Under Voltage Load Shedding

Incorporating Bus Participation Factor

Ardiaty Arief, Muhammad Bachtiar Nappu

Zhao Yang Dong

Muhammad Arief

School of Information Technology and Electrical

Engineering, University of Queensland
St. Lucia, Brisbane, Australia
e-mail:ardiaty@itee.uq.edu.au,bachtiar@itee.uq.edu.au

Dept. of Electrical Engineering

Hong Kong Polytechnic University
Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong
e-mail: zydong@ieee.org

Dept. of Electrical Engineering

University of Hasanuddin
Makassar, Indonesia
e-mail: aarief@ft.unhas.ac.id

under frequency load shedding for abnormal perturbances

outside planning and operating criteria. A basic guidelines for
the design of an under voltage load shedding was
recommended by [9]. This study performed eigenvalue
calculation to establish the voltage pick-up for the tripping
signal. Another approach of UVLS which comprised
eigenvalue calculation is by [10] where eigenvalue is employed
to measure global index for closeness of voltage collapse and
voltage magnitude on critical buses. Reference [11] carried out
a study considering critical contingencies to recommend an
optimal under voltage load shedding based on modal
participation factor. Modal participation factor in this research
is used to find the most appropriate bus for load shedding
location. In [12], a load shedding is proposed using optimal
power flow with relaxation of restrictions to minimize the load
reduction. References [13, 14] developed strategy for under
voltage load shedding with generic dynamic load model. In
[15], a particle swarm optimization (PSO) is implemented into
under voltage load shedding. Another methodology of UVLS
was suggested by setting up a training scenario followed by
optimization step based on micro-genetic algorithm [16].

Abstract Under voltage load shedding (UVLS) plays a vital part

in power system control when the system is subjected to large
disturbances. Load shedding has been employed for long time as
the last remedy to preclude major power system failure which is
activated by under frequency or under voltage relays. This paper
proposes an advanced method for under voltage load shedding
incorporating the bus participation factor method to determine
the location of load shedding. The main motivation of this study
is to attain a better performance of UVLS. The proposed
methodology is implemented on a 3-machine 9-bus test system.
Dynamic simulation is performed to validate the robustness of
the proposed method.
Keywords-bus participation factor; modal analysis; under
voltage load shedding; voltage stability

I.

INTRODUCTION

Power system stability has been identified as a crucial

prerequisite for a safe and trustworthy operation of electricity
power system for over the past 80 years [1, 2]. The instability
of the power system has instigated disturbance expansion [3].
Additionally, after the restructuring of power systems, voltage
stability has become one of the foremost apprehensions in
power system planning and operation. Large troubles with
voltage stability take place because of the immense transits of
power transmitted to long distances [4]. Nowadays, modern
power systems are heavily stressed and working at their limit
with smaller capacity and stability margins [5].

This paper attempts to create an under voltage load

shedding by using bus modal participation factor approach.
This work considers critical contingency for the basis of the
proposed UVLS scheme design. Bus participation factor in
modal analysis indicates the contribution of the bus to the
system instability. Buses with high participation factor are the
firstly priority for the location of load shedding. Participation
factor has been very useful and widely applied in various
applications for voltage stability enhancement and other field
of electric power system [17-22]. The proposed methodology is
implemented on a 9-bus test system. Dynamic simulation is
performed to validate the robustness of the proposed method.

Voltage instability can bring the whole network system to

significant voltage drop condition, therefore alleviation action
is required. References [6, 7] discussed various techniques for
voltage instability mitigation, which are: the use of reactive
power-compensating appliances, controlling the network
voltage and generator reactive output, coordinating the
protections/controls, controlling transformer tap changers and
under voltage load shedding. Load shedding is an economical
way of alleviating system collapse where small load cutback
between 5% and 10% can maintain the stability of the system.
Nonetheless, load shedding should be arranged to be able to tell
apart between faults, transient voltage dips and low voltage
condition leading to voltage instability/collapse.

II.

UNDER VOLTAGE LOAD SHEDDING TO ENHANCE

SYSTEM STABILITY

Kundur, et al in IEE/CIGRE Joint Task Force [23]

introduce a recent classification of power system stability as
can be seen in Fig. 1. Voltage stability as in [23] is delineated
as the ability of a power system to maintain steady voltages at

all buses in the system after being subjected to a disturbance

from a given initial operating condition. Voltage stability

Different methods have been proposed for under voltage

load shedding. Initially, the concept of UVLS was proposed by
Taylor [8] in 1992 to provide additional protection beside

depends on the capability of the power system to sustain

equilibrium between load demand and load supply. As can be

This work was supported in part by an Indonesia Government Scholarship

and a Hong Kong Polytechnic University grant (ZV3E)

978-1-4244-7398-4/10/$26.00 2010 IEEE

561

IPEC 2010

It is important for power systeem engineers to understand

this menace. Research has attested that UVLS is an effectual
counter-measure action against voltaage instability/collapse. The
philosophy of UVLS is that wheneever the system is disrupted
then lead to voltage drop condition below
b
a certain pre-selected
level for a certain pre-determined time period, then selected
loads should be removed [26]. It is
i expected that the system
voltage will retrieve to its normal limit by cutting off some
loads. The objective of a UVLS is to reinstate the balance
reactive power within the system, to
o avert voltage collapse and
to manage the voltage problems reside within a local area
rather than permitting it to spread
d out to other areas [27].
Consequently, the design of an UVLS
U
should be robust.
UVLS must cover enough loads as well
w as not overly sensitive.
Therefore, there are some consideerations to ensure efficient
load shedding [26, 28]:

seen in Fig. 1, voltage stability can be claassified into two

subcategories: large-disturbance and small-dissturbance voltage
stability and it may be short-term or long-term incident.

Rotor Angle
Stability

Power
System
Stability

SmallDisturbance
Angle
Stability

Short Term

Transient
Stability

Short Term
Short Term

Frequency
Stability

Voltage
Stability

Long Term
LargeDisturbance
Voltage
Stability

Short Term

SmallDisturbance
Voltage
Stability

Short Term

Long Term

A. Amount of load to be shed.

oad is imperative in order to
Shedding adequate amount of lo
ensure UVLS can mitigate the menace of voltage instability.
Shedding insufficient amount of thee necessitated load will not
be effective in arresting voltage co
ollapse, on the other hand,
shedding more load than requireed may lead to an over
frequency circumstances. In the con
ncept of UVLS [8], a UVLS
scheme was examined by an electric area utilities company
with these setting:

Long Term

Figure 1. Power system stability classificattion [23]

The voltage stability evaluation for a givven system state

inspects two aspects, proximity that verifies hoow far the system
is operating from the voltage collapse pointt and mechanism
that identifies areas prone to voltage instabbility issues and
offers solution information useful to forestalll instability [6,
24].
When succession of the voltage instabilityy incidents results
in partial or total blackout or considerably low
w voltages which
are below the tolerable limits in the majorrity areas of the
system, the system is considered to be ccollapse. Voltage
collapse is condition of heavily loaded electriic power systems
which can lead to declining voltages, cascaading failure and
blackouts [25]. As transmission network becom
me more stressed,
voltage instability/collapse risk also boosts uup. Yet, there are
two defense actions against incidents thaat might initiate
instability, as the power system become m
more stressed and
work closer to their limits [16]:

Shedding 5% of load when

n the system voltage drops
10% below lowest normall voltage after 1.5 second
time delay.

Shedding 5% of load when

n the system voltage drops
8% below lowest normal voltage
v
after 3 second time
delay.

Shedding 5% of load when the

t voltage drops 8% below
lowest normal voltage after 6 second time delay.

B. Location of load shedding

ne location of load shedding
Some considerations to determin
are proposed in [26]. Study in [11] shows
s
that shedding load in
the correct location can arrest voltage instability. However,
shedding the same amount of load
d in different location gives
different result and may not be effecctive to improve the system
stability.

preventively deed to observe the system security

margin by taking into consideeration different
contingencies possibilities then perform
m right actions to
preserve sufficient system margins.

s
C. Timing and time steps of load shedding.
Load shedding is executed in steeps in order to preclude over
shedding condition. The minimum time delay before a UVLS
is triggered should be sufficient in preventing
p
voltage collapse
as well as avoiding unnecessary trip
pping during transient time
where load shedding is unnecessary..

correctively deed to negate more severe risks by

utilizing automatic corrective appplications with
protection schemes.

D. Voltage level(s) at which shedd

ding
The voltage level for load shedd
ding should be just above a
level that indicates the inception off voltage collapse as well as
above the voltage levels where motors
m
begin to stall, since
voltage collapse is immensely quick
k after it. This voltage level
can be around 8-15% below lowest normal
n
voltage [8].

Voltage instability is also believed as the ccore cause of the

blackout in Canada and Northeast United Staates at 14 August
2003 [29, 30]. During this blackout, firstly, several 345 kV
transmission lines tripped and resulted in one m
more 345 kV line
being overload and then disconnection of anotther 345 kV line.
Furthermore, the 138 kV transmission lines aalso tripped. The
cascading failures continue causing the voltaage dropped and
tripping of lines and generators in response to under voltage on
the system.

Many utilities have implementted the under voltage load

shedding programs. Reference [31] summarizes different
applications of UVLS in several cou
untries.

562

III.

IV.

PARTICIPATION FACTOR METHODOLOGY

One important factor to be taken into account in designing

effective UVLS is location where the load should be shed. One
possible approach for this matter is by analyzing the system
stability separately where load shedding takes place at each
different bus. This method may be suitable for small power
system, nevertheless, for moderate or even large power system,
this process will be time consuming. Bus participation factor in
modal analysis, on the other hand, offers effective solution for
this problem. The concept modal analysis can be found in [24].
This technique provides useful information about voltage
stability critical areas and information about the best steps to
enhance system stability.

A 9-bus test system shown in Fig. 2 is used in this

numerical example. This system has 3 generators and 3 loads.
Generator data for all machines are provided by Table I.
Further details of the system data can be seen in [32]. Fig. 3
shows the pre-fault system voltage magnitude profile at the
normal operating condition.
In this investigation, a disturbance occurs between bus 5
and 7 and then resulting in loss of transmission line between
these two buses. Fig. 4 illustrates system voltage fluctuations
response at load buses after the incident of the fault. It clearly
confirms the unstable load buses voltages which oscillate
between 0.8-1.0 pu. The worst voltage is at bus 6 reaching
approximately 0.8 pu. The voltages at load buses 5 and 8 also
indicate the instability since they drop below 0.9 pu. This
circumstance signifies the need of load shedding to reinstate
the system voltage stability.

Power system is modeled as follow,

TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

(1)

where,
is variations in bus real power
is variations in bus reactive power injection
is variations in bus voltage angle
is variations in bus voltage magnitude
J is the Jacobian matrix of partial derivatives

8
G1

7
5

Critical bus recognition is accomplished by applying modal

analysis method on the system Jacobian matrix, hence

(2)

Where, JR is the reduced Jacobian matrix. The modes of power

network can be acquired by the eigenvalues and eigenvectors
of the reduced Jacobian matrix JR, thus

0
0

1
G2

(3)

Figure 2. 9-bus test system

TABLE I.

0
0
0

G3

0
(4)

Where,
is the right eigenvector matrix of JR
is the left eigenvector matrix of JR
is the diagonal eigenvector matrix of JR
The relative bus participation factor of the kth bus to the ith
mode is provided by the left and right eigenvectors correlating
to the system critical modes and can be given as,

GENERATOR DATA [32]

Generator

G1

G2

G3

Rated MVA
kV
Power factor
Type
Speed
xd
x'd
xq
xq
xl(leakage)
d0
q0
Stored energy at rated speed

247.5
16.5
1.0
hydro
180 r/min
0.1460
0.0608
0.0969
0.0969
0.0336
8.96
0
2364 MWs

192.0
18
0.85
steam
3600 r/min
0.8958
0.1198
0.8645
0.1969
0.0521
6.00
0.535
640 MWs

128.0
13.8
0.85
Steam
2600 r/min
1.3125
0.1813
1.2578
0.25
0.0742
5.89
0.6
301 MWs

(5)
Load buses with large participation factor have more
influence in contributing to the voltage instability.
Consequently these buses become the best candidate buses for
determining the location of load shedding to enhance system
voltage stability.

Previous research has also proven that shedding load at the

proper bus will enhance voltage stability from the steady state
voltage analysis approach as in [33]. Many research have
proven the effectiveness of modal bus participation factor.
Participation factor has been very useful and widely applied in
various applications for voltage stability enhancement and
other field of electric power system. Particular study in [11]

563

each load buses independently. Figs. 6-8 confirm the usefulness

of modal participation factor in determining the best location
for load shedding. As results, loaad shedding at bus 5 or 6
provide voltage improvement. Fiig. 6 proves the voltage
stability enhancement after load sheedding at load bus 5. Fig. 7
shows the voltage stability improvement after load shedding of
the same amount at load bus 6. Ho
owever, by comparing both
figures, the system voltage is more stable when the load is cut
off at bus 5. All load buses voltagees recover to above 0.9 pu.
Nonetheless, when load shedding takes place at bus 6, the
voltage at bus 5 even though improves but still unstable below
0.9 pu.

employed modal participation factor find the most appropriate

bus for load shedding location. This studdy confirms the
effectiveness of load shedding at bus with hhigh participation
factor. However, study in [11] only evaluuates the system
stability from steady state voltage stability ppoint of view. In
this paper, on the other hand, the efficacyy of bus modal
participation factor is simulated with dynamicc voltage stability
analysis. Since this system only consists of 3 load buses, load
shedding is simulated at each load buses individually to
validate the proposed method.
Voltage Magnitude Profile
1

0.4
0.35
Bus Participation Factor

V [p .u .]

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05

0
1

5
Bus #

Bus 6

Bus 5

Bus 8

Load Bus
B

Figure 3. Steady state voltage magnitude profile

Figure 5. Load buses parrticipation factor

1.1

0.9

0.8

0.9

0.7

0.8

Voltage magnitude (pu)

Voltage magnitude (pu)

1.1

0.6
0.5
0.4

VBus 5
VBus 6

0.3
0.2

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4

VBus 5

VBus 8

VBus 6

0.3
0

VBus 8

time (s)

0.2

time (s)

Figure 4. Voltage collapse at load buses after fault andd line disconnection
between bus 5 and 7 without load sheddding

Figure 6. Voltage stability restoration

n after load shedding at bus 5

Based on Eq. 5, participation factors for eaach load buses are

calculated and can be seen in Fig. 5. By referriing to Fig. 5, load
bus 5 has the highest participation factor, hence this bus
become the best candidate for location of loadd shedding. From
the concept of UVLS as in [8], 5% of load should be
disconnected when the system voltage drrop below 90%
voltages for 1.5 seconds. Thus, in these simulations, the
amount of load shedding is 5% at 1.5 seconnds performed at

The system voltage stability beecomes more severe if load

shedding proceeds at bus 8 as indiicated in Fig. 8. Bus 8 has
small participation factor hence it is not recommended to be
selected as location of load sheddiing. After load shedding at
bus 8, instead of improving volttage stability, the voltage
fluctuates in even wider range. Non
ne of the load buses voltages
become stable. The worst voltagee is at bus 6 which drops
below 0.7 pu.

564

this case bus with small participation factor cannot arrest the
system from instability, even can deteriorate the situation.

1.1

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

A. Arief and M.B. Nappu thanks to University of

Hasanuddin and the Indonesian Government and Z.Y. Dong
thanks to Hong Kong Polytechnic University grant (ZV3E).

Voltage magnitude (pu)

0.9
0.8
0.7

REFERENCES

0.6
0.5

[1]

0.4

VBus 5

0.2

[2]

VBus 6

0.3

VBus 8
0

[3]
5

time (s)

[4]
Figure 7. Voltage stability restoration after load shedding at bus 6
[5]

Voltage magnitude (pu)

1.1
1

[6]

0.9

[7]

0.8

[8]

0.7
0.6

[9]

0.5
0.4

VBus 5

0.2

[10]

VBus 6

0.3

VBus 8
0

[11]

time (s)

Figure 8. Voltage stability diminution after load shedding at bus 8

V.

[12]

CONCLUSIONS

Under voltage load shedding (UVLS) which is a low-cost

mean of diminishing system collapse plays a vital part in power
system control when the system is subjected to large
disturbances. It has been employed for long time as the last
remedy to prohibit major power system failure.

[13]

[14]

In this paper, an UVLS design by applying bus

participation factor analysis approach is proposed. The bus
participation factor indicates load buses for the firstly priority
for the location of load shedding. Participation factor has been
proven to be effective in different areas of electric power
system. The time-domain simulations on the 3-machine 9-bus
test system confirm that bus participation factor provides
information for the best location of load shedding. This
analysis has demonstrated the importance of shedding at the
right bus. Shedding the load at bus with high participation
factor can revive the system from being unstable. On the other
hand, shedding the same amount of load at the incorrect bus, in

[15]
[16]

[17]

[18]

565

Z. Y. Dong, Power System Dynamics and Stability, reference notes for

ME course on Power System Dynamics and Stability: UQ Publisher,
2007.
Z. Y. Dong and P. Zhang, Emerging Techniques in Power System
Analysis: Springer, 2009.
A. Wiszniewski, "New Criteria of Voltage Stability Margin for the
Purpose of Load Shedding," IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol.
22, pp. 1367-1371, 2007.
M. Klaric, I. Kuzle, and S. Tesnjak, "Example of Undervoltage Load
Shedding Implementation," in IEEE AFRICON Conference, Windhoek,
Namibia, 26 - 28 September, 2007, pp. 1-6.
A. Saffarian, M. Sanaye-pasand, and H. Asadi, "Performance
Investigation of New Combinational Load Shedding Schemes," in Joint
International Conference on Power System Technology and IEEE Power
India Conference, New Delhi, India, 12-15 October, 2008, pp. 1-8.
P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control. New York: McGrawHill, 1994.
Y. Mansour and C. Canizares, "Voltage Stability," in Power System
Stability and Control, L. L. Grigsby, Ed. Boca Raton: Taylor and Francis
Group, 2007.
C. W. Taylor, "Concepts of Undervoltage Load Shedding for Voltage
Stability," IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 7, pp. 480-488,
1992.
H. G. Sarmiento, R. Castellanos, G. Pampin, G. Villa, and M. Mirabal,
"Revisiting Undervoltage Load Shedding Schemes: A step by step
approach," in Proc. IEEE/PES Transmission and Distribution
Conference and Exposition, Chicago, USA, 21-24 April, 2008, pp. 1-6.
M. Klaric, I. Kuzle, and S. Tesnjak, "Undervoltage Load Shedding using
Global Voltage Collapse Index," in IEEE PES Power Systems
Conference and Exposition, New York, USA, 10-13 October, 2004, pp.
453-459, vol. 1.
C. M. Affonso, L. C. P. da Silva, F. G. M. Lima, and S. Soares, "MW
and MVar Management on Supply and Demand Side for Meeting
Voltage Stability Margin Criteria," IEEE Transactions on Power System,
vol. 19, pp. 1538-1545, 2004.
T. S. P. Fernandes, J. R. Lenzi, and M. A. Mikilita, "Load Shedding
Strategies Using Optimal Load Flow With Relaxation of Restrictions,"
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 23, pp. 712-718, 2008.
R. Balanathan, N. C. Pahalawaththa, U. D. Annakkage, and P. W. Sharp,
"Undervoltage Load Shedding to Avoid Voltage Instability," IEE
Proceedings Generation, Transmission and Distribution, vol. 145, pp.
175-181, 1998.
R. Balanathan, N. C. Pahalawaththa, and U. D. Annakkage, "A Strategy
for Undervoltage Load Shedding in Power Systems," in Proceedings
International Conference on Power System Technology, POWERCON
Beijing, China, 18-21 August, 1998, pp. 1494-1498 vol.2.
T. Amraee, A. M. Ranjbar, B. Mozafari, and N. Sadati, "An Enhanced
Under-Voltage Load-Shedding Scheme to Provide Voltage Stability,"
Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 77, pp. 1038-1046, 2007.
C. Moors, D. Lefebvre, and T. Van Cutsem, "Design of Load Shedding
Schemes Against Voltage Instability," in IEEE Power Engineering
Society Winter Meeting, Singapore, 23-27 January, 2000, pp. 1495-1500,
vol. 2.
W. A. Hashlamoun, M. A. Hassouneh, and E. H. Abed, "New Results on
Modal Participation Factors: Revealing a Previously Unknown
Dichotomy," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 54, pp.
1439-1449, 2009.
L. C. P. D. Silva, Y. Wang, V. F. D. Costa, and W. Xu, "Assessment of
Generator Impact on System Power Transfer Capability using Modal

[19]
[20]

[21]
[22]
[23]

[24]
[25]

[26]

[27]
[28]

[29]
[30]
[31]

[32]
[33]

Participation Factors," IEE Proc. Generation Transmission Distribution,

vol. 149, pp. 564-570, 2002.
Y. Mansour, X. Wilsun, F. Alvarado, and R. Chhewang, "SVC
placement using critical modes of voltage instability," IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 9, pp. 757-763, 1994.
J. Zhang, J. Y. Wen, S. J. Cheng, and J. Ma, "A Novel SVC Allocation
Method for Power System Voltage Stability Enhancement by Normal
Forms of Diffeomorphism," IEEE Transaction on Power Systems, vol.
22, pp. 1819-1825, 2007.
D. L. H. Aik and G. Andersson, "Use of Participation Factors in Modal
Voltage Stability Analysis of Multi-Infeed HVDC Systems," IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 13, pp. 203-211, 1998.
Z. Jianyun and S. Yuanzhang, "Variational approach in modal analysis,"
in Proc. IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, San
Fransisco, USA, 12-16 June, 2005, pp. 259-265 Vol. 1.
P. Kundur, J. Paserba, V. Ajjarapu, G. Andersson, A. Bose, C.
Canizares, N. Hatziargyriou, D. Hill, A. Stankovic, C. Taylor, T. Van
Cutsem, and V. Vittal, "Definition and Classification of Power System
Stability IEEE/CIGRE Joint Task Force on Stability Terms and
Definitions," IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 19, pp. 13871401, 2004.
B. Gao, G. K. Morison, and P. Kundur, "Voltage Stability Evaluation
Using Modal Analysis," IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 7,
pp. 1529-1542, 1992.
I. Dobson and L. Lu, "Computing an Optimum Direction in Control
Space to Avoid Stable Node Bifurcation and Voltage Collapse in
Electric Power Systems," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol.
37, pp. 1616-1620, 1992.
M. Begovic, D. Fulton, M. R. Gonzalez, J. Goossens, E. A. Guro, R. W.
Haas, C. F. Henville, G. Manchur, G. L. Michel, R. C. Pastore, J.
Postforoosh, G. L. Schmitt, J. B. Williams, K. Zimmerman, and A. A.
Burzese, "Summary of "System Protection and Voltage Stability"," IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 10, pp. 631-638, 1995.
C. J. Mozina, "Undervoltage Load Shedding," in 60th Annual
Conference for Protective Relay Engineers Texas, USA, 27-29 March,
2007, pp. 16-34.
S. S. Ladhani and W. Rosehart, "Under Voltage Load Shedding for
Voltage Stability Overview of Concepts and Principles," in IEEE Power
Engineering Society General Meeting, Denver, Colorado, USA, 6-10
June, 2004, pp. 1597-1602, vol. 2.
D. Novosel, M. M. Begovic, and V. Madani, "Shedding Light on
Blackouts," IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, vol. 2, pp. 32-43, 2004.
U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force, "Final Report on the
August 14, 2003 Blackout in the United States and Canada: Causes and
Recommendations," April 2004.
S. Imai, "Undervoltage Load Shedding Improving Security as
Reasonable Measure for Extreme Contingencies," in IEEE Power
Engineering Society General Meeting, San Francisco, California, USA,
12-16 June, 2005, pp. 1754-1759, vol. 2.
P. M. Anderson and A. A. Fouad, Power System Control and Stability.
Piscataway, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2003.
A. Arief, M. B. Nappu, X. Yin, X. Zhou, and Z. Y. Dong, "Under
Voltage Load Shedding Design with Modal Analysis Approach," in The
8th IET International Conference on Advances in Power System Control,
Operation and Management Hongkong, 8-11 November, 2009.

566