Final year report

© All Rights Reserved

7 views

Final year report

© All Rights Reserved

- APC100
- Level Control of Tank System Using PID Controller-A Review
- shipmdl
- EML_5311_Project_28_April_Ramin_Shamshiri
- Dogleg
- 2
- Automatic Controllers & Control Modes
- Arb 03 Pid Control
- 30120140505012
- Tuning of a Pd Pi Controller Used With a Highly Oscillating Second Order Process
- List of Publications
- 3241
- pr
- 0060
- Suppression of Low Frequency Oscillation in Traction Network of High-speed Railway Based on Auto Disturbance Rejection Control
- 1-s2.0-S1877705812004134-main
- Paper 22
- 1-s2.0-S1474667015365447-main.pdf
- DA TING GOES SKRRAAAAA
- Coordinated+Controller+Tuning+of+a+Boiler+Turbine+Unit+with+New+Binary+Particle+Swarm+Optimization+Algorithm

You are on page 1of 24

LITERATURE REVIEW

A. INTRODUCTION

The objectives of the Load Frequency Control (LFC) are to distribute the load between

generators and to control the tie-line power to pre-specified values and to maintain sensibly

uniform frequency. In order to supply reliable electric power with good quality, LFC in power

system is very important. Constant frequency is identified as the mark of a normally operating

system. A power plant got to monitor the load conditions and serve consumers entire day. It is

therefore irrelevant to consider that uniform power is generated throughout. So, depending on

load demand, power generation varies. The objective of control strategy is to deliver and

generate power in an interconnected system as reliably and economically as possible while

maintaining the frequency and voltage within the limits. The system frequency is mainly

affected due to change in load, while reactive power depends on changes in voltage magnitude

and is less sensitive to frequency. To keep the frequency constant PID controller is used which

controls the turbines used for tuning the generators and also the steady state error of system

frequency is reduced by tuning the controller gains. There are different algorithms to optimize

the controller gains for load frequency control of an interconnected power system like PSO.

Since its invention, many PSO variants have been proposed by modifying its solution update

rule to improve its performance. The subtraction-based solution update mechanism has caused

premature convergence and stagnation in particle population during the iterations. To overcome

these issues, this study presents a distribution-based update rule for PSO algorithm. The

experimental results and comparisons show that PSOd is a better version of PSO.

B. LITERATURE SURVEY

To maintain power with an acceptable quality is the main objective of power system operation

and control. The problem of the load frequency control (LFC) is one of the most important areas

in the interconnected power systems. Power system is a complex system, nonlinear and is

subjected to different kinds of events. Frequency of a power system needs to be kept constant

for reliable power supply despite of fluctuations in load. Recently, many different control

algorithms have been proposed for LFC. PSO a population based technique first described by

James Kennedy and Russell C. Eberhart (1995) [1]. This applies the concept of social

1

interaction to problem solving. Generally, PSO is opted as it is easy to implement,

computationally efficient and simple in concept. Hence PSO is successfully applied to tune the

parameters of controller which helps in achieving the objective of keeping the frequency

constant by minimising the objective function. Since its invention, many PSO variants have

been proposed by modifying its solution update rule to improve its performance. The

subtraction-based solution update mechanism has caused premature convergence and stagnation

in particle population during the iterations. To overcome these issues, a distribution-based

update rule for PSO algorithm was developed which not only minimises the objective function

but also prevent premature convergence. [2] Here PID is used for the application of Load

Frequency Control (LFC) of an interconnected power system. The Integral of Time multiplied

by Absolute Error (ITAE) is a performance index used to design control system. The index was

proposed by Graham and Lathrop (1953), who derived a set of normalized transfer function

coefficients to minimize the ITAE criterion for a step input.

C. PROJECT OBJECTIVE

As we know 50 Hertz is normal operating frequency in India and if there is a variation of ±2.5

hertz then it is going to seriously affect the entire system. For example, turbine blades are prone

to get damaged in such condition. Also, there is a relation between frequency and motor speed

which is also going to be affected by frequency variation.

algorithm for restricting the value of change in frequency to a constant against any

variation in load demand.

The power flow through the tie line of each area must be maintained to its pre-

specified value.

Minimise the error of the system.

2

D. PROJECT LAYOUT

Chapter 1 Reviews the literature on load frequency control (LFC) of power system and

necessity of frequency control. Motivation and objective along with brief description of the work

is presented.

Chapter 2 Describes the load frequency control (LFC) of two area interconnected power system,

need for maintenance of constant frequency. The major components of power system are

described with mathematical modeling. Objective function and PID controller are described

also.

Chapter 3 Discusses recent algorithms on optimization PSOd. Algorithm of PSOd are included

in this.

Chapter 4 Comparison of PSO and PSOd is done. Table 4.3 Shows the simulation results of

PSO and PSOd control algorithm of two area interconnected power system. Simulations were

performed using MATLAB Simulink. Step load disturbance is applied in areas for PSOd based

controller and tie- line power flows and frequency oscillations are observed.

3

CHAPTER 2

A. INTRODUCTION

If the system is connected to a number of different loads in a power system, then the system

frequency and speed change with the governor characteristics as the load changes. If it is not

required to keep the frequency constant in a system, then the operator is not required to change

the setting of the generator. But if constant frequency is required the operator can adjust the speed

of the turbine by changing the governor characteristic as and when required. If a change in load is

taken care by two generating stations running at parallel, then the complexity of the system

increases. The possibility of sharing the load by two machines is as follow:

Suppose there are two generating stations that are connected to each other by tie

line. If the change in load is either at A or at B and the generation of A is alone asked

to regulate so as to have constant frequency, then this kind of regulation is called

Flat Frequency Regulation.

The other possibility of sharing the load the load is that both A and B would regulate

their generations to maintain the constant frequency. This is called parallel

frequency regulation.

The third possibility is that the change in the frequency of a particular area is taken

care of by the generator of that area thereby the tie-line loading remains the same.

This method is known as flat tie-line loading control.

In Selective Frequency control each system in a group is takes care of the load

changes on its own system and does not aid the other systems un the group for

changes outside its own limits.

In Tie-line Load-bias control all the power systems in the interconnection aid in

regulating frequency regardless of where the frequency change originates. The

equipment consists of a master load frequency controller and a tie line recorder

measuring the power input on the tie as for the selective frequency control.

The error signal i.e. Δf and ΔPtie are amplified, mixed and transformed to real power

command signal ΔPV which is sent to the prime mover to call for an increase in the

torque. The prime mover shall bring about a change in the generator output by an

4

amount ΔPG which will change the values of Δf and ΔPtie within the specified

tolerance. The first step to the analysis of the control system is the mathematical

modelling of the system’s various components and control system techniques [3].

a) GENERATOR MODEL

2𝐻 𝑑 2∆𝛿

= ∆𝑃𝑚 − ∆𝑃𝑒

𝜔 𝑑𝑡 2

𝜔

𝑑∆𝜔 1

𝑠

Or in terms of small deviation in speed = (∆𝑃𝑚 − ∆𝑃𝑒 )

𝑑𝑡 2𝐻

1

∆Ω(𝑠) = [Δ𝑃𝑚 (𝑠) − Δ𝑃𝑒 (𝑠)]

2𝐻𝑠

b) Load Model

The load on the power system consists of a variety of electrical drives. The

equipment used for lighting purposes are basically resistive in nature and the rotating

devices are basically a composite of the resistive and inductive components. The

speed-load characteristic of the composite load is given by

Δ𝑃𝑒 = Δ𝑃𝐿 + 𝐷Δ𝜔

Where,

5

ΔPL is the non-frequency- sensitive load change, 𝐷Δ𝜔is the frequency sensitive load

change.

D is expressed as percent change in load by percent change in frequency.

The source of power generation is commonly known as the prime mover. It may be

hydraulic turbines at waterfalls, steam turbines whose energy comes from burning of the

coal, gas and other fuels. The model for the turbine relates the changes in mechanical

power output ΔPm to the changes in the steam valve position ΔPV

Δ𝑃𝑚 (𝑠) 1

𝐺𝑇 = =

Δ𝑃𝑉 (𝑠) 1 + 𝜏 𝑇 𝑠

Where T, the turbine constant is, in the range of 0.2 to 2.0 seconds.

d) Governor model

When the electrical load is suddenly increased then the electrical power exceeds

the mechanical power input. As a result of this the deficiency of power in the load

side is extracted from the rotating energy of the turbine. Due to this reason the

kinetic energy of the turbine i.e. the energy stored in the machine is reduced and the

governor sends a signal to supply more volumes of water or steam or gas to

increase the speed of the prime-mover so as to compensate speed deficiency.

6

Fig.3: Graphical Representation of speed regulation by governor

The slope of the curve represents speed regulation R. Governors typically have a speed regulation

of 5-6 % from no load to full load.

1

Δ𝑃𝑔 = Δ𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑓 − Δ𝑓

𝑅

Or in s- domain

1

Δ𝑃𝑔 (𝑠) = Δ𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑓 − ΔΩ(𝑠)

𝑅

The command ΔPg is transformed through hydraulic amplifier to the steam valve position

command ΔPV. We assume a linear relationship and consider simple time constant we have the

following s-domain relation:

1

Δ𝑃𝑉 (𝑠) = Δ𝑃

1 + 𝜏𝑔 𝑔(𝑠)

7

Combining all the block diagrams from earlier block diagrams for a single are system we get the

following:

Fig.4: Mathematical Modelling of Block Diagram of single system consisting of Generator, Load, Prime

Mover and Governor

The connection between power systems is made possible via tie-lines. Tie-line allows

the flow of electric power between areas. Area will obtain energy with the help of tie-

lines from other areas, when load change occurs in that area. Hence LFC also needs to

control the tie-line power exchange error. Tie-line power error are the integral of the

frequency difference in between two areas. Tie-line power can be written

mathematically as

0

|𝑉10 ||𝑉20 |

𝑃12 = sin(𝛿10 − 𝛿20 )

𝑋

P12=T12 1 2

|𝑉10 ||𝑉20 |

Where, 𝑇12 = cos(𝛿10 − 𝛿20 ) is the synchronizing coefficient

𝑋

8

1 𝑑

Frequency deviation ∆f is related to reference angle by ∆𝑓 = (𝛿 0 + ∆𝛿)

2𝜋 𝑑𝑡

1 𝑑

∆𝑓 = (∆𝛿)

2𝜋 𝑑𝑡

Δ𝛿 = 2𝜋 ∫ Δ𝑓𝑑𝑡

2𝜋𝑇12

∆𝑃12 (𝑠) = (∆𝑓1(𝑠) − ∆𝑓2(𝑠))

𝑠

So, for control area 2

−2𝜋𝑎12𝑇12

Δ𝑃21 (𝑠) = (Δ𝑓1(𝑠) − Δ𝑓2 (𝑠)

𝑠

9

Fig. 6 Block diagram of two area interconnected system

10

D. Area Control Error

Control error of each area consists of linear combination of tie line flows and frequency.

ACE represents a mismatch between area generation and load (AGC). The objective of

LFC is to minimize the error in frequency of each area as well as to keep the tie-line error

to scheduled value which is quite difficult in presence of fluctuating load. If we control the

error in frequency back to zero, any steady state errors in the frequency of the system would

result in tie-line power errors because the error in tie-line power is the integral of the

frequency change between each pair of areas. Therefore, it is needed to consider the

information of the tie-line power deviation in control input. As a result, an error called ACE

is defined as

Where,

∆𝑓𝑖 =𝑖𝑡ℎ area frequency error

∆𝑃𝑡𝑖𝑒,𝑖𝑗 =power flow error in tie line between 𝑖 𝑡ℎ and 𝑗𝑡ℎ area

The input to controller is area control error having objective of controlling the ACE and the

frequency deviation. Now which controller is to be taken into consideration depends on

performance of controller and the requirement of process.

E. Controllers

The fundamental control loop can be simplified for a SISO (single-input-single-output)

system as in Fig. 2.5 Here we are ignoring the disturbances in the system.

11

The controller may have different structures. But the one of most popular controller in all is

Proportional-Integral-derivative (PID) type controller. In fact, more than 95% of the

industrial controllers are of PID type.

The transfer function of the controller is given by:

1

𝐶 (𝑠) = 𝐾𝑝 (1 + 𝜏𝑑 𝑠 + )

𝜏𝑖 𝑠

Where,

𝐾𝑝 =Proportional gain

𝜏𝑖 =Integral time

In this the effects of the individual components- proportional, derivative and integral on the

closed loop response of this system are explained.

1. In case of proportional controller, the time response improves (i.e. the time constant

decreases) and there is offset between the output response and desired response. By

increasing the proportional gain, this offset can be reduced; but that may also cause

increase oscillations for higher order systems.

2. When only integral action of controller is considered with integral controller, the order

of the closed loop system increases by one. This increase in order may cause instability

of the closed loop system, if the process is of higher order dynamics. The major

advantage of this integral control action is that it reduces steady state error to zero due

to step input. But simultaneously, the system response is in general oscillatory, slow as

well as even sometimes unstable.

3. PI gives the double advantages of fast response due to P-action and the zero-steady

state error because of I-action. By using P-I controller, the steady state error can be

carried down to zero, and simultaneously, the transient response can be improved.

4. P-D controller apparently is not very useful, since it cannot reduce the steady state

error to zero. But for higher order processes, it can be shown that the stability of the

closed loop system can be improved using P-D controller.

12

Suitable combination of proportional, integral and derivative actions can provide all the

desired performances: fast response, zero steady state error and less offset. In this order is

low, but is universally applicable as it can be used in any type of system. PID controllers

have also been found to be robust, and that is the reason, it finds wide acceptability for

industrial processes.

F. Objective function

In this adjustment of parameters is done using optimization and objective function which is

a function of error and time and the function used is integral of time-multiplied absolute

error criterion (ITAE). Another objective function which is also a function of error and time

is there known as integral of the square of the error criterion (ISE) but this performance

index is not taken into consideration because this one is computationally not comfortable

and is less sensitive in comparison to ITAE. Whereas ITAE has the benefits of producing

less oscillations and smaller overshoots, maintain robustness and in addition to that it is

most sensitive i.e. best selectivity this makes the ITAE index the desirable criterion used for

design of control system. Focus is on minimizing the ITAE criterion. ITAE is composed of

tie line power and frequency deviation of both areas. The objective function is

∞

𝐽 = ∫ 𝑡( |∆𝑓1| + |∆𝑓2| + |∆𝑃𝑡𝑖𝑒 |)𝑑𝑡

0

Where, ∆f1 and ∆f2 are frequency deviations; ∆𝑃𝑡𝑖𝑒 is the change in tie line power Since

integrating up to infinity is not practicable a large value of T should be chosen such that

error is negligible. Here T=10 seconds istaken.

13

CHAPTER 3

OPTIMIZATION ALGORITHMS

A. Optimization Algorithm

Keeping in view the effort required and time consumed to get optimum values of

the controller by the conventional methods motivates us to go for an advanced method

which includes optimization algorithm based on natural processes. There are many

optimization algorithms that have been proposed or developed till date.

Particle swarm optimization (PSO), originated by James Kennedy and R.C. Eberhart in

1995. It is a stochastic (connection of random variable) evolutionary computation method

used to explore search space. This technique is based on swarm’s intelligence and

movement. As this is based on swarm behavior, is a population based technique. The bird

generally follows the shortest path for food searching. Based on this behavior, this

algorithm is developed. It uses a number of particles where every particle is considered as a

point in N-dimensional space. Each particle keeps on accelerating in the search space

depending on the knowledge it has about the appreciable solution comparing its own best

value and the best value of swarm obtained so far. It is well described by the concept of

social interaction because each particle search in a particular direction and by interaction

the bird with best location so far and then tries to reach that location by adjusting their

velocity this require intelligence.

Given below are the two main equations of PSO algorithm:

Velocity modification equation:

w =weighing function

𝑐1=weighing factor

𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑1 =random number between 0-1

𝑝𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡1 =personal best of agent i

14

𝑠𝑖𝑘 =current position of agent i at iteration k

𝑔𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡1 =g-best of the group

Step1: The initial particles are set to some linear position in the range of 𝐾𝑝 and𝐾𝑖 .

Step4: Evaluate the ITAE for the particles at their corresponding positions.

Step12: Iteration=iteration+1.

15

C. Distributed Particle Swarm Optimization (PSOd)

Proportional-plus-integral-plus-derivative controller is designed here based on Distributed

Particle Swarm Optimization (PSOd) for controlling the frequency deviation which is a

major problem of a two-area interconnected power system. In order to improvise the

performance of supplying power of a power system, error function is minimized. The

objective function taken into consideration over here is Integral Time multiplied with

Absolute Error (ITAE). To optimize the gain values of controller, the PSOd algorithm is

used. For D-dimensional search space and N particles, Let X be particle the population,

𝑝𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡1 be the personal information or self-best solution obtained so far, 𝑔𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡1 be the

best solution obtained by the particle population so far and V be the velocities of the

particles. X, 𝑝𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡1 and V are N×D matrix and 𝑔𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡1 is 1×D vector. For initialization

of the particle population, Eq. (3.1) is used.

𝑗

𝑋𝑖,𝑗 (0) = 𝐿𝑗𝑚𝑖𝑛 + 𝑟𝑖 × (𝑈𝑗𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 𝐿𝑗𝑚𝑖𝑛 )

where, 𝐿𝑗𝑚𝑖𝑛 the lower bound of the search space for jth dimension, 𝑈𝑗𝑚𝑎𝑥 is the upper

𝑗

bound of the search space for jth dimension and 𝑟𝑖 is a random number produced for each

particle’s each dimension, in range of [0,1].

𝑗

[𝐿𝑗𝑚𝑖𝑛 + 𝑟𝑖 × (𝑈𝑗𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 𝐿𝑗𝑚𝑖𝑛 ) − 𝑋𝑖,𝑗 (0)]

𝑉𝑖,𝑗 (0) =

2

i=1, 2…., N and j=1, 2,…,D ..........……………………………………..…...(Eq.3.2)

The initialization of velocities of the particles depends on both the upper and lower bound

of search space and the current particle positions. In the initialized stage, the current

particle positions are assigned as self-best solution 𝑝𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡1 of the particles by using Eq.

(3.3).

16

The best solution of the population in the initialized phase is determined using Eq. (3.4).

Eqs.(3.5), (3.6), (3.7) and (3.4) are executed.

1 2

𝑉𝑖,𝑗 (𝑡 + 1) = 𝑤 × 𝑉𝑖,𝑗 (𝑡) + 𝑟𝑖,𝑗 × 𝑐1 × (𝑝𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖,𝑗 (𝑡) − 𝑋𝑖,𝑗 (𝑡)) + 𝑟𝑖,𝑗 × 𝑐2 ×

𝐽 = 1,2, … . . 𝐷………………………………………………. Eq. (3.6)

𝑝𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖 (𝑡 + 1) = { (Eq.3.7)

𝑝𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖 (𝑡) 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒

In Eq. (3.5), w is inertia weight and it is not in the basic PSO algorithm, but it is used in all

contemporary versions of PSO algorithm.

To cope with loss of diversity in the particle population, a new position update rule based

on the normal distribution is proposed. In the new approach the velocity update rule is

removed and Eq. (3.8) is used for obtaining a new position for a particle, based on the

normal distribution given as follows:

using Eq. (3.10) and Z is calculated by using Eq. (3.11).

𝜇= ………………………………..……(Eq.3.9)

3

17

1

𝜎 = √ × [(𝑋𝑖,𝑗 (𝑡) − 𝜇)2 + (𝑝𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖,𝑗 (𝑡) − 𝜇)2 + (𝑔𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑗 (𝑡) − 𝜇)2 ]…(Eq.3.10)

3

1

𝑍 = (−2 ln 𝑘1 )2 × cos(2 π 𝑘2 )………………………………………….…. (Eq.3.11)

To solve a continuous optimization problem, after Eq. (3.1)– (3.4) are calculated, Eqs.

(3.11), (3.10), (3.9), (3.8), (3.7), (3.4) are iterated until a pre-defined termination condition

is met. As seen from the steps of the algorithm, the simple structure of the basic PSO

algorithm is kept in the proposed approach. In the proposed approach, it is an issue the

standard deviation is0. To solve this issue, we used a threshold value (T) for the standard

deviation. If T is less than 1E-05, the standard deviation is accepted as half of the mean.

Therefore, the new position obtained for the particle can be different from current position

of the particle.

18

CHAPTER 4

Then simulation work is done for two area interconnected power system according to its

block diagram as shown in Fig.6 and considering transfer function of each block simulation

is done. The parameter values used in the simulation are taken from [2] and tabulated in the

appendix. Then PSO and PSOd algorithm are applied to get the value of parameters of

controller where ITAE value is minimum. The values of different parameters used in PSO

and PSOd algorithms are mentioned in the Table 1. The table 2 gives the values of

optimized control parameters and error for each method applied.

Parameters Values

Population Size 50

Numbers of iterations 10

0.05

0

F1(Hz)

-0.05

-0.1

PSOd PID

-0.15 PSO PID

0 5 10 15

Time(sec)

Fig 8 Frequency deviation of Area 1

19

0.04

0.02

-0.02

F2(Hz)

-0.04

-0.06

-0.08

PSO PID

-0.12

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time(sec)

0.01

-0.01

Ptie(p.u)

-0.02

-0.03

PSOd PID

PSO PID

-0.04

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time(sec)

20

The model of the system under study as shown in Fig 6 is developed in

MATLAB/SIMULINK environment and PSO and PSOd program written in (m.file).

The developed model is simulated in a separate program (by .m file) considering a 10%

step load change in area 1. The objective function is calculated in the .m file and used in the

optimization algorithm. For the implementation of PSO and PSOd, the parameters required

are taken from Table 4. The optimization was repeated 30 times and the best results were

chosen and tabulated.

To show superiority of the proposed PSOd algorithm the results obtained by taking the

appropriate parameters [9] were compared with the results of PSO [10]. From the above

simulation and result we found the values of frequency deviation of area -1, frequency

deviation of area-2 and the tie line power deviation. The results were tabulated in Table 2.

Comparing the values, we see that the ITAE value of PSOd is much smaller than PSO.

Also, the settling time and overshoot value was calculated for both PSO and PSOd

algorithms. The results were tabulated in Table 3. On comparing the values of settling time

and overshoot we found that the respective values were less for PSOd than PSO.

From the above we can observe clearly that in PSOd based controller the Settling Time, Peak and

Peak time, overshoot values are much more improved than the PSO based controller. It is clear that

the PSOd applied PID gives a much better controlling results then the normal PSO applied PID

controlling. These results help us to have an optimal control of the two-area system.

Method Kp Ki Kd ITAE

PSO -0.223 1.423 0.426 0.743

PSOd 0.166 1.8357 0.495 0.399

Table 3 Settling time and overshoot for frequency deviation and tie line power deviation

Δf1 Δf2 ΔPtie Δf1 Δf2 ΔPtie

0.0428 0.0291 0.8480 8.3955 8.1582 8.0821

PSO

PSOd 0.0368 0.0222 0.4002 5.4333 5.9110 6.0124

21

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION

task that motivates to design optimum controllers. They should have the capability of

monitoring the power system like maintenance of frequency and voltage in no time. Many

optimization techniques are used in the design of controllers. Chapter 1 gives a brief

introduction to load frequency control (LFC) of power system and necessity of frequency

control. In Chapter 2 the major components of power system were described with

mathematical modeling. Objective function was also described. In Chapter 3 we discussed

PSOd based algorithm applied to PID. Simulations were performed using MATLAB

Simulink In Chapter 4 we compared the results of PSO and PSOd. Different plots of

frequency deviation were obtained by varying the load demand of areas. From simulation

and result we found that PSOd based PID controller is having improved system

performance in terms of settling time, maximum overshoot compared to PSO based PID

controller. It is clear that the PSOd applied PID gives a much better controlling results than

the normal PSO applied PID controlling. This signifies the superiority of PSOd over PSO.

22

APPENDIX

Parameter Value

TPS1, TPS2 20 s.

T12 0.545p.u.

a12 -1

23

REFERENCES

[1] R. C. Eberhart, and J. Kennedy, A new optimizer using particle swarm theory.

Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Micro-machine and Human

Science, Nagoya, Japan. pp. 39-43, 1995.

[2] Mustafa Servet Kiran, “Particle swarm optimization with a new update mechanism”,

SCIENCEDIRECT, 2017.

[3] Elgerd. O. I., “Energy Systems Theory: an introduction”, New York: McGraw- Hill,

1982.Electric.

[5] C.L.Wadhwa, “Electrical Power system”, Sixth Edition, New Age International

Publisher, New Delhi.

[6] I.J. Nagrath and M.Gopal “Control System Engineering” Fifth Edition, New Age

International Publisher, New Delhi.

[7] Rabindra Kumar Sahu , Sidhartha Panda, Umesh Kumar Rout, Dillip Kumar Sahoo,

“Teaching learning based optimization algorithm for automatic generation control of

power system using 2-DOF PID controller” SCIENCEDIRECT. pp. 2-13, 2015.

[9] Elgerd OI, Fosha CE. Optimal megawatt-frequency control of multi-area electrical

energy systems. IEEE Trans PAS 1970.

[10] Mohanty B, Panda S, Hota PK. Hybrid BFOA–PSO algorithm for automatic

generation control of linear and nonlinear interconnected power systems. Applied Soft

Computing 2013; 13:47 18-30

24

- APC100Uploaded bypstindia
- Level Control of Tank System Using PID Controller-A ReviewUploaded byInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development - IJSRD
- shipmdlUploaded bywernlan
- EML_5311_Project_28_April_Ramin_ShamshiriUploaded byRaminShamshiri
- DoglegUploaded byJoseEduardoSantaCruz
- 2Uploaded bykhairi
- Automatic Controllers & Control ModesUploaded byVishal Iyer
- Arb 03 Pid ControlUploaded bySajitha Nishali
- 30120140505012Uploaded byIAEME Publication
- Tuning of a Pd Pi Controller Used With a Highly Oscillating Second Order ProcessUploaded byIJSTR Research Publication
- List of PublicationsUploaded byAnonymous TxPyX8c
- 3241Uploaded bynicacio_89507470
- prUploaded byBobert Paulsen
- 0060Uploaded byAleksandar Micic
- Suppression of Low Frequency Oscillation in Traction Network of High-speed Railway Based on Auto Disturbance Rejection ControlUploaded bySuveetha Suvi
- 1-s2.0-S1877705812004134-mainUploaded byrajeev_kumar365
- Paper 22Uploaded bykuttiyar
- 1-s2.0-S1474667015365447-main.pdfUploaded byVignesh Ramakrishnan
- DA TING GOES SKRRAAAAAUploaded by;(
- Coordinated+Controller+Tuning+of+a+Boiler+Turbine+Unit+with+New+Binary+Particle+Swarm+Optimization+AlgorithmUploaded byMonowar Hossain
- Optimal Image Selection for Segmentation with Particle Swarm OptimizationUploaded byInternational Journal of Advanced and Innovative Research
- Control Loops for BoilerUploaded byGloria Hamilton
- Scilab Recipe 3_ Xcos Blocks Seasoning _ Scilab NinjaUploaded byWendell Kim Llaneta
- A Tutorial on Cascade ControlUploaded bysanchevh
- 3c52b6eafcd6ef58266593c1f106d04371ef.pdfUploaded byIkok Gendol
- 3612634Uploaded byAndré Felipe Oliveira
- Ace the IeltsUploaded byTaha Hasan
- report allUploaded byharshit tygai
- LCS UMU - Inverted PendulumUploaded byGlen Hansard
- 0810.3776 régulation.pdfUploaded bynabil

- AuroraCommunicationProtocol 4 7 PUBLICUploaded byMarko Radosavljević
- Reactores_hans Von Mangoldt[1]Uploaded byMiguel CV
- 4600gasPLUS Transmitter SCOTTsafetyUploaded bymax_power
- Cat C15.pdfUploaded byAna Lorca
- Ferroresonance Vt Gis v002Uploaded byqais652002
- AMX2000 PRO1k Owners ManualUploaded byamstereo
- Allen BradleyUploaded byAlvaro Daniel Torres Antiquera
- Acuvim l Power Meter User ManualUploaded byThi Ha Yu Shein
- K-Pos Training Manual.pdfUploaded bydmzoly
- LTE RF PlanningUploaded bySham Degiggsy
- An-3003 Applications of Non Zero Crossing Triac Driver FeaturingUploaded byHavanyani
- 56749_00Uploaded byAhmed Azad
- LightSYS Manual Instalador_ENUploaded byarturolectura76
- phdsplnd14Uploaded byVasantha Prasath
- I2C UM10204Uploaded byDileep Chandu
- ASSIGNMENT - Types of InductorsUploaded byJasonKoylass
- P&M Plugins Manual V3 CopiaUploaded byMedikes Disidentes
- BL SL105 ManualUploaded byAndrew Allen Barbosa Coe
- Cooper Power Systems - Recloser Guide.PDFUploaded byAerwin Bautista
- Part Number Codes ACS-800_enUploaded bymix111
- ClockingUploaded bykryptonites1234
- Ips PlotUploaded byZahid Jamil
- Condensadora Ttb TraneUploaded byRoberto Reyes Lara
- High Voltage DC TransmissionUploaded bybhaveshbhoi
- VLSI - CHP11Uploaded byfeki2607
- 8051 microcontrollerUploaded byAt Tanwi
- 01296755Uploaded byMohan Bukya B
- 8.Common_emitter_configurations_BJT_.docxUploaded byvamsi krishna
- ation HelpUploaded byAyuk Hwr
- ETB-10Uploaded byal nakheel electronics