DESIGN OF PSS FOR MULTI-MACHINE SYSTEMS USING MODIFIED
SWARM OPTIMIZATION ALGORITHM WITH WIND ENERGY GENERATION
Abstract: Autonomous Group Particle Swarm
Optimization (AGPSO) algorithm is exemplified in this
article for ideal Power System Stabilizers (PSS) plan in a
poly-machine control system joined with wind energy
generation. The PSS’s structure fine-tuning issue is
detailed as an enhancement issue which is comprehended
by AGPSO Calculation. An Eigenvalues establish a
target work including the damping proportion, and the
damping variable of the softly damped electromechanical
modes is visualized in the PSS’s plan issue. The
executions of the anticipated AGPSO establish PSSs
(AGPSOPSS) is contrasted and Particle Swarm
Optimization (PSO) founded PSS (PSOPSS) under
numerous working circumstances and unsettling
influences. The terminations of the created AGPSOPSS
are checked through Eigenvalues and time space
investigation. Additionally, the viability of the proposed
calculation in giving brilliant damping attributes is
confirmed.
Key words: AGPSO algorithm, PSO, PSS, Multimachine
system, Wind Energy Generation
1. Introduction
Power system (PS) instability issue is taking
up an imperative part in the investigation of
arranging and direction, since unsteadiness may
deliver antagonistic impacts on the hearty structure
of PS. In particular, undamped control motions with
recurrence somewhere in the range of 0.2 and 2.0
Hz, i.e., nearby and between region motions might
imperil the system task and source the system
unsteadiness [Klein, 1991; Kundur, 1994]. As an
end, the wide region power outage may happen. To
cover this issue in PS, dynamic controller is required
keeping in mind the end goal to call down for in
general system solidness [Klein, 1992]. In the
present situation of PS, wind is the quickest and the
most broadly-used sustainable power source
innovation for control age at present. Before the
finish of 2003, around 74%of the overall breeze
vitality limit mounted on Europe, additional
eighteen % in North America and eight % in Asia
and the Pacific [Thomas Ackermann, 2005].
Wind turbines are able to make moreover
with a set speed or variable-speed generators. A set-
speed wind turbine by and large furnished with an
acceptance generator (twisted rotor) to change over
the mechanical vitality from the breeze turbine into
electrical vitality, and it's specifically associated
with the system through capacitor banks. The
primary inconveniences of the settled speed wind
turbine are wild receptive power utilization,
mechanical pressure and restricted power quality
control. To beat these downsides and for a most
extreme streamlined effectiveness over an extensive
variety of twist speeds amid the age of electrical
vitality, variable-speed wind turbines are planned.
DFIG (Twofold Nourished Acceptance Generator),
WRSG (Wound Rotor Synchronous Generator) and
PMSG (Permanent Magnetic Synchronous
Generator) are natural sorts of variable-speed wind
turbines [Hansen, 2001]. An offbeat generator with
its rotor associated with a VSC (Voltage Source
Converter) through slip rings, a supposed doubly
bolstered enlistment generator. Point by point
demonstrating of DFIG for solidness ponders with
its dynamic conduct is introduced in [Akhmatov,
2002].
By breaking down the motions happened in
PS because of intensity age by synchronous
generators, one of the renowned kinds of motions is
alluded to between region modes came about
because of swinging of one age zone concerning
different regions. The extra single is identified with
fluctuation of generators live in a solitary zone next
to both other and is recognized as nearby mode
[Eremia, 2013; Machowski, 2009]. Power System
Stabilizer is utilized to supply an assistant control
flag to an excitation system in parliamentary method
to ease the two kinds of motions [M. Klein, 1992;
Machowski, 2009].
In the most recent couple of years,
Computerized reasoning (AI) procedures are
examined to address the issues related with PSS
plan. Fake Neural System (ANN) [Segal, 2004; El-
Razaz ZS, 2001; Kumar, 2011], Fluffy Rationale
Control (FLC) pulled in much consideration in
control applications [Ardanuy, 2007; El-Razaz, throughout time space investigation and
2001; Yee, 2008; Defeat KC, 2010; Hussein T, Eigenvalues. Outcomes assessment affirms that the
2010; Megala, 2014]. Afterward, Powerful systems, proposed calculation gives superb strong execution
for example, H-boundlessness [Sil A, 2009; EL- to lessening the motions indifferent working
Razaz ZS, 2006; Bevrani H, 2011; Alden MJ, 2015; circumstances and aggravations.
Dulau M, 2015], H2 [Werner H, 2003; Peng Y,
2011] and - union [Yue M, 2003] were utilized for Problem formulation
PSS plan.
2.1 Power system model
Of late, advancement calculations filled in The linearized state equations representing the
multi machine system equipped with DFIG and the
as the essential apparatus for tackling PSS outline PSS are expressed under the form of:
issue. Some of them are, Reproduced Tempering
(SA) [Abido, 2000], Tabu Pursuit (TS) [Abido,
1999; Abido and Abdel-Magid, 1999], Hereditary
Calculation (GA) [Abido, 1997; Abdel-Magid YL,
2003], Molecule Swarm Improvement (PSO) Where
[Abido, 2002; Soliman, 2008; Shayeghi, 2010; x( state vector )  [ , syn , ed' , eq' , vm , vr ,
Jalilvand, 2011], Microscopic organisms Scavenging
v f , xg , v , w ,  p , idr , iqr ]T
(BF) [Ghoshal, 2009; Ali, 2012; Ali ES, 2013; abed-
Elazim, 2013], Cuckoo Hunt (CS) [abed-Elazim,
where A is a 13n x 13nmatrx and equal while
2016], Dim Wolf Enhancement (GWO) [Shakarami,
2016], Educating Learning Based Streamlining B is a 5nxmmatrx and equal . Both ‘A’ and ‘B’
(TLBO) [Anouar Farah, 2016] and Water Cycle is estimated at the convinced “operating point”. ‘X’
Calculation (WCA) [Amin Khodabakhshian, 2016]. is a 13nx1 state vector, and ‘U’ is an m x1 input-
In the advanced situation, PS joined with various vector.
sorts of producing units to react to the requirement
for electric capacity to the shoppers. In this manner 2.2 Test system
the ideal outline of PSS is to ensure the legitimacy
of its use. The possibility of the commitment of
DFIG to the system damping by use of proper
facilitated tuning of PSS by enhancement strategies
tended to in [Y. Mishra, 2012; Mishra, 2009; H.
Ahmadi, 2014; TossapornSurinkaew, 2014]. From
the review, it demonstrates that the ideal outline of
PSS with the incorporation of wind control age is
routed to a solitary machine while the less
consideration is paid for multi machine system.

Another metaheuristic calculation known as

Autonomous Group Particle Swarm Optimization
(AGPSO) calculation, made from the PSO
calculation, is examined for ideal outline of PSS
structure. The PSS outline issue is made as an
enhancement errand utilizing AGPSO calculation.
Stabilizers are harmony to move every single
electromechanical mode to a predefined region in
the S-plane to affirm the virtual solidness. The
approval of the improved AGPSOPSS is held in a
multimachine control system beneath various
working conditions in examination by PSOPSS
The test system appeared in Fig. 1 is developed by
five synchronous generators (SG), one DFIG and 15
(14+1) alternating buses. DFIG parameter utilized
for the reproduction is given in [Mishra, 2009]. In
the test system, each SG is symbolized by a fourth-
order outfitted by a turbine governor type II and an
automatic voltage controller (AVR) type III
[Federico Milano, 2010]. The plan information in
detail is given in [Federico Milano, 2010].
In the type III AVR, the original field
voltage vf0 and bus voltage v0 are set at the
instatement step. The field voltage vf is exposed to
an anti-windup limiter. If s0 is set to one, the signal
vsyn/v0 is allowed [Klein, 1991; Kundur, 1994;
Federico Milano, 2010]. Subsequent to the
introduction of the AVR, the value of s0 is set to v0.
2.3 PSS controller design
PSS structure is ideal because of the
simplicity of web-based tuning. A far-reaching
investigation of the impacts of various PSS structure
on the general unique execution of the power system
is talked about in [M. Klein, 1992; Kundur, 1989]. It
shows that the proper decision of the PSS,
parameters results in worthy execution amid system
aggravations. The arrangement of the i th PSS is
given by:  sT   1  sT   1  sT  
U pss ,i   K pss ,i     ( syn ), i
W 1i 3i
 
  1  sTW   1  sT2i   1  sT4i  
(2)
Each PSS consists of a stabilizer gain, a washout
block serves in the form of a low pass filter along
with a time constant as well as the ‘phase’
compensation blocks within time constants.
Lag-Lead time
constants
Gain Washout
Fig. 2. Control structure of PSS
From the Fig. 2, the information signal of
each PSS is the rotor speed deviation, and the yield
is the balancing out flag subject to an enemy of
windup limiter. The washout square guarantee to the
PSS yield is zero in the consistent state. Stabilizer
gain computes the measure of damping presented by
PSS whereas the stage compensator square gives the
suitable lead/slack remuneration of the yield flag
[M. Klein, 1992]. In this article, the estimation of
washout time consistent Tw esteem is settled as 10 s
[M.R. Shakarami. 2016]. The estimations of
stabilizer gain Kpss,i and time constants T 1i, T2i, T3i
and T4i are to be resolved.
Table 1 Updating strategy with functions- C1 and C2
3. Optimization techniques
3.1 Particle swarm optimization (PSO)
PSO is a populace exposed stochastic
advancement procedure formed by [Eberhart, 1995;
Kennedy, 1995], provoked by the aggregate perform
of winged animal rushing or fish tutoring. In PSO,
each single arrangement is a "molecule" in the
pursuit space. The majority of the particles are
having wellness, which are checked on by the
wellness capacity further improved, and speeds
which coordinate the flying of the particles.
Every single cycle and each particle are
invigorated by watching two "best" behaviors. The
main ace is the better collection proficient up
awaiting now. (The wellness regard is additionally
put away.) This regard is called p best. An additional
"best" regard that is pursued by the particle swarm
enhancer is the best regard, obtained until now by
several particle in the populace. This best regard is a
worldwide best and called g best. All through
iteration, every swarm modifies its position and
speed as given below:
vqt 1  w.vqt  C1 .rd .( pbest q  xqt )  C2 .rd .( gbest  xqt )
(3)
t 1 t 1
x  x v
t
q q q
(4)
3.2 Autonomous Group Particle Swarm
Optimization Algorithm
Despite the fact that PSO accomplished its
notoriety by different issues in the advancement
field, yet, because of its temperament, PSO
experiences halfway confidence that causes the less
correct control of its speed and heading. In addition,
the calculation can't work at all the issues of
dissipating and streamlining. Moreover, it is
influenced by the moderate assembly in refined hunt
arrange, feeble neighborhood seek capacity and this
may prompt conceivable ensnarement in nearby
least arrangements. In pronouncement to get rid of
these disadvantages, PSO is changed by a scientific
case of unmistakable parts with assorted slants,
bends, and interference indicates are utilized tune
social and subjective constants of C1 and C2
parameters to create particles of various practices to
accomplish the coveted outcome. This change drives
the PSO into an altered PSO algorithm named as
Autonomous Group PSO (AGPSO)
[SeyedaliMirjalili, 2014]. Refreshing procedures are
permitted to tune the C1 and C2 parameters as given
in Table1.
 Method Formula Mathematical
C1 C2 Functions
AGPSO 1
Group 1 (-2.05/T)t + 2.55 (1/T)t+1.25 Linear
Group 2 (-2.05/T)t + 2.55 (2t3/T) + 0.5 Linear and Cubic
Group 3 (-2t3/T3) + 2.5 (1/T)t+1.25 Linear and Cubic
Group 4 (-2t3/T3) + 2.5 (2t3/T3) + 0.5 Cubic
AGPSO 2
Group 1 2.5- (2log(t) / log(T)) (2log(t)/log(T))+0.5 Logarithmic
Group 2 (-2t3/T3) + 2.5 (2t3/T3) + 0.5 Cubic
Group 3 0.5+ 2 exp[-(4t/T2)] 2.2- 2 exp[(4t/T2)] Exponential
Group 4 2.5+2(t/T)2-2 (2t/T) 0.5-2(t/T)2+2(2t/T) Quadratic
AGPSO 3
Group 1 1.95-2t1/3/T1/3 2t1/3/T1/3 + 0.05 Principal third root
Group 2 (-2t3/T3) + 2.5 (2t3/T3) + 0.5 Cubic
Group 3 1.95-2t1/3/T1/3 (2t3/T3) + 0.5 Principal third root and
Cubic
Group 4 (-2t3/T3) + 2.5 2t1/3/T1/3+ 0.05 Principal third root and
    Cubic 
 0 max   j , p    
 l    j , p  0 
2

4. Objective function J new    


 p 1  
   min   j , p    
  j , p  0  0  

To build system solidness edge and more  K pss ,i ,min  K pss ,i  K pss ,i ,max
noteworthy damping for low recurrence motions,  to
Subject
damping factor (σj,p) and damping proportion (ζj,p) T1i ,min  T1i  T1i ,max
of the frail swaying modes ought to be exhaustively 
PSS T2i ,min  T2i  T2i ,max
upgraded. Eigenvalue examination is performed to T
locate the reasonable target work which portrays the  3i ,min  T3i  T3i ,max
upgrade of damping variable and proportion to limit T4i ,min  T4i  T4i ,max
 (8)
the steadiness issue for the power system. In view of
this wonders, the advancement of PSS parameter
issue is planned at first as two target capacities Eqns. Optimal solution of Eqn. (8) places the system
closed-loop Eigenvalues in the D-shaped section
(5) and (6) are joined as a solitary target work (Eqn. 
  0
(the most stable region) in which j , p and
(8)) with two diverse soundness edges (  0 -   j , p   0
damping factor and ζ0-damping proportion) utilized as exhibited in Fig. 3.  
 
for ideal upgrade.
 l 2 
σ0
J1  Min      0  max   j , p    σ
0  
 p 1
j,p
(5)  
 l 
J 2  Min      0  min   j , p   
 p 1 
j,p 0
(6)
J new   J1   J 2 
(7)
Improvement of PSS is given a role as a compelled
streamlining issue given in Eqn. (8), where the Fig. 3. Desired stable region (D-shaped sector)
imperatives are the PSS parameter limits [Ali ES,
For the test system, all the synchronous generators
2012; Ali ES, 2013; Abd-Elazim, 2013; Abd-
are outfitted with stabilizers. In this manner the
Elazim, 2016]:
complete is to tune five stabilizers (five machines).
Minimize
Parameter limits of PSS are given in Eqn. (9) [Ali
ES, 2012; Ali ES, 2013; Abd-Elazim, 2013; Abd-
Elazim, 2016; M.R. Shakarami, 2016; Anouar
Farah, 2016; Amin Khodabakhshian, 2016; Ali ES,
2014].
1  K pss ,i  50 p.u;
0.001  T1i  T4i  1s;
(9)
The blocking system is completed assessing five
pre-determined working conditions exhibited in
Table 2. It is important for a shut circle least
damping proportion of 15% and a damping element
of - 1 over working conditions [Abd-Elazim, 2016;
Table 2 Specific Operating Conditions
Specific Operating Conditions
Cases
Case 1
Case 2 Lines 13–14, 10-9 and 9–11 out of service
Case 3
Case 4
Case 5
Stage 2:Particles xi are arbitrarily divided into some
predefined self-sufficient gatherings (AGPSO1,
AGPSO2 and AGPSO3) with recipient capacities
given in Table. 1.
Stage 3: Ascertain gbest, pbest, and the target work
esteem (Eqn. (8)) of every molecule xi at every
emphasis.
Stage 4: For every molecule xi, the coefficients C1
and C2
are refreshed utilizing its gathering's procedure from
Table. 1.
Stage 5: Speeds vi and places of all particles xi will
be refreshed utilizing Eqns. (3) and (4). It ought to
be noticed as the molecule travels from the present
position xi to the new position x i+1 replaced with
Eqn. (8) into Eqn. (1) and Eqn. (2), this outcome
from the adjustment in parameters of controllers.
5. Results and Simulations
In the recreation think about, MATLAB
programming based Power System Examination
Ali ES, 2014].
4.1 Autonomous Group particle Swarm
Optimization implementation
Usage of the AGPSO calculation for the
advancement of PSSs parameters appeared in Fig. 4
is clarified as takes after:
Stage 1: Instate the particles xi (PSSs parameters) of
PSO haphazardly inside as far as possible given in
Eqn. (10).
xi=[Kpss,i,T1,i, T2,i,T3,i,T4,i]T(10)
Five machine system
Base case (No change)
-25% loading
-50% loading
+25% loading
Tool compartment (PSAT) [Federico Milano, 2013]
is utilized. Enhancement calculations (AGPSO and
PSO) are exhibited for the tuning of PSS with DFIG
connected to test system in Fig. 2.
This area delineates the striking quality of
the proposed AGPSO calculation in outlining PSS
contrasted and improved PSS with PSO. An
intermingling diagram of wellness capacities with
two enhancement calculations is exhibited in Fig. 5.
They diminish over cycles of AGPSO1, AGPSO2,
AGPSO3 and PSO. The last estimation of the target
work is Jnew is simply equivalent to zero for every
one of the calculations with the exception of
AGPSO1, in light of the fact that AGPSO1
happened to the esteem precisely equivalent to zero.
It is recommended that all modes are changed over
to the predetermined D-shape part in the S-plane and
the anticipated target work is gotten in AGPSO1.
Additionally, computational time (CPU) of the
considerable number of calculations is assessed in
view of the normal CPU time expected to meet the
arrangement. The normal CPU for AGPSO is 30.3 s
whereas it is 45.7 s for PSO. The anticipated
AGPSO procedure and PSO are customized by
means of MATLAB 7.1 did with PSAT. The
specified CPU time is the normal of 10
implementations of the computer program.
 and  =-0.10) from test system is situated in an
exceedingly shaky locale. Subsequently, appropriate
plan of PSS is required for good, hearty execution
and overcomes unrivalled damping qualities of
electromechanical modes in the pattern.

Fig. 5. Iteration vs Objective function

The system Eigenvalues and damping
proportion of negligible rotor wavering modes with
five distinctive working conditions appear in Table
3, and every one of the Eigenvalues is shown in Fig.
6 separately. It is imagined that both the test systems
are in the flimsy area without PSS controller. By Fig. 6. Open loop eigen values (without PSS
contrasting and five conditions, fifth (  = 0.8582 controller) – Test system
Table 3 Minimal rotor oscillation modes (Electromechanical modes) – Test system
Operating Eigen value Damping Ratio Frequency of
Conditions pu % oscillation ( Hz)
Case 1 0.0036±8.1598i -0.004 ---- 1.298
Case 2 0.1388±8.1529i -0.017 ---- 1.297
Case 3 -0.7500±8.2307i 0.09 9 1.310
Case 4 -1.3114±8.2961i 0.15 15 1.320
Case 5 0.8582±8.0384i -0.10 ---- 1.279
Appropriately, for test system fifth working about, similar re-enactment conditions are
condition for test system is utilized for the considered for all the improvement procedures, for
simulation study. Table 4 demonstrates the PSS’s example, 200 particles and 1000 iterations as the
parameter esteems in light of the proposed target combination measure and the estimation of
work utilizing AGPSO and PSO calculations. C1=C2=2 (for PSO), w=0.5 [34].
Keeping in mind the end goal to play out a
reasonable examination think

Table 4 PSSs parameters using AGPSO and PSO – Test system

Generator Algorithm Kpss(p.u) T1(s) T2 (s) T3 (s) T4 (s)

AGPSO1 20.51 0.11 0.23 0.56 0.49
AGPSO2 35.82 0.29 0.27 0.11 0.9
G1 AGPSO3 41.45 0.24 0.23 0.31 0.15
PSO 11.23 0.72 0.41 0.47 0.55
AGPSO1 29.42 0.41 0.34 0.49 0.22
AGPSO2 37.23 0.47 0.25 0.18 0.65
G2 AGPSO3 12.19 0.14 0.49 0.55 0.33
PSO 28.55 0.18 0.77 0.89 0.21
AGPSO1 24.61 0.34 0.34 0.55 0.9
AGPSO2 15.23 0.67 0.17 0.23 0.89
G3 AGPSO3 12.78 0.74 0.44 0.71 0.66
PSO 23.73 0.82 0.51 0.39 0.29
 AGPSO1 31.29 0.76 0.38 0.48 0.55
AGPSO2 29.91 0.68 0.22 0.49 0.11
G4 AGPSO3 37.73 0.47 0.54 0.09 0.31
PSO 41.43 0.29 0.25 0.33 0.99
AGPSO1 11.34 0.36 0.18 0.23 0.45
AGPSO2 23.26 0.75 0.66 0.34 0.67
G5 AGPSO3 37.28 0.64 0.22 0.88 0.34
PSO 26.75 0.18 0.23 0.44 0.55

Test system Eigenvalues and its damping proportion

of Negligible rotor swing mode for with and without
PSS conditions are exhibited in Table 7, and the
modes are shown in Fig. 7. Clearly,
electromechanical modes are moved with
AGPSOPSS to one side of the S-plane and the
estimations of the damping factors and damping
proportion are fundamentally upgraded to be (  = -
1.7664 and  =0.28) from test system.
Consequently, AGPSOPSS gives great, powerful
execution and accomplishes predominant damping
qualities of electromechanical modes.

Fig. 7. Closed loop eigen values with optimized

PSSs parameters-case 5
 Start

Read bus, line and dynamic data and solve the power flow
for the specified condition given Table. 2

Initialize the parameters of AGPSO such number of particles (Np) and

total no.of iterations (T) and also set the constant system values such as
σ0=-1 , ζ0=0.15. Set iteration (t) =1
 
 
Initialize Np particles of system variables (PSS parameters) Kpssi,,T1i-T4i. within its boundary
limits. where i=1,2…n=no of PSSs
 
 

Divide particles into autonomous groups

 
 

t = t+1
t=t+1
 j, p  j, p  j j , p 

max  j , p   min  j , p  
 l 2
 l 
Use the
new
particle

 p 1  j , p  0



 
 0  max  j, p  
      min   
 j , p  0  0  
j, p  
s
positio
   p 1 
n + +
 

B
 A

Calculate Pbest and Gbestof each particles

 
 

Extract the particles from its group

 
 

Update C1 and C2 corresponding its strategy from Table.1;

Update each particle’s velocity
 
 

Define the new position of particles using updated velocities

 
 

No Total iteration
B number is
reached
Display the optimal values of variables (PSS
parameters) Kpssi,,T1i-T4i and its
Yes corresponding objective function value
 
 

end

Fig. 4 Optimal design of PSS-AGPSO approach

Table 7. Optimized rotor Oscillation mode with damping ratio

Optimization Minimal rotor oscillation Damping ratio (pu) System
Approach mode (pu) (%) Condition
Without optimization 0.8582±8.0384i -0.10 --- (Unstable)
AGPSO1 -1.318 ± 7.4981i 0.17 17 (Stable)
AGPSO2 -1.7664±6.0172i 0.28 28 (most stable)
AGPSO3 -1.5015±5.7528i 0.25 25 (Stable)
PSO -1.1893±0.0338i 0.23 23 (Stable)
5.1 Time-domain simulation analysis
5.1.1 Response under scenario1

A 3phase fault happens in a transmission

line between bus 2 and bus4 at t= 1.0 s and emptied
at t = 1.1 s by opening the electrical switch without
discharging. Fig. 8 demonstrates the reactions of and
due situation 1 for test system separately. Plainly the
system with the proposed AGPSOPSS is more
balanced out than PSOPSS. Likewise, the mean
settling times to ease system motions are roughly
5.4s with AGPSOPSS and 10.8s with PSOPSS. So,
the outlined controller is adequate for giving
satisfactory damping to the low frequency motions.

Fig. 9. Rotor speed of all synchronous generators

Test system reaction under situation 2 situation

along with a similar controller parameter(s) appear
in Fig. 9. Clearly, the proposed AGPSOPSS gives
great damping qualities to system oscillatory modes
and balances out the system quickly. Likewise, the
mean settling times of motions are Ts = 6.2s
utilizing AGPSOPSS, for PSOPSS Ts = 8.2s
individually. Subsequently, the proposed
AGPSOPSS beats the PSOPSS controller in
lessening motions viably and magnifying settling
time.
5.1.3 Response under scenario 3
A temporary three-phase fault happens at
bus 9 at time t = 1.0sec and is cleared at t= 1.2sec.

Fig. 8. Rotor speed of all synchronous generators

5.1.2 Response under scenario 2

A temporary three-phase fault happens at
bus 4 at time t = 1.0sec and is cleared at time
t=1.1sec.
 nearby optima. Reproduction results likewise
underwrite the strength and prevalence of the
proposed AGPSO construct PSS with respect to
giving great damping trademark to system motions
over an extensive variety of time space situations.
Our future work is to apply and break down AGPSO
into vast scale multi machine system.

NOMENCLATURE
vsyn - Generator terminal
voltage in pu.
ke - Regulator gain in pu.
s0 - Bus voltage signal either 0
or1.
T1 - Regulator zeroes in s.
T2 - Regulator poles in s.
Te - Field circuit time constant
in s.
Tr - Measurement time
constant in s.
vfmax - Maximum field voltage in
pu.
Fig. 10. Rotor speed of all synchronous generators vfmin - Minimum field voltage in
pu.
The approval of the execution in another harsh ∆upss - Stabilizing signal
trouble is affirmed by concerning situation 3 to both ∆upssmax - Maximum limit +0.1 pu
the Test system. Fig. 10 demonstrates the reactions ∆upssmin - Minimium limit -0.1 pu
 , ,  ∆δ - Rotor angle deviation of
of syn1 syn 2 syn3 and syn 4 under situation 3 for
Test system individually. The figures show that the synchronous generator,
AGPSO based PSSs, utilizing the anticipated target (n x 1)
work, present predominant damping and achieve ∆ωsyn - Rotor speed deviation of
better strong execution in correlation with alternate synchronous generator,
strategies. Consequently, AGPSO based PSS (nx1)
incredibly upgrades the damping attributes of the ∆ed’, ∆eq’ - d- and q-axis transient
power system. internal voltage
deviation, (n x 1)
Conclusion ∆idr, ∆iqr - d and q-axis rotor current
In this project, AGPSO algorithm is deviation, (n x 1)
proposed for planning of PSS controller structure in ∆vm - Measurement voltage
two diverse multi machine power systems with wind deviation of AVR, (n x 1)
energy generation. The outline issue of the proposed ∆vr - Regulator voltage
stabilizer is created as an advancement issue, and deviation of AVR, (n x 1)
AGPSO used to explore for ideal structure. An ∆vf - Field voltage deviation of
Eigenvalue exposes target work mirroring the mix of AVR, (n x 1)
the damping factor, and damping proportion is ∆xg - Governor signal
advanced for various working conditions. Re- deviation,
enactment outcomes affirm self-sufficient gathering (n x 1)
swarming system of PSO taking into account ∆vω - Wind speed deviation,
quicker and more proficient assembly than PSO, (k x 1)
likewise keeping the particles from being caught in ∆Wω - DFIG rotor speed
deviation,(k x 1)
∆θp - Pitch angle deviation,
(k x 1)
∆u - (Output vector)-PSS
signal, (np x 1)
∆y - (Output vector), (1 x np)
A - System matrix;
B - Input matrix;
C - Output matrix;
D - Feed forward matrix;
K - Diagonal matrix of PSS;
σj,p - Damping factor jth eigen
value of pth oscillation
mode;
ωj,p - Imaginary part of jth eigen
value of pth oscillation
mode;
ζj,p - Damping ratio jth eigen
valueofpth oscillation mode
fj,p - Frequency of jth eigen
value of pth oscillation mode;
w - Inertia weight
vqt - Velocity of the qth particle
at tth iteration
xqt - Position of the qth particle
at tth iteration
q - 1, 2,…total no of
populations(Np)
rd - Random number (0-1)
C1 and C2 - cognitive and social
constant.
Vref - Actual reference voltage
in pu
n - No of synchronous
generators
p - No of oscillation
(electromechanical) modes
j - No.of eigen values
t and T - Current and total
number of iterations
 [6] Abido MA. (1999). A novel approach to
conventional power system stabilizer design using
tabu search. Electric Power Energy Syst; 21:443–54.
[7] Abido MA. (2002). Optimal design of
power system stabilizers using particle swarm
optimization. IEEE Trans Energy Convers;
17(3):406–13.
[8] Abido MA. (2000). Simulated annealing
based approach to PSS and FACTS based stabilizer
tuning. International Journal of Electrical Power and
Energy Systems; 22(4):247–58.
[9] Akhmatov, V, (2002). ‘Variable-speed
Wind Turbines with Doubly-fed Induction
Generators, Part I: Modelling in Dynamic Simulation
Tools’, Wind Engineering, vol. 26, no.2, pp. 85–108.
[10] Alden MJ, & Wang X. Robust (2015). H1
control of time delayed power systems. Syst Sci
ContrEng: Open Access J; 3(1):253–61.
[11] Ali ES, & Abd-Elazim SM. (2012).
Coordinated design of PSSs and SVC via bacteria
foraging optimization algorithm in a multimachine
REFERENCES power system. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst;
[1] Abd-Elazim SM, & Ali ES. (2013). A 41(1):44–53.
hybrid particle swarm optimization and bacterial
foraging for optimal power system stabilizers design. [12] Ali ES, & Abd-Elazim SM. (2012).
International Journal of Electrical Power and Coordinated design of PSSs and TCSC via bacterial
Energy Systems; 46(1):334–41. swarm optimization algorithm in a multimachine
power system. International Journal of Electrical
[2] Abd-Elazim SM, & Ali ES. (2016). Power and Energy Systems; 36(1):84–92.
Optimal Power System Stabilizers design via Cuckoo
Search algorithm. International Journal of Electrical [13] Ali ES, & Abd-Elazim SM. (2013). Power
Power and Energy Systems; 75: 99–107. system stability enhancement via bacteria foraging
optimization algorithm. International Arabian
[3] Abdel-Magid YL, &Abido MA. (2003). Journal of Science and Engineering; 38(3):599–611.
Optimal multi-objective design of robust power
system stabilizers using genetic algorithms. IEEE [14] Ali ES. (2014). Optimization of power
Trans Power Syst; 18 (3):1125–32. system stabilizers using BAT search algorithm.
International Journal of Electrical Power and
[4] Abido MA, & Abdel-Magid YL. (1997). A Energy Systems; 61(C):683–90.
genetic based fuzzy logic power system stabilizer for
multimachine power systems. In: Proceedings of [15] Amin Khodabakhshian, Mohammad Reza
IEEE conference. p. 329–34. Esmaili, &MosayebBornapour. (2016).Optimal
coordinated design of UPFC and PSS for improving
[5] Abido MA, & Abdel-Magid YL. (1999). A power system performance by using multi-objective
tabu search based approach to power system stability water cycle algorithm. International Journal of
enhancement via excitation and static phase shifter Electrical Power and Energy Systems; 83:124–133.
control. International Journal of Electrical Power
Systems Research; 52(2):133–43. [16] Anouar Farah, Tawfik Guesmi, HsanHadj
Abdallah, &AbderrazakOuali. (2016).A novel chaotic
teaching–learning-based optimization algorithm for
multi-machine power system stabilizers design [26] Federico Milano (2010). Power System
problem. International Journal of Electrical Power Modelling and Scripting. London, Springer-Verlag
and Energy Systems; 77:197–209. London Limited.
[17] Ardanuy JF, &Zufiria PJ. (2007). Design [27] Ghoshal SP, Chatterjee A, Mukherjee V.
and comparison of adaptive power system stabilizers (2009). Bio-inspired fuzzy logic based tuning of
based on neural fuzzy networks and genetic power system stabilizer. Int J Exp Syst Appl;
algorithms.Neurocomputin; 70(16–18):2902–12. 36:9281–92.
[18] Bevrani H, Hiyama T, &Bevrani H. (2011). [28] H. Ahmadi & H. Seifi, (2014).
Robust PID based power system stabilizer: design “Probabilistic tuning of Power System Stabilizers
and real-time implementation. International Journal considering the wind farm generation uncertainty,”
of Electrical Power and Energy Systems; 33 (2):179– Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol. 63, pp.
88. 565–576.
[19] Dulau M, &Bica D. (2015). Design of [29] Hansen, L. H., Helle L., Blaabjerg F.,
robust control for single machine infinite bus system. Ritchie E., Munk-Nielsen S., Bindner, H., Sørensen,
Procedia Technol; 19:657–64. P., &Bak-Jensen,B (2001). Conceptual Survey of
Generators and Power Electronics for Wind
[20] Eberhart, R. C., & Kennedy, J, (1995). “A Turbines, Risø-R-1205(EN), Risø National
new optimizer using particle swarm theory,” Laboratory, Denmark.
Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on
Micromachine and Human Science, Nagoya, Japan. [30] Hussein T, Saad MS, Elshafei AL, &Bahgat
pp. 39-43. A. (2010). Damping inter-area modes of oscillation
using an adaptive fuzzy power system stabilizer.
[21] El-Razaz ZS, & Ali ES. (2001). Design of International Journal of Electrical Power Systems
an adaptive PSS using FLC for multi-machine power Research; 80:1428–36.
system. In: Proceedings of the universities power
engineering conference 36, UPEC, Swansea, [31] Jalilvand A, &Khalkhali RAE. (2011).
September 12–14, 2001. p. 1833–8. Optimal design of PID power system stabilizer in
multimachine power system using PSO and genetic
[22] El-Razaz ZS, & El-Hameed MA. (2001). algorithm. Int Rev Electric Eng; 6(2):907–12.
An artificial neural network based power system
stabilizer for multi-machine power system. [32] Kennedy, J., & Eberhart, R. C (1995).
International Arabian Journal of Science and “Particle swarm optimization”, Proceedings of IEEE
Engineering; 26 (1B):29–40. International Conference on Neural Networks,
Piscataway, NJ. pp. 1942-1948.
[23] EL-Razaz ZS, Mandour ME-D, & Ali ES.
(2006). Damping controller design for power systems [33] Kumar J, Kumar PP, Mahesh A, &
using LMI and GA techniques. In: 41st international Shrivastava A. (2011). Power system stabilizer based
universities power engineering conference, UPEC, on artificial neural network. In: International
September 6–8. p. 500–6. conference on power and energy systems, Chennai; p.
1–6.
[24] Eremia M., Shahidehpour M. (2013).
Handbook of electrical power system [34] Kundur P, Klein M, Rogers GJ, &Zywno
dynamics:modeling, stability, and control. 1st ed. MS. (1989). Application of power system stabilizers
Wiley-Blackwell. for enhancement of overall system stability. IEEE
Trans Power Syst; 4(2):614–26.
[25] Federico Milano (2013). Power System
Analysis Toolbox Version 2.1.8. Albacete, Spain: [35] M. Klein, G. Rogers, & P. Kundur (1991).
Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha. "A fundamental study of inter-area oscillations in
power systems", IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, Vol. 6, pp. 914– 921.
 [36] M. Klein, G.J. Rogers, S. Moorty, & P. PSO in a multimachine environment. Int J Energy
Kundur (1992). "Analytical Investigation of Factors Convers Manage; 51 (4):696–702.
Influencing Power System Stabilizers Performance",
IEEE Trans. on Energy Conversion, vol. 7, pp. 382- [47] Sil A, Gangopadhyay TK, Paul S, & Maitra
390. AK. (2009). Design of robust power system stabilizer
using H1 mixed sensitivity technique. In:
[37] M.R. Shakarami, & I. FarajiDavoudkhani. International conference on power systems,
(2016). Wide-area power system stabilizer design Kharagpur; p. 1–4.
based on Grey Wolf Optimization algorithm
considering the time delay. International Journal of [48] Soliman HM, Bayoumi EHE, & Hassan MF.
Electrical Power and Energy Systems; 133:149–159. (2008). PSO based power system stabilizer for
minimal overshoot and control constraints. J Electric
[38] Machowski J, Bialek J, &Bumby J. (2009). Eng; 59(3):153–9.
Power system dynamics stability and control. 2nd ed.
Wiley. [49] Thomas Ackermann (2005). Wind Power in
Power Systems. England, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
[39] Megala M, &Rajan CCA. (2014). Design of
fuzzy logic power system stabilizer in multimachine [50] TossapornSurinkaew&IssarachaiNgamroo
power system. Adv Intell Syst Comput; 247:49–57. (2014). “Coordinated Robust Control of DFIG Wind
Turbine and PSS for Stabilization of Power
[40] Mishra Y, Mishra S, Tripathy M, Senroy N Oscillations Considering System Uncertainties,”
& Dong ZY (2009). “Improving stability of a DFIG- IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 5, no.
based wind power system with tuned damping
controller”, IEEE Trans Energy Conversion vol. 24, [51] Werner H, Korba P, & Yang TC. (2003).
no. 3, pp. 650–660. Robust tuning of power system stabilizers using LMI
techniques. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Technol;
[41] P. Kundur (1994). Power System Stability 11(1):147–52.
and Control. New York, NY, USA:McGraw-Hill.
[52] Y. Mishra,S. Mishra &Fangxing Li (2012).
[42] Peng Y, Zhu QM, & Nouri H. (2011). “Coordinated Tuning of DFIG-Based Wind Turbines
Robust H2 power system stabilizer design using LMI and Batteries Using Bacteria Foraging Technique for
techniques. In: Proceedings of International Maintaining Constant Grid Power Output,” IEEE
Conference on Modeling, Identification and Control Systems Journal, Vol.6, no.1, pp.16-26.
(ICMIC). p. 405–10.
[53] Yee SK, & Milanovic JV. (2008). Fuzzy
[43] Rout KC, & Panda PC. (2010). Power logic controller for decentralized stabilization of
system dynamic stability enhancement of SMIB multimachine power systems. IEEE Trans Fuzzy
using fuzzy logic based power system stabilizer. In: Syst; 16(4):971–81.
Power electronics and instrumentation engineering
communications in computer and information [54] Yue M, & Schlueter RA. l -Synthesis
science, vol. 102; p. 10–4. (2003). Power system stabilizer design using a
bifurcation subsystem based methodology. IEEE
[44] Segal R, Sharma A, & Kothari ML. (2004). Trans Power Syst; 18 (4):1497–506.
A self-tuning power system stabilizer based on
artificial neural network. International Journal of
Electrical Power and Energy Systems; 26(6):423–30.
[45] SeyedaliMirjalili, Andrew Lewis & Ali Safa
Sadiq (2014). “Autonomous Particles Groups for
Particle Swarm Optimization”, Arab J Sci Eng, vol.
39, pp. 4683–4697.
[46] Shayeghi H, Shayanfar HA, Safari A,
&Aghmasheh R. (2010). A robust PSSs design using