Loading conditions for the 9 bus, 3 machine
system ( in p.u).
101
Table (6.5) Open loop eigenvalues of the rotor oscillation
modes of the system.
102
Table (6.6) System modes with optimal decentralized
controller and centralized one.
105
Table (6.7) The eigenvalues, and damping ratios associated
with the rotor oscillation modes of the system for
both controllers.
105

Table (6.8) System modes with sub optimal decentralized and
centralized controller.
109
Table (6.9) The eigenvalues, and damping ratios associated
with the rotor oscillation modes of the system for
both controllers.
109
Table (6.10) System modes with variable controller. 112

XIV
List of Tables
Table (6.11) Eigenvalues of closed loop system with
centralized and decentralized controllers for 1.0
p.u (normal load).
118
Table (6.12) Eigenvalues of closed loop system for different
operating conditions with three GALMI
controllers.
123
Table (6.13) Eigenvalues of closed loop system with global and
reduced global controller for 1.00 p.u (normal
load).
129

XV

Chapter 1

Introduction

1.1 Power System and Robust Control Technique

Power systems are usually large nonlinear systems, which are often subject to low
frequency oscillations when working under some adverse loading conditions. The
oscillation may sustain and grow to cause system separation if no adequate damping
is available. To enhance system damping, the generators are equipped with power
system stabilizers (PSSs) that provide supplementary feedback stabilizing signals in
the excitation systems. PSSs enhance the power system stability limit by improving
the system damping of low frequency oscillations associated with the
electromechanical modes. Many approaches are available for PSS design, most of
which are based either on classical control methods or on intelligent control strategies.

Power systems continually undergo changes in the operating condition due to changes
in the loads, generation, and in the transmission network resulting in accompanying
changes in the system dynamics. A well-designed stabilizer has to perform
satisfactorily in the presence of such variations in the system. In other words, the
stabilizer should be robust to changes in the system over its entire operating range.

The nonlinear differential equations, which simulate the behavior of a power system,
can be linearized at a particular operating point to obtain a linear model, which
represents the small signal oscillatory response of the power system. Any variation in
the operating condition of the system may cause a variation in the system model. For
a different variation in the operating conditions of a particular system a set of a linear
models, each corresponding to one particular operating condition may be generated.
Since, at any given instant, the actual plant could correspond to any model in this set,
a robust controller would have to impart adequate damping to each one of these entire
sets of linear models.
1
Robust control technique has been applied to power system controller design since
1980s. The main advantage of this technique is that it presents a natural tool for
successfully modeling plant variations. Several studies, which will be mentioned in
previous work, have been devoted to the design of power system controllers for PSS
and/or FACTS devices using
H . In these studies, many classical control

objectives such as disturbance attenuation, robust stabilization of power systems are
expressed in terms of performance and tackled by
H

H

synthesis techniques.
The control problem is to find a controller that minimizes
H where
= ) (s
ZW
T and represents the norm of the transfer function of the output (Z)
to the disturbance (W). In other words, minimize the energy of the output signals (Z)
for a given set of exogenous signals (W). All these studies produce a controller, which
is robust. These controllers provide added damping to the system under a wide
range of operating conditions.

1.2 Power System Modes of Oscillation

An electrical power system consists of many individual elements connected together
to form a large, complex system capable of generating, transmitting and distributing
electrical energy over a large geographical area. Due to these interconnections of
elements, a large variety of dynamic interactions are possible to done which may
affect on the system.

The stability problem involves the study of the electromechanical oscillations inherent
in power systems [1]. Power systems exhibit various modes of oscillation due to
interactions among system components. Power systems usually have two distinct
forms of oscillations.

1- Local modes are associated with the swinging of units at a generating station
with respect to the rest of the power system. The term local is used because the
oscillations are localized at one station or a small part of the power system.
Typical local-mode frequency range from 0.8-2.0 Hz.
2
2- Inter-area modes are associated with the swinging of many machines in one
part of the system against machines in other parts. They are caused by two or
more groups of closely coupled machines being interconnected by weak ties.
Typically have a frequency in the range from 0.1-0.8 Hz.

Undamped oscillations once started often grow in magnitude over the span of many
seconds. Sustained oscillations in the power system are undesirable for many reasons.
They can lead to fatigue of machine shafts, cause excessive wear of mechanical
actuators of machine controllers and also make system operation more difficult. It is
therefore desirable that oscillations are well damped. So PSS is necessary to provide
appropriate damping of undesirable oscillations caused by disturbances.

1.3 Power System Stabilizers

The basic function of a power system stabilizer is to extend the stability limits by
adding damping to generator rotor oscillations by controlling its excitation using
auxiliary stabilizing signal(s). To provide damping, the stabilizer must produce a
component of electric torque, which is in phase with rotor speed deviations. The
oscillations of concern typically occur in the frequency range of approximately 0.1 to
2.0 Hz, and insufficient damping of these oscillations may limit the ability to transmit
the power. The block diagram used in industry is shown in Figure (1.1). It consists of
a washout circuit, phase compensator (lead-lag circuit), stabilizer gain and limiter [2].

Figure (1.1) Block diagram of PSS
K
STAB

Stabilizer gain Washout Lead-Lag
u
max
u
min
u
sT
w
1+sT
w
1+sT
1
1+sT
2
1+sT
3
1+sT
4
Lead-Lag

The phase compensation block provides the appropriate phase lead characteristic to
compensate for the phase lag between the exciter input and generator electrical
torque. The required phase lead can be obtained by choosing the values of time
constants .
4 1
,....,T T
3
The signal washout block serves as a high pass filter, with the time constant high
enough to allow signals associated with oscillations in speed to pass as it. Without it,
steady changes in speed would modify the terminal voltage. It allows the PSS to
respond only for a change in the speed. From the viewpoint of the washout function,
the value of is not critical and may be in the range of 1 to 20 seconds.
W
T
W
T

The stabilizer gain determines the amount of damping introduced by PSS.
Ideally the gain should be set at a value corresponding to maximum damping.
However, in practice the gain is set to a value that results in satisfactory damping of
the critical system modes without compromising the stability of other modes.
STAB
K

In order to restrict the level of generator terminal voltage fluctuation during transient
conditions, limits are imposed on PSS outputs.

1.4 Decentralized Control

The complexity and high performance requirements of present day industrial
processes place increasing demands on control technology. The orthodox concept of
driving a large system by a central controller has become unattractive for either
economic or reliability reason. New emerging notions are subsystems,
interconnections, parallel processing, and information constraints, to mention a few.
In complex system, where databases are developed around the plants with distributed
sources of data, a need for fast control action in response to local inputs and
perturbations dictates the use of distributed (that is, decentralized ) information and
control structures.

The accumulated experience in controlling complex system suggests three basic
reasons for using decentralized control structures:
1- dimensionality ,
2- information structure constraints, and
3- uncertainty.
4
Because the amount of computation required to analyze and control a large-scale
system grows faster than its size, it is beneficial to decompose the system into
subsystems, and design controls for each subsystem independently based on local
subsystem dynamics and its interconnections. In this way, special structure features
of a system can be used to devise feasible and efficient decentralized strategies for
solving large control problems previously impractical to solve by one shot
centralized methods.

A restriction on what and where the information is delivered in a system is a standard
feature of interconnected systems. For example, the standard automatic generation
control in power system is decentralized because of the cost of excessive information
requirements imposed by a centralized control strategy over distant geographic areas.
The structure constraints on information make the centralized methods for control and
estimation design difficult to apply, even to systems with small dimensions.

It is a common assumption that neither the internal nor the external nature of complex
systems can be known precisly in deterministic or stochastic terms. Decentralized
control strategies are inherently robust with respect to a wide variety of structure and
unstructured perturbations in complex systems[3].

Figures (1.2-1.3) represent a schematic diagram of centralized and decentralized
controller respectively.

K
G
-1

G
0
G
1

G
2

Figure (1.2) Schematic diagram of centralized controller

5

G
-1

G
0
G
1

G
2

K
-1
K
0
K
1
K
2
Figure (1.3) Schematic diagram of decentralized controller

1.5 Conflict Between Centralized and Decentralized Controller in
PSS Design

Two basic approches are avaliable for designing PSS. The first approach is to use a
multi-input multi-output centralized controller which would require a significant
amount of system wide communication. With this approach, the controller success
heavily depends on the communication which can be a serious disadvantage. Also a
controller failure might paralyze the whole network. So centralization is undesirable.

The second approach is the decentralized controller schemes, which have a number of
advantages. From which its operation requires a local signal so it is easy to design as
a hardware. So a failure of one controller has no detrimental effect on the
performance of the other controllers. Also the dependence on communication between
control stations is greatly reduced.

In the centralized PSS, the control signal to a machine is a function of the outputs for
all the machines. This affects on the gain matrix of centralized PSS for multimachine
power system by making it full. So a transmitted signals among the generating units is
needed. For this the centralized controller system is complex to design and
implement.
6
In the decentralized PSS, the control signal for each machine should be a function of
its output only. So the gain matrix should have a zeros for all offdiagonal terms. For
this the decentralized control scheme is preferable.

1.6 Thesis Objectives

For large power systems comprising many interconnected machines, the PSS
parameter tuning is a complex task due to the presence of several poorly damped
modes of oscillation. The problem is further complicated by continuous variation in
power system operating conditions. To meet modern power system requirements,
controllers have to guarantee stability and robustness over a wide range of system
operating conditions. Thus the robustness is one of the major issues in power system
controllers design. So the recently developed
H synthesis is the way to handle

these requirements.

The main objectives of the thesis:

1- Design a robust controller for single machine infinite bus (SMIB)
a) Design a robust controller based on the
H .
b) Design a reduced controller based on balanced truncation method.
c) Design a proportional integral (PI) controller using the genetic algorithms
(GAs), which is well known as the new generation of the artificial
intelligence (AI). The parameters of the PI controller are tuned to mimic
the robust performance of the
H optimal one designed in (a). In other

word, the parameters of the PI controller have to obtain the same as that
of . More specifically, GAs is used to obtain the control parameters
of the PI controller subject to the
H constraints in terms of linear matrix

inequalities (LMI). Hence, this control design is called GALMI.
d) Another optimization tool, which is particle swarm optimization (PSO) is
used to tune PI controller and ensure a best solution.
7
2- Design a robust controller for multimachine system
a) Design a centralized and decentralized robust controller based on the
optimal control method for PSS.
H
b) Design a GALMI for each area instead of the robust local decentralized
controller.
H

3- Design global controller to coordinate between the decentralized controllers
and ensure stability of the interconnected system.
a) Design a global controller based on multi-input multi-output (MIMO)
centralized controller.
H
b) Design a global controller based on reduced MIMO centralized
controller via balanced truncation method.
H
c) Design a global controller based on two level PSS. The parameters of PI
controller are selected to shift the undamped mechanical modes of
oscillation to the left hand side of vertical line in the complex s- plane by
GA.

1.7 Outline of The Thesis

The general description of the thesis is as follow:

Chapter 1: Discuss power system modes of oscillation and the classical structure of
PSS in brief. Also, conflict between centralized and decentralized controller in PSS
design are investigated. Moreover, introduces the reader to the thesis objectives and
outlines of their chapters.

Chapter 2: Performs a survey of the previous work, which discusses the relevant
work in the area of tuning PSS and robust control.

8
Chapter 3: Presents the steady state and dynamic models of a SMIB and
multimachine power system. The mathematical formulations have been manipulated
in details. The machine models have been formulated in state-space form.

Chapter 4: Illustrates the design of centralized and decentralized controllers using
optimal and sub-optimal method for multimachine power system. Moreover, three
robust controllers are proposed. The first is based on
H theory, and results in a

high number of states, which represents the order of controller. The second controller
is a reduced order controller based on balanced truncation. The third is the PI
controller, has a simple structure, which is more appealing from an implementation
point of view, and it is tuned by GAs to achieve the same robust performance as the
first one. More specifically, GAs optimization is used to tune the control parameters
of the PI controller subject to the
H constraints in terms of LMI. Hence, the third

control design is called GALMI. Particle swarm optimization (PSO), which is another
optimization technique, is used to tune the PI controller and ensure the best solution.
The previous controllers are further extended for designing centralized and
decentralized controller for multimachine power system based on . Moreover,
three global control strategies are introduced in this thesis to coordinate between the
decentralized controllers and ensure stability of the interconnected system. The first
utilizes a MIMO centralized
H controller system. The second is based on reduced

MIMO centralized controller via balanced truncation method. The third strategy
utilizes a two level PSS based on PI controller.
H

Chapter 5: The implementation and application of the three robust controllers are
illustrated for SMIB system. The first one is based on

high order controller. The second controller is the reduced one based on balanced
truncation. The third controller design is based on GAs and is called GALMI. PSO is
used instead of GAs to redesign the third controller. The performance of the
implemented controllers is obtained for different operating conditions.

9
Chapter 6: In this chapter, the implementation of the decentralized and centralized
controller based on optimal control theory and a comparison between them is
presented. Also the problem of fixed mode is presented. Moreover, a novel robust
decentralized controller with a simple structure is introduced based on the
optimal control method for PSS in multimachine area. The parameters of the PI
controller are tuned to mimic the robust performance of the decentralized one.
GALMI is used to obtain the control parameters of the PI controller. A global
controller is developed by reduced centralized controller based on minimum
communicated information to coordinate the local decentralized controllers. The
reduced controller is achieved by using the balanced truncation method. Another
global controller, which is more appealing from an implementation point of view, is
presented based on two level PSS to damp both local and interarea modes. Objective
function is presented using GA to allow the selection of the stabilizer parameters. The
effectiveness of the suggested techniques in damping local and interarea modes of
oscillations in multimachine power systems is verified under various operating
conditions to demonstrate their robust performance.
H

Chapter 7: highlights the significant contributions of the present work and draws the
scope for future work in this area.
10
Chapter 2

Review of Literature

2.1 Introduction

Power systems are modeled as large nonlinear highly structured systems. Conventional
linear control is limited since it can only deal with small disturbances about an operating
point. Two important issues for power systems control are robustness and a decentralized
structure. The robustness issue arises to deal with sources of uncertainties, which mainly
come from the varying network topology, and the dynamic variation of the load. Since
physical limitation on the system structure makes information transfer among subsystems
unfeasible, decentralized controllers for multimachine systems must be used.

Over the last four decades, considerable amounts of research have been done in the area
of design and application of robust and decentralized control for power system, which are
discussed in the following section.

2.2 Previous Work

The optimal output decentralized (local) and global control of a power system consisting
of three interconnected synchronous machines is considered in [4]. A computational
method is introduced which enables the optimal output control (either global or local) of
a complete system to be found, thereby allowing realistic configurations to be studied.
The main question considered in this paper is as follows: given a multimachine, what are
the advantages, if any of feeding back the outputs of other machines in a system to
control a given machine? How does the performance of such a control system (termed
global control) compare with the overall system performance obtained by controlling
each machine from its own outputs (termed local decentralized control)?

11
The load and frequency control of a multi-area interconnected power system is studied in
[5]. In this problem, the system is assumed to be subject to unknown constant
disturbances, and it is desired to obtain, if possible, robust decentralized controllers so
that the frequency and tie-line /net-area power flow of the power system are regulated.
The problem is solved by using some structural results recently obtained in decentralized
control, in conjunction with a parameter optimization method, which minimizes the
dominant eigenvalue of the closed-loop system. A class of minimum order robust
decentralized controllers, which solve this general multi-area load, and frequency control
problem is obtained. Application of these results is then made to solve the load and
frequency control problem for a power system consisting of nine synchronous machines
(described by a 119th-order system).

A method of coordinating multiple adaptive PSS units in a power system is presents in
[6]. The method is based on decentralized adaptive control scheme. Self-tuning adaptive
controllers are used as PSS units on given generators. The generators that tend to strongly
dynamically interact are coordinated by communication the controlled inputs between
them. The communicated information is used in such a way that the controllers are not
dependent on one another and is robust to any communication failures. Simulation results
that compare non-coordinated controllers with coordinated ones are presented for a 17
machines system. Two different system-operating points are tested. It is shown that better
system damping is obtained if the adaptive PSS units on the strongly coupled generators
are coordinated.

The design of a controller for a (TCSC) thyristor controlled series compensator to
enhance the damping of an inter area oscillation in a large power system is presented in
[7]. It describes a comprehensive and systematic way of applying the control design
algorithm in power systems. Two methods to obtain a satisfactory reduced order system
model, which is crucial to the success of the design, are describes.
H

12
An optimal control method is outlined to deal with uncertainties in power system
modeling and operation as they affect the design of a PSS [8]. It focuses on the design
process for PSS using a nominal model with an uncertainty description, which represents
the possible perturbation of a synchronous generator around its normal operating point.
The uncertainties are due to incomplete knowledge of the physical system in the model
formulation process and system abnormal operating conditions. This excitation controller
enables the power system to remain stable over a wide range of operating condition.
H

The design of a robust controller for generator excitation systems is used to improve the
steady state and transient stabilities [9]. The unique approach used is to first treat the
nonlinear characteristics of the system as model uncertainties at the controller design
stage using robust methodology. The performance of the controller has been evaluated
extensively by non-linear simulation. It is concluded that the robust controller provides
better damping to the oscillatory modes of the system than the conventional PSS in all the
cases studied.

In [10], a model matching robustness design procedure based on optimization
theory for the robust redesign of nominal operating conditions and tunes the nominal
control law to enhance the robustness with respect to the off nominal operating
conditions. The procedure is applied to the design of a PSS for a single machine infinite
bus system, which has a range of possible operating conditions. The results show that the
redesign controller contains features similar to the nominal controller, but yet improves
significantly the damping of the machine swing modes at the off nominal conditions.
H

Design of a robust controller for a Static Var Compensator (SVC) to improve the
damping of power system is presented [11]. The main contributions of this paper are to
formulate and to solve the power system damping control problem using robust
optimization techniques, and to synthesize the controller with explicit consideration of
the system operating condition variations. Nonlinear simulations using PSCAD/EMTDC
have been conducted to evaluate the performance of the closed loop system. The results
13
have indicated the performance of the closed loop system. The results have indicated that
the designed controller can provide damping to the system under a wide range of
operating conditions.

In [12], the usual trial and error attempts for selection of performance weights are
discarded, that is the main problem in design of a robust
H power system stabilizer

(PSS), and instead a systematic and automated approach based on Genetic Algorithms
(GAs) is proposed. The resulting
H PSS performs quite satisfactory under a wide

range of turbo generator operating conditions and is robust against unmodelled low
damped torsional modes. It also provides sufficient robustness against significant changes
in configuration and parameters.

In [13], a new PSS design for damping power system oscillations focusing on interarea
modes is described. The input to the PSS consists of two signals. The first signal is
mainly to damp the local mode in the area where PSS is located using the generator rotor
speed as an input signal. The second is an additional global signal for damping interarea
modes. Two global signals are suggested; the tie line active power and speed difference
signals. The choice of PSS location, input signals and tuning is based on modal analysis
and frequency response information. These two signals can also be used to enhance
damping of interarea modes using SVC located in the middle of the transmission circuit
connecting the two oscillating groups. The effectiveness and robustness of the new
design are tested on a 19-generator system having characteristics and structure similar to
the Western North American grid.

A method to design sub optimal robust excitation controllers based on control
theory is presented [14]. The sub optimal controller results from additional constraints
that are imposed on the standard optimal
H solution. Global stability constraints are

incorporated into the algorithm to ensure stability of the interconnected system
under decentralized control. Furthermore, a lyapunov-based index is used to evaluate the
H
14
robustness properties of the closed loop. In order to obtain a reduced order controller, the
method of balanced truncation is used. The sub optimal
H controllers are output

feedback controllers. These controllers posses superior robustness as compared to CPSS
and optimal controllers.
H

A method based on optimal control is presented for the design of power system
controllers aimed at damping out electromechanical oscillations [15]. By imposing
decentralization and output feedback as constraints to the control problem, the resulting
controller structures are compatible with those employed by electric utilities. On the other
hand, the use of formulation based on the Chandrasekhar equations allows that sparsity
be exploited by the optimal control algorithm. This makes the method applicable to large
systems. The performance of the proposed method is assessed through its application to
two multimachine systems: the 10 machine New England system and a large power
system based on the South Southeast Brazil interconnected network.

A systematic robust decentralized design procedure based on the optimization
technique for tuning multiple FACTS devices is presented [16]. The design procedure
uses a model matching robustness formulation and requires the design of a parameter to
achieve decentralized control. The approach is used to design damping controllers for an
SVC and a TCSC to enhance the damping of the interarea modes in a 3 area 6 machine
system. The feedback signals for the controllers are synthesized from the local voltage
and current measurements.
H

A new method of designing a robust
H PSS to deal with some limitations of the

existing PSS (standard PSSs) is presented [17]. These limitations include
H

H
(i) the inability to treat the system uncertainty when a stable nominal plant becomes an
unstable perturbed plant
(ii) the cancellation of the plants poorly damped poles by the controllers zeros.
15
The proposed multiple inputs single output controller for the excitation system is based
on the numerator denominator uncertainty representation which is not restricted in the
modeling of uncertainty as compared to the standard additive or multiplicative
uncertainty representation. Furthermore, the bilinear transformation has been used in the
design to prevent the pole zero cancellation of the poorly damped poles and to improve
the control system performance. Simulation results have shown satisfactory performance
of this PSS for a wide range of operating conditions and good stability margin as
compared to both the conventional PSS and the standard
H PSS.

The decentralized load frequency controller design problem presented [18]. It is shown
that, subject to a condition based on the structure singular values (SSV), each local area
load frequency controller can be designed independently. The stability condition for the
overall system can be stated as to achieve a sufficient interaction margin and a sufficient
gain and phase margin defined in classical feedback theory during each independent
design. It is demonstrated by computer simulation that within this general framework,
very local controllers can be designed to achieve satisfactory performances for a sample
two-area power system and a simplified four-area power system. Under the designed
framework based on the structure singular values, other design methods for local area
controllers may be applied.

In [19], the design of linear robust decentralized fixed structure power system damping
controllers using GA is presented. The designed controllers follow a classical structure
consisting of a gain, wash out stage and two lead lag stages. To each controller is
associated a set of three parameters representing the controller gain and the controller
phase characteristics. The GA searches for an optimum solution over the parameter
space. Controller robustness is taken into account as the design procedure considers a
prespecified set of operating conditions to be either stabilized or improved in the sense of
damping ratio enhancement. A truly decentralized control design is achieved as the loop
control channels are closed simultaneously. The approach is used to design SVC and
TCSC damping controllers to enhance the damping of the interarea modes in a three-area
16
six-machine system. Local voltage and current measurements are used to synthesis
remote feedback signals.

A new decentralized nonlinear voltage controller for multimachine power systems is
introduced [20]. A decentralized nonlinear voltage controller is developed by use of the
robust control theory. Performance of this controller in a three-machine example system
is simulated. The simulation results show that both voltage regulation and system
stability enhancement can be achieved with this controller regardless of the system

In [21], coordinated optimal decentralized controller design of excitation and TCSC
control for improving damping of overall power systems is discussed. Decentralized and
coordinated control is indispensable to power system because power systems are large
scaled and geographically distributed over large area. In particular, FACTS devices need
decentralized and coordinated control more and more. One present the decentralized
controller based on the only local available output variable of each subsystem. Simulation
of 3 machine and 9 bus with 1 TCSC show that decentralized controller has the
reasonable performance compared to centralized controller.

A novel method for the design of TCSCs in a meshed power system is developed [22].
The selection of the output feedback gains for the TCSC controllers is formulated as an
optimization problem and the simulated annealing (SA) algorithm is used to find the
solution. Using this method, the conflicting design objectives, such as the improvement
in the damping of the critical modes, any deterioration of the damping of the non-critical
modes and the saturation of the controller actuators, can be simultaneously considered. It
is also shown that the SA algorithm can be used to design robust controllers, which
satisfy the required performance criteria over several operating conditions. This control
scheme can be easily implemented as only the measurable signals local to each TCSC
location are used to control the TCSCs (decentralized control).

17
In [23], one presents a new setup for analyzing the stability of a multimachine power
system with parameter variations. This method is based on SSV, which allows
computation of an effective measure for robustness in the presence of real parametric
uncertainty. Once the robustness problem has been set up it becomes amenable to the
application of synthesis tools for robust controller design. This technique is applied to
the robust stability assessment of a 4-machine test system specifically designed to
analyze the effect of control on the interarea.

In [24], numerical simulations and testing results of the new method is presented for
stability robustness of multimachine power systems. The approach is based on SSV tools.
The variations of operating conditions are treated as structured uncertainty. Simulation
results for a test system have shown excellent accuracy of robust stability assessment for
a wide range of operating conditions.

In [25], a systematic procedure for the design of decentralized controllers for
multimachine power systems is presented. The robust performance in terms of (SSV or
) is used as the measure of control performance. A wide range of operating conditions
was used for testing. Simulation results have shown that the resulting controllers
would effectively enhance the damping torques. Providing better robust stability and/or
performance characteristics both in the frequency and time domain compared to
conventionally designed PSSs.

A robust decentralized excitation control of multimachine power systems is introduced
[26]. One concerned with the design of decentralized state feedback controller for the
power system to enhance its transient stability and ensure a guaranteed level of
performance when there exist variations of generator parameters due to changing load
and/or network topology. It is shown that the power system can be modeled as a class of
interconnected systems with uncertain parameters and interconnections. One develops a
guaranteed cost control technique for the interconnected system using a linear matrix
inequality ( LMI ) approach. A procedure is given for the minimization of the cost by
employing the powerful LMI tool. The designed controller design is simulated for a
18
three-machine power system example. Simulation results show that the decentralized
guaranteed cost control greatly enhances the transient stability of the power system in the
face of various operating points, faults in different locations or changing network
parameters.

Robust design of multimachine PSSs using SA optimization technique is presented [27].
This approach employs SA to search for optimal parameter settings of a widely used
conventional fixed structure lead lag PSS (CPSS). The parameters of this simulated
annealing based power system stabilizer (SAPSS) are optimized in order to shift the
system electromechanical modes at different loading conditions and system
configurations simultaneously to the left in the s-plane. Incorporation of SA as a
derivative free optimization technique in PSS design significantly reduces the
computational burden. One of the main advantages of this approach is its robustness to
the initial parameter settings. In addition, the quality of the optimal solution does not rely
on the initial guess. The performance of the SAPSS under different disturbances and
loading conditions is investigated for two multimachine power systems. The eigenvalue
analysis and the nonlinear simulation results show the effectiveness of the SAPSSs to
damp out the local as well as the interarea modes and enhance greatly the system stability
over a wide range of loading conditions and system configurations.

Robust design of multimachine (PSSs) using the Tabu Search (TS) optimization
technique is presented [28]. This approach employs TS for optimal parameter settings of
a widely used conventional fixed structure lead lag PSS (CPSS). The parameters of this
stabilizer are selected using TS in order to shift the system poorly damped
electromechanical modes at several loading conditions and system configurations
simultaneously to a prescribed zone in the left hand side of the s-plane. Incorporation of
TS as a derivative free optimization technique in PSS design significantly reduces the
computational burden. In addition, the quality of the optimal solution does not rely on the
initial guess. The performance of this PSS under different disturbances and loading
conditions is investigated for multimachine power systems. The eigenvalue analysis and
the nonlinear simulation results show the effectiveness of the designed PSSs in damping
19
out the local as well as the interarea modes and enhance greatly the system stability over
a wide range of loading conditions and system configurations.

Several control design techniques namely, the classical phase compensation approach, the
synthesis, and a linear matrix inequality technique, are used to coordinate two power
system stabilizers to stabilize a 5-machine equivalent of the South/Southeast Brazilian
system [29]. The open loop system has an unstable interarea mode and cannot be
stabilized using only one conventional power system stabilizer. Both centralized and
decentralized controllers are considered. The different designs are compared and several
interesting observations are provided.

An effective method for designing coordinated
H PSSs to improve the damping of

local and interarea oscillations is presented [30]. Target modes types of inputs of the PSS,
and effective locations for each controller are examined using the participation factor and
residue concept. To realize coordination of the controllers, a method for constructing the
effective reduced model for this design is presented, minimizing the uncertainty for each
controller. With such a small uncertainty, a tight design, which yields marginal
robustness, can be realized, increasing the performance of each controller as well as that
of the total system. The influence of the reduced model on the controller characteristics is
discussed. The effectiveness of this design is demonstrated through nonlinear numerical
simulation in a five machine seven bus system under two critical operating conditions.

A design method of damping controllers of two facts devices, namely synchronous
voltage source when it is used only for reactive shunt compensation, advanced static var
compensator (ASVC) and SVC is introduced [31]. The application of ASVC and SVC for
damping control is demonstrated and the comparison is made about the damping control
capabilities paying attention to the difference in the design philosophy and detailed
dynamic performances. An important issue in designing this kind of controllers is to
suppress over voltage that appears under large disturbance. This over voltage problem
sometimes appears in the existing SVC system. To cope with this over voltage problem,
it uses the control sensitivity function to regulate indirectly the controller output so that
20
the over voltage problem is treated in the design step. Another important issue is that one
point out the zero problems tends to appear inherent in a typical ASVC system making
the controller design difficult. To design robust controller under this condition, one
suggest to use the bilinear transform to design a robust
H optimal controller, it is
shown that this controller provides more robust stability and better performance for
additional damping for power system oscillations while suppressing over voltages.
Performance comparison is also made between ASVC and SVC cases.

A new PSS design method, which uses the numerator denominator perturbation
representation and includes the partial pole placement technique and a new weighting
function selection method is presented [32]. This overcomes certain conventional
PSS design algorithm limitations. A sixth order machine model is used to increase
the accuracy of selected weighting functions. A robust PSS has been successfully
designed for single and two machine systems by treating the highly nonlinear
characteristic of the power system as model uncertainty. The design is verified to have
better performance for a wide range of operating conditions when compared with the
conventional PSS designs.
H

The design of robust power system stabilizers, which place the system poles in an
acceptable region in the complex plane for a given set of operating and system
conditions, is introduced [33]. It therefore, guarantees a well-damped system response
over the entire set of operating conditions. The proposed controller uses full state
feedback. The feedback gain matrix is obtained as the solution of a LMI expressing the
pole region constraints for polytopic plants. The technique is illustrated with applications
to the design of stabilizers for a single machine and a 9 bus, 3 machine power system.

The design of robust control for the second generation of FACTS devices such as static
compensator (STATCOM), and unified power flow controller (UPFC) using a loop
shaping design via a normalized coprime factorization approach, where loop shape refers
to the magnitude of the loop transfer function L=GK as a function of frequency is
H
21
presented [34]. Since method is based on classical loop shaping ideas, it is relatively easy
to implement. Furthermore, comparing it with the other methods of robust control,
it is more flexible and is not limited in its applications. Simulation of the system
following a disturbance is performed to demonstrate the effectiveness of the designed
controller.
H

A robust controller for providing damping to power system transients through
STATCOM devices is presented [35]. The method of multiplicative uncertainty has been
employed to model the variations of the operating points in the system. A loop shaping
method has been employed to select a suitable open loop transfer function, from which
the robust controller is constructed. The design is carried out applying robustness criteria
for stability and performance. The proposed controller has been tested through a number
of disturbances including three phase faults. The robust controller designed has been
demonstrated to provide extremely good damping characteristics over a range of

A genetic algorithm based method is used to tune the parameters of a PSS [36]. This
method integrates the classical parameter optimization approach, involving the solution
of a Lyapunov equation, within a genetic search process. It also ensures that for any
operating condition within a predefined domain, the system remains stable when
subjected to small perturbations. The optimization criterion employs a quadratic
performance index that measures the quality of system dynamic response with in the
tuning process. The solution thus obtained is globally optimal and robust. This method
has been tested on two different PSS structures: the lead lag PSS and the derivative PSS.
System dynamic performance with PSS tuned using this technique is highly satisfactory
for different load conditions and system configurations.

A mixed sensitivity design of a damping device employing a UPFC is presented
[37]. The problem is posed in the LMI framework. The controller design is aimed at
providing adequate damping to interarea oscillations over a range of operating conditions.
H
22
The results obtained in a two area four machine test system are seen to be very
satisfactory both in the frequency domain and through nonlinear simulations.

In [38], a robust PSS is designed using loop shaping design procedure. The resulting PSS
ensures the stability of a set of perturbed plants with respect to the nominal system and
has good oscillation damping ability. Comparisons are made between the resulting PSS, a
conventionally designed PSS and a controller designed based on the structure singular
value theory.

A decentralized controller for load frequency control (LFC) problem in power systems is
designed based on control technique formulated as a LMI problem [39]. To
achieve decentralization, interfaces between interconnected power systems control area
are treated as disturbances. The LMI control toolbox is used to solve such a constrained
optimization problem for LFC applications. The performance of this controller is
illustrated and compared with that of a conventional controller through simulation of a
two-area power system.
H

A LMI based robust controller design for damping oscillations in power systems is
presented in [40]. This controller uses full state feedback. The feedback gain matrix is
obtained as the solution of a LMI. The technique is illustrated with applications to the
design of stabilizer for a typical single machine infinite bus (SMIB) and a multimachine
power system. The LMI based control ensures adequate damping for widely varying
system operating conditions and is compared with conventional power system stabilizer
(CPSS).
2
H

In [41], a design procedure of a
H mixed sensitivity PSS is developed to improve

power system stability. A study system representing SMIB is investigated. The machine
accelerating torque is selected as input signal to the PSS. A comparison between system
response to disturbances for the
H and lead lag PSS is made. The simulation results

23
show that the PSS ensures the stability of the system and has good damping ability
at a wide range of system loading.
H

The Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) technique is used to develop a controller for
damping power system oscillations [42]. The speed deviation and its rate of change are
selected as input signals to the controller. The objective is to get optimal gains values of
the controller within pre-specified limits to improve the system dynamics. In order to
ensure the reliability of the PSO based controller, a comparison has made between the
effect of the developed controller and that of
H controller on the dynamic

performance of a SMIB. The simulation results show that the PSO based controller offers
effective damping to system oscillations in a wide range of operating conditions.

The application of PSO technique to optimize a PID controller parameters for LFC is
discussed [43]. The capability of the controller is investigated through variations the
magnitude of load disturbance. The simulation results show that the applied PSO based
PID controller has achieved good system performance. A comparative study results is
made between the controller and the designed one. The performance is shown to be
better for the new PID controller.
H

2.3 Contributions of This Thesis

There has been considerable amount of work done to develop new controllers in the area
of design and application of robust and decentralized control for power system. The
previous controllers are suffered from high dimension and practical implementation
especially in multimachine system. Moreover, none of them addresses the problem of
coordination of multiple controllers by means of global controller. This research has
filled this point since it has achieved the design, development, and testing of a simple low
order controller and global controller scheme to control and coordinate the actions of
decentralized controllers. The proposed controller provides a simple and effective scheme
to stretch the stability limit and to increase the loadability of the system.
24
The main contributions of this thesis are summarized as follows:

A new controller is presented to design a robust PSS for a SMIB using PI controller. The
parameters of PI controller are obtained by GA to achieve the same performance of
H
based on output feedback in term of LMI. This controller, which is called GALMI, is
simpler than one. This controller succeeds in achieving a robust tuned PSS.
Moreover, it overcomes the difficulty of computation and high dimension of controller
system especially in multimachine environment. So it is more advantageous, in terms of
practicability and reliability.
H

The design of centralized and decentralized PSS for a multimachine power system using
output feedback is presented. In centralized controller, the control signal is a
function of output of all machines. In decentralized controller, the control signal to each
machine becomes a function of the output of that machine only.
H

A new simple algorithm is introduced to design robust decentralized PSS for a
multimachine power system using GALMIs. For each area, the decentralized controller
based on is replaced by GALMI. Moreover, a global controller is designed to deal
with the interactions, which is unconsidered in design of decentralized controllers.
H

A new application for a MIMO centralized
H controller is illustrated for designing a

high order global controller. Another two global controllers are introduced in this thesis
to treat the problem of possible adverse interaction between multiple decentralized
controllers and to overcome the problem of high order of centralized controller.
The first is based on the reduced centralized with minimum communicated
information. While the second is based on two level PSS. In this controller, not only is
the cost of implementation drastically reduced, but also, the risk of loss of stability due to
signal transmission failure is minimized. Moreover, it represents a simple global
controller to damp both local and interarea modes.
H
25

Chapter 3

Modeling of Power Systems

3.1 Introduction

The nonlinear differential equations governing the behavior of a power system can be
linearized about a particular operating point, to obtain a linear model, which
represents the small signal oscillatory response of a power system. Variations in the
operating condition of the system result in the variations in the parameters of the
small signal model. A given range of variations in the operating conditions of a
particular system thus generates a set of linear models, each corresponding to one
particular operating condition. Since, at any given instant, the actual plant could
correspond to any model in this set, a robust controller would have to impart adequate
damping to each one of these entire sets of linear models. In this chapter, the
mathematical models for a power system required in formulating the stability problem
will be presented. The typical single machine infinite bus (SMIB) is shown in Figure
(3.1). The system data has been given in appendix A

Figure (3.1) Machine-infinite bus system
X
e R
e

3.2 System Equations

The complete system has been simulated in state space representation. For simplicity
both the state and algebraic equations for (SMIB) are given below [1,2]:
26
Machine Equations

Using the third order model for the synchronous machine, the differential equations,
which describe the machine dynamics, can be arranged as

d
I
do
d
X
d
X
fd
E
do
q
E
do
q
E
=

1 1
&
(3.1)

e
T
m
T
j
=
1
& (3.2)
=
B
&
(3.3)

Static Exciter Equations

The differential equations that describe the static excitation system can be written as

s
V
a
a
K
t
V
a
a
K
f
V
a
a
K
fd
E
a
fd
E +
=

1
&
(3.4)

s
V
f a
f
K
a
K
t
V
f a
f
K
a
K
f
V
f a
f
K
a
K
f
fd
E
f a
f
K
f
V +
=

1
&
(3.5)

Algebraic Equations

The linearized algebraic equations can be summarized as

q
I
q
X
d
V = (3.6)
d
I
d
X
q
E
q
V + = (3.7)
d
I
qo
I
d
X
q
X
q
I
qo
E
q
E
qo
I
e
T
+ = (3.8)
27
q
V
to
V
qo
V
d
V
to
V
do
V
t
V + = (3.9)

The transmission network having an impedance of
e
jX
e
R + , which is connected to
an infinite bus with voltage , is included in the following equations:
V

d
I
e
R V
q
I
e
X
d
V =
+ ] )
0
cos( [ (3.10)

q
I
e
R V
d
I
e
X
q
V =
+ ] )
0
sin( [ (3.11)

3.3 Block Diagram Simulation

One has to build the block diagram of every equation and all blocks are connected
together to form one block. For example, the machine equation. (3.1) is formed as

(X
d
-X'
d
)
I
d
E
fd
+
+
1
1
+ s
do
E'
q

The exciter is connected to this block by the voltage
fd
E , i.e., the output of the
exciter is an input to the field winding of the machine.

+
+
-
-
V
ref
V
t
V
s
E
fd K
a
(1+
a
s)
(1+
f
S)
K
f
S

28
The terminal voltage V
t
that is a feedback signal to the exciter is formed by the
following block.

I
q
I
d
E'
q
-X
q
V
d
V
q
X'
d
+
+
V
do
V
to
V
qo
V
to
+
+
V
t

The electric torque equation (3.8) is formed in a block diagram as

I
q
I
d
E'
q
E
qo
X'
d
) (X
q
- I
qo
I
qo
T
e
+
+
-

The electric torque output signal from the previous block is an input to the block
diagram representing the swing equation, which is described by equation (3.2) and
(3.3).

T
m
T
e
+
-
1
j
S

o
S

29
The transmission network equation (3.10,3.11) are formed in a block diagram as
shown below

V
cos(
0
-)
X
e
1/R
e
+
+

I
q
V
d
I
d

V
sin(
0
-)
X
e
1/R
e
+
+
+

I
d
V
q
I
q

The block diagram of a single machine adopted to be used in SIMULINK Toolbox is
developed as shown in Figure (3.2).

30

31

3.4 State Space Formulation

The system in general is described by a set of differential and algebraic equations in
the standard form as shown in equation (3.12)

(3.12)
] ][ [ ] ][ [ ] [
] ][ [ ] ][ [ ] [
U D X C Y
U B X A X
+ =
+ =
&

Once the equations are obtained in this form the eigenvalues of the matrix A indicate
the stability of the system.
In general these equations can be written as shown previously but they can be
rearranged as follows:

(3.13) [ ] [ ][ ] [ ][ ] U R X Q
Y
X
P + =
&
Where X, Y and U are the state space variables, while P, Q and R are real constant
matrices. The entries of these matrices are function of all system parameters and
depend on the operating condition. The P matrix of equation (3.13) can be partitioned
as follows:
[ ] (3.14)
=
xs
G
o
A I
P
0
Where matrix I is an identity matrix of dimension , where is the number of
the state space variables. The P matrix is of dimension n x n where n is the total
number of states and algebraic variables. Matrix 0 is a null matrix. The matrix
s
n x
s
n
s
n
xs
G

is
a square matrix of dimension where
v
n x
v
n
v
n

is the total number of the algebraic
variables and matrix A
0
is a very sparse matrix of dimension
v
n x n
s
. Then the inverse
of P matrix is obtained by partitioning as follows:

(3.15) [ ]
1
] [ 0
1
] [
1
xs
G
xs
G
o
A I
P
32

Thus the inverse of P matrix involves the inversion of the
xs
G matrix, which is
partitioned in turn, and it is almost in a block form.
The Q and R matrices are partitioned as

=
D
R
s
R
R
C
Q
A
Q
Q ,
Where is a matrix of dimension and matrix
A
Q
s
n x
s
n
C
Q is of dimension
s
n x
v
n
then the coefficient matrices of the state space are

D
R
xs
G D , D
o
A
s
R B
C
o
A
A
Q A ,
c
Q
xs
G C
1
] [
1
] [
= =
=
=

It can be seen that the matrix A is obtained, as a sum of two matrices. The matrix
contains almost all the control parameters. The eigenvalues of the system matrix A
described by the equation (3.12) are indicative of the system performance.
A
Q

The system eigenvalues are related to the different modes in the system while the real
part is a measure of the amount of the damping and the imaginary part is related to the
natural frequency of the oscillation of the corresponding modes. System eigenvalues
are in general function of all control and design parameters; the change in any of these
parameters affects on the system performance. Hence, causes a shift in the whole
eigenvalue pattern. The amount of shift depends on the sensitivity of the different
eigenvalues as well as the amount of change in the parameter. The matrix P is shown
below.

33

=
e
R
e
X
e
X
e
R
t
V
q
V
t
V
d
V
q
E
q
X
q
X
q
I
d
X
q
X
f
T
a
T
f
K
a
K
a
T
a
K
j
d
d
X
d
X
P
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0
1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Equation (3.13) can be written in the form

[ ]
s
f
T
a
T
f
K
a
K
a
T
a
K
f
V
fd
E
q
E
V
V
q
I
f
T
a
T
f
K
a
K
f
T
f
T
a
T
f
K
a
T
a
K
a
T
d d
q
I
d
I
t
V
e
T
q
V
d
V
f
V
fd
E
q
E
P V
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 )
0
sin( 0 0
0 0 )
0
cos( 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0
0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0
1
0 0 0
1
0 0 0
0 0 0 377 0
0 0 0 0 0
0
0
1
0 0
0
1
.
.
.
.
.
*

34
3.5 Formulation of The System Model

In order to establish the relationship between the internal quantities of different
machines in the power system, a common reference frame (D, Q), which rotates at
synchronous frequency of the steady state network, is considered. This selection is
based on those derived in [2]. This selection has the advantages of that the angle
between the d-q frame of each machine and the selected D-Q frame is itself the rotor
angle that is between the system slack bus and the q- axis of the generators.

The relationship between the internal machine reference q
i,
d
i
and the general network
reference Q, D is shown in Figure (3.3).

q
Q
ref
d
D
ref
i
VQi
Vqi
Vdi
V
Di
V
i
Figure (3.3) Conversion from machine axes to common frame axes.

Thus each machine quantities can be referred to the general reference frame as:

(3.16)
Qt
V
Dt
V
t t
t t
qt
V
dt
V

cos sin
sin cos
Where and are the component of internal voltage w.r.t the machine q.d axes,
while and are the same quantities but w.r.t the common frame. Equation
(3.16) can be written in the form:
dt
V
qt
V
Dt
V
Qt
V

35
(3.17)
qt
V
dt
V
t t
t t
Qt
V
Dt
V

cos sin
sin cos

Or symbolically as

[ ] ] ][ [
mt
V
u
T
Nt
V = (3.18)

Where
u
T

is
(3.19)
=
t t
t t
u
T

cos sin
sin cos
] [

and is the voltage w.r.t common frame while is the voltage w.r.t the internal
machine axes.
Nt
V
mt
V

Considering all the units connected to the network one can write

(3.20) ] [ 0
0
0 0
22
0
0
11
] [
m
V
nn
T
T
T
N
V
=
L
L
L
Since [ ]
u
T
-1
=[ ]
u
T
t
, equation (3.18) can be written in the form:

[ ]=[ ]
m
V
u
T
t
[ ] (3.21)
N
V

For a small perturbations in the system equation (3.20) can be linearized around an
operating point this yields to

36
(3.22)
=
n
n

dn
V
qn
V
d
V
q
V
d
V
q
V
N
V
t
o
T
m
V
.
2
2
1
1
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
. . . . . . .
0 0 0 0 0
2
0
0 0 0 0 0
2
0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1
0 0 0 0 0 0
1

One can write for one machine only as:
(3.23)
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
10
cos
10
sin
10
sin
10
cos
1
1
d
V
q
V
Q
V
D
V
q
V
d
V

The network is described by the nodal admittance matrix equation

I
N
=GV
N

(3.24)

Where G is the reduced admittance matrix of dimension n x n where n is the number
of the active source buses.

Linear static loads are incorporated in the G matrix as constant admittances connected
to the ground of the bus. Equation (3.24) is obtained by eliminating all the non-
generator buses that supply only linear static loads.

The G matrix is the reduced Y bus matrix is a complex matrix of dimension n x n
where n is the number of the system power plants.

Equation (3.24) can be split into 2n equations; hence one can obtain the following
equation for a system containing only two machines.

37
(3.25)
2
2
1
1
22 22 12 12
22 22 12 12
12 12 11 11
12 12 11 11
2
2
1
1
Q
V
D
V
Q
V
D
V
G B G B
B G B G
G B G B
B G B G
Q
I
D
I
Q
I
D
I

Equation (3.18) can be written:

m
TV
N
V = (3.26)
Or

N
V
t
T
N
V T
m
V =
=
1

Also from equation (3.24) one can get

m
TI
N
GV
N
I = = (3.27)

Perturbing equation (3.27) gives

m
TI
N
V G
m
I
o
T = (3.28)

Equation (3.28) can be written for one machine only as:
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
11 11
11 11
1
1
10
cos
10
sin
10
sin
10
cos

D
I
Q
I
Q
V
D
V
G B
B G
q
i
d
i
(3.29)

The block diagram of a single machine adopted to be used in SIMULINK Toolbox is
developed as shown in Figures (3.4). Each machine connected to the network by
evaluating each machine currents ( , ) in terms of the system states. This is done
by combining equation 3.23 and 3.29.
d
I
q
I

38

I
d
E
fd
X'
d
) (X
q
-
I
qo
I
q
(X'
d
-X
q
)I
qo
E
qao
V
do
V
to
Vq
o
V
to

o
S
1
t
j
S
-
+
+
-
+
T
m
+ +
-X
q
X'
d
from network
from network
+

3.6 System Under Study

The system under study is a nine-bus system. There are three generators and six-load
buses. The single line diagram of the system is shown in Figure (3.5). The system bus,
line and generator data are presented in Tables (3.1), (3.2), and (3.3) respectively.

+
1
t
do
S+1
+
+
t
f
S+1
K
f
S
+
-
-
t
a
S+1
K
a
V
ref
Figure (3.4) Block diagram representation of a single machine connected to the network

39

~
~
~
1
4
7
6
load A
2
5
8
load C
9
3
load B
Figure (3.5) System under study
Local load

Table (3.1) Bus data for the base case (Load flow) on the 100 MVA Base
Bus # Bus type V
t
(p.u.) (degree) P
g
(p.u.) P
L
(p.u.) Q
L
(p.u.)
1 Swing 1.04 0 0 0.8 0.5
2 Gen. 1.025 0 1.63 0 0
3 Gen. 1.025 0 0.85 0 0
4 Load 1.0 0 0 0.90 0.30
5 Load 1.0 0 0 1.25 0.50
6 Load 1.0 0 0 1.00 0.35
7 Load 1.0 0 0 0 0
8 Load 1.0 0 0 0 0
9 Load 1.0 0 0 0 0

40

Table (3.2) Transmission lines and transformer data all values are in p.u. on 100
MVA base.
Impedance Bus #
R X
Charging
capacitor
1-7 0.0 0.0576 0.0
2-8 0.0 0.0625 0.0

Transformer
3-9 0.0 0.0586 0.0
7-5 0.01 0.085 0.176
4-7 0.017 0.092 0.158
5-8 0.032 0.161 0.306
4-9 0.039 0.17 0.358
6-8 0.0085 0.072 0.149

Transmission Lines
6-9 0.0119 0.1008 0.209

Table (3.3) Generator data: Reactance values are in pu on a 100-MVA base.
All time constants are in seconds
Generator 1 2 3
Rated MVA 247.5 192.0 128.0
KV 16.5 18.0 13.8
Power factor 1.0 0.85 0.85
Type hydro steam Steam
Speed 180 r.p.m 3600 r.p.m 3600 r.p.m
X
d
0.146 0.8958 1.3125
X
d
` 0.0608 0.1198 0.1813
X
q
0.0969 0.8645 1.2578
X
q
` 0.0969 0.1969 0.25
X
l
0.0336 0.0521 0.0742
`
d0
8.96 6.00 5.89
`
q0
0.0 0.535 0.6
Stored energy at
rated speed
2364 MW.s 640 MW.s 301 MW.s

41
3.7 State Space Equations

The matrices P and Q in equation (3.13) were partitioned as shown in equation (3.14).
Matrixes Q
1
and Q
2
are shown in Figure (3.6) and (3.7) respectively. Also matrices
and
0
A
xs
G are shown in symbolic form in Figure (3.8) and (3.9) respectively.

1
)
3
1
( )
3 3
3
(
3
3
3
3
1
3
3
3
3
1
3
1
3
)
1
( )
2 2
2
(
2
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
2
)
1
( )
1 1
1
(
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1
f a
f
K
a
K
f f a
f
K
f
V
a
a
K
a
fd
E
o
do do
q E
f a
f
K
a
K
f f a
f
K
f
V
a
a
K
a
fd
E
o
do do
q
E
f a
f
K
a
K
f f a
f
K
f
V
a
a
K
a
fd
E
o
do do
q
E
f
V
fd
E q E
f
V
fd
E
q
E
f
V
fd
E
q
E

42

3 3
3 3
2 2
2 2
1 1
1 1
3
2
1
3 3
3 3
2 2
2 2
1 1
1 1
3 3
2 2
1 1
3
3
2
2
1
1
3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1
Do q
Qo d
Do q
Qo d
Do q
Qo d
t
t
t
Do Q
Qo D
Do Q
Qo D
Do Q
Qo D
qo e
qo e
qo e
q
d
q
d
q
d
f fd f fd q f fd q
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
V
V
V
V V
V V
V V
V V
V V
V V
I T
I T
I T
V
V
V
V
V
V
V E q E V E E V E E

2
43
Chapter 3 Modeling of Power System

44
I I I I I I V V V V V V V V V T T T V V V V V V
q3 d q2 d2 q d1 t3 t t Q D Q D2 Q D e3 e e q d3 q d2 q d

3 1 2 1 3 3 2 1 1 2 1 3 2 1 1

3 3 a f

3 3
3
3
3
'
3
'
3 3
2 2
2 2
2
2
2
'
2
'
2 2
1 1
1 1
1
1
1
'
1
'
1 1
1
) (
1
) (
1
) (
f a
a
a
j
do
d d
a f
f a
a
a
j
do
d d
a f
f a
a
a
j
do
d d
K K
K
T
X X
K K
K
T
X X
K K
K
T
X X
'
1 q
E
1
w
1

1 fd
E
1 f
V

'
2 q
E
2
w

2

2 fd
E
2 f
V

'
3 q
E
3
w
3

3 fd
E
3 f
V
Figure (3.8 ) Matrix Ao
Chapter 3 Modeling of Power System

3 3
3 3
2 2
2 2
1 1
1 1
3
2
1
3 3
3 3
2 2
2 2
1 1
1 1
3 3
2 2
1 1
3
3
2
2
1
1
3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1
Do q
Qo d
Do q
Qo d
Do q
Qo d
t
t
t
Do Q
Qo D
Do Q
Qo D
Do Q
Qo D
qo e
qo e
qo e
q
d
q
d
q
d
f fd f fd q f fd q
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
V
V
V
V V
V V
V V
V V
V V
V V
I T
I T
I T
V
V
V
V
V
V
V E q E V E E V E E

Figure (3.9) Matrix
xs
G

45

46
Chapter 4

Centralized and Decentralized Controllers

4.1 Introduction

In large-scale system, decentralization control concept arises. In these systems,
several local control stations are used. The controller observes only local signals
which are used them as local inputs. All of the controllers however are involved in
controlling the large system. The reason why such a decentralization constraint
usually arises in large systems is due to the fact that a centralized controller requires
excessive computational requirements and excessive information gathering networks
to make such a controller realistic. The decentralization concept makes control of the
large-scale system realistic provided that imposed constraints are satisfied.

4.2 Large Scale Controllers

The purpose of this chapter is to present the decentralized and centralized controller
and make a comparison between them to figure out their drawbacks and limitations.
These limitations are removed by proposing new three robust controllers. The first
one is based on
H theory, which results in a high order robust controller. The

second controller is a reduced one based on balanced truncation. The third controller,
which is the proportional integral (PI) controller, is tuned by a genetic algorithm (GA)
to achieve the same robustness as the first one. Moreover, it is more desired from an
implementation point of view. More specifically, GA, which is the new generation of
artificial intelligence (AI), is used to tune the controller parameters of the PI controller
subject to the
H constraints in terms of linear matrix inequalities (LMI). Hence, the

third control design is called GALMI. To ensure the best solution another
optimization techniques, which is the particle swarm optimization (PSO) is used to
obtain the parameters of PI controller.

47
The previous controllers are further extended for designing centralized and
decentralized controller for multimachine power system based on
H . Moreover,
three global control strategies are introduced in this chapter to coordinate between the
decentralized controllers and ensure stability of the interconnected system. The first
utilizes a multi-input multi-output (MIMO) centralized
H controller system. The

second is based on reduced MIMO centralized
H controller via balanced

truncation method. The third strategy utilizes a two level PSS based on PI controller.
The flow chart shown in Figure (4.1) describes the general structures, coordination
and decisions making philosophy of such controlling schemes.

Figure (4.1) Flow chart of the controllers

Two level
PSS
Controllers
Proposed
Global

GALMI
PSO
H
Multimachine SMIB
Optimality
Optimal Suboptimal
centralized decentralized
Reduced
H

GALMI
PSO
centralized decentralized
Local controllers
By 3GALMI
Reduced
global
Centralized
H

MIMO

48
4.3 System Representation

In this section system equations are written in the appropriate form to be suitable for
the previous mentioned controllers. The large system may be described by the
following equation
,
,
.
:
Cx y
Bu Ax x S
=
+ =
(4.1)
Which can be written as an interconnected system
, ,
,
.
N
N
N

+ =
+
+ + =
i
j
i
x
ij
C
i
x
i
C
i
y
)
j
u
ij
B
j
j
x
ij
(A
i
u
i
B
i
x
i
A
i
x S:
(4.2)
Which is composed of N subsystems
N i ,
i
x
i
C
i
y
,
i
u
i
B
i
x
i
A
.
i
x
i
S
=
+ = :
(4.3)
Where
li
R t
i
y ,
mi
R t
i
u ,
ni
R t
i
x ) ( ) ( ) ( are the states, inputs, and outputs of the
subsystem
i
S at a fixed time R t . All matrices have proper dimensions, and
{ }. ,.... 2 , 1 N = N At present, one is interested in disjoint decompositions, that is,
,
T T
N
y
T
y
T
y y
,
T T
N
u
T
u
T
u u
,
T T
N
x
T
x
T
x x
) ,...
2
,
1
(
) ,...
2
,
1
(
) ,...
2
,
1
(
=
=
=
(4.4)
and where
l
R t y
m
R t u
n
R t x ) ( , ) ( , ) ( are the states, inputs, and outputs of the
overall system S , so that
lN
R
l
R
l
R
l
R
,
mN
R
m
R
m
R
m
R
,
nN
R
n
R
n
R
n
R
=
=
=
.....
2 1
.....
2 1
.....
2 1
(4.5)

A compact description of the interconnected system S is

49
,
,
.
:
x
C
C x
D
C y
u
C
B x
C
A u
D
B x
D
A x S
+ =
+ + + =
(4.6)
where
{ }
{ }
{ }, ,....,
2
,
, ,....,
2
,
, ,....,
2
,
N
C C
1
C diag
D
C
N
B B
1
B diag
D
B
N
A A
1
A diag
D
A
=
=
=
(4.7)
and the coupling block matrices are R ) ( ) ( ) (
ij
C
C
C ,
ij
B
C
B ,
ij
A
C
A = = =
R
(4.8)
The collection of N decoupled subsystems is described by
x
D
C y
u
D
B x
D
A
.
x
D
S
=
+ = :
(4.9)
obtained from (4.6) by setting the coupling matrices to zero.
Important special classes of interconnected systems are input ) 0 ( =
C
B and output
) 0 ( =
C
C decentralized systems, where inputs and outputs are not shared among the
subsystems. Input-output decentralized systems are described as
, x
D
C y
x
C
A u
D
B x
D
A
.
x S
=
+ + = :
(4.10)

4.3.1 State and Output Feedback
A static decentralized state feedback,
, x
D
K u = (4.11)
is characterized by a block-diagonal gain matrix,
), ,...,
2
,
1
(
N
K K K diag
D
K = (4.12)
which implies that each subsystem
i
S has its individual control law,
, i ,
i
x
i
K u N = (4.13)
With a constant gain matrix
i
K . The control law u of (4.11), which is equivalent to
the totality of subsystem control laws (4.13), obeys the decentralized information

50
structure constraint requiring that each subsystems
i
S is controlled on the basis of its
locally available state
i
x , and equation (4.10) can be written as
x
C
A x
D
K
D
B
D
A
.
x S + = ) ( :
(4.14)
But in case of output feedback, the closed-loop system is described as
x
C
A x
D
C
D
K
D
B
D
A
.
x S + = ) ( :
(4.15)

4.4 Design of The Optimal Decentralized Controller

There is no general method for designing optimal decentralized controls for
interconnected systems. For this reason, standard design practice is to optimize each
decoupled subsystem using Linear Quadratic (LQ) control laws. Then, sub optimality
of the interconnected closed loop system, which is driven by the union of the locally
optimal LQ control laws, is determined with respect to the sum of the quadratic costs
chosen for the subsystems.

Consider again the interconnected system
i
i
j
x
ij
A
i
u
i
B
i
x
i
A
.
i
x S N
N

+ + = , : (4.16)
in the compact form
x
C
A u
D
B x
D
A
.
x S + + = : (4.17)
One assume that the subsystems

i
S
i
u
i
B
i
x
i
A
.
i
x + = : R R (4.18)
or, equivalently, their union
u
D
B x
D
A
.
x S , : + = (4.19)
is controllable, that is, all pairs ) , (
i
B
i
A are controllable. With
D
S one associate a
quadratic cost

51
+ =
0
) ( ) ,
0
( , dt u
D
R
T
u x
D
Q
T
x u x
D
J (4.20)
where
D
Q =diag ) . ,.........
2
,
1
(
N
Q Q Q is a symmetric nonnegative definite matrix,
D
R =diag ) . ,.........
2
,
1
(
N
R R R is a symmetric positive definite matrix, and the pair
)
2
1
, (
D
Q
D
A is observable. The cost
D
J can be considered as a sum of subsystem
costs
+ =
0
. ) ( ) ,
0
( dt
i
Ru
T
i
u
i
x
i
Q
T
i
x
i
u
i
x
i
J (4.21)
In order to satisfy the decentralized constraints on the control law, one solve the
standard LQ optimal control problem (
D
J
D
S , ) to get
, x
D
K
D
u =
(4.22)
where ) ,....,
2
,
1
(
N
K K K diag
D
K = is given as ,
1
D
P
T
D
B
D
R
D
K

= (4.23)
and ) ,....,
2
,
1
(
N
P P P diag
D
P = is the unique symmetric positive definite solution of
the Riccati equation 0
1
= +
+
D
Q
D
P
T
D
B
D
R
D
B
D
P
D
A
D
P
D
P
T
D
A (4.24)
The control R
D
u
R
, when applied to R
D
S
R
, results in the closed loop system R
x
D
K
D
B
D
(A x
D
S )
.
:
R
(4.25)
Which is optimal and produces the optimal cost R
0 0
)
0
( x
D
P
T
x x
D
J =
R

The important fact about the locally optimal control
i
u is that it is decentralized.
Each component ,
i
x
i
K
i
u =
of
D
u uses only the local state
i
x .
The closed loop matrix is
C
A
D
K
D
B
D
A A + =
(4.26)

The LQ paradigm would appear to be useless as a design methodology because full
state feedback is almost never feasible. Normally, it is too costly to install the
instrumentation needed to measure all the state variables. Sometimes, it is actually

52
impossible to measure some of the state variables. Moreover, there is no method to
get the weighting matrices except trail and error technique.

4.5 Design of The Suboptimal Decentralized Controller

Unfortunately, in real design problem only some of the states are available as
measured outputs. In this section one develop design techniques using reduced state,
as output feedback. An output feedback control strategy can be expressed as
x C G y G u * * * = = (4.27)
That is, only the measured outputs are used to synthesize the system inputs by
comparing equation (4.27) with equation x K u * = of complete state feedback. One
conclude that imposing the output feed back constraint on the conventional state
feedback strategy is tantamount to solve the following for G
C G K * = (4.28)
Since the previous equation implies that
T
K
T
G
T
C = * , matrix
T
G can be obtained
by using the concept of pseudo-inverse; applied to matrix
T
C . It can thus be easily
shown that the output feedback gain matrix is given by
1
) * ( * *

=
T
C C
T
C K G (4.29)
By substituting the control (4.27) into equation (4.1), the closed loop equations are
found to be
x
C
A x BGC A x = ) ( & (4.30)
However output feed back is more realistic and interesting than state feed back but it
takes much calculating time because one has to perform state feed back as a first step.
Moreover, the problem of the weighting matrix still exists.

The operating conditions of power systems are always varying to satisfy different load
demands. Consequently, there is a need for controllers, which are robust to changes in
the system operating conditions. Robust controllers based on
H control theory are

particularly suited for this purpose and it will be presented in the next section.


53
4.6
H Robust Controller

2
H and
H syntheses are carried out in the modern control paradigm. In this

paradigm both performance and robustness specifications can be incorporated in a
common framework along with the controller synthesis. In the modern paradigm, all
of the information about a system is cast into the generalized block diagram shown in
Figure (4.2). The generalized plant, P , contains all the information a designer would
like to incorporate into the synthesis of the controller, K . System dynamics,
frequency weights to influence the controller synthesis, actuator dynamics, and
implementation hardware dynamics from amplifiers, and analogs to digital and digital
to analog converters are all included in P . The inputs and outputs of P are, in
general, vector valued signals. The sensor measurements that are used by the feedback
controller are denoted y, and the inputs generated by the controller are denoted u. The
components of W are all the exogenous inputs to the system. Typically these consist
of disturbances, sensor noise and reference commands. The components of Z are all
the variables that one wishes to control [3].

The general control problem in this framework is to synthesize a controller that will
keep the size of the performance variables, Z, small in the present of the exogenous
signals, W. For a classical disturbance rejection problem, Z would contain the
performance variables one wishes to keep small in the presence of the disturbances
contained in W that would tend to drive Z away from zero. Hence, the disturbance
rejection performance would depend on the size of the closed loop transfer function
from W to Z, which one shall denote as ) (s
ZW
T .

Clearly then, the size of ) (s
ZW
T influences the effect that the exogenous signals in
W has on Z. Thus, in this framework, one seeks controllers that minimize the size
of the closed loop transfer function ) (s
ZW
T . Given that ) (s
ZW
T is a transfer
function matrix, it is necessary to use appropriate norms to quantify its size. The two
most common norms that are used to classify the size of ) (s
ZW
T are the
2
H and

54
H norms. In this thesis, one seeks controllers that minimize the
H norm of
) (s
ZW
T in the modern control paradigm.

Computing The
2
H Norm
The
2
H norm of G(s), denoted
2
G , is defined as
2
1
2
2
1

(jw)]dw [G(jw)G trace
G
*

Realize that G(s) is a system and thus requires an appropriate norm to classify its size.
By a norm, one mean a positive, scalar number that is a measure of the size of G(s)
over all point in the complex s-plane. Trace (A) is the sum of diagonal element of A.
The
2
H norm has an attractive, physically meaningful interpretation. The
2
H norm
of G(s) thus gives a precise measure of the power or signal strength of the output of
a system driven with unit intensity white noise.

Computing The
H Norm
Here one defines and discusses the
H norm of the linear, time-invariant, stable

system with transfer function matrix B A sI C s G
1
) ( ) (

=
The
H norm of ) (s G , denoted
G , is defined as
[ ] ) (
max
sup
J G G =

Figure (4.2) Generalized block diagram of
H
u
y
Z
P
K
W

55
In this definition sup denotes the supremum or least upper bound of the function
[ ] ) (
max
J G , thus the
H norm of ) (s G is nothing more than the maximum value

of [ ] ) (
max
j G over all frequencies . The supremum must be used in the
definition since; strictly speaking the maximum of [ ] ) (
max
J G may not exist even
though [ ] ) (
max
J G is bounded from above.

H norms also have a physically meaningful interpretation when considering the

system ) ( ) ( ) ( s u s G s y = . Recall that when the system driven with a unit magnitude
sinusoidal input at a specific frequency, [ ] ) (
max
J G is the largest possible output
size for the corresponding sinusoidal output. Thus, the
H norm is the largest

possible amplification over all frequencies of a unit sinusoidal input. That is, it
classifies the greatest increase in energy that can occur between the input and the
output of a given system. A state space procedure for calculating the
H norm is as
follows [44].

Let
min
=
G , for the transfer function B A sI C s G

1
) ( ) (

= with A stable and

G , 0 if and only if the matrix

=
T
A C
T
C
T
BB A
H
2
1

has no eigenvalues on the axis J . Let us compute a bound, , on
G such that

G . So to find
min
, one has to perform the following procedure

1- Select a 0 .
2- If H has eigenvalues on the axis J then increase . Otherwise decrease it.
3- Compute the eigenvalues of H .
4- Continue until
min
is calculated to within the desired tolerance.

56
H controller design requires substantial mathematical and computation effort. An

optimization tool called LMI, which could be used to alleviate the computation
burden and make the controller more feasible. An introduction of LMI is presented
below.

4.6.1 Linear Matrix Inequality (LMI)

Recently a class of numerical optimization problems called LMI problems has
received significant attention [45]. For systems and control, the important of LMI
optimization stems from the fact that a wide variety of system and control problems
can be recast as LMI problems. Except for a few special cases these problems dont
have analytical solutions. However, the main point is that through the LMI framework
they can efficiently solved numerically in all cases. Therefore recasting a control
problem as an LMI problem is equivalent to finding a solution to the original
problem.

LMI Definition
A linear matrix inequalities is a matrix inequality of the form
, 0
m
i i
F
i
x
O
F x F >
=
+ =
1
) (
or equivalent to 0
m
F
m
x F x
O
F x F > + + + = .....
1 1
: ) ( , (4.31)
where
m
R x is a vector of m real numbers called the decision variables, and the real
symmetric matrices m 0,..., i ,
n n
R
T
i
F
i
F =
= are given. The inequality symbol in

previous equation means that ) (x F is positive definite, i.e., 0 ) ( > u x F
T
u for all
nonzero
n
R u . Equivalently, the smallest eigenvalue of ) (x F is positive. The set
{ } 0 ) ( | > x F x is convex.

A simple example is the Lyapunov inequality . 0 Q XA X
T
A X F > + + = ) ( Here,

n n
R Q A

, are assumed to be given and
n n
R X

is the unknown. The unknown
variable is therefore a matrix. Note that this defines an LMI only if Q is symmetric.


57
System of LMIs
A system of linear matrix inequalities is a finite set of linear matrix inequalities
0 ) ( ,....., 0 ) (
1
> > x
n
F x F (4.32)
It is a simple that every system of LMIs can be rewritten as one single LMI as shown
in equation (4.33).
, 0
) ( . 0 0
0 ) (
3
. .
0 ..... ) (
2
0
0 .... 0 ) (
1
>
x
n
F
x F
x F
x F
(4.33)
the last inequality indeed makes sense as ) (x F is symmetric for any x. Further, since
the set of eigenvalues of ) (x F is simply the union of the eigenvalues of
) ( ,....., 0 ) (
1
x
n
F x F > .

Stability of LMI
Consider the problem to determine asymptotic stability of a linear autonomous system
Ax x = & (4.34)
where
nxn
R A . By this, one means the problem to decide whether or not all
functions
nxn
R X which satisfy equation (4.34) have the property that
0 ) ( lim =

t x
t
. Lyapunov said that this is asymptotic stable if and only if there
exists S X such that 0 > X and . 0 XA X
T
A < + Thus, asymptotic stability of the
system (4.34) is equivalent to feasibility of the LMI

0
0
0
>
XA X
T
A
X

LMI feasibility problems
Given an LMI ) (x F > 0, the corresponding LMI problem (LMIP) is to find
feas
x
such that, ) (
feas
x F >0 or determine that the LMI is infeasible. This is a convex
feasibility problem. One will say solving the LMI ) (x F > 0 to mean solving the
corresponding LMIP.

58
4.6.2 Robust
H Control Design Via LMI

In order to synthesize a
H controller via LMI approach, state space representation

of the system ) (s P and controller ) (s K are needed [39]. They are given by equations
(4.35 to 4.39), respectively.

State space system model
u B W B Ax x
2 1
+ + = & (4.35)
u D W D x C Z
12 11 1
+ + = (4.36)
u D W D x C y
22 21 2
+ + = (4.37)
)
2
, ( B A is stabilizable, and )
2
, ( C A is detectable.

State space controller model
y
k
B
k
x
k
A
k
x + =
.
(4.38)
y
k
D
k
x
k
C u + = (4.39)
Combining the equations of system modes with that of controller results in the
following closed loop system:
W
cl
B
cl
x
cl
A
cl
x + =
.
(4.40)
W
cl
D
cl
x
cl
C z + = (4.41)
From equation (4.35 and 4.39) one has
) (
2 1
.
y
k
D
k
x
k
C B W B Ax x + + + = (4.42)
Combining equation (4.37) with 0
22
= D in equation (4.42), results in
)
21 2
(
2 2 1
.
W D x C
k
D B
k
x
k
C B W B Ax x + + + + = (4.43)
Equation (4.43) can be arranged as follows
k
x
k
C B W D
k
D B B x C
k
D B A x
2
)
21 2 1
( )
2 2
(
.
+ + + + = (4.44)
The relation between the controller and closed loop states is given by equation (4.45)

59
x
cl
x
k
x = (4.45)
Equation (4.38) can be written as
)
.
(
1
y
k
B
k
x
k
A
k
x
= (4.46)
Combining equations (4.37) and (4.46)
)
21 2
(
1
.
1
W D x C
k
B
k
A
k
x
k
A
k
x +
= (4.47)
W D
k
B x C
k
B
k
x
k
A
k
x
21 2
.
+ + = (4.48)
Combining equation (4.44) and (4.48) and organize in matrix form

W
D
k
B
D
k
D B B
k
x
x
k
A C
k
B
k
C B C
k
D B A
k
x
x
+
+
+
=
21
21 2 1
2
2 2 2
.
.
(4.49)

From equation (4.36) and (4.39) one has
) (
12 11 1
y
k
D
k
x
k
C D W D x C z + + + = (4.50)

Combining equations (4.37) and (4.50)
)
21 2
(
12 12 11 1
W D x C
k
D D
k
x
k
C D W D x C z + + + + = (4.51)

The previous equation can be organized in matrix form
[ ] [ ][ ] W D
k
D D D
k
x
x
k
C D C
k
D D C z
21 12 11 12
)
2 12 1
( + +
+ = (4.52)
Examining equations (4.40,4.41,4.45,4.49,and 4.52) one can say that

+
=
+
=
21
21 2 1
,
2
2 2 2
D
k
B
D
k
D B B
cl
B
k
A C
k
B
k
C B C
k
D B A
cl
A
[ ]
[ ]
21 12 11
,
12
)
2 12 1
(
D
k
D D D
cl
D
k
x
x
cl
x
k
C D C
k
D D C
cl
C
+ =

= + =
(4.53)

60
4.7 Robust Controller Design Via Reduced Order Model

Modern control design methods such as
H and LQG, produce controllers of order at

least equal to that of the plant. These control laws may be too complex with regards to
practical implementation and simple designs are then sought. For this purpose, one
can either reduce the order of the plant model prior to controller design, or reduce the
controller in the final stage, or both. The central problem is: given a high-order linear
time invariant stable model G , find a low order approximation
r
G such that the
infinity (

H ) norm of the difference,
r
G G , is small. In order to reduce the
order of the controllers, one makes use of the model reduction technique by balanced
truncation. One will present a brief outline of this procedure below. The details of the
balanced truncation algorithm can be found in [46].

Let ) , , , ( D C B A be an nth order stable system, but not necessarily minimal, state-
space realization of the transfer function
B A sI C D s G
1
) ( ) (

+ =
. The
controllability and observability Grammians are defined as:

=
0
0
dt
At
Ce
t
C
t
t
A
e Q
dt
t
t
A
e
t
BB
At
e P
(4.54)
The Hankel singular values are defined as ) (PQ = where ) (PQ denotes the
eigenvalue of PQ. Let T be a transformation with
b
x T t x = ) ( . Then the state space
of system can be expressed as:
u
b
D
b
x
b
C
b
y
u
b
B
b
x
b
A
b
x
+ =
+ = &
(4.55)
One partition the state vector
b
x into two parts
T
b
x
b
x ]
2

1
[ where
2 b
x is the vector
of the states that one wish to eliminate.
2 b
x corresponds to high frequency or fast
modes. Thus, equation (4.55) becomes:

61
[ ] u
b
D
b
x
b
x
b
C
b
C
b
y
u
b
B
b
B
b
x
b
x
b
A
b
A
b
A
b
A
b
x
b
x
+
2
1
2

1
2
1
2
1
22

21
12

11
2
1
&
&
(4.56)
The controllability and observability Grammians of the balanced truncation system
are diagonal and satisfy the following equation:
0
2 2

1 2
2 1

1 1
22

21
12

11
22

21
12

11
=
T
b
B
b
B
T
b
B
b
B
T
b
B
b
B
T
b
B
b
B
T
b
A
b
A
b
A
b
A
b
A
b
A
b
A
b
A
(4.57)

0
2 2

1 2
2 1

1 1
22

21
12

11
22

21
12

11
=
b
C
T
b
C
b
C
T
b
C
b
C
T
b
C
b
C
T
b
C
b
A
b
A
b
A
b
A
T
b
A
b
A
b
A
b
A
(4.58)

where [ ]
22

11
= diag is the matrix of Hankel singular values arranged in
decreasing order on the diagonal. The model reduction scheme of balanced truncation
consists of removing states
2 b
x from
b
x . The reduced model is given by:
u
b
D
b
x
b
C
b
y
u
b
B
b
x
b
A
b
x
+ =
+ =
1 1
1 1 11 1
&
(4.59)
At this end, use the corresponding above formulas to obtain a low-frequency reduced-
order ) , , , (
r
D
r
C
r
B
r
A . The reduced-order model can be rewritten as
=
r
D
r
C
r
B
r
A
s
r
G

) ( (4.60)
where
r r
R
r
A

,
m r
R
r
B

,
r q
R
r
C

, and
m q
R
r
D

.
The difference between G and
r
G following a th r order model truncation is by
n
r
H
i
s
r
G s G
1
2 ) ( ) ( Hankel singular values
H
i
.
An advantage of modal truncation is that the poles of the truncated model are a subset
of the poles of the original model and therefore retain any physical interpretation they

62
might have. In this thesis, one makes use of balanced truncation to reduce the order of
the
H controller, not the plant. However, a solution of the consequent nonconvex

constrained optimization problem can not be achieved by using LMI technique alone.
Therefore, the proposed GA optimization technique is utilized to search off line for
the control parameters.

4.8 Limitations and Shortcomes of Previous Mentioned Controllers

Implementing of the previous mentioned controllers on both SMIB as well as on
multimachine system shows the following shortcomes and limitations:
Optimal controller is very difficult since it requires a complete state feedback
so it is not realistic controller. Moreover, there is no method to get the
weighting matrices except trail and error technique.

Suboptimal controller is more realistic and interesting than state feedback but
it takes much calculating time because one has to perform state feedback as a
first step. Moreover, the problem of the weighting matrix still exists.

Centralized controller requires excessive computational requirements and
information gathering networks to make such a controller realistic while the
decentralization constraint makes control of the large-scale system realistic.

H procedure controllers of order at least equal to that of the plant. This

control law may be too complex with regards to practical implementation.

Multiple controllers applied to a multiple control station plant may result in
adverse interactions. So global control is necessary to coordinate the operation
of the local decentralized controllers by allowing some information to be
communicated between two or more of the controllers.

To remedy the previous drawbacks new controllers are proposed. These controllers
are described in details in the following sections.


63
4.9 Proposed Robust Control Design Via GALMI

In this section, the robust control design algorithm using GALMI technique is
presented. The objective of the proposed design is to tune the PI controller parameters
to achieve the same robust performance as the conventional
H design. Moreover,
the order of the controller is effectively reduced. GAs optimization is used to tune the
control parameters of the PI controller subject to the
H constraints in terms of
LMI. The optimization objective is to minimize the effects of disturbances on the
controlled variables. The objective is
min
= ) (s
ZW
T (4.61)
where
) (s
ZW
T is the infinity norm of the transfer function from W to Z.
Ky u = (4.62)
From the above equation, the desired controller is only a simple static output feedback
controller, and it is much less complex than the one obtained from the conventional
H control design in (4.38 and 4.39). To determine the control parameter vector
K , (4.37) is first substituted into (4.62), which results in (4.63). Next, (4.63) is
substituted into (4.35 and 4.36), and the closed loop system is finally obtained as
(4.64).
x KC u
2
= (4.63)
W
cl
D x
cl
C Z
W
cl
B x
cl
A x
+ =
+ = &
(4.64)
Where
1
,
2 2
B
cl
B KC B A
cl
A = + =
] 0 [ ,
2 12 1
= + =
cl
D KC D C
cl
C
subsequently, K is searched for, in order to minimize the performance index . The
successfully obtained control vector ( K ) also guarantees the system stability.

There are many optimization tools to get the parameters of the previous controller
such as Genetic algorithm, Particle swarm optimization, Tabu search, and Simulated
annealing. GA and PSO are used and will be discussed briefly in the next subsection.

64
4.9.1 An Overview of Genetic Algorithms

In the animal kingdom, animals evolve and generate according to the role of
survival of the fittest. In nature, animals fight constantly for food, shelter and mates.
Thus, only the fittest will survive and the weak will perish. This mechanism of
weeding out the useless has worked perfectly for centuries and it is a good method for
optimization. GA is such an optimization method. It is based on the mechanics of
natural selection and natural genetics. The search process is very similar to the natural
evolution of biological creature in which successive generations of organisms are
given birth and raised until they are able to breed. Just like in animal kingdom, only
the fittest will survive to produce while the weakest will be eliminated.

Genetic algorithm vs normal optimization methods

The first principles of GA were laid down by John Holland at the university of
Michigan in 1975. Since then GA has evolved and is will described by other authors
such as Goldberg. Four reasons are given for the preference of GA over more normal
optimization and search procedures [47]:
(a) They usually work with a coding of the variables instead of the variables
themselves.
(b) Search a population of solutions in parallel, not a single one. Hence, it is easy
to jump out of local optimal.
(c) GAs dont require derivative information for other auxiliary knowledge, only
the objective function and corresponding fitness levels influence the directions
of search.
(d) GAs use probabilistic transition rules, not deterministic ones.

Genetic algorithm flow chart

Figure (4.3) shows a schematic diagram of a GA [48]. The process commences with
random generation of a pool of possible solutions, i.e. the population and the
individuals that form it. Each individual in the population, also called chromosome is
represented by a string, which is formed by a number of sub-strings equal to the
number of the problems variables. Each variable is coded in a suitable coding system

65
(binary, real values, etc). The population size and the chromosome size are kept
constant during the whole search process.
The performance of each individual in the population is evaluated through an
objective function, which models the dynamic problem and has an output a fitness
value. The fitness value is a measure of how good the respective individual is with
respect to the problem objective.

Individuals will be selected in accordance with their fitness value to take part in the
genetic process. The purpose of selection is to keep the best well-fit individuals and
increase the number of their offspring in the next generation, on the account of the
least fit individuals.

Figure (4.3) Flow chart of the GA optimization
End
Output of the best individual
Y
N
Start
Input parameters boundaries
Nind ,Maxgen
Generate the initial population
Create new Generation
Selection, Crossover ,
and Mutation
Maximal number of
generation ?
Calculate the fitness of each
individual of population

66
The recombination process consists in the grouping of the selected individuals in pairs
(i.e. parents) in which they exchange genetic information forming two new individual
(i.e. children, or offspring). This process helps the optimization search to escape from
possible local optima and search different zones of the search space.

A mutation genetic operator that replaces allele of genes is implemented to increase
the probability of complete search, by allowing the investigations in vicinity of local
optima.

4.9.2 An Overview of Particle Swarm Optimization

Particle swarm optimization (PSO) is a population based stochastic optimization
technique developed by Eberhart and Kennedy in 1995, inspired by social behavior of
bird flocking or fish schooling [49]. PSO shares many similarities with evolutionary
computation techniques such as GA. The system is initialized with a population of
random solutions and searches for optima by updating generations. However, unlike
GA, PSO has no evolution operators such as crossover and mutation. In PSO, the
potential solutions, called particles, fly through the problem space by following the
current optimum particles. The detailed information will be given below.

The algorithm

As stated before, PSO simulates the behaviors of bird flocking. Suppose the following
scenario: a group of birds are randomly searching food in an area. There is only one
piece of food in the area being searched. All the birds do not know where the food is.
But they know how far the food is in each iteration. So what's the best strategy to find
the food? The effective one is to follow the bird, which is nearest to the food.

PSO learned from the scenario and used it to solve the optimization problems. In
PSO, each single solution is a "bird" in the search space. One calls it "particle". All of
particles have fitness values, which are evaluated by the fitness function to be
optimized, and have velocities, which direct the flying of the particles. The particles

67
fly through the problem space by following the current optimum particles.
PSO is initialized with a group of random particles (solutions) and then searches for
optima by updating generations. In every iteration, each particle is updated by
following two "best" values. The first one is the best solution (fitness) it has achieved
so far. (The fitness value is also stored.) This value is called pbest. Another "best"
value that is tracked by the particle swarm optimizer is the best value, obtained so far
by any particle in the population. This best value is a global best and called gbest.
After finding the two best values, the particle updates its velocity and positions [50].
Figure (4.4) shows the flow chart of PSO optimization.

Set number of particle and maximum
iteration number
Start
Initial population with random position (x)
and velocity (v)
Figure (4.4) Flow chart of PSO optimization
Reached
goal?
Search for local best position of each particle
& Search for the global position
Evaluate fitness function for each particle
Gbest= parameters of best solution
End
YES
NO
Update velocity
Next iteration
Update position

68
Comparisons between GA and PSO

Most of evolutionary techniques have the following procedure:
1. Random generation of an initial population
2. Reckoning of a fitness value for each subject. It will directly depend on the distance
to the optimum.
3. Reproduction of the population based on fitness values.
4. If requirements are met, then stop. Otherwise go back to 2.

From the procedure, one can learn that PSO shares many common points with GA.
Both algorithms start with a group of a randomly generated population; both have
fitness values to evaluate the population. Both update the population and search for
the optimum with random techniques. Both systems do not guarantee success.

However, PSO does not have genetic operators like crossover and mutation. Particles
update themselves with the internal velocity. They also have memory, which is
important to the algorithm.

Compared with GAs, the information sharing mechanism in PSO is significantly
different. In GAs, chromosomes share information with each other. So the whole
population moves like a one group towards an optimal area. In PSO, only gBest gives
out the information to others. It is a one-way information sharing mechanism. The
evolution only looks for the best solution. Compared with GA, all the particles tend to
converge to the best solution quickly even in the local version in most cases.

4.10 Global Controller Design

It is known that multiple controllers applied to a multiple control station plant can
unknowing interact resulting in detrimental effects. This problem occurs for two
reasons. First, the system identification part of an independent controller has no
knowledge of other system inputs; therefore an improper model may be identified.
Second, the control calculation part of a given independent controller is done with no

69
knowledge of other control calculation; this may result in the controllers are fighting
each other.

Figure (4.5) shows the flow chart of the local and global controller. The process
commences with dividing the system into N areas. For each area, one designs the
decentralized controller via
H which results in a high order controller. To

overcome this difficulty the local decentralized controller is replaced by PI controller
designed via GALMI, which represents the local controller. The system performance
is obtained due to local controller alone. So one predicts a deteriorated response due
to the unconsidered interactions in design. Moreover, one has to augment the
decentralized controller by allowing some information to be communicated between
controllers, which represent the global controller. The global controller is a multi-
input multi-output (MIMO) centralized controller via
H and results in a high order

controller. The order of the controller has been reduced for easy of implementation. A
balanced truncation method is used to get the reduced global controller. Finally a
comparison between both controllers is performed. The disadvantage of the robust
controller is the higher order than the PI controller.


70

Start
Input system parameters
and operating condition
Divide the system into N areas
For I=1 : N
Find
H controller and ( SISO)

Use genetic to find PI for same
robust of
H controller
NO
Is I=N ?
YES
Find the closed loop system
Find Centralized
H controller (MIMO)
I=I+1
Write the output eigenvalues
and get system response
Use the Reduced
H controller to
reduce complete system state
Comparison between exact and reduced
global controller response
End
Figure (4.5) Flow chart of the local and global controller

71
4.11 Proposed Two Level PSS Controller Design

This section describes a new PSS design for damping power system oscillations. The
input to the PSS consists of two signals. The first signal is mainly to damp the local
mode in the area where PSS is located using the generator rotor speed as an input
signal. The second is an addition global signal for damping inter-area modes. The
global signal studied is the summation between two generators speed deviations.
Although control-using signals obtained remotely required additional communication
equipment, it is likely that the cost of such equipment would be offset by the addition
operating flexibility gained by the control [13].

The new PSS design aims to enhance the damping of poorly damped local and inter-
area modes. This design provides a control signal, which is a sum of two component
control signals. The first control signal
l
u is to provide damping for local modes
using the local generator rotor speed as a PSS input. Moreover, it is designed by the
three SISO PI local decentralized controllers via GALMI. This part of the controller is
called PSS1 and can be considered as a first-level controller in a two-level control
scheme as shown in Figure (4.6). The second control signal
g
u is to provide damping
for the inter-area modes, controlled from the selected coupled machines using a global
input signal. This part of the controller is called PSS2. It is the second-level
controller. Therefore the total control signal for the jth machine is

g
j
u
l
j
u
j
u + =


72

The two level PSS controller is better than global one based on centralized controller
via
H due to it is more appealing from implementation point of view, and its simple
structure. The order of the closed loop system is greatly reduced for two level PSS
than that for robust global controller.

Gen
j
Gen
i
PSS1
i
PSS1
j
PSS2
i
PSS2
j
Coordinator
Ptie12

i

j
Ptie12
or
(
i

j
)
u
l
i
+
u
g
i
u
l
j
u
g
j
+
+
+
AREA 2
AREA 1

j
i
+
Figure (4.6) Proposed two level PSS design.
Chapter 5 Robust Controller Design for Single Machine Infinite Bus

Chapter 5

Robust Controller Design for Single Machine Infinite Bus

5.1 Introduction

A major concern in control design in power systems is the robustness of the
controller. In practice this translate into the ability of the controller to perform
satisfactorily under a broad range of operating conditions, and in the presence of other
uncertainties such as disturbances and errors due to monitoring instruments.

The main concern in this chapter is to implement of three robust controllers for single
machine infinite bus (SMIB), the first one is based on

high order controller. The second controller is the reduced one based on balanced
truncation. The third controller is a proportional integral (PI) controller, and it is tuned
by a genentic algorithm (GA) to achieve the same robustness as the first one. More
specifically, GA optimization is used to tune the control parameters of the PI
controller subject to the constraints in terms of linear matrix inequalities (LMI).
Hence, the third control design is called GALMI. To ensure the best solution, another
optimization tool which is particle swarm optimization (PSO) is used to tune the
parameters of PI controller.
H

5.2 Dynamic Model of SMIB

In this section, a dynamic model of SMIB is prepared to be controlled by the
control. The state space model is given in equations (5.1 to 5.3)
H

u B W B Ax x
2 1
+ + = & (5.1)
73

u D W D x C Z
12 11 1
+ + = (5.2)
u D W D x C y
22 21 2
+ + = (5.3)

u B W B Ax x
2 1
) ( + = & (5.4)

Applying Laplace to equation (5.4)
u B W B x A Is
2 1
) ( + = (5.5)
[ ] (5.6) u B W B A Is x
2 1
1
) ( +
=

Substitute from equation (5.6) into equations (5.2) and (5.3) then
[ ]
[ ] u D W D u B W B A Is C y
u D W D u B W B A Is C Z
22 21 2 1
1
) (
2
12 11 2 1
1
) (
1
+ + +
=
+ + +
=
(5.7)

u D B A Is C W D B A Is C y
u D B A Is C W D B A Is C Z
=
22 2
1
) (
2 21 1
1
) (
2
12 2
1
) (
1 11 1
1
) (
1
(5.8)

From equation (5.8) one has (5.9)
u
W
G G
G G
y
Z
22 21
12 11
Where ,
11 1
1
) (
1
) (
11
D B A Is C s G +
=
12 2
1
) (
1
) (
12
D B A Is C s G +
=
,
21 1
1
) (
2
) (
21
D B A Is C s G +
=
22 2
1
) (
2
) (
22
D B A Is C s G +
=

Implementing a feedback controller defined by y s K u ) ( = or = K
s
V .
Combining equation (5.9) with y s K u ) ( = , results in
Ky G W G y
22 21
+ = (5.10)
74

W G K G I y
21
1
)
22
(

= (5.11)
Combining equation (5.11) and (5.9)
W G K G I K G W G Z
21
1
)
22
(
12 11

+ = (5.12)

From equation (5.12) one has
W G K G I K G G Z *
21
1
)
22
(
12 11

+ = (5.13)

From equation (5.13), one can get the closed loop transfer matrix from the
disturbance W to the regulator output
) (s
ZW
T
Z .

21
1
)
22
(
12 11
G K G I K G G
ZW
T

+ =

where
n
R t x ) ( denote the state vector , and ] [
f
V
fd
E w
q
E
t
x =
1
) (
m
R t W is the vector of input disturbance , and
ref
V W =
2
) (
m
R t u is the vector of control input , and
s
V u =
1
) (
P
R t Z is the vector of error signals , and
s
V w
t
Z ] [ =
P2
R t y ) ( is the vector of measured variables w y =
is the deviation from nominal values
A is obtained from chapter three section four.
t
]
f
T
a
T
f
K
a
K

a
T
a
K
0 0 [0
2
B
1
B = =
=
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
1
C , 0] 0 0 1 [0
2
C =
[ ]
t
D 1 0 0
12
=
75

) 1 , 3 (
11
Zeros D = , , and ] 0 [
21
= D ] 0 [
22
= D
=
a
T
a
K , gain and time constant of the excitation system
=
f
T
f
K , gain and time constant of the field system
) (s
ZW
T is the closed loop transfer matrix from the disturbance W to the regulator
output Z .
= ) (s
ZW
T is the maximum value of over all frequencies ) ( jw
ZW
T

5.3 Implementation of Controller
H

Robust control as control is a controller design method that focuses on the
reliability (robustness) of the control system. Robustness is usually defined as the
ability of the control system to operate correctly when confronted with a great
changes in operting conditions or disturbances. So
H control produced a robust

controller satisfactory for different operating conditions. In this section the time
domain simulation is performed for SMIB under a 10 % increase in generator
reference voltage (Vref) to demonstrate the capability of the controller to
enhance system damping.
H

Test case (Pg=1.0, and Qg=-0.2p.u)

In order to guarantee the overall effectiveness of the proposed controller, an operating
condition (Pg=1.0p.u, Qg=-0.2p.u) leading power factor is considered. Figures (5.1,
5.2) indicate the effectiveness of the controller in comparison without controller one.
It is obvious shown that the sytem with
H control returns faster to steady state and

restrains the power system oscillations. However, the system without controller is
unstable and oscillation is increased.

76

On the other hand, the order of the
H based stabilizer is as high as that of the plant.

That means both plant and
H controller are represented by five states.

Consequently, the order of the closed loop is ten states. This gives rise to complex
structure of such stabilizers and reduces their applicability. A traditional remedy for
the disadvantages of controller is using the reduced order model. An
implementation of the reduced order controller is introduced in the next section.
H

Figure (5.1) Response of for 0.1 p.u step in Vref for tested operating point

77

Figure (5.2) Response of for 0.1 p.u step in Vref for tested operating point

5.4 Balanced Truncation
H Controller Implementation

The success of a controller design for a power system hinges to a large extend
on the derivation of a high quality reduced controller of
H . One means the

dimension of the state vector in a minimal realization. On other word, all
uncontrollable or unobservable modes have been removed. In this section the time
domain simulation is performed for SMIB under a 10 % increase in generator
reference voltage (Vref) to evaluate the performance of the closed loop system with
the exact and reduced controller. Also, a comparison between the exact
controller and the reduced one is obtained.
H

78

First case (Pg=1.0, and Qg=0.4p.u)

Table (5.1) shows the eigenvalues for different controllers, the value of , and the
damping ratio of the mechanical modes. The reduced controller of order 3 is stable.
Moreover, the damping ratio of this controller is almost equal to exact one. Also, the
value of for the exact and reduced to 3 states controller is nearly coincident while
its value for reduced to 2 states is larger than that of the exact controller.

The superiority of the proposed controller w.r.t exact one can be shown in Figures
(5.3, 5.4). Examining these Figures indicate that the system is stable and there is a
very slight difference between the responses of both controllers. The settling time of
both controllers is one second approximately . So these Figures indicate the capability
of the reduced to 3 states controller in damping oscillations. Also, one can say the
reduced to 3 states controller retains most of the important characteristics of the exact
one.

Table (5.1) Eigenvalues of closed loop system with different controllers
With exact
controller
Controller
reduced to 3
states
Controller
reduced to 2
states
Eigen values of
machine
-260.12
-5.23 9.89j
-1.02
-1.00
-145.49
-3.97 8.23j
-1.09
-13.62
-234.50
+6.25 11.03j
-0.96
-0.37
Eigen values of
controller
-287.64
-99.75 113.9j
-10.19
-0.0173731
-378.4 55.38j
-0.0173722
-701.67
-0.0173721
(gopt) 2.3316 2.3369 39.06
Damping ratio
of mechanical
mode
0.4675
Stable
0.4345
Stable
Negative
Unstable
79

Figure (5.3) Response of for 0.1 p.u step in Vref for first operating point

Figure (5.4) Response of for 0.1 p.u step in Vref for first operating point

80

Figure (5.5) compares the change in control signal of the reduced controller w.r.t
exact one. Both responses are coincide. Figure (5.6) compares the bode plot of the
closed loop system with exact
H controller and the reduced to 3 states controller.

The smaller the norm of the closed loop, the better the disturbance will be attenuated.
The reduced to 3 states controller possess good disturbance attenuation as that of the
exact controller. The value of
H (gopt) for both controllers are equal to 2.33.

Figure (5.5) Change in control signal for 0.1 p.u step in Vref

81

Figure (5.6) Bode plot of the transfer function for first operating point

Second case (Pg=1.0, and Qg=-0.2p.u)

Another operating condition is considered to demonstrate the effectiveness of the
reduced controller. The time response of a rotor angle and speed are shown in Figures
(5.7, 5.8) for both controllers respectively. It is clear the system response with both
controllers is stable. The difference between the response of both controllers is
negligible. Figure (5.9) shows the response of speed due to ten percent change in
mechanical torque. The performance of the reduced

H controller is satisfactorily
compared with the performance of the exact high order complex one. In addition to its
order is low which enable it to be used with multimachine system. So, one will
recommed the reduced order model instead of the exact one.

82

Figure (5.7) Response of for 0.1 p.u step in Vref for second operating point


83

Figure ( 5.9 ) Response of for 0.1 p.u step in Tm for second operating point

The previous two controllers either exact
H controller or reduced one suffer from

high dimension problem which become a complex one especially when treating with a
large power system. So one has to find a third controller makes use of the main
benefit of the but it is a simple one. The third controller is a PI controller tuned
by a GA to achieve the same robust performance as the first one. In more details, the
third controller design is first cast into the robust
H control design in terms of

LMI. An additional constraint is that the structure of the controller is predefined as a
PI type, which is ideally practical for industry. In order to obtain the optimal
controller parameters with regards to the
H and controller structure constraints,

GAs, a powerful probabilistic search technique is used to find the control parameters
of the PI controller. The coordination between GAs and LMI, proposed in this chapter
and called here the GALMI technique, is needed because the formulated control
design is in terms of nonconvex optimization problem, which cannot be solved by
using LMI techniques alone. Another tool, which is the PSO, is used to obtain the PI
controller parameters. An implementation of GALMI for SMIB is presented in the
next section.
84

5.5 Implementation of GALMI Controller

The proposed algorithm gives the optimal robust control parameters
*
K when the
minimum robust performance index is achieved. In order to test the robustness of
the GALMI, performance of the controller with optimum parameter obtained using
the proposed method was examined for various system loading conditions.
*

First case (Pg=1.0, and Qg=0.4p.u)

Figure (5.10) shows the comparative performance of the
H controller , and GALMI

for a small perturbation of ten percent change in reference voltage. Figure (5.10)
gives the speed response. The system behaves satisfactorily with all controllers.
However, the settling time of the oscillations is considerably smaller with
H
compared with GALMI. The structure of GALMI which is a PI controller is simpler
than The structure of controller. Figure (5.11) compares the change in control
signal of the , and GALMI controller.
H

Figure (5.10) Response of for 0.1 p.u step in Vref for first operating condition

85

Figure (5.11 ) change in control signal for 0.1 p.u step in Vref

Figure (5.12) shows that objective function decreases monotonically over generations
of GAs. Figures (5.13, 5.14) show the convergence of the controller parameters
towards the optimal solution after approximately 50 generations. The optimization
process finds the solution that remains unchanged thereafter. The steady state value of
objective function is 2.5080, and the associated controller parameters are Kp= 10 0,
and Ki= . 37 3The value of Ki is greater than that of Kp since Kp is related with
damping torque component while Ki is related with synchronizing torque component.
Also, the main objective of PSS is to inject a damping torque so any change in
makes an effective change in damping torque. This can be seen from the following
equation:

d
T
S
T
d
K
s
K
e
T + = + = * *
where
e
T is the change in electric torque component.
s
K , is the synchronizing and damping torque coefficient respectively.
d
K
S
T , is the change in synchronizing and damping torque component
respectively.
d
T
86

Figure (5.12) Variations of objective function

Figure (5.13) Variations of Kp

87

Figure (5.14) Variations of Ki

Table (5.2) shows the eigenvalues , controllers, and the damping ratios of the
mechanical modes of the GALMI and
H controllers. The damping ratio of the
H
controller is greater than that of GALMI. However, this value (0.1925) is sufficient to
damp oscillations. Also, the associated with GALMI is near from optimal
associated with
H . represents the norm of the transfer function of the output (Z)

to the disturbance (W). As the is reduced as the effect of the disturbance on the
output is reduced. So one can deduce that the smaller the the better the damping
characteristics obtained. Moreover, the structure of GALMI is simpler than the robust
design, whose order is the number of system states that increases with the details
modeling and in the multimachine system.
H

88

Table ( 5.2 ) Comparison between three controllers for first operating point
With GALMI controller
With
H controller
Eigen values of
machine
-219.15
-3.36 17.13j
-1.83 1.19j
-260.12
-5.23 9.89j
-1.02
-1.00
Eigen values of
the controller
-2.03

-467.78
-201.09 15.55j
-9.43
-0.0173731
Damping ratio of
mechanical mode
0.1925 0.4675
= ) (s
ZW
T
2.5080 2.3316
PI Controller
parameters
Kp=100
Ki=373

Table ( 5.3 ) gives the parameters of PI controller and the value of based on GA
and PSO. The associated with PSO is greater than that of GALMI. The
performance of system with GALMI is better than PSO.

PSO is very fast than GAs. However, it can fly past optimal solutions and can get
stuck in local minima. This can be seen from the previous results of GA and PSO tool.
Consequently, one decides to use the GA optimization tool instead of PSO.

Table ( 5.3 ) Comparison between GA and PSO
PI controller based GA PI controller based PSO
Gains of PI
controller
Kp=100
Ki=373
Kp=124.95
Ki=180
= ) (s
ZW
T
2.5080 2.75
89

Figure (5.15) shows the response of for different values of . The simulation
results show that the smaller the the better the performance.

Figure(5.15) Response of for different values of
(gopt) for P=1.0, Q=0.4

Second case (Pg=1.0, and Qg=-0.2p.u)

It is also very important to test the controller under the leading power factor operating
conditions. The purpose of this case is to test the robustness of the proposed controller
(GALMI). A system performance with a 10% step increase in the reference voltage is
shown in Figure (5.16). Figure (5.16) gives the speed response for the certain
disturbance. The simulation results show the superiority of the proposed controller to
damp oscillations. Although, the settling time is smaller with
H controller than
GALMI but GALMI has a simpler structure than
H controller.

90


Figure (5.17) shows the response of speed due to ten percent change in mechanical
torque. The system behaves satisfactorily with both controllers. Figure (5.18) shows
the change of the
with frequency for both controllers. The value of related to

GALMI controller is near to that of
H .

91

Figure (5.17) Response of for 0.1 p.u step in Tm for second operating point.

Figure (5.18) Bode plot of the transfer function

92

5.6 Recommendation for Multimachine System

1- In multimachine system, decentralized control is indispensable because of the
economical constraint to contruct and maintain the communication system.

2- PSS should provide some degree of robustness to the variations in system loading
conditions, and disturbances.
H control, as robust control is adopted to be used in

multimachine system based on the decentralization concept.

3- In multimachine system, where large number of states are existed, notion of
reduced model becomes clear. One recommends to use GALMI based on robust
decentralized controller via .
H

4- In decentralized design, coordination among each controller is necessary. Because
each controller calculates the control signal from only ones own information and
cant consider the information of other subsystems, it may be possible for each
controller to hunt in view point of the overall system. In order to avoid the problem
from decentraliztion, each controller must be coordinated by using a global controller.
93
Chapter 6 Robust Decentralized Controller Design for Multimachine System
Chapter 6

Robust Decentralized Controller Design for Multimachine
System

6.1 Introduction

Power systems are complex non-linear systems and often exhibit low-frequency
electromechanical oscillations due to insufficient damping caused by adverse
operating conditions. Power system stabilizer (PSS) units have long been regarded as
an effective way to enhance the damping of electromechanical oscillations in power
system. As a supplementary control to provide extra damping for synchronous
generators, PSS have been widely used in the electric power industry. Studies have
shown that a well-tuned PSS can improve power system stability effectively. Over the
past two decades, various control methods have been proposed for PSS design to
improve overall system performance. Among these, conventional PSS of the lead-lag
compensation type [1, 2] have been adopted by most utility companies because of
their simple structure, flexibility and easy of implementation. However, the
performance of these stabilizers can be considerably degraded with the changes in the
operating condition during normal operation. Most methods developed in recent years
are based on well-developed modern control theory. These include: pole assignment,
optimal control, self-tuning and adaptive control, variable structure control, rule-based
and neural network based control, etc.

In recent years, the standard control problem has received increasing attention:
for a given > 0, find all controllers such as that the
H norm of the closed-loop

transfer function is less than [3]. Practical power systems with PSS must be robust
over a wide range of operating conditions. However, these techniques arent widely
used for multimachine power systems.

94
For a multimachine system consisting of many controllers, the investigation of the
superiority of the optimal control method to design and to coordinate all the
controllers to obtain good performance and robustness for the whole system is still
limited.
H

For large-scale systems which are composed of interconnections of many lower-
dimensional subsystems, two schemes can be used the centralized and decentralized
control. Decentralized control scheme is preferable since it can alleviate the
computational burden, avoid communication between different subsystems, and make
the control more feasible and simpler. The use of centralized controllers is not feasible
because of the prohibitive cost of information exchange and lower reliability
associated with centralized controller systems. A power system is such a large-scale
system where generators are interconnected through transmission lines. Decentralized
control is therefore considered for power systems.

This chapter introduces the implementation of the decentralized and centralized
controller based on optimal control theory and makes a comparison between them.
Also, the problem of fixed mode is presented. The main concern of this chapter is the
application of the optimal control method to design the centralized and
decentralized controller for multimachine system. Also, the proportional integral (PI)
controllers are used to achieve the same robust performance as the decentralized one.
GAs is used to tune the control parameter of the three PI local controllers. Moreover,
three global controllers are designed. The first is the centralized controller based on
to coordinate the three local decentralized controllers. The second is the reduced
controller, which is achieved by using the balanced truncation method. While the third
is the two level PSS. The block diagram represents the system and each controller is
developed using the SIMULINK Toolbox in MATLAB. The system responses for
each controller are obtained after a certain disturbance.
H

95
6.2 Evaluation of Multimachine System

Figure (6.1) shows the single line diagram of the tested system. The system consists
of three generators, nine buses,three loads, and local load at generator (1). The three
generators are represented by the third order model and equipped with static exciters.

~
~
~
1
4
7
6
load A
2
5
8
load C
9
3
load B
Figure (6.1) System under study
Local load

6.2.1 System Modes Classification
In large power system, participation matrix is used to classify system modes. The
importance of this classification is to determine the machines that participate in the
unstable mode. Table (6.1) shows the participation matrix corresponding to the
mechanical modes. The unstable mode is strongly related to generator (1), then
generator (2). Table (6.2) shows system modes after classification. It is obvious that,
the system is poorly damped since the interarea mode (+0.15 1.49j) is unstable. This
unstable mode is expected since all machines are equipped with static exciter.

96

Table (6.1) A part of the participation matrix corresponding to the mechanical modes
Mechanical
states
2 , 1
=+0.15 1.49j
4 , 3
=-0.35 8.14j
6 , 5
=-0.67 11.62j
1
,
1
0.3340 0.1391 0.0037
2
,
2
0.0854 0.3242 0.0875
3
,
3
0.0452 0.0536 0.4156

Table (6.2) System modes after classification

System modes

i
1
,
1
+0.15 1.49j
2
,
2
-0.35 8.14j
Mechanical

modes
3
,
3
-0.67 11.62j
-215.70
-218.44 Exciters modes
-218.99
-0.75 0.84j
-1.39 0.71j
-3.90

Interaction modes
-1.25

Table (6.3) shows the eigenvalues, and frequencies associated with the rotor
oscillation modes of the system. Examining Table (6.3) indicates that the 0.2371 Hz
mode is the inter-area mode with generator (1) swinging against generator (2) and
generator (3). The 1.2955 Hz mode is the inter-machine oscillation local to generator
(2). Also the 1.8493 Hz mode is the inter-machine mode local to generator (3). The
positive real part of eigenvalue of generator (1) indicates instability of the system.

97

Table (6.3) The eigenvalues, and frequencies associated with the rotor oscillation
modes of the system.
Eigenvalues Frequencies
Generator (1)
Generator (2)
Generator (3)
+0.15 1.49j
-0.35 8.14j
-0.67 11.62j
0.2371
1.2955
1.8493

6.2.2 Block Diagram Simulation of Multimachine System
Connections between the three generators are performed by calculating the network
currents Id and Iq as function of system states. These functions are expressed as gains
when forming the overall system block diagram. These gains are functions of the
system operating conditions. The block diagram, which is shown in Figure (6.2), is
built using SIMULINK Toolbox in MATLAB.

The block diagram is used to obtain the system performance for any disturbances. To
guarantee the effectiveness of this simulation, the state space matrix A of the block
diagram and its eigenvalues are recalculated using a MATLAB linmod and eig
order, respectively. The eigenvalues obtained from block diagram are similar to that
obtained from the state space matrix obtained in Table (6.2).
98

99
6.2.3 Response of The System Without Controller
The time response of a system due to 0.1-p.u-step change in the reference voltage for
generator (1) without controller can be obtained from the block diagram simulation.
Figures (6.3, 6.4) show the time responses of and ,
12
,
12
respectively.
Examining these Figures, the system instability is obvious since the oscillation
increases continuously with time. On other word the system is unstable due to
negative damping of mechanical modes associated with generator (1).

12
to 0.1 p.u in Vref

12

R
to 0.1 p.u step in Vref
100
6.2.4 Effect of Loading on System Dynamic
The system loads were assumed to vary from 25-175 % of the base case generating a
range of operating conditions. The light, nominal, and heavy loading conditions are
given in Table (6.4). The open loop eigenvalues ( dominant eigen values) of the
tested system for three operating conditions are given in Table (6.5). As each pair of
conjugate eigenvalues corresponds to an oscillation mode. Mode 1,2 and 3 are the
rotor oscillation modes (the electromechanical modes). It can be seen that the
damping of the rotor oscillation modes for all operating conditions are poor. In the
power systems, a damping ratio ) ( of at least 10% and the real part of eigenvalue
) ( not greater than 0.5 for the troublesome low frequency oscillations, when
excited, will die down in reasonably short time [40].

Figure (6.5) shows the open loop mechanical modes of the system for the range of
load variation in steps of 25%. The low frequency oscillation modes can be seen to
be unstable. In order to improve the damping of electromechanical modes, a
controller was injected for all generators.

The implementation of the decentralized and centralized controllers based on optimal
and sub optimal control theory are discussed in the following sections. Moreover, the
problem of fixed mode is presented.

Table (6.4) Loading conditions for the 9 bus, 3 machine system ( in p.u)
Light (0.25 p.u) Nominal (1.00 p.u) Heavy (1.75 p.u)
Gen
G1
G2
G3
P Q
0.3711 -0.1860
0.4076 - 0.4045
0.2125 -0.4504
P Q
1.5164 0.7705
1.63 0.0665
0.85 -0.1086
P Q
2.7387 2.0112
2.8525 0.9287
1.4875 0.4493
Load
Load A
Load B
Load C
P Q
0.3125 0.125
0.225 0.075
0.25 0.0875
P Q
1.25 0.5
0.90 0.30
1.00 0.35
P Q
2.1875 0.875
1.575 0.525
1.75 0.6125
Local load 0.2 0.125 0.80 0.50 1.40 0.875
101
Table (6.5) Open loop eigenvalues of the rotor oscillation modes of the system.
Modes Light Nominal Heavy
Gen (1)
Gen (2)
Gen (3)
+0.01 0.82j
-0.58 6.03j
-0.96 7.77j
+0.15 1.49j
-0.35 8.14j
-0.67 11.62j
+0.32 1.66j
+0.15 7.82j
-0.36 12.15j

Figure (6.5) Open loop poles (mechanical modes) for the 9 bus, 3 machine system

6.3 Implementation of Optimal Controller

The considered multimachine system, which consists of three generators and nine
buses, can be divided to three areas. Therefore let u= be the
control vector which contains three stabilizing signals. These signals require fifteen
gains for decentralized controller and forty-five gains for centralized one. To design
an optimal control (OC) and improve the stability of the system, two matrices are
chosen. Q and R are symmetric weighting matrices that serve as the design
parameters. Their elements can be selected to provide suitable performance. Let Q
and R be
[ ]
s
v
s
v
s
v
3 2 1

102
Q=diag [1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 ]
R=diag [0.2 0.2 0.2 ]

The controller gains and stabilizing signals are obtained for decentralized and
centralized controller. A comparison between the system modes and damping ratios
are obtained for both controllers.

Decentralized controller

In the decentralized PSSs, the stabilizing signal for each machine should be a function
of the states of that machine alone. In such scheme, not only is the cost of
implementation drastically reduced, but also, the risk of loss stability due to signal
transmission failure is minimized. A decentralized control scheme may be more
feasible than a centralized control one. The controller gains and stabilizing signals are
obtained and shown below.

=
15 14 13 12 11
10 9 8 7 6
5 4 3 2 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
K K K K K
K K K K K
K K K K K
K
D

f
V
fd
E q E Vs
1
8001 . 0
1
0215 . 0
1
3192 . 0
1
3232 . 187
1
' 7839 . 2
1
+ =

f
V
fd
E q E Vs
2
8668 . 0
2
0241 . 0
2
1215 . 0
2
1233 . 103
2
' 1847 . 3
2
+ =

3
8965 . 0
3
0250 . 0
3
1459 . 0
3
7242 . 76
3
' 4284 . 3
3 f
V
fd
E q E Vs + + =

Centralized controller

The gain matrix of centralized PSSs for multimachine power system is generally full.
This results in the stabilizing signal of each machine is a function of states of all
machines. Also, centralized PSSs require transmission of signals among the
generating units. The controller gains and stabilizing signals are obtained and shown
below.
103
=
45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31
30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16
15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K
K
C

3
0348 . 0
3
0009 . 0
3
3191 . 0
3
6107 . 21
3
' 0881 . 0
2
0361 . 0
2
0010 . 0
2
7318 . 0
2
9836 . 48
2
' 1976 . 0
1
9216 . 0
1
0248 . 0
1
4981 . 1
1
5753 . 247
1
' 2863 . 3
1
f
V
fd
E q E
f
V
fd
E q E
f
V
fd
E q E Vs
+ +
+ +
+ + =

3
0059 . 0
3
0000 . 0
3
1412 . 0
3
5387 . 3
3
' 2431 . 0
2
9042 . 0
2
0250 . 0
2
2294 . 0
2
7624 . 108
2
' 2021 . 3
1
0597 . 0
1
0016 . 0
1
3993 . 1
1
7203 . 37
1
' 2620 . 0
2
f
V
fd
E q E
f
V
fd
E q E
f
V
fd
E q E Vs

+ +
+ + =

f
V
fd
E q E
f
V
fd
E q E
f
V
fd
E q E Vs
3
9227 . 0
3
0257 . 0
3
0308 . 0
3
5957 . 77
3
' 3725 . 3
2
0098 . 0
2
0004 . 0
2
7384 . 0
2
2811 . 30
2
' 2375 . 0
1
0364 . 0
1
0010 . 0
1
4054 . 1
1
3177 . 31
1
' 1095 . 0
3
+ + +
+
+ + =

Observing the previous stabilizing signals, one note that the gains associated with
signal are greater than that of other states. Since damping torque is mainly related to
signal. Tables (6.6, 6.7) show the modes corresponding to the decentralized
controller in contrast to the centralized one and the damping ratios of the mechanical
modes. Examining Table (6.6) indicates that system is stable under centralized and
decentralized controller.

The term damping ratio is used to measure the rate of decay of the signal associated
with a particular oscillation mode. For example, if the eigenvalue of this mode are
j =
2 , 1
, the damping ratio in percentage is defined as 100 *
2 2

= %.
The damping ratios of the closed loop system for the critical mode for the different
system control (configurations) are listed in Table (6.7). The smallest damping ratio is
0.2636 belong to decentralized controller, and it is sufficient to damp any oscillations
and restrain any disturbances.
104
Table (6.6) System modes with optimal decentralized controller and centralized one
System states without
controller
optimal decentralized
controller
optimal centralized
controller
Exciters modes -215.70
-218.44
-218.99
-215.01
-218.21
-218.82
-215.33
-218.16
-218.56
1
,
1

2
,
2

3
,
3

+0.151.49j

-0.35 8.14j

-0.67 11.62j
-0.75 1.66j

-2.55 9.33j

-4.65 14.14j
-3.63 5.32j

-3.46 8.91j

-4.34 13.16j
Interaction
modes
-3.90
-1.25
-1.39 j0.71
-0.75 j0.84
-18.07
-12.78
-0.98 0.08j
-1.01
-1.00

-15.13
-14.71
-10.33
-1.01
-1.00
-1.00

Table (6.7) The eigenvalues, and damping ratios associated with the rotor
oscillation modes of the system for both controllers.
Decentralized controller Centralized controller
Eigenvalues Damping ratios Eigenvalues Damping ratios
Gen.(1)
Gen.(2)
Gen.(3)
-0.75 1.66j
-2.55 9.33j
-4.65 14.14j
0.4117
0.2636
0.3125
-3.63 5.32j
-3.46 8.91j
-4.34 13.16j
0.5638
0.3620
0.3132

Figures (6.6, 6.7) show the response of
13
w and
23
w respectively for both
centralized and decentralized controller to 0.1 p.u step in Vref of Gen (1). Examining
these responses show that the system is stable with both controllers. Moreover, the
system performance with centralized controller is better than decentralized one.
However, the centralized controller prosperity relates to communication, which can be
a serious risk.
105

13
w for 0.1 step in Vref of Gen (1)

23

106
Optimal controller is very difficult since it requires a complete state feedback.
Moreover, some of the states are unavailable as measured outputs so it is not realistic
controller. In the following section, one implement technique using reduced state, as
output feedback.

6.4 Implementation of Sub optimal Controller

Let u= be the control vector, which contains three stabilizing
signals, and
[ ]
s
v
s
v
s
v
3 2 1

[ ]
3 2 1
w w w y = be the measured outputs. So one has three stabilizing
signals that require three gains for decentralized controller and nine gains for
centralized one. Q and R are weighting matrices that serve as design parameters.
Their elements can be selected to provide suitable performance. Let Q and R be

Q=diag[ 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 ]
R=diag[0.2 0.2 0.2 ]


In the decentralized PSSs, the stabilizing signal for each machine should be a function
of the outputs of that machine alone. The controller gains and stabilizing signals are
obtained and shown below.

=
33
22
11
G
G
G
D
G

Vs
1
3232 . 187
1
=
Vs
2
1233 . 103
2
=
3
7242 . 76
3
= Vs
107


The gain matrix of centralized PSSs for multimachine power system is generally full.
This results in the stabilizing signal of each machine is a function of the outputs of all
machines. The controller gains and stabilizing signals are obtained and shown below.

=
33 32 31
23 22 21
13 12 11
G G G
G G G
G G G
C
G

3
6107 . 21
2
9836 . 48
1
5753 . 247
1
= Vs
3
5387 . 3
2
7624 . 108
1
7203 . 37
2
= Vs
3
5957 . 77
2
2811 . 30
1
3177 . 31
3
= Vs

Examining the resulting stabilizing signals, one sees that the diagonal elements are the
largest one, for example is greater than . This is expected since the
best signal for damping is from the considered generator (local signal). Also, the gain
is greater than so generator 2 is more coupled to generator 1 than
generator 3. Also, is greater than .
11
G
13 12
G and G
12
G ,
13
G
22
G
23
G and G ,
21

Tables (6.8, 6.9) show the modes corresponding to the decentralized controller in
contrast to the centralized one and the damping ratio associated with the mechanical
modes. Examining Table (6.9) indicates that system is stable under centralized and
decentralized controller. The smallest damping ratio is 0.0178 belong to decentralized
controller, and it is sufficient to damp any oscillations and restrain any disturbances.

108

Table (6.8) System modes with sub optimal decentralized and centralized controller
System states without
controller
Sub optimal
decentralized controller
Sub optimal
centralized controller
Exciters modes -215.70
-218.44
-218.99
-216.16
-218.89
-219.94
-216.63
-218.70
-219.83
1
,
1

2
,
2

3
,
3

+0.15 1.49j
-0.35 8.14j
-0.67 11.62j
-0.64 8.84j
-0.77 13.55j
-0.33 18.51j
-0.78 10.05j
-1.47 14.76j
-0.42 17.89j
Interaction
modes
-3.90
-1.25
-1.39 j0.71
-0.75 j0.84
-0.15
-0.97
-0.75 j0.51
-0.60 j0.37
-0.10
-0.09
-0.77 j0.54
-0.61 j0.41

Table (6.9) The eigenvalues, and damping ratios associated with the rotor
oscillation modes of the system for both controllers.
Eigenvalues Damping ratios Eigenvalues Damping ratios
Gen.(1)
Gen.(2)
Gen.(3)
-0.64 8.84j
-0.77 13.55j
-0.33 18.51j
0 . 0772
0.0567
0.0178
-0.78 10.05j
-1.47 14.76j
-0.42 17.89j
0.0774
0.0991
0.0235

12
, and
13
w respectively for both
controllers system to 0.1-p.u step in Vref of generator (1). The response of both
controllers is stable. The simulation results shown clearly indicate that the centralized
controller based on sub optimal control method can enhance the stability and damp
out the oscillations greater than decentralized one. However, decentralized controller
is simpler and more realistic than centralized one.
109

12
for 0.1 step in Vref of Gen (1)

13

110
Comparing the gains of the decentralized controller in state feedback with that in
output feedback, one can deduce that the output feedback is a part of state feedback.
Also, the previous results can be deduced when comparing the gains of the centralized
controller in state feedback with that in output feedback.

Observing the gains of the stabilizing signals for all cases. One can notes that the
gains associated with signals are the largest one since w w is the strongest
coupling with the damping torque.

Comparing the damping ratios and the mechanical modes in case of state feedback
with that of output feedback, one can see that the damping ratios are high and the real
parts of the mechanical modes are more negative in case of state feedback. However,
the output feed back is simpler than the state feedback and the system become
satisfactorily with output feedback.

6.5 Fixed Modes Problem Formulation

The main problem is concerned about finding under what conditions there exists a set
of appropriate decentralized feed back control laws that will stabilize the complete
system. In the case of centralized control, the result is well known namely that any
modes of the system which are not both controllable and observable (fixed modes)
must be stable. In the case of decentralized control, a generalization of this condition
is necessary; this is accomplished by introducing the idea of fixed modes of a
system.

For the system ( and a set of output feedback gains K, the set of fixed modes
of with respect to K is defined as the intersection of all possible sets of the
eigenvalues of matrix
)
)
C B A , ,
( C B A , ,
( ) C
D
BK A+ , that is,
( ) ( ) I
K
D
K
C
D
BK A C K B A
+ = , , ,
Where ( ) . denotes the set of eigenvalues of ( ) C
D
BK A+ . Note also that can
take on the null matrix; hence the set of fixed modes
D
K
( ) . is contained in ( ) A . In
111
short, the fixed modes of a system are the eigenvalues of the system that are invariant
under decentralized output feedback.

Algorithm to find fixed modes of (A,B,C) with respect to K
1. Find the eigenvalues of A.
2. Select an arbitrary matrix K
D
K so that dimension of A equals that of BKC.
3. Find the eigenvalues of ( ) C
D
BK A+ .
4. The fixed modes of (A,B,C) with respect to K are contained in those eigenvalues of
( ) C
D
BK A+ which are common with the eigenvalues of A (if there are any).
Moreover for almost any K chosen, the fixed modes will be identically equal to
those eigenvalues of A.
5. Repeat steps 2 to 4 using a different K, if there is any doubt which eigenvalues of A
are the fixed modes of A.
If the fixed modes of the system are unstable, this system cannot be stabilized via
controller.
Table (6.10) System modes with variable controller.
System states Controller 1 Controller 2 Controller 3
Exciters
modes
-215.69
-218.44
-219
-215.69
-218.44
-218.99
-215.68
-218.44
-218.99
1
,
1

2
,
2

3
,
3

+0.19845 1.467j

-0.33604 8.1099j

-0.66491 11.656j
+0.21129 1.4646j

-0.335798.1115j

-0.669111.596j
+0.25854 1.4457j

-0.31822 8.0911j

-0.66269 11.613j
Interaction
modes
-4.0754
-1.2328
-0.74633 0.83675j
-1.3825 0.72457
-4.1067
-1.228
-0.74716j0.8414
-1.3808j0.72758
-4.312
-1.2102
-0.74811 j0.84039
-1.3591 j0.74039

Table (6.10) gives the system modes with different controllers K generating by
random function. Examining Table (6.10) indicates that system is unstable but it is
free from any fixed modes.
112
6.6 Centralized and Decentralized Controller Design Via
H

In this section, two basic approaches are available for designing stabilizer for
multimachine power system. The first approach is to use a multi-input multi-output
(MIMO) centralized controller via
H , which would require a significant amount of

system wide communication. The centralized controller (PSS) for multimachine
power system is generally full. This results in the control input of each machine is a
function of all machines output. Figure (6.10a) shows the centralized output feedback
controller. The locally measured state fedback at the AVR reference input of
each machine after multiplication by suitable feedback controller. With this approach,
the controller success heavily depends on the communication, which can be a serious
disadvantage.

The second approach is to use a decentralized controller for multimachine power
system via . Using a decentralized output feedback strategy means that only the
local outputs are fed back to the local inputs. So one has to design three single input
single output (SISO) controllers for the proposed system. It is easy to see that the
decentralized controller imposes a block diagonal structure on the output feedback
controller K. This is schematically shown in Figure (6.10b), where the submatrices
are the feedback controllers of the three generators. Such a
scheme would be more advantages in terms of practicability and reliability.
H
33
K and K K
22
,
11

Robust control as control is a controller design method that focuses on the
reliability (robustness) of the control system. Robustness is the resilience of the
control system to maintain function even with the changes in internal structure or
external disturbances. So one can say that the robustness can be interpreted as the
ability of the controller to operate correctly when confronted with a wide range of
operating conditions in spite of 0.1 p.u disturbances in the reference voltage of
generator (1).
H

113

33 32
K
31
K
23
K
22 21
K
13
K
12
K
11
Controller
Plant
3 3
2 2
1 1
G
s
V
G
s
V
G
s
V

Figure (6.10a) Schematic of centralized output feedback controller

Controller
Plant
33
0 0
0
22
0
0 0
11

3 3
2 2
1 1
G
s
V
G
s
V
G
s
V

Figure (6.10b) Schematic of decentralized output feedback controller

Light Load Condition

12
w , and
23
w respectively for light
load condition. The simulation results have indicated that the robust controller based
on centralized and decentralized technique via
H can maintain stability and provide

114
greater damping. Moreover, the settling time of the oscillations is two second for both
controllers. The system response with centralized controller is more damped than
decentralized one.

12
w for light load condition.


23
w for light load condition.


115

Normal Load Condition

The superiority of the proposed controller can be shown in Figures (6.13, 6.14), which
show the response of , and
12
w
23
w respectively for normal load condition. These
Figures indicate the capability of the proposed controller in damping disturbance.
Moreover, the settling time of the oscillations is two second for both controllers so the
two-designed controller is capable of providing sufficient damping to the system
oscillatory modes under disturbances.

Figure ( 6.13) The response of
12
w for normal load condition.

116

Figure ( 6.14 ) The response of
23
w for normal load condition.

Table (6.11) shows eigenvalues of closed loop system with centralized and
decentralized controllers for normal load. The negative real part of the eigenvalues
indicates the stability of the system. The closed loop system for each controller
composes of 30 states because controller based on
H has order equal to that of the

plant. The two unstable mechanical modes of generator (1) are transported to a stable
location of (-2.3215 4.033j) with damping ratio of 0.4989 for centralized controller
and (-2.7569 5.0914j) with damping ratio of 0.4762 for decentralized controller.

117
Table (6.11) Eigenvalues of closed loop system with centralized and decentralized
controllers for 1.0 p.u (normal load)
Exciters
modes
-215.76
-218.44
-219.02
-216.4
-218.97
-222.62
1
,
1

2
,
2

3
,
3

-2.7569 5.0914j

-2.5673 9.0782j

-2.804 12.562j
-2.3215 4.033j

-4.2051 11.567j

-7.9118 11.451j
Interaction
modes
-1.0958
-1.0215
-1.0178
-1.0038
-1.0026
-0.9997
-1.0803
-1.0222
-1.0004
-1.00
-1.00
-0.88116
Controller
modes
-17045
-16726
-16822
-29.896 14.547j
-21.877 3.5062j
-27.798
-8.9383
-4.9207
-4.2417
-2.7161
-0.058109
-0.089781
-0.057917
-554.1
-557.38
-413.80
-113.4 81.076j
-68.955 63.69j
-38.775 12.626j
-13.441
-7.7322
-4.2773
-0.059451
-0.071659
-0.019363
gopt 1.7489, 2.8463 ,3.963 19.984

Heavy Load Condition

A heavy operating condition is considered to demonstrate the effectiveness of the
proposed controller. The system responses of
12
w , and
23
w are shown in Figures
(6.15, 6.16). These Figures show a comparative performance of centralized and
decentralized controllers based on
H . Both controllers provide good damping

characteristics and the system is stable. This illustrates the effectiveness of both
controllers under all possible operating conditions. So one can say that there is no
118
significant real advantage in using a more complex centralized controller instead of
the simple decentralized one, which is effective in controlling the complete system.
However, these robust controllers have a major disadvantage that its order is very
high. Moreover, these controllers may be too complex with regards to practical
implementation and so simpler design is then required. The success of the
controller strategy hinges to a large extent on the derivation of a high quality
reduced controller of . So one has to reduce the order of controller by making use
of the proposed technique (GALMI), which is developed in chapter 4. Also, it will be
adopted to be used in multimachine environment in next section.
H

12
w for heavy load condition.

119

23
w for heavy load condition.

6.7 Dynamic Model of Multimachine System

GALMI controller was applied on SMIB system in the previous chapter, but the real
challenge is to apply it on multi-machine power systems. Due to the geographically
distributed nature of power systems, a decentralized controller may be more feasible
than a centralized one. So one has to extend the proposed (GALMI) controller for
multimachine systems. The objective of this section is to tune the PI controller
parameters to achieve the same robust performance as the local decentralized
design. More specifically, instead of solving the
H

H control problem to obtain a
robust high order dynamic controller, the proposed GALMI technique, coordinates
GAs with the LMI control toolbox optimization in order to obtain the control
parameters of a traditional PI controller.

For a large power system consists of a number of interconnected control areas, each
area has several generating units. A dynamic model of control system is developed for
multimachine. The state space model is given in (6.1) and (6.2). Also, its controlled Z
for control design is defined as (6.3)
H
120
u B W B Ax x
2 1
+ + = & (6.1)
x C y
2
= (6.2)
u D x C Z
12 1
+ = (6.3)
Where
n
R t x ) ( denote the state vector and ] .....
2 1
[
T
n
x
T
x
T
x
T
x =
L
R t y ) ( is the vector of measured variables and ] .....
1
[
T
L
y
T
2
y
T
y
T
y =
1
) (
P
R t Z is the vector of error signals, and ]
1
.....
1
[
T
P
Z
T
2
Z
T
Z
T
Z =
is the vector of control input, and
m
R t u ) ( ] .....
1
[
T
m
u
T
2
u
T
u
T
u =
2
) (
P
R t W is the vector of input disturbance, and ]
2
......
2 1
[
T
P
W
T
W
T
W
T
W =

]
1 1
[
1 f1
V
fd
E
1

1
q E
T
x = ,
1
y =
1

]
1
[
1 S
V
1

1

T
Z = ,
1 1 S
V u =
]
1
.....
1 1
[
2 1
b b b Diag B B = =
t
]
f
T
a
T
f
K
a
K

a
T
a
K
0 0 [0
2 1
= = b b
=
a
T
a
K , gain and time constant of the excitation system
=
f
T
f
K , gain and time constant of the field system
]
1
...
1 1
[
1
c c c Diag C =
=
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
1
c
]
2
...
2 2
[
2
c c c Diag C = , 0] 0 0 1 [0
2
= c
]
12
....
12 12
[
12
d d d Diag D = , [ ]
t
d 1 0 0
12
=
121
=
33
0 0
0
22
0
0 0
11
A
A
A
A Where A is the matrix for 3 decoupled subsystems

6.8 Simulation and Evaluation of GALMI

To increase the reliability and reduce the cost of the controller, only local signals are
considered to obtain a satisfactory reduced dynamic model of a crucial prerequisite to
a successful controller design. In this section a simulation study is carried out to
demonstrate the capability of the proposed controller via GALMI on the damping
oscillations over a wide range of operating conditions. Three different loading
conditions are considered to test the system robustness under a 10% step change in the
reference voltage was applied at machine (1) as follows.


Table (6.12) shows the eigenvalues of the closed loop system with three PI local
decentralized controllers (GALMI) for different operating conditions. The closed loop
system with the proposed controller is stable for light and normal load condition.
However, it is unstable for heavy load one due to increase the interactions, which are
unconsidered in design.

Figure (6.17) shows the responses of
12
. Examining this Figure indicates that the
closed loop system is stable but it is exhibits significant oscillations. Moreover, the
settling time is about 15 sec.

122
Table (6.12) Eigenvalues of closed loop system for different operating conditions
with three GALMI controllers
Light load
condition 0.25 p.u
Normal load
condition 1.0 p.u
Heavy load
condition 1.75 p.u
Exciters
modes
-215.52
-218.26
-219.12
-215.86
-218.63
-219.29
-216.24
-218.59
-219.32
1
,
1

2
,
2

3
,
3

-0.32 0.47j

-0.98 9.14j

-0.80 15.13j
-0.15 0.55j

-0.68 10.36j

-0.63 14.06j
+0.00 0.51j

-0.85 10.33j

-0.62 14.58j
Interaction
modes
-2.27 3.76j
-0.76 0.39j
-0.34
-0.75
-2.46 5.97j
-0.68 0.83j
-0.65 0.69j

-2.25 7.41j
-0.80 0.97j
-0.60 0.96j

Controller
modes
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00

12
for light load condition with

123

To show the effectiveness of the proposed method regarding the systems robustness
and performance, simulation is conducted by applying a step disturbance as large as
0.1 p.u at the voltage of generator (1) and then analyzing the system responses. Figure
(6.18) shows the response of
12
for normal load condition. Examining this Figure
indicates that the system is stable but it is poorly damped. Moreover, the previous
simulation result indicates that the system with three PI local decentralized controllers
is suffered from high overshoot and large settling time. The settling time is about 25
second.

12
for normal load condition with


Figure (6.19) shows the response of
23
w . The system instability is obvious since the
oscillation increases continuously with time. The interarea oscillation is clearly
observed in this Figure at frequency of 0.08 Hz.
124
Table (6.12) shows eigenvalues of closed loop system with three PI local
decentralized controllers for heavy load condition. The positive real part of the
interaction mode indicates a negative damping that can lead to spontaneous growth of
oscillation.

Investigations reveal that the proposed approach provides deteriorating performances
when the load increases due to interactions that arent taken into consideration. The
previous simulation result indicates that the three PI local decentralized controllers are
insufficient to stabilize the system. Moreover, the system needs another controller
(global controller) to coordinate the operation of the three local decentralized
controllers.

23
w for heavy load condition with

6.9 Implementation of Global Controller

To treat the problem of possible adverse interaction between multiple decentralized
controllers and to realize coordination of their operations, an implementation of the
proposed global controllers are investigated below. In this section, two global
125
controller are proposed. The first is the MIMO centralized controller based on
H
control, which would require a significant amount of system wide communication.
The second global controller is the reduced one by balanced truncation method. The
effectiveness of the proposed controllers is demonstrated through time simulation by
applying a step disturbance in Vref of generator (1) under great changes in operating
conditions.


13
and
13
w respectively. The system
behaves satisfactorily with the global and reduced global controller. Moreover, the
system oscillation with the robust controller is less than 3PI controllers and the setting
time is about 3 second where it is more than 15 second with 3PI controllers. The
orders of the global controller and reduced global one are 18 and 9 states respectively.

13
for light load condition
due to different robust global controllers.

126

13
w for light load condition


13
and
12
w respectively. These
Figures show that the system performance is greatly enhanced by the exact global
controller and the reduced one. The oscillations are damped out much quicker. The
settling times for global controller and reduced one are about 3 and 5 second
respectively.

Table (6.13) shows a comparison between the eigenvalues of the closed loop system
with global controller and reduced one. It is quite clear that the system eigenvalues
associated with electromechanical modes have been shifted to the left of the S- plane
with both controllers. The minimum damping ratio equal to 0.14 and it is associated
with system controlled by reduced global controller. This damping ratio is sufficient
enough to stabilize the system. Moreover, the interaction modes are enhanced. This
demonstrates that the system damping with these controllers is greatly improved.
However, the structure of the reduced global controller is much simpler than the
127
global one. The values of for both controllers are almost equal. Until now, one
recommends to consider the reduced global controller than the exact one.

13
for normal load condition
due to different robust global controller.

12
w for normal load condition
128
Table (6.13) Eigenvalues of closed loop system with global and reduced global
controller for 1.00 p.u (normal load)
Exact global controller Reduced global controller
Exciters
modes
-216.04
-218.67
-219.45
-216.76
-218.63
-218.63
1
,
1

2
,
2

3
,
3

-2.3234 6.4717j
-2.2797 10.469j
-2.3045 13.844j
-1.0764 7.6646j
-0.55798 10.068j
-1.7441 13.615j
Interaction
modes
-1.8221
-1.2221
-1.1462
-1.0449
-1.0138
-0.91345

-1.6103 0.9970j
-1.3947 0.3024j
-1.6396 3.0492j
PI controller
modes
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
Controller
modes
-7471.2
-7917.6
-7788.1
-37.469 25.798j
-30.576 15.373j
-18.979
-15.733
-6.3776
-4.9251
-2.3705
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
-0.027996
-0.042693
-0.028665
-6290.5
-170.66
-1.3861 17.967j
-3.7298
-1.1171
-0.027997
-0.042693
-0.028665

19.9840 20.0079


13
, and
13
w respectively. It is obvious
that the system performance with global and reduced global controller is almost the
129
same. The simulation results show the superiority of the proposed controller to damp
oscillations. Moreover, The settling time is about than 3 second.

The disadvantage of the robust controller is that its order is higher than that of PI
controller. However, if the controller is implemented on a microcomputer, such a
disadvantage becomes merely a slight increase in the computation effort. Also, the
system with either global controller or reduced global one would require a significant
amount of system wide communication. With this approach, the controller success
heavily depends on the communication, which can be a serious disadvantage. In the
next section another global controller is implemented but with simple and low order
structure.

13
for heavy load condition

130

13
w for heavy load condition

6.10 Implementation of The Proposed Two Level Controller

The closed loop modes are specified to have some degree of relative stability. In this
case, the closed loop eigenvalues are constrained to lie to the left of a vertical line.
This condition motivates the following approach for determining the parameters of
the second level global controller (PSS2). The realtive stability is determined by the
value of as shown in Figure (6.26). One chose the value of to be 0.5 [52].

Figure (6.26) Region in the left hand side of a vertical line.
j

131
The performance of the proposed two level controller as a global controller is
investigated in this section. The response of the system with proposed controller is
obtained under a 10% step change in the reference voltage applied at machine (1) for
a wide range of operating conditions.


13
, and
12
w respectively for normal
load condition. The simulation results show the comparative performance of the
reduced global and two level PSS controllers. A significant damping is achieved by
both controllers and the oscillation is greatly damped. The settling time associated
with both controllers almost equal. The settling time is about 6 sec. However, the two
level PSS is simpler and low order than reduced global controller. The order of the
system with two level PSS controller becomes 19 states while it is 27 states for the
reduced global one.

13
response for normal load condition
with different robust damping global controllers.

132

12
w response for normal load condition


To show the effectiveness of the robust global controller based on two level PSS
regarding the systems robustness and performance, simulation is conducted by
applying a step disturbance for heavy load and then analyzing the system responses.
Figures (6.29, 6.30) show the comparative response of
12
w and
13
w respectively
for the reduced global and two level PSS controllers. These Figures indicate the
capability of the two controllers in adding a damping component to stabilize the
system. The settling time associated with two level PSS equal to 4 sec while it is
about 6 sec for reduced global controller. Moreover, the two level PSS controller is
better than reduced global one due to it is more appealing from implementation point
of view, and its simple structure.
Also, dependence on communication between control stations is greatly reduced. In
this approach, not only is the cost of implementation drastically reduced, but also, the
risk of loss of stability due to signal transmission failure is minimized.
133

12
w response for heavy load condition

13
w response for heavy condition

134
6.11 System Performance With Two Subsequence Disturbances

In order to guarantee the overall effectiveness of the robust global controller based on
two level PSS regarding the systems robustness and performance, two subsequent
disturbances are performed. The disturbance is 0.1 p.u. step increase in reference
voltage applied at t=0.0 followed by 0.05 p.u. step increase in the mechanical
reference torque of generator (1) is applied at t=10 sec. The superiority of the
proposed controller can be shown in Figures (6.31, 6.32) for heavy load condition.
These Figures, which show the response of
12
w and
13
w respectively, indicate the
capability of the proposed controller in damping two subsequent disturbances.

12
w under two subsequence disturbances.

135

13
w under two subsequence disturbances.

136

Chapter 7

Conclusions and Recommendations

This thesis proposes the application of
H technique in order to design PSSs that

will ensure a stable and robust operation of a single machine connected to an infinite
bus, over a wide range of operating points. Also a reduced controller is designed
based on the balanced truncation method. Moreover, a novel robust controller is the
proportional integral PI type, and is tuned to mimic the robust performance of the
one. Genetic algorithms (GAs) optimization and particle swarm optimization
(PSO) is used to tune the control parameters of the PI controller.
H

This method has also been extended in this thesis to design the PSSs for multimachine
power systems. Due to the geographically distributed nature of power systems, two
schemes can be used ,the centralized and decentralized control , for designing PSS.
Moreover, two global control strategies are introduced in this thesis to coordinate
multiple decentralized controllers. The first ,which is a Multi-input multi-output
(MIMO) system , is based on the reduced centralized with minimum
communicated information. While the second is based on two level PSS. The
simulation results show the effectiveness performance and robustness against possible
disturbances of the proposed controllers under different operating points.
H

7.1 Conclusions of This Thesis

The thesis show that multiple controllers applied to a multiple control station plant
can unknowing interact resulting in detrimental effects. This problem occurs for two
reasons. First, the system identification part of an independent controller has no
knowledge of other system inputs, therefore an improper model may be identified.
Second, the control calculation part of a given independent controller is done with no
knowledge of other control calculation; this may result in the controllers fighting
one another.
137

Only decentralized controllers are insufficient to stabilize the system due to increase
the interactions which are unconsidered in design. So global control is necessary to
coordinate the operation of the local decentralized controllers.

MIMO centralized controller system which results in high order controller, can be
used as a global controller. Also, the two level PSS design aims to enhance the
damping of poorly damped local and inter-area modes and is used in this thesis as a
global controller with simpler structure and easy implementation one.
H

Although control-using signals obtained remotely required additional communication
equipment, it is likely that the cost of such equipment would be offset by the addition
operating flexibility gained by the control.

The simulation results show the effectiveness performance and robustness against
possible disturbances of all controllers under different operating points and in
multimachine system as well as in SMIB.

7.2 Recommendations for Future Work

The system investigated has been limited up to a three generator, nine bus system. It
would be desirable to examine PSS based on
H tuning for larger and more realistic

systems. Based on the experience accumulated during simulations and due to the
development of both the system model and the proposed controller in a generic
manner, the extension of the work could be done without difficulties.

The systems considered in the thesis assume that the loads are constant impedance
loads. It would be of interest to the designer to understand how the dynamics of the
system will be affected by the load dependence on voltage and consequently, how the
optimal PSS parameters will be affected.

Using another robust controller like with
2
H

H , loop shaping, model predictive
controller.
138

Since many FACTS devices depend on decentralized controller so one has to use the
proposed control to tune and coordinate the operation between them.

Test and implement robust controller to various other power system phenomena as in
voltage and load frequency control and with FACTS devices.
139
References

[1] P. Kunder, Power System Stability and Control, McGraw-Hill, 1994.

[2] P. M. Anderson and A. A. Fouad, Power System Control and Stability, Iowa
State University Press, Iowa, 1977.

[3] W. S. Levine The Control Handbook CRC Press and IEEE Press 1996.

[4] E. J. Davison, N. S. Rau and F.V. Palmay The Optimal Decentralized Control of
A Power System Consisting of A Number Of Interconnected Synchronous Machines
Int. J. Control. 1973, Vol. 18, No. 6, 1313-1328.

[5] E. Davison, and N. Tripathi, The Optimal Decentralized Control of A Large
Power System: Load And Frequency Control IEEE Transactions on Automatic
Control Vol. 23, No.2 , April 1978 ,pp. 312-325.

[6] D. J. Trudnowski, D. A. Pierre, J. R. Smith and R. Adapa Corrdination of
Multiple Adaptive PSS Units Using A Decentralized Control Scheme IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 7, No.1, February 1992, pp. 294-300.

[7] M. Klein , L. X. Le, G. J. Rogers , S. Farrokhpay, and N. J. Balu Damping
Controller Design in Large Power Systems IEEE Transactions on Power Systems,
Vol. 10, No.1, February 1995, pp. 158-166.
H

[8] S. Chen and O. P. Malik

H Optimization Based Power Systems Stabilizer
Design IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib. , Vol. 142, No.2, March 1995, pp. 179-
184.

[9] Q. Zhao, and J. Jiang Robust Controller Design for Generator Excitation
Systems IEEE Transcations on Energy Conversion , Vol. 10, No.2, June 1995, pp.
201-209.
140
[10] G. N.Taranto, J. H. Chow, and A. Othman Robust Redesign of Power System
Damping Controllers IEEE Transcations on Control System, Vol. 3, No.3,
September 1995, pp. 290-297.

[11] Q. Zhao, and J. Jiang Robust SVC Controller Design for Improving Power
System Damping IEEE Transcations on Power Systems, Vol. 10, No.4, November
1995, pp. 1927-1932.

[12] R. Asgharian, and S. A. Tavakoli A Systematic Approach To Performance
Weights Selection in Design of Robust
H PSS Using Genetic Algorithms IEEE

Transactions on Energy Conversion , Vol. 11, No.1, March 1996, pp. 111-117.

[13] M. E .Aboul Ela , A. A. Sallam, J. D. Mcalley , and A. A. Fouad Damping
Controller Design for Power System Oscillations Using Global Signals IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 11, No.2, June 1996, pp. 767-773.

[14] S. S. Ahmed , L. Chen, and A. Petroianu Design of Sub optimal
Excitation Controllers IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 11, No.1,
February 1996, pp. 312-318.
H

[15] A. J. A. Simoes Costa , F. D. Freitas ,and A. S. Silva Design of Decentralized
Controllers for Large Power Systems Conidering Sparsity IEEE Transcations on
Power Systems, Vol. 12, No.1, February 1997, pp. 144-152.

[16] G. N. Taranto, J.K.Shiau, J. H. Chow, and H. A. Othman Robust Decentralized
Design for Multiple FACTS Damping Controllers IEE Proc. Gener. Transm.
Distrib. , Vol. 144, No.2, January 1997, pp. 61-67.

[17] F. Komla, N. Yorino, and H. Sasaki Design of
H PSS Using Numerator

Denominator Uncertainty Representation IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion ,
Vol. 12, No.1, March 1997, pp. 45-49.

141
[18] T. C. Yang, H.Cimen, and Q. M. Zhu Decentralized Load Frequency Controller
Design Based on Structured Singular Values IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib. ,
Vol. 145, No.1, January 1998, pp. 7-14.

[19] G. N. Taranto, and D. M. Falcao Robust Decentralized Control Design Using
Genetic Algorithm in Power System Damping Control IEE Proc. Gener. Transm.
Distrib. , Vol. 145, No.1, January 1998, pp. 1-6.

[20] C. Zhu, R. Zhou, and Y.Wang A New Decentralized Voltage Controller for
Multimachine Power Systems IEEE Transcations on Power Systems, Vol. 13, No.1,
February 1998, pp. 211-216.

[21] S. C. Lee, J. C. Seo, S. I. Moon, and J. K. Park Coordinated Optimal
Decentralized Controller Design of Excitation and TCSC Control for Enhancing of
Dynamic Stability International Conference on Electrical Engineering (ICEE98)
Vol1, pp.401-404.
2
H

[22] X. R. Chen, N. C. Pahalawaththa, U. D. Annakkage, and C. S. Kumble Design
of Decentralized Output Feedback TCSC Damping by Using Simulated Annealing
IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib. , Vol. 145, No.5, September 1998, pp. 553-558.

[23] M. Djukanovic, M. Khammash, and V. Vittal Application of The Structure
Singular Value Theory for Robust Stability and Control Analysis in Mutimachine
Power Systems Part 1: Framework Development IEEE Transcations on Power
Systems, Vol. 13, No.4, November 1998, pp.1311-1316.

[24] M. Djukanovic, M. Khammash, and V. Vittal Application of The Structure
Singular Value Theory for Robust Stability and Control Analysis in Mutimachine
Power Systems Part 2: Numerical Simulations and Results IEEE Transcations on
Power Systems, Vol. 13, No.4, November 1998, pp.1317-1322.

142
[25] M. Djukanovic, M. Khammash, and V. Vittal Seqential Synthesis of Structure
Singular Value Based Decentralized Controllers in Power Systems IEEE
Transcations on Power Systems, Vol. 14, No.2, November 1999, pp.635-641.

[26] S. Xie, L.Xie, Y. Wang, and G. Guo Decentralized Control of Mutimachine
Power Systems with Guaranteed Performance IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib. ,
Vol. 147, No.3, May 2000, pp. 355-365.

[27] M. A. Abido Robust Design of Multimachine Power System Stabilizers Using
Simulated Annealing IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. 15, No.3,
September 2000, pp. 297-304.

[28] M. A. Abido and Y.L. Abdel Magid Robust Design of Multimachine Power
System Stabilizers Using Tabu Search Algorithm IEE Proc. Genre. Transm. Distrib.
, Vol. 147, No.6, November 2000, pp. 387-394.

[29] G. E. Boukarim, S. Wang, J. H.Chow, G. N. Taranto, and N. Martins A
Comparison of Classical, Robust, and Decentralized Control Designs for Multiple
Power System Stabilizers IEEE Transcations on Power Systems, Vol. 15, No.4,
November 2000, pp.1287-1292.

[30] A. Soeprijanto, N. Yorino, and H. Sasaki A Method for Constructing Reduced
Models Effective for Designing Coordinated
H PSSs T. IEE Japan, Vol. 120-B,

No.11, 2000, pp. 1474-1480.

[31] F. Armansyah, N. Yorino, and H. Sasaki Evaluation Study on ASVC and SVC
for Power System Oscillation Damping T. IEE Japan, Vol. 121-B, No.5, 2001, pp.
611-617.

[32] C. Y. Chung, C.T. Tee, A.K. David and A.B. Rad Partial Pole Placement of
Based PSS Design Using Numerator Denominator Perturbation Representation
IEE Proc. Genre. Transm. Distrib. , Vol. 148, No.5, May 2001, pp. 413-419.
H

143
[33] P. Shrikant Rao and I.Sen Robust Pole Placement Stabilizer Design Using
Linear Matrix Inequalities IEEE Transcations on Power Systems, Vol. 15, No.1,
Ferbrary 2000, pp. 313-319.

[34] M. M. Farsangi, Y. H. Song, W. L. Fang, and X. F. Wang Robust FACTS
Control Design Using The Loop Shaping Method IEE Proc. Genre. Transm.
Distrib. , Vol. 149, No.3, May 2002, pp. 352-358.
H

[35] A. H. M. A. Rahim, S. A. Albiyat, and H. M. Al maghrabi Robust Damping
Controller Design for a Static Compnsator IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib. , Vol.
149, No.4, July 2002, pp. 491-496.

[36] A. Andreoiu and K. Bhattacharya Robust Tuning of Power System Stabilizers
Using Lyapunov Method Based Genetic Algorithm IEE Proc. Gener. Transm.
Distrib. , Vol. 149, No.5, September 2002, pp. 585-592.

[37] B.C. Pal Robust Damping Of Interarea Oscillations with Unified Power Flow
Controller IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib. , Vol. 149, No.6, November 2002,
pp. 733-738.

[38] C. Zhu, M. Khammash, V. Vittal, and W. Qiu Robust Power System Stabilizers
Design Using
H Loop Shaping Approach IEEE Transactions on Power Systems,

Vol. 18, No.2, May 2003, pp. 810-818.

[39] D. Rerkpreedapong, A. Hasanovic, and A. Feliachi Robust Load Frequency
Control Using Genetic Algorithms and Linear Matrix Inequalities IEEE Transcations
on Power Systems, Vol. 18, No.2, May 2003, pp. 855-861.

[40] S. Furuya, Hardiansyah, and J. Irisawa LMI Based Robust Controller
Design for Damping in Power Systems T. IEE Japan, Vol. 124-B, No.1, 2004, pp.
113-120.
2
H

144
[41] H.E. Mostafa, A.A. Emary, M.A. El-Sharkawy, and K. Yassin, Robust Power
System Stabilizer Based on
H Mixed Sensitivity Optimal Control The 6

th

Regional Conference for National Committees of CIGRE IN Arab Countries, PP.
270-278, Nov. 2005, Cairo.

[42] H.E. Mostafa, A.A. Emary, M.A. El-Sharkawy, and K. Yassin, Damping Power
System Oscillations Using Particle Swarm Based Controller The 5
th
ICEENG
Conference 16-18 May 2006, Military Technical College, Cairo.

[43] H.E. Mostafa Tuning PID Controller For Load Frequency Control Using
Particle Swarm Optimization Technique The 5
th
ICEENG Conference 16-18 May
2006, Military Technical College, Cairo.

[44] R. Y. Chiang, and M. G. Sofonov Robust Control Toolbox Users Guide, The
Mathwork Inc., 1992.

[45] P. Gahinet, A. Nemirovski, A. Laub and M. Chilali The LMI Control Toolbox,
The Mathwork Inc., 1995.

[46] S. Skogestad, and I. Postlethwaite Multivariable Feedback Control Analysis
And Design John Willey& Sons 1996.

[47] M. Mitchell An Introduction Of Genetic Algorithms Fifth printing, 1999
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

[48] H. Pohlheim GEATbx Introduction Evolutionary Algorithms: Overview,
Methods and Operators version 3.5a (July 2004)

[49] J. Kennedy, and R. Eberhart, "Particle Swarm Optimization", Proc. of IEEE
International Conference on Neural Networks, Vol. IV, pp.1942-1948, Perth,
Australia, 1995.

145
[50] B. Birge, PSOT a Particle Swarm Optimization Toolbox for Use with Matlab
Proceedings of the IEEE Swarm Intelligence Symposium , pp. 182-186, April 2003.

[51] J. C. Doyle, K. Glover, P. P. Khargonekar, and B. A. Francis State Space
Solutions to Standard and
2
H

H Control Problems IEEE Transactions on
Automatic Control, Vol. 34, No.8, May August 1989, pp. 831-847.

[52] Y.L. Abdel Magid , M. A. Abido, S. Al-Baiyat, and A. H. Mantawy
Simulations Stabilization of Multimachine Power Systems Via Genetic Algorithms
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 14, No.4, Nov 1999, pp. 1428-1439.

146
Appendix A

Appendix A

System under study

Figure (1) shows the system under study in which a synchronous machine is
connected to an infinite bus through a transmission line. The generator is modeled by
a third-order and is equipped with a static exciter. The system data are as shown:

a) Synchronous generator (p.u)

Ra=0.001096 X
d
=1.7 X
q
=1.64 X
f
=1.651
X
d
=0.245 T

do
=5.9 H=2.37 D=0

b) Excitation system

K
a
=400 T
a
=0.05 sec K
f
=0.025 T
f
=1.0 sec

c) Transmission line (p.u)

R
e
=0.02 X
e
=0.4

Figure (1) Machine-infinite bus system
X
e R
e

147

.
.
. .

.
.

.
.

)
H ( .
.

.
.

:
.

.

:
.

:

. .
.
:
.

.

. )
H (
.

.
.

.
. .
.

:

.
.

:

.
.

.
.
.
.
.

:
.
.

, ,_,' -
. , ,' , ,,,,' ..
_-==v =| -==,, -,-:| ==,.' ,,=
-,,,| ,| =,= .| _.|

=,- --:= == _- ,= =,,
_ ,.- .= .,- ','
-_ _,' . , ,' ,,,,' ..
.- , ==
. _=- ,=| _,= . __| _:= ,,-_
, ,_ ,' , . .. ,,,,' ,' ' ,,,,'
- ,_,' - ,_,'

Robust Decentralized Controller Design Via Ai To Enhance Power System Dynamic Performance

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Robust Decentralized Controller Design Via Ai To Enhance Power System Dynamic Performance

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Zagazig University

H control design in terms of

H and controller structure constraints,

V Infinite bus voltage.

H Control Design Via LMI. 58

H . In these studies, many classical control

H synthesis is the way to handle

H optimal one designed in (a). In other

H constraints in terms of linear matrix

H theory, and results in a

H constraints in terms of LMI. Hence, the third

H controller system. The second is based on reduced

H theory, and results in a

H power system stabilizer

H PSS performs quite satisfactory under a wide

H solution. Global stability constraints are

H controllers are output

H PSS to deal with some limitations of the

H PSSs to improve the damping of

H mixed sensitivity PSS is developed to improve

H and lead lag PSS is made. The simulation results

H controller on the dynamic

H controller is illustrated for designing a

Figure (3.3) Conversion from machine axes to common frame axes.

H theory, which results in a high order robust controller. The

H constraints in terms of linear matrix inequalities (LMI). Hence, the

H controller system. The

H controller via balanced

H control theory are

H syntheses are carried out in the modern control paradigm. In this

H norms. In this thesis, one seeks controllers that minimize the

H norm of the linear, time-invariant, stable

H norm of ) (s G is nothing more than the maximum value

H norms also have a physically meaningful interpretation when considering the

H norm is the largest

G , for the transfer function B A sI C s G

G , 0 if and only if the matrix

H controller design requires substantial mathematical and computation effort. An

= are given. The inequality symbol in

H Control Design Via LMI

H controller via LMI approach, state space representation

H and LQG, produce controllers of order at

H controller, not the plant. However, a solution of the consequent nonconvex

H procedure controllers of order at least equal to that of the plant. This

H which results in a high order controller. To

H and results in a high order

H controller and ( SISO)

H theory, and results in a

H control produced a robust

H control returns faster to steady state and

H based stabilizer is as high as that of the plant.

H controller are represented by five states.

H . One means the

H controller and the reduced to 3 states controller.

H (gopt) for both controllers are equal to 2.33.

H controller or reduced one suffer from

H control design in terms of

H and controller structure constraints,

H controller , and GALMI

H controllers. The damping ratio of the

H . represents the norm of the transfer function of the output (Z)

(gopt) for P=1.0, Q=0.4

with frequency for both controllers. The value of related to