2015 IEEE Power, Communication and Information Technology Conference (PCITC)
Siksha ‘O’ Anusandhan University, Bhubaneswar, India.
Enhancement Of Stability Of SMIB using ZN-PID
and LQR-PSS as Affected by Excitation Control
Ritambhara Pradhan
Department of Electrical Engineering,
VSSUT, Burla, Odisha, India
pradhan.ritambhara@gmail.com
Abstract—This paper presents the study of steady state
stability of a synchronous machine connected to infinite bus
(SMIB) through external reactance under small disturbance.
The automatic voltage regulator (AVR) a part of the
excitation control improves the steady-state stability of the
power system but fails at high gain. Power system stabilizer
(PSS) a supplementary controller added with AVR improves
the synchronizing torque and reduces the oscillations of rotor
angle and speed deviation. Proper response is achieved by PID
controller. However, in this report, the desired response is
found by proper tuning of PID controller using Ziegler-
Nichols methods. Further, the PSS is designed and
implemented using linear optimal controller called Linear
Quadratic Regulator and helps in improving the system
stability.
Keywords- Single machine infinite bus (SMIB), Power system
stabilizer (PSS), Automatic voltage regulator (AVR), Linear
quadratic regulator (LQR), Proportional Integral Derivative
controller (PID), Zeigler-Nichols (ZN).
I. INTRODUCTION
The power system is a large network consisting of
alternators with excitation control and governing control
connected through infinite bus, transmission lines with its
accessories and synchronous motors and condensers
[1].The synchronous machines are important components
of power systems and maintain synchronism. The ability of
the power system is to supply the power continually as
demanded by load in presence of disturbances to satisfy
both reliability and security as far as planning and operating
is concerned. For any small initial deviations due to gradual
change of load, the system equilibrium point’s changes and
oscillation stays for some periods and then it regains its
original equilibrium points and maintains stability. Such
stability is called dynamic stability. However, large
disturbances (event disturbances) such as sudden change in
bus, load and generation power or change of system
configuration due to line switching and fault particularly
three-phase short-circuits (during lightning) at the generator
bus implies transient instability. A system is said to be
transiently stable when the post disturbance equilibrium
point converges to the pre-disturbance steady state
978-1-4799-7455-9/15/$31.00 ©2015 IEEE
Bidyadhar Rout
Department of Electrical Engineering,
VSSUT, Burla, Odisha, India
rout.bdr@gmail.com
operating point after the fault is cleared. The detail stability,
transient stability and synchronism are reported in [2].
The power systems itself is non-linear and the stability
is studied by linearising the system model as reported in [3-
4]. The concept of synchronous machine as affected by
excitation controller and the phenomenon of stability of
synchronous machine under small perturbations in the case
of SMIB has been proposed in [2]. In order to maintain
stability of a system, controllers can be designed. One such
classical controller is a PID controller.PID controller is
widely used because of its simple structure and robust
performance even in a wide range of operating conditions.
Unfortunately, it is difficult to tune the parameters of PID
because of problems like high order, time delays and non-
linearization. The first method used for tuning was
proposed by Ziegler and Nichols.
In the late 1950s and in the early 1960s most of the new
generating units that are added to the electric utility systems
were equipped with continuously acting voltage regulators
[5]. These units constitute a larger percentage of generating
capacity so it became important that the voltage regulator
action had a detrimental impact upon the dynamic stability
(or, more accurately, steady state stability) of the power
system. An oscillation of small magnitude and low
frequency often exists for long periods of time and in some
cases it can hamper power transfer capability. Therefore,
Power system stabilizers were developed to provide
damping to these oscillations via modulation of the
generator excitation. In the past five decades the PSS have
been frequently used to provide the desired system
performance under condition that requires stabilization.
Stability of synchronous generator depends on a number of
factors like the setting of automatic voltage regulator
(AVR). Many generators are designed with high gain, fast
acting AVRs in order to enhance large scale stability to
hold the generator in synchronism in the power system
during large transient fault conditions. But high gain
excitation systems decrease the damping torque of
generator. A supplementary excitation controller referred to
as PSS has been added to synchronous generators to
counteract not only the effect of high gain AVRs, but also
other sources of negative damping [6].
 2015 IEEE Power, Communication and Information Technology Conference (PCITC)
Siksha ‘O’ Anusandhan University, Bhubaneswar, India.

The PSS is applied to the excitation system or control d 2θ m

loop of the generating unit to provide positive damping. J= = Tm − Te Nm (3)
The most widely used conventional PSS is the lead-lag dt 2
PSS, where the gain settings are fixed at certain value Where θ m = angle in radian (mech)
which are determined under particular operating conditions Tm = turbine torque in Nm; it requires a negative
to result in optimal performance for that specific conditions value for a motoring machine.
[7]. The PSS is designed by LQR approach and it is seen Te = electromagnetic torque developed in Nm; it
that it gives better result than conventional PSS.
acquires negative value for a motoring machine.
In this paper the stability of SMIB is done by tuning While the rotor undergoes dynamics as per Eq. (3), the
PID controller using ZN-method and design of PSS is done rotor speed changes by insignificant magnitude for the time
by using LQR method. period of interest (1s).Therefore Eq.(3) can be converted
into its more convenient power form by assuming the rotor
II. DYNAMICS OF SYNCHRONOUS MACHINE speed to remain constant at the synchronous speed ω sm .
The kinetic energy of rotor at synchronous machine is '
Multiplying both sides of Eq. (12.3) by ω sm we can write-
given by:-
1 d 2θ m
KE = Jω sm 2
× 10 −6 MJ Jω sm × 10 −6 = Pm − Pe MW (4)
2 dt 2
Where, J = rotor moment of inertia in kg-m2 Where, Pm = mechanical power input in MW
ω sm = Synchronous speed in radian (mech)/s
Pe = electrical power output in MW; stator copper
⎛P⎞ loss is assumed negligible.
But, ωs = ⎜ ⎟ω sm = rotor speed in radian (elect)/s
⎝2⎠ Rewriting Eq. (4)
Where, P = no. of machine poles ⎛ ⎛ 2 ⎞2 ⎞ 2
2 ⎜ J ⎜ ⎟ ω × 10 −6 ⎟ d θ e = P − P MW
1 ⎛2⎞ ⎜ ⎝P⎠ s ⎟ dt 2 m e
KE = J ⎜ ⎟ ω s × 10 −6 ω s ⎝ ⎠
2 ⎝P⎠
Where, θ e = angle in radian (elect)
1
= M ωs
2 d 2θ e
Or, M = Pm − Pe (5)
⎛2⎞
2
dt 2
Where, M = J ⎜ ⎟ ω s × 10 −6 For convenience, we can measure the angular position of
⎝P⎠
the rotor with respect to a synchronously rotating frame of
= moment of inertia in MJ-s/elect radian
reference. Let
Inertia constant H is defined as-
δ = θe − ωst (6)
1
GH = KE = Mω s Where, δ = rotor angular displacement from
2
Where, G = machine rating (base) in MVA (3-phase) synchronously rotating reference frame (called torque
H = inertia constant in MJ/MVA or MW-s/MVA angle/power angle)
From Eq. (6)
So, now
2GH GH d 2θ e d 2δ
M = = MJ-s/elect radian (1) = (7)
ωs πf dt 2 dt 2
Hence Eq. (5) can be written in terms of δ as
GH
= MJ-s/elect degree d 2δ
180 f M = Pm − Pe MW (8)
M is also called as the inertia constant. dt 2
Taking G as base, the inertia constant in per unit (pu) is- With M as defined in Eq. (1), we can write
H 2 GH d 2 δ
M ( pu ) = s /elect degree (2) = Pm − Pe MW (9)
πf πf dt 2
H 2 Dividing throughout by G, the MVA rating of the machine
= s /elect degree
180 f d 2δ
M ( pu ) = Pm − Pe ; in pu of machine rating as
The inertia constant H has a range of values for each class of dt 2
machines. base (10)
H
The Swing Equation Where M ( pu ) =
πf
Here, we have assumed that the windage, friction and
iron-loss torque is negligible. The differential equation H d 2δ
governing the rotor dynamics [10] can be written as- = Pm − Pe pu (11)
πf dt 2
 2015 IEEE Power, Communication and Information Technology Conference (PCITC)
Siksha ‘O’ Anusandhan University, Bhubaneswar, India.

The equation (Eq. (10)-Eq. (11)), is called the swing The Heffron-Phillips constants are-
equation and it describes the rotor dynamics for a K1 = ΔTe Δδ ]E ' Change in electrical torque for a change
synchronous machine (generating/motoring).It presents a q

second-order differential equation where the damping term
(proportional to dδ dt ) is absent because it is a lossless
machine and the torque of damper winding is ignored. This
assumption leads to pessimistic results in transient stability
analysis-damping helps to stabilize the system. Damping
must be considered in a dynamic stability study. Since the
electrical power Pe depends upon the sine of angle
δ (Pe = Pmax Sinδ ) the swing equation is a non-linear
in rotor angle with constant flux linkages in the d axis.
]
K 2 = ΔTe ΔE q' δ Change in electrical torque for change d-
axis flux linkages with constant rotor angle
K3 = Impedance factor
K 3 = xd' + xe xd + xe For the case where the external
impedance is a pure reactance x e
1 ΔEq
'

second-order differential equation. K4 = Demagnetizing effect of a change in rotor

K 3 Δδ
angle
III. SINGLE MACHINE INFINITE BUS
K 5 = Δet Δδ ]E ' Change in terminal voltage with change
The system of study is the one machine connected to q

infinite bus system through a transmission line having in rotor angle for constant '
Eq
resistance re and inductance x e as shown in Fig. 1.
K 6 = Δet ΔE q
'
] δ
Change in terminal voltage with change
'
in Eq for constant rotor angle
T d' 0 Field open circuit time constant
Tdz' = K 3Td' 0 Field time constant under load
Fig. 1. One machine to infinite bus system
The values of field circuit and the exciter shown in the
previous figure is shown in the figure given below-
In order to find the model of a SMIB, the following
state space equations are taken-
•
Δδ = ω 0 Δ ω

( )
• 1
Δω = − K1 Δδ − K 2 ΔE q' '
M

1 ⎛⎜ ΔE q' ⎞
•
ΔE q' = ' − K 4 Δδ − + ΔE fd ⎟
Td 0 ⎜⎝ K3 ⎟
⎠

( )
• 1
ΔE fd = − K e K5 Δδ − Ke K 6 ΔEq' − ΔE fd + Ke u
Te
Fig. 3. Single machine supplying an infinite bus through external
The Heffron –Phillips model of single machine infinite impedance including effects of voltage regulator-excitation system.
bus system [8] is shown in Fig. 2.
The simulink model for Heffron-Philips model with
PID or PSS is shown in the figure given below-

Fig. 2. Heffron-Phillips model

Fig. 4. Heffron-Phillips model with PID or PSS

 2015 IEEE Power, Communication and Information Technology Conference (PCITC)
Siksha ‘O’ Anusandhan University, Bhubaneswar, India.

IV. ZEIGLER-NICHOLAS TUNED PID CONTROLLER V. LINEAR QUADRATIN REGULATOR

PID controller consists of Proportional, Integral and
Derivative gains. The feedback control system is illustrated
in Fig. 4, where r, e, y are respectively the reference, error
and controlled variables [9].
Fig. 5. A common feedback control system
In the diagram of Fig. 5, G(s) is the plant transfer
function and C(s) is the PID controller transfer function that
is given as [13]:
K y (t ) = Cx (t ) + Du (t )
C (s) = K p + i + K d s
s Where x(t), y(t) and u(t) are n, r, and m dimensional state,
Where K p , K i , K d are respectively the proportional,
integral, derivative gains/parameters of the PID controller.
Now, let us come to the Zeigler-Nicholas method of tuning
PID.
The first method of Z-N tuning is based on the open-
loop step response of the system. The open-loop system’s
S-shaped response is characterized by the parameters,
namely the process time constant T and L. These
parameters are used to determine the controller’s tuning
parameters (Table I).
TABLE I: ZIEGLER-NICHOLS OPEN-LOOP TUNING PARAMETER
Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR) is the optimal theory
of pole placement method. LQR algorithm defines the
optimal pole location based on two cost function. To find
the optimal gains, one should define the optimal
performance index firstly and then solve algebraic Riccati
equation. The required condition for this controller is that
the matrix should be controllable and observable. For this
the study state-space representation, state feedback control,
performance index, and Riccati equation [11-12].
For a controllable LTI system with a space state model
shown in Eq. (12):
.
x(t ) = Ax(t ) + Bu (t )
(12)
output, and control vectors, respectively. A is the state
matrix, B is the input matrix and C is the output matrix.
LQR approach constructs a linear state feedback law (i.e.
control law) as given in Eq. (13):
u (t ) = − Kx(t )
(13)
The control law indicated in Eq. (13) minimizes the
quadratic performance index shown in Eq. (14). The
performance index consists of state and control energies-
∫ [x ]
∞
T
J= Qx + u T Ru dt
0 (14)

Kp Kd Where, Q ∈ R n×n is the symmetric, positive semi-definite

Controller Kp Ti = Td =
Ki Kp state weighting (i.e. state penalty) matrix, and R ∈ R n×n is
the symmetric, positive definite control weighting (i.e.
P T/L - 0 control penalty) matrix. In Eq. (13), K is the control gain
matrix given below-
PI 0.9 *(T/L) L/0.3 0
K = R −1 B T P
PID 1.2 *(T/L) 2*L 0.5* L
Where P is the unique symmetric, positive semi-definite
solution to the algebraic Riccati equation as depicted in Eq.
The second method of Z-N tuning is closed-loop tuning (15).
method that requires the determination of the ultimate gain
and ultimate period. This can be achieved by adjusting the PA + A T P + Q − PBR −1 B T P = 0
(15)
controller gain (Ku) till the system undergoes sustained
oscillations (at critical gain), while maintaining the integral Using the control law depicted in Eq. (13) guarantees to
time constant (Ti) at infinity and the derivative time maintain the output as close as possible to the desired output
constant (Td) at zero (Table II)- with minimum control energy.
' '
TABLE II: ZIEGLER-NICHOLS CLOSED-LOOP TUNING PARAMETER
Here, X = [Δ δΔ ω Δ E q Δ E fd ]T

Kp Kd ⎡ 0 ω 0 0 ⎤
Controller Kp Ti = Td = ⎢ K1 K2 ⎥
Kp
Ki
⎢− M 0 −
M
0 ⎥
⎢ 1 ⎥⎥
P
0.5* K u
-
0 A = ⎢ − K4 0 −
1
⎢ T do' K 3 T d' 0 T d' 0 ⎥
PI
0.45* K u 1.2 K p / Pu 0 ⎢K K − KeK6 −1 ⎥
⎢ e 5 0 ⎥
PID
0.6* K u 2Kp Pu K u * Pu /8 ⎣⎢ T e Te T e ⎦⎥
 2015 IEEE Power, Communication and Information Technology Conference (PCITC)
Siksha ‘O’ Anusandhan University, Bhubaneswar, India.

1
⎡ Ke ⎤
B T = ⎢0

(radian)
0 0 ⎥

angle
0
⎣ Te ⎦
-1

C = [0 0]
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
time(seconds)
1 0 0.02

speed
0

VI. SIMULATION AND RESULTS -0.02

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
time(seconds)

Field voltage
2

(per unit)
Results Using ZN-PID 0

3
-2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
time(seconds)
2.5
Fig. 9. Change in angle, speed, and field voltage respectively
2
(radian)
angle

1.5 TABLE III: SETTLING TIME OF DIFFERENT CONTROLLERS

Sl.no. Name of controllers Settling time(ts) in sec
1 1. ZN-PID 10
2. LQR 7.2
0.5

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 VII. MACHINE SPECIFICATIONS
time (seconds)
Fig. 6. Change in angle
-3
TABLE IV: TABLE SHOWING MACHINE SPECIFICATION
x 10
10
Parameters Values
8 Pt 0.5
6
Vt 1.0
4
xe 0.4
speed

2
re 0
0
Ke 25
-2
Te 0.05
-4

-6
f 60 Hz
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Fig. 7. Change in speed

time (seconds) D 0
1.2 ωb 377
1
H 5
xd 1.6
Field voltage

0.8
(per unit)

0.6 xq 1.55
0.4
x d' 0.32
0.2
t d 0d 6
0
(All are in pu, unless otherwise stated)
-0.2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
time (seconds) TABLE V: TABLE SHOWING THE VALUES FROM K 1 TO K 6
Fig. 8. Change in field voltage
Constants Values
Results Using LQR-PSS K1 0.9340

K2 1.0186

K3 0.3600

K4 1.3053

K5 0.05

K6 0.4512
 2015 IEEE Power, Communication and Information Technology Conference (PCITC)
Siksha ‘O’ Anusandhan University, Bhubaneswar, India.

VIII. CONCLUSION
The results obtained in the presented work indicate that
the power system parameters can be fixed through different
approaches mentioned in the literature. Design of PID using
Ziegler-Nicholas method is done. Design of power system
stabilizer PSS based on LQR control is introduced which
improves damping and also improves the eigen values of
the system. The synchronizing and damping torques
coefficients is improved with LQR control than the system
without controller.
REFERENCES
[1] P. Kundur, “Introduction to the power system stability problem,” In
Power System Stability and Control, New Delhi: McGraw Hill
Education, 1994, INDIA, pp. 17-18.
[2] B. S. Surjan and R. Garg, (2012, October), Power system stabilizer
controller design for SMIB stability study, IJEAT, Vol. - 2.
[3] F. P. demello, C. Concordia, “Concepts of synchronous machine
stability as affected by excitation control,” IEEE Trans on Power
System and Apparatus in, vol-pas-88, No. 4, pp. 316-329, April
1969.
[4] F. P. deMello, D. N. Ewart and M. Temoshok, "Stability of
synchronous machines as affected by excitation systems, machine
and system parameters," Proc. American Power Conf., vol. XXVII,
pp. 1150-1159, 1965
[5] D. K. Sambariya, R. Gupta and A. K. Sharma. "Fuzzy Applications
to Single Machine Power System Stabilizers." Journal of Theoretical
& Applied Information Technology 5.3 (2009).
[6] H. Othman, J. J. Sanchez, M. A. Kale and J. H. Chow, “On the
Design of Robust Power System Stabilizers”, Proceedings of the 28th
Conference on Decision and Control Tampa, Florida December
1989.
[7] J. J. Dai, A. A. Ghandakly, "A decentralized adaptive control
algorithm and the application in power system stabilizer (PSS)
design," Industry Applications Conference, 1995.
[8] A. K. Vidyarthi, S. Tanala and A. D. Diwan. "Performance
Comparison of Power System Stabilizer with and without FACTS
device, "International Journal of Advances in Engineering and
Technology, 2014.
[9] P. Venugopal, A. Ganguly and H. Singh, "Design of tuning method
of PID controller using Fuzzy logic," International Journal of
Engineering Trends in Engineering and Development 5.3 (2013), pp.
239-248.
[10] K. R. Padiyar, “Analysis of single machine system,” in Power system
dynamics stability and control, 2nd Edition, B. S. Pbcs.
[11] A. M. Yousef and A. M. Kassem, “Optimal Power System Stabilizer
Based Enhancement of Synchronizing and Damping Torque
Coefficients”, wseas transactions on power systems, Issue 2, Vol.7,
April 2012.
[12] K. Hassani, W.S. Lee, “Optimal Tuning of Linear Quadratic
Regulators Using Quantum Particle Swarm Optimization”
Proceedings of the Int. Conference of Control, Dynamic Systems,
and Robotics Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, May 15-16, 2014, Paper No.
59.
[13] B. Das, B. Subudhi, B. B. Pati,”Co-operative control coordination of
a team of underwater vehicles with communication constraints,”
Transactions of the Institute of Measurement and Control, Jun. 2015.