Electrical Power and Energy Systems 66 (2015) 67–77

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electrical Power and Energy Systems

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijepes

Comparative performance analysis of teaching learning based

optimization for automatic load frequency control of multi-source
power systems
A.K. Barisal ⇑
Department of Electrical Engineering, V. S. S. U. T, Burla, Odisha, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper presents a new population based parameter free optimization algorithm as teaching learning
Received 4 October 2013 based optimization (TLBO) and its application to automatic load frequency control (ALFC) of multi-source
Received in revised form 12 September 2014 power system having thermal, hydro and gas power plants. The proposed method is based on the effect of
Accepted 10 October 2014
the influence of teacher on the output of learners and the learners can enhance their knowledge by
interactions among themselves in a class. In this extensive study, the algorithm is applied in multi area
and multi-source realistic power system without and with DC link between two areas in order to tune the
Keywords:
PID controller which is used for automatic generation control (AGC). The potential and effectiveness of
Automatic load frequency control
Automatic generation control
the proposed algorithm is compared with that of differential evolution algorithm (DE) and optimal output
Dynamic performance feedback controller tuning performance for the same power systems. The dynamic performance of
Multi source power system proposed controller is investigated by different cost functions like integral of absolute error (IAE), integral
HVDC link of squared error (ISE), integral of time weighted squared error (ITSE) and integral of time multiplied
Teaching learning based optimization absolute error (ITAE) and the robustness of the optimized controller is verified by its response toward
changing in load and system parameters. It is found that the dynamic performance of the proposed
controller is better than that of recently published DE optimized controller and optimal output feedback
controller and also the proposed system is more robust and stable to wide changes in system loading,
parameters, size and locations of step load perturbation and different cost functions.
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction sources of power generation and their corresponding participation

The purpose of an interconnected power system is to generate,
exchange and control of electric energy with nominal system fre-
quency, voltage profile and tie-line power interchange within their
prescribed limits. The automatic load frequency control which is
basically a part of automatic generation control plays an important
role in power pool by maintaining scheduled system frequency and
scheduled tie-line power in normal operation and during slow and
small perturbations. The modern power system is composed of
multiple sources of generation such as thermal, hydro gas and
renewable energy power plants having many control areas or
regions representing coherent group of generators. The area con-
trol error as the controlled output of AGC is driven to zero in order
to make the frequency and tie line power deviations of control area
to zeros [1,2]. The environmental drive to promote renewable
energy invites new players to realistic power system with multiple
⇑ Tel.: +91 6632430754; fax: +91 6632430204.
E-mail address: a_barisal@rediffmail.com
factor are more important for the study of LFC.
Many researchers in the recent past have proposed several
strategies for LFC of power systems in order to maintain the system
frequency and tie line power flow at their scheduled values during
normal operation and also during small perturbations. To meet the
today’s stringent quality requirements, accurate-tools based realis-
tic models with faster solution speed; high degree of reliability is
required. While considerable progress has been made in the devel-
opment of intelligent controllers and their applications to large
scale power system still remain a challenging area and a common
problem. It is found in literature survey that the early work on AGC
was started by Cohn [3] but the design of modern optimal control-
ler concept for interconnected power system was initiated by
Elgerd and Fosha [4]. The recent past control strategies for auto-
matic generation control of power system are reported by Kumar
and Kothari [5] which includes various control aspects for AGC
system incorporating with other additional devices. The gain
scheduling control method for AGC of interconnected power
system was proposed by Lee et al. [6]. This control is different from

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2014.10.019
0142-0615/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
68 A.K. Barisal / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 66 (2015) 67–77
other control techniques in terms of robustness to wide range of
operating conditions and also easy implementation. The growth
in size and complexity of electric power system due to non linear
load characteristics and variable operating points has necessitated
the use of intelligence based methods to address satisfactorily the
performances under small perturbations. The intelligent control-
lers such as fuzzy logic based gain scheduling [7], two fuzzy rules
for integral and proportional gains PI controller [8], adaptive fuzzy
gain scheduling method [9], genetic algorithm (GA) based PI and
PID controller [10], PSO based controller [11], self tuning fuzzy
type PID controller [12], a reinforcement learning approach [13],
adaptive neuro-fuzzy interference system (ANFIS) [14], evolution-
ary fuzzy PI controller [15], PSO based controller with fuzzy
application [16], differential evolution (DE) algorithm based PI
controller [17], optimal output feedback controller for multi-
source system [18], generalized neural network approach [19],
several classical controllers [20] for AGC studies in interconnected
power system, were preferred by researchers from the beginning of
these dates.
It is found in literature survey that most of the researchers
adopt thermal–thermal or thermal hydro systems in AGC studies.
Surprisingly, very few papers in literature that considers a single
area [18,22] or multi-area without or with HVDC link connecting
two areas [21,22] of realistic power system having generation from
thermal, hydro and gas units. Mohanty et al. have considered a two
area AC–DC system with parallel tie lines for frequency stabiliza-
tion by using DE tuned PID controller [22] that better performs
than an optimal output feedback controller [21] for similar power
system. Gozde et al. proposed the usage of craziness based PSO
algorithm for AGC system for an interconnected thermal power
plants in the year 2011 [23]. One year after, Gozde et al. [24] again
proposed the artificial bee colony based PI and PID controller
parameter tuning and its superior performance compared to PSO
with transient response analysis method in 2012.
There has been considerable progress in intelligent algorithm
based controller research work attempting to better control for
AGC systems [25]. Teaching learning based optimization (TLBO)
[26] is a new optimization technique developed by Rao et al. and
it has hardly been applied to tune the controller in AGC studies.
The author has proposed a parameter free optimization algorithm
for tuning of controller for load frequency control of the present
scenario above realistic power systems having multiple sources
of power generation and its superior dynamic performances are
compared to that of recently published optimal controller [21]
and DE tuned controller [22] for the same AGC system.
Optimal parameter combinations for the DE-tuned controller
[22] are experimentally determined by conducting a series of
experiments through simulation with six different DE parameter
settings [17] before conducting actual simulation to collect the
results. However, the proposed TLBO a parameter free algorithm
is very simple in concept and easy implementation to tune the
controller of AGC for the realistic power system. In the present
work, a brief overview of TLBO technique with a flow chart for
the sake of completeness and better reading of the paper and also
request the readers to refer to [26,27] for more details of TLBO and
its application.
The main investigations of the present work:
i. To propose a new nature inspired algorithm as teaching
learning based optimization (TLBO) for the load frequency
control of the realistic power system.
ii. To optimize the PID controller gains and study of its dynamic
performances for above power system.
iii. To compare the dynamic performance of TLBO based PID
controller to that of optimal controller and DE tuned control-
ler for single area system.
iv. To compare the dynamic performance of TLBO based PID
controller to that of optimal controller and DE tuned control-
ler for multi-source multi area power system without and
with HVDC link.
v. To carry out the sensitivity analysis for the proposed
TLBO-PID controller with its optimum parameters and its
robustness to wide changes in loading pattern and several
system parameters from their nominal values and also
changes in size and locations of load perturbations and
different cost functions.
System investigated
Single area realistic power system
The system under study is a realistic power system which
includes reheat thermal, hydro and gas generating units. The
linearized model of single area system is given in Refs. [18,22]
and multi area system shown in Fig. 1 for simulation and LFC
study. The nominal parameters of the system are provided in
Ref. [18] for single area and for multi area in appendix. Each unit
has its regulation parameter and participation factor [22] which
decide the contribution to the nominal loading.
Multi source multi area realistic power system with HVDC link
The two area power system interconnected by parallel AC–DC
tie lines [21,22] which comprises more practical combination of
generating units such as reheat thermal, hydro and gas units in
each area is simulated using MATLAB Simulink. Furthermore, the
generators in each area may or may not participate in the LFC task
and the participation rates are not same for all participating
generators. The summation of participation factors of all
participating generators is equal to unity in a control area. Transfer
function model of multi-source multi area with HVDC link with
integral controllers is depicted in Fig. 1.
Control strategy with objective function
When designing a controller, the main purpose of controller
must be foremost in all considerations. This can include system
dynamics, robustness to model uncertainty, ability to follow the
set point, sensitivity to measurement noise and attenuation of load
disturbances. The Proportional Integral Derivative controller (PID)
is the widespread and popular feedback controller used in many
modern industries. The popularity of PID controllers stems in part
to their wide applicability to a variety of single input single output
applications. PID controller is often used when stability and fast
response are required. It is reported in Ref. [22] that the DE tuned
PID controller outperforms than the DE tuned PI and I controllers
for multi-source multi area realistic power system. Keeping in view
above, The PID controller is employed in the present paper for
comparative performance analysis of similar power system.
There are four kinds of performance criteria, generally consid-
ered in the control design. These are the integral of absolute error
(IAE), integral of squared error (ISE), integral of time weighted
squared error (ITSE) and integral of time multiplied absolute error
(ITAE). However, ITAE and ISE criterions are mostly used in AGC
studies for their better performance as compared to ISTE and IAE
criterion. Systems with ITAE objective functions settle more
quickly than ISE method. Therefore, ITAE is a better objective func-
tion among all and considered in present paper for comparative
point of view.
The objective function for multi source power system may be
defined as
 A.K. Barisal / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 66 (2015) 67–77 69

1/R1 Thermal power plant with Reheat turbine

Area-1
DEL PD1

1/R2 1 Kr*Tr.s+1 1 HVDC1

KT
1/R3 Tsg.s+1 Tr.s+1 Tt.s+1 Kdc1
B1 UT
Tdc1.s+1
Hydro power plant with Governor
ACE-1 Kps1
1 Trs.s+1 -Tws+1
Ki UH KH Tps1.s+1
Tgh.s+1 Trh.s+1 0.5*Tws+1
e s u Powe System1
Controller 1 Xc.s+1 Tcr.s+1 1 DEL F1 (s)
KG
UG bg.s+cg Yc.s+1 Tfc.s+1 Tcd.s+1
Gas Turbine power plant
DEL PT 2*pi*T12

Thermal power plant with Reheat turbine s

UT
a12 HVDC2
a12 1 Kr*Tr.s+1 1
KT Kdc2
Tsg.s+1 Tr.s+1 Tt.s+1
ACE-2 Tdc2.s+1

Hydro power plant with Governor Kps2

Ki UH
1 Trs.s+1 -Tws+1 Tps2.s+1
e s u KH
Power System2
Controller1 Tgh.s+1 Trh.s+1 0.5*Tws+1
DEL PD2 DEL F2 (s)
UG
1 Xc.s+1 Tcr.s+1 1
1/R1 KG
bg.s+cg Yc.s+1 Tfc.s+1 Tcd.s+1
B2 1/R2
1/R3 Gas Turbine power plant Area-2

Fig. 1. Transfer function model of multi-source multi area with HVDC link with integral controllers.

Z t sim
algorithm based optimization are applied increasingly due to their
J ¼ ITAE ¼ ðjDF 1 j þ jDF 2 j þ jDPTie jÞ  t  dt ð1Þ
0
simpler implementing, better performance of converging and less
execution time at present [25]. The controller parameters can be
where DF1 and DF2 are the frequency deviations of area-1 and adjusted very quickly in response to the changes in the plant
area-2, respectively. DPTie is the incremental change in tie line dynamics. The details of proposed TLBO algorithm are depicted in
power and tsim is the time range of simulation. Minimize J subject following section.
to PID

controller gains such as K ij min 6 K i 6 K ij max;

Intelligent algorithms
where i ¼ P; I; D and j ¼ 1; 2; 3: ð2Þ
The differential equation of PID controller of each unit of power Over the last decades, there has been a growing interest by
system that are thermal, hydro and gas with respective control many researchers in analyzing the algorithms inspired by the
inputs as UT, UH and UG may be written as behaviors of natural phenomena. The intelligent algorithms are
Z well suited to solve complex computational problems. These algo-
dACE1 rithms are population based stochastic parallel search algorithms
U T ¼ K P1 ACE1 þ K I1 ACE1 þ K D1 ð3Þ
dt differ from traditional optimization techniques by many aspects
Z
dACE1
U H ¼ K P2 ACE1 þ K I2 ACE1 þ K D2 ð4Þ
dt
UT
Controller-1
Z
dACE1
U G ¼ K P3 ACE1 þ K I3 ACE1 þ K D3 ð5Þ -
dt e UH U
Ref. Controller-2 Power System
The ACE signal is the area control error which includes the data +
about the frequency error and the tie line power error for the UG
related control area. They may be represented in (6) and (7) for Controller-3
area-1 and area-2, respectively. Control parameters

ACE1 ¼ B1 DF 1 þ DPTie ð6Þ Scheduling

TLBO Algorithm for gain
scheduling with ITAE Result
Variables
objective function (.m file)
ACE2 ¼ B2 DF 2  DPTie ð7Þ

The controllers’ gains are tuned by the proposed TLBO algorithm Δf , Δ PTie Controlled output of LFC
according to the ITAE objective function. The typical block diagram
of the gain scheduling control is depicted in Fig. 2. The intelligent Fig. 2. Control strategy for gain scheduling of control parameters.
70 A.K. Barisal / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 66 (2015) 67–77

that are population of solutions, not a single point solution, no

Start
limitation of size of the problem, independent of initial guess of
the variables, simple concept and easy implementation, very close
to hundred percent success rate, significantly fast and robust due Initialize all variables and generate initial
to competition and selection and also incredibly well in solving population array (student x subject)
the realistic AGC problems.

Evaluate the mean grade of each subject (variable)

Teaching learning based optimization

Teaching learning based optimization (TLBO) is a recent Identify the best solution (teacher)
addition to modern heuristic optimization techniques, developed
by Rao et al. [26]. It works on the basis of teaching and learning
mechanism in a class between the teacher and the students. This Modify new solution based on best solution
method is based on the effect of the influence of a teacher in the X new = X old + r ( X teacher − (TF )Mean )
results of students in a class. The teacher is generally considered
as most respected and highly learned person in society who
imparts quality education to their students in the class. The result
of a student is improved not only the quality of teaching delivered Is new solution No
by the teacher but also the collective knowledge of his/her own is better than Reject
and the sharing knowledge of his/her classmates. The result of existing?
the students is finally evaluated on the basis of their outcomes/
grades in the class. Yes
TLBO is a nature inspired, parameter free algorithm which uses
a population of solutions to proceed to the optimal solution. For Replace best solution with new one
TLBO, the population is considered as students in a class and the
control variables are the subjects offered to them. This algorithm
working process is divided into two parts, namely teaching phase Select any two solutions randomly X i and X j
and learning phase are described below. The flow chart of the and modify the new solution as below
proposed TLBO method is depicted in Fig. 3. ( )
X new = X old + r X i − X j if X i better than X j

(A) Teaching Phase: This is the first part of the algorithm in

(
Otherwise, X new = X old + r X j − X i )
which the teacher tries the level best according to his/her
potential to improve the performance of students in a class.
The average result of the class room is improved by the
influence of teacher to some extent ie lkj . If the new average Is new solution No
is better than Reject
grade of jth subject at kth iteration is lknewj , the difference
existing?
between the existing mean and new mean of the jth subject
at the kth iteration may be given as [27]
Yes
 
k
l diffj ¼ rand lknewj  ðT F Þlkj ð8Þ Replace best solution with new one

where TF is the teaching factor which is evaluated randomly

by the following equation.
Is stopping No
T F ¼ roundð1 þ randð0; 1ÞÞ ð9Þ criteria is
satisfied?

The grade of the jth subject of the ith student at k + 1th iteration
is updated by Yes

xkþ1
i;j ¼ xki;j þ lkdiffj ð10Þ Return best solution

(B) Learning phase: It is the last part of the algorithm where Fig. 3. Flow chart of TLBO algorithm.
students upgrade their results by mutual interactions among
themselves. Any two students such as xi, xj are randomly
selected from the class and their grades are updated based
of jth subject of lth student (randomly selected) at kth
on the better student. The learning process may be
iteration. f(xi) is the overall grade point of ith student:
expressed mathematically as follows:
  X i ¼ ½ xi1 xi2 . . . ; xij . . . ; xiND 
xkþ1
ij ¼ xkij þ rand  xkij  xklj if f ðxi Þ < f ðxl Þ ð11Þ
Implementation of TLBO algorithm for LFC
 
Otherwise; xijk¼1 ¼ xkij þ rand  xklj  xkij if f ðxi Þ > f ðxl Þ The computational procedure for proposed TLBO algorithm may
be described in the following steps.
ð12Þ
where xk+1
ij , xkij
are the grade point of the jth subject of the ith Step-1: Input parameters of the system and specify the upper
student at the kth and k + 1th iteration; xklj is the grade point and lower boundaries of each variable.
 A.K. Barisal / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 66 (2015) 67–77 71

Table 1
Tuned control parameters, system modes, minimum damping ratio, settling time, Maximum overshoot and ITAE objective function of multi source single area system.

Methods TLBO-controller DE-controller [22] Optimal control [18]

Controller (I) KI1 KI2 KI3 KI1 KI2 KI3 KI1 KI2 KI3
Parameter 0.0511 0.0041 0.1847 0.0516 0.0071 0.1701 0.1514 0.0131 0.0708
System modes 19.9861 19.9860 19.9859
12.6456 12.6456 12.6429
5.8224 5.8243 5.8415
3.9972 3.9946 3.9735
2.9890 2.9878 3.0062
0.5274 + 0.8597i 0.5377 + 0.8609i 0.5103 + 0.8810i
0.5274–0.8597i 0.5377–0.8609i 0.5103–0.8810i
1.2728 1.2787 1.3331
0.4932 0.4671 0.2824 + 0.0777i
0.1090 0.1101 0.2824–0.0777i
0.0329 0.0334 0.0347
5.0000 5.0000 5.0000
MDR 0.5229 0.0301 0.5012
ITAE 0.5135 0.5165 0.9934
MOS 0.0013 0.0006 0.0093
Settling time (0.002% band) 5.23 5.41 15.75

MDR: Minimum damping Ratio, MOS: Maximum Overshoot.

0.02 Step-3: Evaluate the average grade of each subject. The mean
grade of jth subject is given by
 
0 lj ¼ mean xij ; x2j ; . . . ; . . . . . . xij ; . . . . . . xNPj ð14Þ

-0.02
Step-4: Evaluate the objective function. Find out the best
Δ F (Hz)

solution so far as the teacher and is given by

-0.04
X teacher1 ¼ X jf ðxÞ ¼ min ð15Þ
No control
DE Integral [22] Step-5: Update the grade point of each subject of each individ-
-0.06 TLBO Integral ual student as per Eq. (10).
Optimal Control [21] Step-6: Every student in class improves the grade point of each
-0.08 subject through mutual interaction with other students. The
0 10 20 30 40 50
modification of the grade point with the help of learning phase
T ime (sec) concept may be determined by [26,27].
Fig. 4. Frequency deviations of the single area by using I controller for 1% change in
Step-7: If the stopping criterion (maximum iterations set) is
step load perturbation with AC tie line only. satisfied then print the result. Otherwise, go to step-2.

Results and simulations

Table 2 The present work has been implemented in Matlab-7.10.0.499

Tuned controller parameters (PID) of multi-source multi area system without and (R2010a) environment on a 3.06 GHz, Pentium-IV; with 1 GB
with HVDC link.
RAM PC for the controller parameter tuning in automatic load fre-
Methods TLBO-controller quency control. The model of the system under study has been
Controller parameter Thermal Hydro Gas developed in MATLAB/SIMULINK environment and TLBO program
has been written (in .m file). The developed model is simulated
System with AC lines only KP = 4.1468 KP = 1.0431 KP = 4.7678
KI = 4.0771 KI = 0.6030 KI = 3.7644 in a separate .m file using initial gain scheduling parameters con-
KD = 2.0157 KD = 2.2866 KD = 4.9498 sidering a 1% step load perturbation in area-1 at time, t = 0 s. The
System with AC–DC parallel lines KP = 5.0658 KP = 0.7032 KP = 8.7211 objective function is calculated in .m file and used in optimization
KI = 3.9658 KI = 0.0220 KI = 7.4729 algorithm for tuning the gains of PID controller for power system.
KD = 2.4170 KD = 0.0264 KD = 2.4181

Investigation of tuning performance

Step-2: Initialize randomly the members (students in a class as
row and their subjects as column) of the population array.
These members (NP) must be feasible candidate solutions (each
row) that satisfy the given constraints. The number of subjects
offered to all students is ND.
Let, Pop ¼ ½ X 1 X 2 . . . X NP  be the trial vector denoting the mem-
bers of population to be evolved.
X 1 ¼ ½ x11 x12 . . . x1ND 
The elements of X1 are the grade points of respective subjects (ND)
of first student member.
Single area multi-source power system
To compare the dynamic performance of TLBO based I control-
ler to that of optimal controller and DE tuned controller for single
area multi-source system is investigated. The proposed optimal
controller parameters, system modes, minimum damping ratio,
settling time, maximum overshoot and ITAE objective function of
multi source single area system are provided in Table 1. It is
evident from the Table 1 that minimum damping ratio (MDR =
ð13Þ 0.5229) for TLBO optimized I controller is superior to that of DE
optimized controller (MDR = 0.0301) and to optimal controller
(MDR = 0.502) which is very important for stability point of view.
Frequency deviation response of the single area by using I
72 A.K. Barisal / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 66 (2015) 67–77

Table 3
Performance criteria for multi source system with AC lines only.

Objective function TLBO-controller By TLBO DE-controller [22] By TLBO Optimal control [21]
Value % Improvement Value % Improvement Value
ITAE 30.1024  104 32.72 44.7442  104 80.50 15.445  103
ISE 11.1210  102 78.83 52.551  102 94.13 1.7372
ITSE 15.4289  104 45.37 28.23  104 72.32 55.742  104
IAE 11.3410  102 3.28 11.7244  102 53.66 24.475  102
Settling times (0.002% band)
Df1 2.28 39.52 3.77 80.77 11.86
Df2 2.88 37.11 4.58 81.47 14.47
DPTie 0 99 4.29 99 6.71
ACE1 2.3 45.1 4.19 75.37 9.34
ACE2 0 99 2.64 99 19.77

Table 4
Performance criteria for Realistic system with parallel AC–DC lines.

Objective function & parameters TLBO-controller By TLBO DE- controller [22] By TLBO Optimal control [21]
Value % Improvement Value % Improvement Value
ITAE 0.10296 48.18 0.1987 94.59 1.9037
ISE 3.438842  105 82.1 19.22  105 96.37 9.49  104
ITSE 2.197295  105 93.68 34.79  105 99.58 52.74  104
IAE 0.0163 57.55 0.0384 88.19 0.1381
Settling times (0.002% band)
Df1 1.48 23.31 1.93 67.54 4.56
Df2 0 99 4.13 99 5.61
DPTie 0 99 3.81 99 11.36

0.005 0.005

0 0
-0.005
-0.005
Δf 2 (Hz)

-0.01
Δ f (Hz)

-0.01
-0.015
1

-0.015
-0.02 TLBO-PID

TLBO -0.02 DE-PID [22]

-0.025
DE-PID [22] Optimal Control [21]
-0.03 -0.025
Optimal Control [21] 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
-0.035 Time (sec)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time (sec) Fig. 6. Frequency deviations of the control area-2 by using PID controller for 1%
change in area-1 with AC tie line only.
Fig. 5. Frequency deviations of the control area-1 by using PID controller for 1%
change in area-1 with AC tie line only.

controller for 1% change in step load perturbation with AC tie line
only is provided in Fig. 4. The settling time of frequency response is
better than to that of DE controller [22] and Optimal controller, but
the maximum overshoot is better than optimal controller [21] and
close to DE controller.
Multi area multi-source power system without and with HVDC
This power system comprises two control areas, each area hav-
ing three PID controllers designed for investigation of load fre-
quency control. A step load change of 1% in area 1 is considered
at t = 0 s. The optimal controller parameters obtained by TLBO
algorithm for the system with AC lines only and with AC–DC par-
allel tie lines are reported in Table 2. The standard objective func-
tions and settling times of frequency with 2% tolerance band, tie
line power deviations and also the settling times of ACEs with
the proposed TLBO-PID controller are provided in Table 3 for the
system with AC lines only. The results are compared with recently
published approach (Optimal control) [21] and with DE tuned PID
controller [22] for the same interconnected power system. In
Table 3, the values of ITAE, ISE, ITSE, IAE, settling time of Df1,
Df2, DPTie, ACE1 and ACE2 are improved by 32.72%, 78.83%,
45.37%, 3.28%, 39.52%, 37.11%, 99%, 45.1% and 99% respectively
with TLBO tuned PID controller compared to DE tuned PID control-
ler [22] and also better than optimal controller [21] for system
with AC line only. Moreover, the proposed controller outperforms
than the DE tuned controller and optimal output feedback
controller.
For the system with AC–DC parallel line, Table 4 shows the var-
ious errors (ITAE, ISE, ITSE and IAE) and settling time of frequency
and tie line power deviations with the proposed PID controller and
the results are compared with that of optimal controller and DE
tuned controller for the similar system. The values of ITAE, ISE,
ITSE, IAE, settling time of Df1, Df2 and DPTie are improved by
 A.K. Barisal / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 66 (2015) 67–77 73

x 10-3 x 10-3
2 1

0 0

Δ P Tie (pu)
Δ p Tie (pu)

-2 -1

-2 TLBO-PID
-4
TLBO-PID DE-PID[22]
-3
-6 DE-PID [22] Optimal- Control [21]
Optimal Control [21]
-4
-8 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Time (sec)
Time (sec)
Fig. 10. Tie line power deviations by using PID controller for 1% change in area-1
Fig. 7. Tie line power deviations by using PID controller for 1% change in area-1 with AC–DC parallel tie lines.
with AC tie line only.

-3
x 10
x 10-3 2
5

0
0
Δ f 1 (pu)

Δ ACE1 (pu) -2
-5

TLBO-PID -4
-10
DE-PID [22] TLBO-PID
Optimal Contro [21] -6 DE-PID [22]
-15 Optimal Control [21]
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time (sec) -8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Fig. 8. Frequency deviations of the control area-1 by using PID controller for 1%
Time (sec)
change in area-1 with AC–DC parallel tie lines.
Fig. 11. Change in area control error of area-1 by using PID controller for 1% change
in area-1 with AC–DC parallel tie lines.

x 10-3
2
-3
x 10
1
3
TLBO-PID
Δ f 2 (pu)

0
DE-PID [22]
2
Optimal Control [21]
-1
Δ ACE (pu)

TLBO-PID
DE-PID [22]
2

-2 1
Optimal Control [21]
-3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
0
Time (sec)

Fig. 9. Frequency deviations of the control area-2 by using PID controller for 1%
change in area-1 with AC–DC parallel tie lines.
-1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time (sec)
48.18%, 82.1%, 93.68%, 57.55%, 23.31%, 99%, and 99% respectively Fig. 12. Change in area control error of area-2 by using PID controller for 1% change
with TLBO tuned PID controller as compared to DE tuned PID in area-1 with AC–DC parallel tie lines.
controller [22] as shown in Table 4.
To verify the superiority of the proposed approach, the dynamic
response of system with AC lines only for step load perturba- responses in terms of settling time, overshoot and under shoot of
tion(SLP) of 1% in area-1 occurring at t = 0 s are shown in Figs. 5–7. frequency responses, tie line power deviations and area control
It is evident from Figs. 5–7 that the superb damping performances errors with system AC–DC parallel lines with 1% SLP in area-1
in term of settling time, overshoot and under shoot of frequency are shown in Figs. 8–12. It is observed that the proposed PID
responses and tie line power deviations are better than that of controller excels in dynamic performance in comparison to DE
DE tuned controller and optimal controller. Similarly, the dynamic controller and optimal controller.
74 A.K. Barisal / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 66 (2015) 67–77

0.005 -3
x 10
1
0
0
-0.005
Δ f 1 (pu)

-1

Δ f (Hz)
-0.01

1
-0.015 -2
1% SLP

-0.02 2% SLP
TLBO-PID
3% SLP -3
DE-PID [22]
-0.025 Optimal Control [21]
0 2 4 6 8 10
-4
T ime (sec) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time (sec)
Fig. 13. Frequency deviations of the control area-1 by using PID controller for 1–3%
change in area-1 with AC–DC parallel tie lines. Fig. 16. Change in frequency of area-1 for 1% change in area-2.

x 10-3 x 10-3
1 5

0
0
-1
Δ f 2 (pu)

Δ f 2 (Hz)

-2
-5

-3
1% SLP
-10 TLBO-PID
-4 2% SLP
DE-PID [22]
3% SLP
Optimal Control [21]
-5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 -15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
T ime (sec)
Time (sec)
Fig. 14. Frequency deviations of the control area-2 by using PID controller for 1–3%
Fig. 17. Change in frequency of area-2 for 1% change in area-2.
change in area-1 with AC–DC parallel tie lines.

-3 -3
x 10 x 10
0.5 5

0 TLBO-PID
4
Optimal Control [21]
-0.5 DE-PID [22]
Δ P Tie (pu)

3
-1
Δ PTie (pu)

-1.5 2

1% SLP
-2 1
2% SLP
-2.5
3% SLP 0
-3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
-1
Time (sec) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time (sec)
Fig. 15. Tie line power deviations of the control area-1 by using PID controller for
1–3% change in area-1 with AC–DC parallel tie lines. Fig. 18. Change in tie line power for 1% change in area-2.

Investigation of robustness
For different loading conditions
To show the robustness of the proposed controllers, SLP is
increased to 1–3% in a step of 1% and its dynamic responses for
the system with AC–DC parallel line are shown in Figs. 13–15. It
is clear that the designed controllers are robust and perform satis-
factorily for different SLP. To verify the robustness of proposed
approach, the location of SLP is changed to area-2 with 1% SLP
occurring at t = 0 s. Figs. 16–18 show the dynamic responses of
the power system with AC–DC line with 1% SLP at area-2. It is clear
from Figs. 16–18 that proposed controller outperforms to other
two controllers. Similarly the SLP is applied simultaneously in both
areas and the dynamic responses of frequency and tie line power
deviations of the AC–DC line are shown in Figs. 19–21. It is also
 A.K. Barisal / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 66 (2015) 67–77 75

-3
x 10 x 10-3
5 2

0
0
-2
+50 %
Δ f 1 (Hz)

Δ f (Hz)
-4
-5 +25%

1
-6 -25%
TLBO-PID -50%
-10 -8
DE-PID [22]
Optimal Control [21] -10
-15
0 5 10 15 20 -12
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time (sec)
Time (sec)
Fig. 19. Change in frequency of area-1 for 1% change in both areas.
Fig. 22. Change in frequency of area-1 for 0.1 p.u change in area 1 with change in
loading.

-3
x 10
5 -3
x 10
2

0
0
Δ f 2 (Hz)

-2
-5
Δ f 1 (Hz)

-4 +50% of T12

TLBO-PID +25% of T12

-10
-6
DE-PID [22] -25% of T12
Optimal Control [21]
-8 -50% of T12
-15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time (sec) -10
0 5 10 15 20 25
Fig. 20. Change in frequency of area-2 for 1% change in both areas.
Time (sec)

Fig. 23. Change in frequency of area-1 by using PID controller and by changing the
T12.

-4
x 10
20
-3
x 10
15 2

0
(pu)

10 TLBO-PID
-2
Tie

DE-PID [22]
Δ f 1 (Hz)

+50% of TT
ΔP

5 Optimal -4
Control [21] +25% of TT
-6
0 -25 % of TT
-8
-50% of TT
-5 -10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time (sec) Time (sec)
Fig. 21. Change in tie line power for 1% changes in both areas. Fig. 24. Frequency deviations of the control area-1 by using PID controller and by
changing the turbine time constant of all generators in both areas simultaneously
TT.
clear that better performance is obtained irrespective to the size of
SLP from Figs. 13–15 and the locations of SLP from Figs. 16–21.
To study the effect of variations of loading conditions on the evident from Fig. 22 that there is negligible effect on the variation
system dynamic performances, the operating load condition are of loading conditions on the frequency deviation response with
varied by ±25% from their nominal values taking one at a time controller parameters obtained at nominal values. Consequently,
[17,22,24]. Three PID controllers applied to each area are tuned it is found that the power system behaves robust toward changing
by TLBO algorithm for all loading conditions separately. It is the load.
76 A.K. Barisal / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 66 (2015) 67–77

x 10
-3 behavior of the system with TLBO optimized PID controller for
2 1% step load changes in area-1 at t = 0 s for the above parameters
variation are shown in Figs. 23–25. It can be observed that the
0 proposed control strategy provides a robust and stable control
satisfactorily at nominal parameters and need not be reset for wide
-2 changes in the system parameters.
Δ f 1 (Hz)

-4 +50% For different cost functions

+25% From the very beginning the LFC study, all simulations were
-6 performed using ITAE objective function in TLBO algorithm. In
-25%
-50% order to determine the robustness of power system with AC–DC
-8
parallel tie line toward different cost functions are investigated
using the standard cost functions such as ITAE, ISE, ITSE and IAE.
-10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Performance criteria for different cost functions and PID controller
Time (sec) gains for parallel AC–DC lines are provided in Table 5. The results
obtained during simulation for different cost functions to the
Fig. 25. Frequency deviations of the control area-1 by using PID controller and by power system are represented in Fig. 26 and Table 5. Moreover,
changing the frequency bias B in both areas simultaneously. it is seen that the tuning performance of TLBO algorithm is affected
from changing the cost function. The settling time obtained with
ITSE for the frequency deviation and maximum overshoots
Table 5 obtained with ISE for them are better than the others as shown
Performance criteria for different cost functions and PID controller gains for parallel in Fig. 26 and Table 5. It can be evaluated in LFC study, the
AC–DC lines. maximum overshoot is more important than settling time.
Cost functions Thermal Hydro Gas Settling time Therefore, ISE is better objective function in comparison to ITSE
and controller and maximum objective function. The compromise solution with consideration
parameters overshoot to the evaluation of both settling time and maximum overshoot
TLBO-PID controller criteria, ITAE is considered to be as the better cost function.
ITAE KP = 1.6124 KP = 0.2257 KP = 1.7139 However, the power system provides the robustness and stable
KI = 1.9382 KI = 1.3005 KI = 1.8857 ST = 2.17 l toward different cost functions.
KD = 1.0485 KD = 0.3818 KD = 0.2069 MOS = 0.011
ISE KP = 1.7810 KP = 0.1027 KP = 1.5967 ST = 2.59
KI = 1.5979 KI = 0.1458 KI = 1.8860 MOS = 0.01
Conclusion
KD = 1.4687 KD = 0.1771 KD = 1.3674 TLBO algorithm is proposed in this paper to tune the parameters
ITSE KP = 1.5970 KP = 0.4738 KP = 1.9474 ST = 1.94 of I and PID controller. A multi-source single area and multi-source
KI = 1.9750 KI = 1.4045 KI = 1.9446 MOS = 0.0121 multi area without and with HVDC link is considered to demon-
KD = 0.3181 KD = 0.7509 KD = 1.2874
strate the proposed method. An integral time absolute error of
IAE KP = 1.8247 KP = 1.8209 KP = 1.9928 ST = 2.11 the frequency deviation of both areas and tie line power is taken
KI = 1.8353 KI = 1.7877 KI = 1.7805 MOS = 0.0112
KD = 1.2371 KD = 0.6906 KD = 0.7276
as the objective function to improve the system response in terms
of settling time and overshoots. Simulation results emphasis that
the proposed TLBO tuned PID controller is robust in its operation
and gives a superb damping performance for frequency and tie line
For different system parameters power deviation following a step load perturbation (SLP) compared
To study the robustness of power system to wide changes in the to optimal output feedback controller and DE tuned PID controller
system parameters such as turbine time constant of both areas, tie for similar system. Furthermore, it is found that the proposed
line power coefficient and frequency bias parameter of both areas system is more robust and stable to wide changes in system
simultaneously are varied in the range of +50% to 50% from their loading, parameters, size and location of step load perturbation
nominal values in steps of 25% taking one at a time. The dynamic and various cost functions. Besides, the simple concept and
architecture of the proposed controller it can be implemented for
real time application.

-3
x 10 Appendix A
5
The typical values of system under study are given below:

0 f = 60 Hz; B1 = B2 = 0.4312 pu MW/Hz; PR = 2000 MW (rating),

PL = 1840 MW (nominal loading); R1 = R2 = R3 = 2.4 Hz/pu MW;
Δ f (Hz)

Tsg = 0.08 s; Tr = 10 s; Kr = 0.3; Tt = 0.3 s; KT = 0.543478;

-5
KH = 0.326084; KG = 0.130438; Tgh = 0.2 s; Trh = 28.75 s;
1

ITAE
Trs = 5 s; TW = 1 s; bg = 0.5; cg = 1; Xc = 0.6 s; Yc = 1 s;
ISE
-10
Tcr = 0.01 s; Tfc = 0.23s; Tcd = 0.2 s; Tps = 11.49 s;
ITSE Kps = 68.9566 Hz/pu MW; Tdc = 0.2 s; Kdc = 1;
IAE T12 = 0.0433 pu; a12 = 1.
-15
0 10 20 30 40
References
Time (sec)
[1] Elgard OI. Electric energy systems theory. New York: Mc Graw-Hill; 1982. p.
Fig. 26. Frequency deviations of the control area-1 by using PID controller and by 299–362.
different cost functions. [2] Kundur P. Power system stability and control. New York: Mc-Grall Hill; 1994.
 A.K. Barisal / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 66 (2015) 67–77
[3] Cohn N. Some aspects of tie-line bias control on interconnected power
systems. Am Inst Electr Eng Trans 1957;75:1415–36.
[4] Elgerd OI, Fosha CE. Optimum megawatt-frequency control of multi-area
electric energy systems. IEEE Trans Power Appl Syst 1970;89(4).
[5] Kumar IP, Kothari DP. Recent philosophies of automatic generation control
strategies in power systems. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2005;20(1):346–57.
[6] Lee KA, Yee H, Teo CY. Self-tuning algorithm for automatic generation
control in an interconnected power system. Electr Power Syst Res 1991;20(2):
157–65.
[7] Rubaai A, Udo V. Self tuning LFC: multilevel adaptive approach. Proc Inst Electr
Eng Gen Trans Distrib 1994;141(4):285–90.
[8] Chang CS, Fu W. Area load frequency control using fuzzy gain scheduling of PI
controllers. Electr Power Syst Res 1997;42:145–52.
[9] Cam E, Kocaarslan I. A fuzzy gain scheduling PI controller application for an
interconnected electrical power system. Electr Power Syst Res 2005;73(3):
267–74.
[10] Pinkang L, Hengjun Z, Yuyun L. Genetic algorithm optimization for AGC of
multi-area power systems. In: Proceedings of IEEE region 10 conference on
computers, communications, control and, power engineering-TENCON’02;
2002. p. 1818–21.
[11] Abdel-Magid YL, Abido MA. AGC tuning of interconnected reheat thermal
systems with particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of the 2003 10th
IEEE international conference on electronics, circuits and systems, vol. 1; 2003.
p. 376–9.
[12] Yes_il E, Guzelkaya M, Eks_in I. Sef-tuning fuzzy PID type load and frequency
controller. Energy Convers Manage 2004;45:377–90.
[13] Ahamed TPI, Rao PSN, Sastry PS. A reinforcement learning approach to
automatic generation control. Electr Power Syst Res 2002;63:9–26.
[14] Khuntia SR, Panda S. Simulation study for automatic generation control of a
multi-area power system by ANFIS approach. Appl Soft Comput 2012;12:
333–41.
[15] Juang C-F, Lu C-F. Power system load frequency control by evolutionary fuzzy
PI controller. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on fuzzy
systems. Budapest, Hungary; 2004. p. 715–9.
77
[16] Ghosal SP. Optimization of PID gains by particle swarm optimization in fuzzy
based automatic generation control. Electr Power Syst Res 2004;72:203–12.
[17] Rout UK, Sahu RK, Panda S. Design and analysis of differential evolution
algorithm based automatic generation control for interconnected power
system, Ain Shams Eng J 2012; <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2012.10.010>.
[18] Parmar KPS, Majhi S, Kothari DP. Load frequency control of a realistic power
system with multi-source power generation. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst
2012;42:426–33.
[19] Chaturvedi DK, Satsangi PS, Kalra PK. Load frequency control: a generalized
neural network approach. Electr Power Energy Syst 1999;21:405–15.
[20] Saikia LC, Nanda J, Mishra S. Performance comparison of several classical
controllers in AGC for multi-area interconnected thermal system. Int J Electr
Power Energy Syst 2011;33:394–401.
[21] Parmar KPS, Majhi S, Kothari DP. Improvement of dynamic performance of LFC
of the two area power system: an analysis using MATLAB. Int J Comp Appl
2012;40:28–32.
[22] Mohanty B, Panda S, Hota PK. Controller parameters tuning of differential
evolution algorithm and its application to load frequency control of multi-
source power system. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2014;54:77–85.
[23] Gozde H, Taplamacioglu MC. Automatic generation control application with
craziness based particle swarm optimization in a thermal power system. Int J
Electr Power Energy Syst 2011;33(1):8–16.
[24] Gozde H, Taplamacioglu MC, Kocaarslan I. Comparative performance analysis
of Artificial Bee Colony algorithm in automatic generation control for
interconnected reheat thermal power system. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst
2012;42:167–78.
[25] Aström KJ, Hagglund T. PID controllers. USA: Instrument Society of America;
1995.
[26] Rao RV, Savsani VJ, Vakharia DP. Teaching–learning-based optimization: an
optimization method for continuous non-linear large scale problems. Inform
Sci 2012;183(1):1–15.
[27] Roy PK. Teaching learning based optimization for short-term hydrothermal
scheduling problem considering valve point effect and prohibited discharge
constraint. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2013;53(1):10–9.