Novel Methodologies with Fuzzy Logic and ANFIS Controller
Based TCSC for Mitigating SubSynchronous Resonance and Low
Frequency Power Oscillations
Abstract: The SubSynchronous Resonance (SSR) phenomenon
may occurs when a steam turbinegenerator is connected to a
long transmission line with series compensation. Flexible AC
Transmission Systems (FACTS) controllers are widely applied
to damp SSR and LowFrequency Oscillations (LFOs). The
ThyristorControlled Series Capacitor (TCSC) is a
commercially available FACTS device developed for damping
SSR and LFO. In this paper, two novel control methods for
damping SSR and LFO is added to the TCSC main control .The
control methods are presented, namely: Fuzzy Logic Controller
(FLC) and Adaptive NeuroFuzzy Inference System (ANFIS)
controller. The suggested ANFIS controller combines the
advantages of FLC as well as the quick response and
adaptability nature of the Artificial Neural Network (ANN). The
ANFIS constructions were trained utilizing the generated
database by the FLC of the TCSC. Fast Fourier Transform
(FFT) is carried out in order to evaluate the effect of TCSC
based ANFIS controller in damping SSR and LFO. The study
system was adopted from the IEEE Second Benchmark Model
(ISBM) by altering a part of the fixed series capacitor to the
TCSC. The MATLAB/SIMULINK software program was used to
verify the effectiveness of each control method.
Keywords: SubSynchronous Resonance (SSR),
ThyristorControlled Series Capacitor (TCSC), Fuzzy
Logic Damping Controller (FLDC), Adaptive Neuro
Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS), Fast Fourier
Transform (FFT).
1. Introduction
Series capacitive compensation in AC transmission
lines provides several advantages, for example increases
the power transfer capability of long transmission lines
and improves transient stability of power systems. This is
because of partially compensating the reactance of the
power networks. However, capacitors in series with
transmission lines can also lead to the SSR problems.
When this methodology is implemented together with a
steam turbinegenerator it can cause to the SSR
occurrence [13]. Flexible AC transmission systems
(FACTS) controllers for instance Static Var Compensator
(SVC), Static Synchronous Series Compensator (SSSC),
Unified Power Flow Controller (UPFC) and GTO
Controlled Series Capacitor (GCSC) have been
implemented to mitigate the SSR in power networks [4
7]. Among the FACTS devices for transient stability
improvement, the TCSC is the most adaptable one [8],
[9]. It can change its obvious reactance smoothly and
quickly [10], [11]. TCSC has great application and ability
in exactly adjusting the power flow on a transmission
line, alleviation interarea power oscillations [12],
damping SSR and enhancement the transient stability
[13].
The alleviation effect of TCSC has the following
characteristic [14]:
TCSC for alleviation of power oscillation is more
effective than the shunt FACTS devices.
TCSC becomes more efficient for controlling power
oscillation at higher deals of power exchange.
The situation of a TCSC on an intertie does not
influence alleviation result.
The alleviation result is not sensitive to the load
features.
The local modes do not excite when a TCSC planned
to alleviation the interarea modes.
This work demonstrates a detailed analysis of the
effect of different TCSC control techniques on SSR and
LFO alleviation. Two novel techniques which are used in
this paper are explained in the following:
Fuzzy Logic Damping Controllers (FLDC) have been
one of the popular controllers among the researches
which have been proposed in the power system
application such as SSR and LFO alleviation [1517].
The benefits of FLDC over the traditional proportional
Integral (PI) controller are that they do not require on
exact mathematical model; they can cope with
Anvar Yarahmadi*, Akbar Lak**, and Hasan Gahramani***
*West Azarbayjan Electric Power Generation Management Co, Anvar.yarahmadi@gmail.com
**Engineering Department of Urmia, Iran, Akbar.lack@gmail.com
*** West Azarbayjan Electric Power Generation Management Co , Hesen.qehremani@gmail.com
nonlinearity, and may be more robust that the traditional
PI controller.
The advantage of fuzzy logic control emerges to be the
most promising, because of its lower computational
burden and robustness. In addition, in the scheme of
fuzzy logic controllers, a mathematical model is not
needed to explain the studied system. Though, in case of
fuzzy control, the main problem is that the parameters
related with the membership functions and the rules
depend extensively on the intuition of the engineer [15
17]. On the other side, fuzzy systems are fundamentally
approximate systems, which a general solution to the
adjusting problem. It must be noted that, when a
control problem includes dynamic nonlinear systems,
the two methodologies (FLC and ANN) walking
together as neurofuzzy systems, can help to manage the
complexity and to decrease the design time. Both of them
are powerful design methods with their own weaknesses
and strengths [1821].To overcome this limitation ANFIS
controller is utilized. Recently, the use of ANFIS based
SSR and LFO damping controller has been emerged as an
effective method to control the power networks [1821].
The results reveal the superior performance of suggested
ANFIS controller than the FLC.
The paper is organized as follows: In section 2, sub
synchronous resonance phenomenon is explained briefly.
Power system structure for SSR study is clarified in
section 3. The structure of the TCSC is briefly presented
in section 4. In Sections 5, the FLDC design is described.
Design procedure of ANFIS Controller is given and is
briefly explained in section 6. In Sections 7, the
simulation results with detailed comparison between two
proposed controllers namely the FLDC and ANFIS in
two cases are presented. Finally, in section 8, the results
obtained from previous sections are concluded.
2. SUBSYNCHRONOUSRESONANCE
Generally, SSR happens in series compensated
transmission lines [1]. Series compensation of
transmission line can lead to the excitation of oscillatory
modes of the rotor shaft in subsynchronous resonance
[13]. A series capacitorcompensated power system has
an electrical resonant with natural frequency (f
e
) which is
following by:
f
e
= f
o
(1)
Where, X
L
is the reactance of compensated line, X
c
is the
reactance of series capacitor and f
o
is the synchronous
frequency of the power network in Hz. At this sub
synchronous natural frequency, these oscillatory modes
cause rotor torques and currents at the complementary
frequency, f
r
as: f
r
= f
o
 f
e
. Therefore, if f
r
is nearby one
of the tensional frequencies of the rotor shaft, the
tensional oscillations will be excited and this situation
will be caused undesirable occurrences namely SSR.
Generally, SSR has two major parts: transient torque or
transient SSR and the second part are selfexcitation
which is named by steadystate SSR. Selfexcitation is
divided into two major parts: the first one is Induction
Generator Effect (IGE), and the second one is tensional
interaction (TI) [13].
3. POWER SYSTEM STUDY MODEL
To study the effects of SSR phenomenon and its
mitigation to help control the TCSC and two FLDC and
ANFIS controller that is added to the control system. We
need a system that applies to this phenomenon. In this
part, the system study, the ISBM system, is introduced
and briefly explained.
For the analysis investigated in this study, the ISBM is
used. The system is composed of a synchronous generator
supplying power to an infinite bus via two parallel
transmission lines, it is a Single Machine Infinite Bus
(SMIB) power network that has two transmission lines,
and one of them is compensated by a series capacitor
accompanying the TCSC that is shown in Fig.1. In this
model, a 600 MVA synchronous generator is attached to
an inﬁnite bus, and the rated line voltage is 500KV, while
the rated frequency is 60Hz. The shaft system consists of
four masses: the Generator (G) and rotating Exciter (EX),
a High Pressure turbine (HP) and Low Pressure turbine
(LP). The transmission line is illustrated by a resistance, a
reactance, a series fixed capacitive compensation, X
fc
and
the TCSC with equivalent reactance, X
TCSC
(α). The
complete mechanical and electrical information for the
study system are displayed in [22].
G
Generator
c
X
2 L
Z
Z
1 L
Z
2 Bus
Infinite
Bus
1 Bus
Z
Ge Ex LP HP
Turbines
L
1
T
2
T
C
Fault
system
TCSC
Fig. 1. Power system study model with TCSC
4. STRUCTURE OF TCSC
As mentioned, TCSC is one of FACTS devices to help
both Fuzzy and ANFIS controller is able to mitigation
SSR. Therefore, the structure of the TCSC is introduced
in this section.
TCSC is one of the most widely utilized FACTS
devices in power systems. It can adjust the impedance
smoothly in an extensive range by adjusting the ﬁring
angles of the Thyristor that with this ability, It can adjust
transmission line impedance to control power ﬂow,
improve system stability, and enhance power transfer
capacity [8], [9].
The basic structure of TCSC is shown in Fig.2. It
comprise of the series compensating capacitor shunted by
a ThyristorControlled Reactor. The basic idea behind the
TCSC plan is to provide a continuously alterable
capacitor by means of partially cancelling the efficient
compensating capacitance by the TCR. the TCR at the
basic system frequency is a continuously alterable
reactive impedance, controllable by delay angle, the
steadystate impedance of the TCSC is that of a parallel
L
C
X
X
LC circuit, containing of a fixed capacitive impedance,
X
c
, and a alterable inductive impedance, X
L
(α), that
is[23], [24]:
(2)
X
L
=ωL, and α is the delay angle measured from the
peak of the capacitor voltage [23], [24].
The TCSC thus exhibits a tuneable parallel LC circuit to
the line current that is a constant alternating current
source. As the impedance of the controlled reactor, X
L
(α)
is changed from its minimum ( Z L) toward its maximum
(infinity), the TCSC Decreases its maximum capacitive
impedance. When parallel resonance at X
c
= X
L
(α) is
established and X
TCSC,max
theoretically becomes infinite
until minimum capacitive impedance, X
TCSC.min
= X
c
=
1/ωc.
Decreasing X
L
(α) additional, the impedance of the
TCSC, X
TCSC
(α) becomes inductive, achieving its
minimum value of (X
L
(α) X
c
)/( X
L
(α)  X
c
) at α=0,
where the capacitor is in fact bypassed by the TCR [23],
[24].
Thus, with the usual TCSC structure in which the
impedance of the capacitor, XC, is bigger than that of the
TCR reactor, X
L
(α), the TCSC has two operating ranges
around its internal circuit resonance: one is the
α
Clim
≤ α ≤ π/2 range, where X
TCSC
(α) is capacitive, and
the other is the 0 ≤ α ≤ α
Llim
range, where X
TCSC
(α) is
inductive. In this paper, TCSC is used instead of series
capacitor in ISBM. So the changes range of α is around
π/2 and as a result, internal circuit resonance does not
happen in TCSC [23], [24].
L
1
T
2
T
C
_
Controller
Damping Auxiliary
Gate pulse
generator
Angle
correction
circuits
Controllerable
phase shifter
Synchronous
timing (PLL)
circuit
i
TCSC
Error amplifier
PI controller
Fig. 2. The structure of the TCSC and its control system
5. FLDC design for TCSC
Recently, Fuzzy Logic Controllers (FLCs) have
emerged as an effective tool to stabilize the power
network with different devices such as FACTS devices or
other power electronic apparatuses [13], [14].
Fuzzy Logic Controller (FLC) presents methodical
approach to control a nonlinear strategy based on human
experience that can be regarded as a heuristic technique
to enhance the operation of closed loop system. The FLC
performance is based on its capability to simulate many
functions at its same time process and output results of
FLC is considerably thorough. Fig.3 shows schematic of
the auxiliary FLDC which is used for enhancing the
TCSC with damping controller. In this part, rotor speed
deviation and its derivative (Δω and (dΔω / dt) = Δα ),
are used as inputs for suggested FLDC that is schemed
based on Mamadani inference engine [25], [26].
ion Fuzzificat
FuzzyInference
Knowledge Based 
&
ation Defuzzific Z ' Input
Input
D '
output
u '
Fig.3. Generalized TCSC supplementary fuzzy controller for sub
synchronous resonance damping
The basic structure of FLDC is classified in four
sections: Fuzzification Block, Fuzzy Knowledgebased
Block, a Fuzzy Inference Engine and a Defuzzification
Block [25], [26].
In this paper, the inputs and the single output are
normalized for the base values defined for the system.
The frame and number of the membership functions
explaining the fuzzy value of controller (for the inputs
and output) are described offline. Zmf and Smf (Z and S
shape Membership Function) membership’s functions are
employed for the inputs and output fuzzy sets of the
FLDC. The designed membership functions for: Δω, Δα
as inputs and Δu as output are shown in Fig. 4. The
control rules of the fuzzy controllers are showed by set of
heuristically selected fuzzy rules.
Fig.4. membership functions for inputs and output fuzzy adjusts of the
FLDC
The fuzzy sets have been determined as: N: negative,
Z: zero, P: Positive, respectively. The rule base with two
proposed input is shown as:
1. If (Δω is P) and (Δα is P) then (Δu is P)
2. If (Δω is P) and (Δα is N) then (Δu is Z)
3. If (Δω is N) and (Δα is P) then (Δu is Z)
4. If (Δω is N) and (Δα is N) then (Δu is N)
C L
C L
TCSC
X X
X X
X
) (
) (
) (
D
D
D
6. TCSCbased ANF1S Controller
In this paper, the suggested ANFIS controller uses
Sugenotype Fuzzy Inference System (FIS) controller,
with the parameters inside the FIS determined by the
neuralnetwork back propagation technique [27], [31].
The ANFIS controller is determined by taking speed
deviation & acceleration as the inputs, and the α by the
TCSC as the output. The output stabilizing signal, i.e., α
is calculated utilizing the fuzzy membership functions
depending on the input variables. The effectiveness of the
proposed approach to the modelling and simulation of the
TCSC controller is applied in the Simulink environment
of MATLAB.
The fuzzy controller utilizes 4 rules and 2 membership
functions in each variable to compute output and
demonstrations good performance. The given concept of
ANFIS construction can be described using a simple
pattern whose rule base is given below.
Rule 1 :
If x is A
1
and y is B
1
, then f
1
=p
1
x+q
1
y+r
1
. (3)
Rule 1 :
If x is A
2
and y is B
2
, then f
2
=p
2
x+q
2
y+r
2
. (4)
Fig. 5 shows the corresponding equivalent ANFIS
architecture.
Fig. 5 The corresponding equivalent ANFIS architecture
The node functions in the same layer are of the same
function family as described below:
Layer 1: Every node i in this layer is an adaptive node
with a node function
for i = 1,2, or (5)
for i = 3,4 (6)
Where x (or y) is the input to node i and Ai (or B
i2
) is
a linguistic label (“small” or “large”) associated with the
node. Here the membership function for A (or B) can be
any continuous and piecewise differentiable functions,
such as commonly used trapezoidal or triangularshaped
membership functions, are also qualified candidates for
node functions in this layer [2730].
(7)
Where {c
i
, a
i
} is the parameter set. These are named
premise parameters.
Layer 2: Every node in this layer is a fixed node
labelled
Ʃ
, whose output is the produce of all the
incoming signals [2730].
) ( ) (
, 2
y x wi O
Bi Ai i
P P i=1,2 (8)
Layer 3: Here, the ith node computes the ratio of the
its rule’s firing strength to the sum of all rule’s firing
strengths [2730].
. 2 , 1 ,
2 1
, 3
i
w w
w
w O
i
i i
(9)
Layer 4: Every node i in this layer is an adaptive node
with a node function
) (
, 4 i i i i i i i
r y q x P w f w O (10)
Where w
i
is a normalized firing strength from layer 3
and {p
i
, q
i
, r
i
} is the parameter set of the node. These
parameters are referred to as consequent parameters [27
30].
Layer 5: The single node in this layer is a fixed node
labelled ∑, which calculates the overall output as the total
of all incoming signals [2730]:
(11)
The ANFIS construction for the TCSC is displayed in
Fig.6. The basic steps followed for designing the ANFIS
controller in MATLAB/Simulink are outlined [31]:
(1) Draw the Simulink model with the fuzzy controller
and simulate it with the presented rule base.
(2) The first step for designing the ANFIS controller
is collecting the training data while simulating the model
with the fuzzy controller.
Fig.6. Control surface of ANFISbased TCSC controller
(3) The two inputs speed deviation & derivative speed
deviation and the output signal Δu provide the training
data.
(4) Usage anfisedit to generate the ANFIS .fis file.
(5) Load the training data collected in Step 2 and
generates the FIS with gbell MFs.
(6) Train the collected data with the generated FIS up
to a special number of Epochs.
), (
, 1
x O
Ai i
P
), (
2 , 1
y O
Bi i
P
»
»
¼
º
«
«
¬
ª
¸
¸
¹
·
¨
¨
©
§
2
exp ) (
i
i
A
a
c x
x P
¦
¦
¦
i
i
i
i i
i
i i
w
f w
f w Q
1 , 5
Input Input
mf
Rule Output
mf
Output
and
0.5
0
0.5
1
20
0
20
40
30
20
10
0
10
20
Rotor Speed Deviation [ p.u ]
Derivative of Rotor Speed Deviation [ p.u ]
D
e
l
t
a
u
[
d
e
g
r
e
e
]
(7) Save the FIS where there is the Simulink model
with the ANFIS based TCSC controller.
7. SIMULATION RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION
Simulation results show the impact of the TCSC on
SSR damping and LFO using novel methodologies with
FLDC and ANFIS controller which are investigated using
two kinds of faults.
Initially, the power system without any damping
controllers is simulated when faults occurred at t=0.7s.
Simulation results for the current line, rotor speed
deviation, torque between Generator and LP turbines, and
the torque between low pressure and high pressure
turbines are provided in Fig.7 (a, b). Due to unstable
mode, when the fault is cleared, large oscillations will be
experienced between sections of the turbine generator
shaft. For this state, the system is completely unstable
and as depicted in Fig.7.a, the rotor speed is oscillating
with subsynchronous frequency of 25 Hz.
0 2 4 6 8
0.2
0.1
0
0.1
0.2
(a):time [ sec ]
R
o
t
o
r
S
p
e
e
d
D
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
[
p
.
u
]
0 2 4 6 8
20
10
0
10
20
(b):time [ sec ]
T
o
r
q
u
e
G
e

L
P
[
p
.
u
]
T,1/T=25 Hz
Fig.7 Simulation results for undamped condition: (a): ω of
generator, (b): torque between generator and Low pressure turbine
In order to damp the power system oscillations, the
system with FLDC and ANFIS controller are simulated in
two cases. Firstly, an inductive fault occurs. Secondly, a
fault resistive occurs.
7.1. CaseI : Simulation results with the inductive fault
In this case, an inductive fault by connecting a reactor
in t=0.7s with 20 ms time duration happens. Simulation
results are conducted with TCSC in order to prove the
effectiveness of the proposed FLDC and ANFIS
controller in SSR attenuation. Fig.8 shows that despite
FLDC and ANFIS controller the inductive fault increased
the line current from 1 to about 6 p.u. Simulation results
for rotor speed deviation, the torque between Generator
and LP turbines, and the torque between low pressure and
high pressure turbines are provided in Fig.8 (a, d). From
this figure, it is observed that, ANFIS operates better than
the FLDC since the system with ANFISbased controller
has less overshoot and less settling time compared with
the FLDC.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
(a):time [ sec ]
R
o
t
o
r
S
p
e
e
d
D
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
[
p
.
u
]
with FLDC
with ANFIS
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
4
2
0
2
4
(b):time [ sec ]
T
o
r
q
u
e
G
e

L
P
[
p
.
u
]
with FLDC
with ANFIS
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
4
2
0
2
4
(c):time [ sec ]
T
o
r
q
u
e
L
P

H
P
[
p
.
u
]
with FLDC
with ANFIS
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2
0
2
4
6
8
(d):time [ sec ]
L
i
n
e
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
[
p
.
u
]
with FLDC
with ANFIS
7 7.05 7.1 7.15 7.2
0.5
0
0.5
Fig.8 simulated results for comparison between FLDC and ANFIS
Controller with fault inductive: (a): ω of generator (b): Torque between
generator and low pressure turbines(c) and the torque between low
pressure and high pressure turbines (d) line current
7.2. CaseII: Simulation results with the resistive fault
In this case, a resistive fault by connecting a resistive
in t=0.7s with 20ms time duration happens. Again, like
Case I simulation results proposed FLDC and ANFIS
controller. Fig.9 shows that despite FLDC and ANFIS
controller the inductive fault increased the line current
from 0.5 to about 1 p.u from this figure, it is observed
that, the ANFIS controller is found to be robust to fault
type and also excellent ability in damping SSR and LFO
in the power system than the FLDC.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
0.01
0.005
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
(a):time [ sec ]
R
o
t
o
r
S
p
e
e
d
D
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
[
p
.
u
]
with FLDC
with ANFIS
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
3
2
1
0
1
(b):time [ sec ]
T
o
r
q
u
e
G
e

L
P
[
p
.
u
]
with FLDC
with ANFIS
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
1
(c):time [ sec ]
T
o
r
q
u
e
L
P

H
P
[
p
.
u
]
with FLDC
with ANFIS
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2
0
2
4
6
8
(d):time [ sec ]
L
i
n
e
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
[
p
.
u
]
with FLDC
with ANFIS
7 7.05 7.1 7.15 7.2
0.5
0
0.5
Fig.9 simulated results for comparison between FLDC and ANFIS
Controller with fault resistive: (a): ω of generator (b): Torque between
generator and low pressure turbines (c) and the torque between low
pressure and high pressure turbines (d) line current
8. CONCLUSION
This paper has shown some results of the performance
of the TCSC in SSR and power oscillation damping in a
highly unstable power system through simulation with
MATLAB® program. In order to make the TCSC able to
mitigate the SSR in power oscillation, two novel control
methodologies with FLDC and ANFIS controller is
investigated using two kinds of faults. Firstly, simulations
are carried out on IEEE Second Benchmark Model
accumulated with TCSC in two separate cases: the Case
el ell elll
includes FLDC and ANFIS controller based TCSC with
occurrence the inductive fault and the Case ΙΙ includes
FLDC and ANFIS controller based TCSC with
occurrence the resistive fault based TCSC. It Can be said
that FLDC have been one of the popular controllers
among the researches have been proposed in the power
system application such as SSR and LFO alleviation. But
there, FLDC is fundamentally approximate system and a
general solution to the adjusting problem. But the two
methodologies (FLC and ANN) walking together as
neurofuzzy systems, can help to manage the complexity
and to decrease the design time. Both of them are
powerful design methods with their own weaknesses and
strengths. With this comment ANFIS controller was
introduced and in this paper is utilized. Simulation results
prove that the inductive fault is stronger than the resistive
fault and the ANFIS controller is found to be robust to
fault type. Hence, it can be said ANFIS controller is a
good candidate in damping SSR and LFO in the power
system than the FLDC.
References
[1] P. Kundur, “Power Systems Stability and Control,”. New York: Mc
GrawHill, 1994.
[2] IEEE Committee Report, “Reader’s Guide to Subsynchronous
Resonance,” IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, vol. 7, no. 1, pp.
150157, February 1992.
[3] IEEE Working Committee Report, “Third Supplement to a
Bibliography for the Study of Subsynchronous Resonance
between Rotating Machines and Power Systems,” IEEE Trans. on
Power Systems, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 830834, May 1991.
[4] R. K. Varma and S. Auddy, “Mitigation of
SubsynchronousOscillations in a Series Compensated Wind Farm
Using Static VarCompensator,” in Proc. IEEE Power Eng. Soc.
General Meeting Conf., 2006, pp. 1–7, Paper 06 GM1272
[5] Massimo Bongiorno, Jan Svensson, LennartAngquist, “On Control
of Static Synchronous Series Compensator for SSR Mitigation”,
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 23,
NO.2, MARCH 2008.
[6] J.Guo, M.L.Crow, J.Sarangapani “An improved UPFC Control for
Oscillation Damping” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol.
24, No. 1, Feb. 2009 ,pp.288 – 296.
[7] de Jesus, F.D.; Watanabe, E.H.; de Souza, L.F.W.; Alves,
J.E.R.;“SSR and Power Oscillation Damping Using Gate
Controlled Series Capacitors (GCSC) ”, IEEE TRANSACTIONS
ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 22, NO. 3, JULY 2007.
[8] D. Rai, G. Ramakrishna, S. O. Faried, and A.A. Edris,
“Enhancement of power system dynamics using a phase
imbalanced series compensation scheme,” IEEE Trans. Power
Syst. , vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 966–974, Apr. 2010.
[9] A. D. D. Rosso, C. A. Canizares, and V. M. Dona, “A study of
TCSC controller design for power system stability improvement,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., , vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 1487–1496, Nov.
2003.
[10] Kejun Li, Jianguo Zhao, Chenghui Zhang, WeiJen Lee, “Dynamic
Simulator for ThyristorControlled Series Capacitor”, IEEE
TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 46,
NO. 3, MAY/JUNE 2010.
[11] Dragan Jovcic, Member, IEEE, and G. N. Pillai, “Analytical
Modeling of TCSC Dynamics”, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 20, NO. 2, APRIL 2005.
[12] K. M. Son and J. K. Park, “On the robust LQG control of TCSC for
damping power system oscillations,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 1306–1312, Nov. 2000.
[13] L. A. S. Pilotto et al., “Impact of TCSC control methodologies on
sub synchronous oscillations,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 18,
no. 1, pp.243–252, Jan. 2003.
[14] Mojtaba Noroozian, Mehrdad Ghandhari, GöranAndersson, J.
Gronquist, Member, IEEE, I. Hiskens, Senior Member, IEEE, “A
Robust Control Strategy for Shunt and Series Reactive
Compensators to Damp Electromechanical Oscillations”, IEEE
TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 16, NO. 4,
OCTOBER 2001.
[15] Mohammadpour, H.A.; Mirhoseini, S.M.H.; Shoulaie, A,
“Comparative study of proportional and TS fuzzy controlled
GCSC for SSR mitigation,”, Power Engineering, Energy and
Electrical Drives, 2009. Page(s): 564 – 569.
[16] Ajami, A.; Taheri, N.; Younesi, M, “A Novel Hybrid Fuzzy/LQR
Damping Oscillations Controller Using STATCOM ,”,Computer
and Electrical Engineering, 2009. Page(s): 348 – 352.
[17] A. Shoulaie, M. Bayatipoodeh, Gh. Shahgholian, A.H. Zarei, Fuzzy
logic controllerfor damping subsynchronous oscillation in power
system, in: International Conference on Intelligent and Advanced
Systems, November, 2007, pp.887–892.
[18] Khuntia, Swasti R.; Panda, Sidhartha, “ANFIS Approach for SSSC
Controller Design for the Improvement of Transient Stability
Performance,”, PROCEEDINGS OF THE FOURTH GLOBAL
CONFERENCE ON POWER CONTROL AND
OPTIMIZATION. AIP Conference Proceedings, Volume 1337,
pp. 123129 (2011).
[19] M. Ansarian, G.H. Shakouri, J. Nazarzadeh, S.M. Sadeghzadeh, A
novel neurooptimal approach for LFC decentralized design in
multiarea power system, in: Power and Energy Conference, 2006,
PECon’06. 1, 2006, pp. 167–172.
[20] M.Z. Youssef, P.K. Jain, E.A. Mohamed, A robust system
stabilizer configuration using artificial neural network based on
linear optimal control student paper competition, in: Electrical and
Computer Engineering, 2001. Canadian Conf. 1, 2003, pp. 569–
573.
[21] A. Demiroren, H.L. Zeynelgil, N.S Sengor, Application of ANN
technique to loadfrequency control for threearea power system,
in: IEEE Power Tech Conf. Porto, 2, 2001.
[22] IEEE SSR Working Group, Second Benchmark Model for
Computer Simulation of Subsynchronous Resonance, IEEE Trans.
on Power Apparatus and Systems. 104, N0.5 PP:10571064, 1985.
[23] N.G. Hingorani, L. Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS: Concepts and
Technology of Flexible ACTransmission System, IEEE Press,
2000.
[24] R. M. Mathur and R. K. Varma, “ThyristorBased FACTS
Controllers for Electrical Transmission Systems,” Piscataway, NJ:
IEEE Press, Feb. 2002.
[25] H. He, “Fuzzy Modeling and Fuzzy Control [Book Review] ,”
Computational Intelligence Magazine, IEEE ,
10.1109/MCI.2008.926613.
[26] H.J. Zimermann (HansJurgen), “Fuzzy Set Theory and it's
Applications,” Kluwer Academic Publishers, 3th Edition, 1996.
[27] J.R. Jang, ANFIS: Adaptivenetworkbased fuzzy inference
system, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 23 (3) (1993) 665–685.
[28] T. Takagi, M. Sugeno, Derivation of fuzzy control rules from
human operator’s control actions, in: IFAC Symp. Fuzzy Inf.
Knowledge Repres.Dec.Analysis, 1983, pp. 55–60.
[29] I. Rojas, J.L. Bernier, R. RodriguezAlvarez, Z. Prieto, What are
the main functional blocks involved in the design of adaptive
neurofuzzy inferencesystems? in: IEEEINNSENNS Conf.
Neural Netw., 6, 2000, pp. 551–556.
[30] E.M. Abdelrahim, T. Yahagi, A new transformed inputdomain
ANFIS for highly nonlinear system modeling and prediction, in:
Electrical and ComputerEngineering, 2001. Canadian Conf., 1,
2001, pp. 655–660.
[31] SimPowerSystems 4.3 user’s guide, Available at:
http://www.mathworks.com/products/simpower/.