9th IFAC symposium on Control of Power and Energy Systems

9th IFAC symposium on Control of Power and Energy Systems

9th IFAC
Indian
9th symposium
Institute
IFAC on Control
of Technology
symposium on Control of
of Power
Power and
and Energy
Energy Systems
9th IFAC
Indian
Indian symposium
Institute
Institute
December of on Control
of Technology
Technology
9-11, 2015. Delhi,
Available online Systems
at www.sciencedirect.com
Indiaof Power and Energy Systems
Indian
Indian Institute
Institute
December 9-11, of Technology
of Technology
2015. Delhi, India
December
December 9-11, 2015. Delhi, India
December 9-11,
9-11, 2015.
2015. Delhi,
Delhi, India
India
ScienceDirect
IFAC-PapersOnLine 48-30 (2015) 143–148
Optimal
Optimal Tuning
Tuning of
of Multimachine
Multimachine Power
Power System
System Stabilizer
Stabilizer using
using Cuckoo
Cuckoo Search
Search
Optimal
Optimal Tuning
Tuning of
of Multimachine
Multimachine Power
Power
Optimal Tuning of Multimachine Power System
System
System
Algorithm Stabilizer
Stabilizer
Stabilizer using
using
using Cuckoo
Cuckoo
Cuckoo Search
Search
Search
Algorithm
Algorithm
Algorithm
*
Algorithm
* * ** **
Dhanraj Chitara***, Anil Swarnkar***, Nikhil Gupta***, K. R. Niazi** **, R. C. Bansal****
Dhanraj Chitara**,, Anil
Dhanraj Chitara Anil Swarnkar
Swarnkar *,, Nikhil
*, Nikhil
Gupta
Gupta *,, K.
*, K.
R.
R. Niazi
Niazi **,, R.
**
**, R.
C.
C. Bansal
Bansal **
**
Dhanraj
Dhanraj Chitara
Chitara ,
, Anil
Anil Swarnkar
Swarnkar , Nikhil
Nikhil Gupta
Gupta , K.
K. R.
R. Niazi
Niazi , R.
R. C.
C. Bansal
Bansal **
*Department of Electrical Engineering, Malaviya National Institute of Technology, Jaipur, India
*Department
*Department of
of Electrical
Electrical Engineering,
Engineering, Malaviya
Malaviya National
National Institute
Institute of
of Technology,
Technology, Jaipur,
Jaipur, India
India
(e-mail: dhanraj.chitara@gmail.com,
*Department
*Department of
of Electrical mnit.anil@gmail.com,
Electrical Engineering,
Engineering, Malaviya nikhil2007mnit@yahoo.com,
Malaviya National
National Institute
Institute of
of Technology,
Technology, krn152001@yahoo.co.in)
Jaipur,
Jaipur, India
India
(e-mail:
(e-mail: dhanraj.chitara@gmail.com,
dhanraj.chitara@gmail.com, mnit.anil@gmail.com,
mnit.anil@gmail.com, nikhil2007mnit@yahoo.com,
nikhil2007mnit@yahoo.com, krn152001@yahoo.co.in)
krn152001@yahoo.co.in)
** Department
(e-mail:
(e-mail: of Electrical, Electronics
dhanraj.chitara@gmail.com,
dhanraj.chitara@gmail.com, and Computer
mnit.anil@gmail.com,
mnit.anil@gmail.com, Engineering, University of
nikhil2007mnit@yahoo.com,
nikhil2007mnit@yahoo.com, Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa
krn152001@yahoo.co.in)
krn152001@yahoo.co.in)
**
** Department
Department of
of Electrical,
Electrical, Electronics
Electronics and
and Computer
Computer Engineering,
Engineering, University
University of
of Pretoria,
Pretoria, Pretoria,
Pretoria, South Africa
** Department
** Department of
of Electrical,
Electrical, Electronics (e-mail:
Electronics and
and Computerrcbansal@ieee.org)
Computer Engineering,
Engineering, University
University of
of Pretoria, Pretoria, South
Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa
South Africa
Africa
(e-mail: rcbansal@ieee.org)
(e-mail: rcbansal@ieee.org)
rcbansal@ieee.org)
(e-mail:
(e-mail: rcbansal@ieee.org)
Abstract: In this paper, optimal multiobjective design of robust multimachine Power System Stabilizers
Abstract:
Abstract: In
In this
this paper, optimal
paper,Search
optimal(CS) multiobjective
multiobjective design
design of
of robust
robustismultimachine
multimachine Power
Power System
System Stabilizers
Stabilizers
(PSS)
Abstract:
Abstract:
(PSS) using
In
using Cuckoo
In this
this paper, optimal
paper,Search
Cuckoo optimal(CS) optimization
multiobjective
multiobjective
optimizationdesign
designalgorithm
of
of robust
algorithm presented
robustismultimachine
multimachine
presented for
Power
Power
for small-signal
System stability
System Stabilizers
small-signal Stabilizers
stability
(PSS) using
(PSS) using This
enhancement. Cuckoo
Cuckoo Searchis (CS)
algorithm
Search (CS)
based optimization
on the obligate
optimization algorithm
brood
algorithm is presented
parasitic
is presented
behaviour forofsmall-signal
for small-signal
some cuckoo stability
species
stability
(PSS) using This
enhancement. Cuckoo Searchis (CS)
algorithm based optimization
on the obligate algorithm
brood is presented
parasitic behaviour forofsmall-signal
some cuckoo stability
species
enhancement.
in combination
enhancement. This
with
This algorithm
Lévy
algorithm is
flight
is based
based on
behaviour
on the
the obligate
of some
obligate brood
birds
brood parasitic
and fruit
parasitic behaviour
flies.
behaviourA of some
conventional
of some cuckoo species
speed-based
cuckoo species
enhancement.
in combination This
withalgorithm
Lévy is based
flight on theof
behaviour obligate
some broodand
birds parasitic
fruit behaviour
flies. A of some cuckoo
conventional species
speed-based
in
in combination
lead-lag PSS
combination is with
used
with Lévy
in this
Lévy flight
work.
flight behaviour
The of
parameters
behaviour of some
someof birds
the
birds and
Cuckoo
and fruit flies.
Search
fruit A
based
flies. A conventional
Power System
conventional speed-based
Stabilizer
speed-based
in combination
lead-lag PSS is with in
used Lévy
this flight
work. behaviour
The of some
parameters of birds
the and fruit
Cuckoo flies.
Search A conventional
based Power System speed-based
Stabilizer
lead-lag
(CSPSS) PSS is used in
are optimized this work.
simultaneously The parameters
to shift theof the Cuckoo Search based Power System Stabilizer
lead-lag
lead-lag PSS
(CSPSS) PSS
are
is
is used
used in
optimizedin this
this work.
work. The
simultaneously The parameters
parameters
to shift the ofunstable
of the
the Cuckooor poorly
Cuckoo
unstable or
Search
Search
poorly
damped
based
damped
electromechanical
based Power
Power System mode
System Stabilizer
electromechanical Stabilizer
mode
(CSPSS)
eigenvalues
(CSPSS) are
are optimized
of all
optimized simultaneously
operating conditions
simultaneously to
to
toa shift
shift the
D-shape
the unstable
zone in
unstable or
the
or poorly
left half
poorly damped
of
dampedthe electromechanical
s-plane. A mode
multiobjective
electromechanical mode
(CSPSS) areofoptimized
eigenvalues all simultaneously
operating conditions toashift
to the unstable
D-shape zone in or poorly
the left halfdamped
of the electromechanical
s-plane. A mode
multiobjective
eigenvalues
eigenvalue
eigenvalues of
of all
based
all operating
objective
operating conditions
function
conditionsis to
to a
a D-shape
designed to
D-shape zone
optimize
zone in
in the
a
the left
problem
left half of the
involving
half of the s-plane.
the A
damping
s-plane. A multiobjective
factor and
multiobjective
eigenvaluesbased
eigenvalue of all objective
operatingfunction
conditionsis to a D-shape
designed to zone in athe
optimize left halfinvolving
problem of the s-plane.
the A multiobjective
damping factor and
eigenvalue
damping based
ratio
eigenvalue based of objective
the
based objective function
electromechanical
objective function
function is is designed
modes.
is designed
designed to to
To optimize
show
to optimize the a problem
effectiveness
optimize aa problem involving
and
problem involving the
involving the the damping
robustness
the damping factor
factor and
of
damping factor CSPSS,
and
eigenvalue
damping ratio of the electromechanical modes. To show the effectiveness and the robustness of and
CSPSS,
damping
time ratiosimulations,
domain
damping ratio of the
of the electromechanical
electromechanical
eigenvalue analysismodes.and
modes. Toperformance
To show the
show the effectiveness
effectiveness and
indices are and the robustness
presented
the robustness
and comparedof CSPSS,
of CSPSS,
with
damping
time ratio of the electromechanical modes. To show the effectiveness and the robustness of CSPSS,
time domain
domain
Genetic
time
simulations,
simulations,
Algorithm based
eigenvalue
eigenvalue
PSSs
analysis
analysis
(GAPSS) and
and
and performance
performance
Particle Swarm
indices
indices are
Optimizationare presented
presented
based PSO
and compared
and(PSOPSS)
comparedunderwith
with
time domain
domain
Genetic simulations,
simulations,
Algorithm based eigenvalue
eigenvalue
PSSs analysis
analysis
(GAPSS) and and
and performance
performance
Particle Swarm indices
indices are
Optimizationare presented
presented
based PSO and compared
and(PSOPSS)
comparedunderwith
with
Genetic
wide
Genetic Algorithm
range of
Algorithm based
operating
based PSSs
conditions
PSSs (GAPSS)
and
(GAPSS) and
severe
and Particle Swarm
disturbances.
Particle Swarm It Optimization
is observed
Optimization based
that CSPSS
based PSO
PSO (PSOPSS)
exhibits
(PSOPSS) under
improved
under
Genetic
wide Algorithm
range of basedconditions
operating PSSs (GAPSS) and and Particle
severe Swarm
disturbances. It Optimization
is observed based
that CSPSSPSOexhibits
(PSOPSS) under
improved
wide range
damping
wide range of operating
performance
of conditions
compare to and
GAPSS severe
and disturbances.
PSOPSS. It is observed that CSPSS exhibits improved
wide range
damping of operating
operating
performance conditions
conditions
compare to and
and severe
GAPSS severe
and disturbances.
disturbances. It
PSOPSS. It is
is observed
observed that
that CSPSS
CSPSS exhibits
exhibits improved
improved
damping
damping performance
performance compare
compare to
to GAPSS
GAPSS and
and PSOPSS.
PSOPSS.
© 2015,
damping IFAC (International
performance compare Federation
to GAPSSof Automatic
and PSOPSS.Control) Hosting by Elsevier
Keywords: Cuckoo search, low frequency oscillations, multimachine system, robust PSS, small signal Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Keywords: Cuckoo search,
search, lowlow frequency
frequency oscillations,
oscillations, multimachine
multimachine system,system, robust
robust PSS,
PSS, small
small signal
stability. Cuckoo
Keywords:
Keywords: Cuckoo
Cuckoo search,
search, lowlow frequency
frequency oscillations,
oscillations, multimachine
multimachine system,system, robust
robust PSS,
PSS, small
signal
small signal
signal
stability.
stability.
stability.
stability. 


1. INTRODUCTION
1.
1. INTRODUCTION
1. INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
A rapid increase in 1. INTRODUCTION
complexity of modern non-linear power 1989).
1989). In
In these
these methods,
methods, the
the location
location selection
selection of
of PSS
PSS and
and its
its
A rapid
A rapid increase
rapid requires
increase in in
in complexity
complexity of
of modern
modern non-linear
non-linear power
power 1989).
optimal
1989). In
In these
tuning
these methods,
is a complex
methods, the
the location
iterative
location selection
process.
selection of
A
of PSS
set
PSS of and
CPSS
and its
its
system
A increase
A rapid requires
increase in the development
complexity
complexity of of efficient
of modern
modern and robust
non-linear
non-linear power
power 1989). Intuning
optimal these is methods,
a complex the iterative
location selection
process. ofset
A PSS of and
CPSS its
system
system requires the development
the development
development of efficient
of efficient and
efficient Small-signalrobust
and robust
robust optimal
parameters
optimal tuning
tuning is
under
is a
a complex
certain
complex iterative
operating
iterative process.
condition
process. A
A set
set of CPSS
produces
of CPSS
methods
system
system
methods for small-signal
requires
requires
for the stability
the development
small-signal stability enhancement.
of and
of efficient Small-signal
enhancement. and robust optimal
parameterstuning is a complex
under certain iterative
operating process.
conditionA set produces
of CPSS
methods can for small-signal
small-signal stability enhancement. Small-signal parameters
undesirable under certain operating condition produces
stability
methods
methods can
stability for be defined
for small-signal
be defined as
as the ability
stability
stability
the ability of the
enhancement.
enhancement.
of the power
power system
Small-signal
Small-signal
system to
to parameters results
parameters
undesirable under when
under
results certainthere
certain
when
is a drastically
operating
operating
there is condition change
condition
aa drastically
produces
produces
change
in
in
stability
maintain
stability can be defined
synchronism
can be defined as the
subjected
as the ability
to
ability of
small
of the power
disturbances.
the power system
system to
Large
to undesirable
power system
undesirable resultsresults
results whenwhen
operating
when therethere
conditions
there is is drastically
and configurations.
is aa drastically
drastically change change
change To in
in
stability
maintain can be definedsubjected
synchronism as the ability
to of the
small power system
disturbances. to
Large undesirable
power system operating conditions and configurations. Toin
maintain
scale synchronism
interconnected
maintain synchronism subjected
power systems
subjected to
to small disturbances.
produces
small low
disturbances. Large
frequency
Large power
make
power system
adaptively,
system operating
PSS
operating conditions
are
conditionsdesigned and configurations.
and configurations.
for any changesTo
To
maintain synchronismpower subjected to small disturbances. Large power
make system operating conditions and configurations. To
scale
scale interconnected
interconnectedoscillations
power systems
systems produces
produces low
low frequency
frequency make adaptively,
adaptively,
corresponding
make to the
PSS
PSS are
are designed
different designed
operating
for
for any
any changes
conditions changes
can be
electromechanical
scale
scale interconnected power
power systems
interconnectedoscillations
electromechanical
(0.2–3.0
systems
(0.2–3.0
Hz) due
produces
produces
Hz) low to
low
due
sudden
frequency
frequency
to sudden make adaptively,
adaptively,
corresponding to thePSS
PSS are
are designed
different designed
operating for
for any
any changes
conditions changes
can be
electromechanical
small variations
electromechanical inoscillations
load
oscillationsor (0.2–3.0
occurrence
(0.2–3.0 Hz)
of
Hz) due
fault
due to
to sudden
(Kundur,
sudden corresponding
achieved by
corresponding to the
variable
to thestructure
differentcontrol
different operating
operating (Hsu conditions
and Chan,
conditions can
can be
1983),
be
electromechanical
small variations inoscillations
load or (0.2–3.0 Hz)
occurrence of due
fault to(Kundur,
sudden corresponding
achieved by to thestructure
variable differentcontrol
operating (Hsu conditions
and Chan, can be
1983),
small
2011). variations
These
small variations in load
oscillations
variations in in load
load or or
may occurrence
preserve
or occurrence
occurrence of of
and fault
of fault (Kundur,
continuously
fault (Kundur,
(Kundur, achieved
optimal
achieved by
control
by variable
variable structure
(Abdel-Magid
structure control
and
control (Hsu
Aly,
(Hsu and
1983),
and Chan,
Chan, 1983),
adaptive
1983),
small
2011). These oscillations may preserve and continuously achieved control
optimal by variable structure control
(Abdel-Magid and (Hsu
Aly, and
1983),Chan,adaptive
1983),
2011).
grow
2011). These
after
These oscillations
a fault, may preserve
causing system
oscillations may preserve
separation andincontinuously
and continuously
the absence optimal
control control
control et(Abdel-Magid
optimal (Ghosh al., 1984), and
(Abdel-Magid androbust
and Aly, control
Aly, 1983), (Gibbard,
1983), adaptive
adaptive
2011).
grow These
after oscillations may preserve andincontinuously optimal
control control
(Ghosh et(Abdel-Magid
al., 1984), and and Aly,
robust 1983),
control adaptive
(Gibbard,
grow
of after aaa damping
sufficient
grow after
fault,
fault, causing
fault, causing
or
causing
system
system separation
sometimes
system separation
limits
separation the in the
the absence
power
in the absence
transfer control
1991) (Ghosh
control methods.
(Ghosh et et al.,
etInal., 1984),
al.,these
1984), and
methods, robust
and robust control
aa linearized
robust (Gibbard,
control (Gibbard,transfer
(Gibbard,
grow
of after a damping
sufficient fault, causing
or system separation
sometimes limits the in the absence
power absence
transfer control
1991) (Ghosh
1991) methods.
methods. In 1984),
these
Inspace
and
methods,
thesedynamic
methods,model
control
a linearized
linearized transfer
transfer
of sufficient
capability.
of sufficient damping
To improve
damping or
or sometimes
the
sometimes damping limits
limits the
and
the power transfer
stability,
power the
transfer function
1991)
1991) or
methods.
methods. state In
Inspacethese methods,
thesedynamic
methods,model a is
linearized
a linearized required for
transfer
transfer
of sufficient To
capability. damping
improve or sometimes
the damping limits andthe power transfer
stability, the function
function or
or state
state space dynamic model is
is required
required for
for
capability.
generators
capability. To
are
To improve
controlled
improve the
by
the thedamping
PSSs
damping toand
add
and stability,
a the
stabilizing
stability, the designing
function
function or
orPSS. state
stateHowever,
space
space in
dynamic
dynamic complicated
model
model is
iselectric
required
required power
for
for
capability. are
generators To controlled
improve by the thedamping
PSSs toand
add stability,
a the
stabilizing designing
designingit PSS.PSS.
PSS. However,
However, in complicated
informulate
complicated electric
electricdynamicpower
power
generators
signal to
generators an are controlled
automatic
are controlled by
voltage
by the PSSs
regulator
the PSSs to add
(AVR).
to add a
It
a stabilizing
modulates
stabilizing systems,
designing
designing is
PSS. very tedious
However, to in
However,toinformulate complicated a linearized
electric
complicated electricdynamic power
power
generators
signal to an are controlled
automatic by the
voltage PSSs (AVR).
regulator to add aIt stabilizing
modulates systems,
systems, it
ittheis very
very tedious
issystem. tedious to formulate aaa linearized
to formulate linearized dynamicdynamic
signal
the to an automatic
generator
signal to excitationvoltage
in such regulator
a way (AVR).
that damping It modulates
torque model
systems,of it is very tedious linearized
signal
the to an
an automatic
generator automatic
excitation
voltage
voltage
in such
regulator
regulator
aa way
(AVR).
(AVR).
that
It
It modulates
damping modulates
torque systems,
model
model ofof it
the
of the
is very
system.
the system.
system.
tedious to formulate a linearized dynamic
the
the generator
component
generator of excitation
electrical
excitation in
in such
torque
such is a way
in
way that
phase
that damping
with
damping rotor torque
speed
torque model
model of the system.
the generator
component of excitation
electrical in suchisa in
torque way that with
phase damping rotor torque
speed To maintain good damping characteristic over a wide range
component of electrical torque is in phase with rotor
rotor speed To maintain good damping
deviation,
component of
component
deviation,
which
which
reduces
of electrical
electrical torque
torque is
reduces
low
is in
low
frequency
in phase
phase with
frequency
oscillations
with rotor speed
speed
oscillations To maintain
of
To maintain
operating good damping itcharacteristic
conditions,
good damping characteristic
is desirable
characteristic
over
overto aaa adapt
over
wide
wide range
wide range
PSS
range
deviation,
(Anderson and
deviation, which reduces
Fouad,reduces
which 2003). low low frequency
frequency oscillations
oscillations To
of maintain
operating good damping it
conditions, characteristic
is desirable overto a adapt
wide rangePSS
deviation,
(Anderson which reduces low frequency oscillations of operating
parameters in conditions,
real-time it is
based desirable
on-line to adapt
measurements. PSS
(Anderson and
(Anderson and Fouad,
and Fouad, 2003).
Fouad, 2003).
2003).
of
of operating conditions,
operatinginconditions,
parameters real-time it is
itbased desirable
is desirable
on-line to
to adapt
adapt PSS
measurements. PSS
(Anderson
Most of andpower
the Fouad,station
2003).PSSs are designed based on a parameters
Therefore,
parameters in in real-time
inaddition
real-time to based
these
basedcontrol on-line measurements.
on-linetheories, artificial
measurements.
parameters
Therefore, in real-time based on-line measurements.
Most
Most of
of
linearized
the
the power
power station
station PSSs
PSSs are
are designed
designed based
based on
on aa Therefore, in
intelligence
Therefore, in
addition
in(AI)
addition
addition
to
to these
approaches
to these such
these
control
control
control as
theories,
theories,
artificial
theories,
artificial
artificial
neural
artificial
Most
Most of
linearized thegenerator
of the power
generator model
power station
station
model with
PSSs
PSSs
with exciter/AVR
are
are designed near
designed
exciter/AVR based some
based
near on
on aa
some Therefore,
intelligence
intelligence
in(AI)addition
(AI)
to these such
approaches
approaches
control
such as
as
theories,
artificial
artificial
artificial
neural
neural
linearized
operating generator
points (DeMellomodel with exciter/AVR near some networks
intelligence (ANN) (AI) (Hsu and
approaches Chen, such1990), as fuzzy
artificial logic (FL)
neural
linearized
linearized
operating generator
generator
points (DeMellomodeland
model andwith
withConcordia,
exciter/AVR
exciter/AVR
Concordia, 1969).
1969). Normally,
near
near some
some
Normally, intelligence
networks
networks (ANN)
(ANN) (AI) approaches
(Hsu
(Hsu and and
and Chen,
Chen, such1990), as
1990),(You artificial
fuzzy logic
fuzzyet logic
logic neural
(FL)
(FL)
operating
fixed points
parameters
operating points (DeMello
type
(DeMello and
lead-lag
and Concordia,
conventional
Concordia, 1969).
power
1969). Normally,
system
Normally, (Hsu and
networks
networks Chen,
(ANN)
(ANN) 1991),
(Hsu
(Hsu and and neuro-fuzzy
Chen,
Chen, 1990),
1990),(You fuzzy
fuzzyet logical., 2003)
(FL)
(FL)
operating
fixed points (DeMello
parameters type and Concordia,
lead-lag conventional 1969).
power Normally,
system (Hsu and
(Hsu been Chen,
and Chen,
Chen, 1991),
1991), and neuro-fuzzy
and neuro-fuzzy
neuro-fuzzy (You advantage al.,
et al., 2003)
al., 2003)
2003)
fixed parameters
stabilizer (CPSS) are type lead-lag conventional power system have
(Hsu and presented 1991), to design
and PSS. The main
(You et of
fixed
fixed parameters
parameters
stabilizer (CPSS) typeused
type
are
for power
lead-lag
lead-lag
used for
applications.
conventional
conventional
power applications.powerIn
power
In
earlier
system
system
earlier (Hsu
have and Chen,
have been
been presented
presented
1991), to and neuro-fuzzy
to design
design PSS.
PSS. The (You advantage
The main
main
et al., 2003)
advantage of
of
stabilizer
decades,
stabilizer (CPSS)
stabilizer
(CPSS) are used
tuning
are used for
was
for power
based
power applications.
on techniques
applications. In
In earlier
derived
earlier these
have
have methods
been
been presented
presented is that
to they
design
to design do
PSS.
PSS. not
The
The require
main
main an
advantage
advantage exact
of
of
stabilizer
decades, (CPSS) are
stabilizer used was
tuning for power
based applications.
on techniques Inderived
earlier these methods
these methods
methodsmodel is that
is that they
thatof they
they do
do not require
not require
require an exact
ansystem.
exact
decades,
from stabilizer
classical
decades, stabilizer tuning
control
stabilizer tuning was
(Bollinger
tuning was based
was based et
based on on
al., techniques
1975),
on techniques (Wu derived
and
techniques derived Hsu,
derived mathematical
these
these methodsmodel is
is thatof they the controlled
do
do not
not require power an exact
ansystem.
exact
decades,
from classical control (Bollinger et al., 1975), (Wu and mathematical ofeasythe controlled power
from classical
1988)
from classical
and moderncontrol (Bollinger
control
control theory
(Bollinger et al., 1975),
(Chow
et al., 1975),
and (Wu andand Hsu,
Sanchez-Gasca,
(Wu Hsu, mathematical
However,
mathematical it may model
not
model be of theto get
the controlled
appropriate
controlled power
powerand system.
accurate
system.
from classical
1988) control (Bollinger et al., 1975), (Wu and Hsu, Hsu, mathematical
However, it may model
not be of
easy the to controlled
get appropriate powerand system.
accurate
1988) and
1988) and modern
and modern control
modern control theory
control theory (Chow
theory (Chow and
(Chow and Sanchez-Gasca,
and Sanchez-Gasca,
Sanchez-Gasca, However,data
training
However,
However,
it may
it
it
may
for
may
not be
power
not
not
be easy
easy to
be systems.
easy to
to get
get
get
appropriate
Therefore,
appropriate
appropriate aa set and
and
and of accurate
rules
accurate
accurate is
1988) and modern control theory (Chow and Sanchez-Gasca, training
training data
data for
for power
power systems.
systems. Therefore,
Therefore, a set
set of
of rules
rules isis
training data for power systems. Therefore,
training data for power systems. Therefore, a set of rules is a set of rules is
2405-8963 ©
Copyright © 2015, IFAC (International Federation of Automatic Control)
2015 IFAC 143Hosting by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Copyright
Peer review©
Copyright 2015
©under IFAC
2015 responsibility
IFAC 143
of International Federation of Automatic
143Control.
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 IFAC
© 2015 IFAC
10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.12.368 143
143
December 9-11, 2015. Delhi, India
144 Dhanraj Chitara et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 48-30 (2015) 143–148
not available in the training of the ANN; such limitation is
overcome by FL. Several meta-heuristic optimization
methods have also developed in the last decades. The various
algorithms based on these methods such as Genetic
Algorithm (GA) (Abdel-Magid et al., 1999), (Abdel-Magid
and Abido, 2003), Tabu Search (TS) (Abdel-Magid et al.,
2000), Simulated Annealing (Abido, 2000), Particle Swarm
Optimization (PSO) (Abido, 2002), Evolutionary
Programming (Abido and Abdel-Magid, 2002) and other
have been widely used to the multimachine PSSs design.
These methods produce satisfactory results for the
optimization of PSSs parameters. The applications of these
methods provide some degree of robustness to variation in
system parameters, configurations and wide range of loading
conditions. These methods have problem of premature
convergence, slow convergence and to be trapped in local
optima to obtain the optimum solution.
In this paper, latest meta-heuristic based CS algorithm is
applied for optimizing parameters of multimachine PSS. The
main advantage of CS algorithm over other meta-heuristic
algorithm is that there are only two parameters, the
population size n, and the probability pa. Once n is fixed, pa
essentially controls the elitism and the balance of the
randomization and local search (Xin-She et al. 2009). A
multiobjective eigenvalue based optimization problem is
formulated for robust PSS design with suitable constraints.
The parameters of stabilizers are tuned simultaneously to
shift the unstable or poorly damped electromechanical mode
eigenvalues of all operating conditions to a D-shaped zone in
the left half of the s-plane in such a way that the relative
stability is improved. The effectiveness of the CSPSS is
tested on a three-machine, nine-bus power system under
various operating conditions and compared with GAPSS and
PSOPSS through time domain simulation, eigenvalues
analysis and performance indices.
2. MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION OF PROBLEM
2.1 Power System Model
The complex nonlinear power system model can be
formulated by a set of nonlinear differential equations.
 eigenvalue of the jth operating point respectively, subjected
X  f ( X ,U ) (1)
where X is state vector composite of variables
' T
[ , w , E q , E fd ] and U is input vector of variable. Here, δ, w,
Eq
'
and Efd are the rotor angle, speed, the internal voltage and
the field voltage respectively. In the design of PSS’s, the U is
the output signal of PSSs and linearized incremental models
around an equilibrium point are usually used (Anderson et al.
2003). Therefore, the state equation of a power system with n
machine and m stabilizers can be written as:

 X  A  X  BU (2)
144
where A is 4n × 4n matrix and equals of  f /  X while B is
4n × m matrix and equal  f /  U . Both A and B are computed
at a certain operating point.  X is 4n × 1 state vector and U
is m × 1 input vector (Abido 2000).
2.2 PSS Structure
The PSS structure is mainly a composite set of gain, washout
filter and the phase compensator block. The output signal of
any PSS is a voltage signal. The stabilizer gain is an
important factor that determines the amount of damping
provided by the PSS. The washout block is designed as a
high-pass filter to reset the steady state offset of the terminal
voltage. The higher value of washout time constant also
improves the overall terminal voltage response during system
islanding conditions. In addition, two lead-lag blocks are
used to eliminate the delay between the excitation and the
electrical torque signals. The output of the PSS must be
limited to prevent the PSS acting to counter the action of
AVR. It may even be desirable to trip the PSS in case
of load rejection. The structure of PSS can be described as:
sT w (1  sT1i ) (1  sT3 i )
U i  K i  wi (3)
1  sT w (1  sT 2 i ) (1  sT 4 i )
where Tw, ΔUi and Δwi are the washout time constant, the
PSS output signal at the ith machine and the speed deviation
of ith machine respectively. In this paper, the values of time
constants Tw, T2, and T4 are prespecified. The stabilizer gain
Ki and time constants T1i and T3i are remained to be
determined.
2.3 Objective Function
To maintain stability, provide greater damping and damping
ratio to electromechanical modes, the parameters of PSS may
be selected to minimize the following multi-objective
function:
np np
   
2 2
J  ( 0   i , j )  ( 0   i , j ) (4)
j 1  i , j   0 j 1  i , j   0
where σi,j and ξi,j are real part and damping ratio of the ith
to the constraints that finite bounds are power system
stabilizer parameters. The value of σ0 and ξ0 represent the
desirable level of system damping factor and damping ratio.
This will place the system closed-loop eigenvalues in the D-
shape sector characterized by σi,j ≤ σ0 and ξi,j > ξ0 as shown in
Fig. 1. The design problem can be formulated as the
following constrained optimization problem, where
constraints are the PSS parameters bounds:
Minimize J subject to
m in m ax
Ki  Ki  Ki (5)
m in
T1i  T1i 
m ax
T1i (2) (6)
December 9-11, 2015. Delhi, India
Dhanraj Chitara et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 48-30 (2015) 143–148 145
T3 i
m in
 T3 i  T3 i
m ax
In this paper, the values of β and ξ0 are selected as –2.5 and
0.15 respectively. There are six parameters to be optimized,
namely Ki, T1i and T3i, i = 2, 3. Typical ranges of the
optimized parameters are set as [0.01–20] for Ki and [0.06–
0.8] for T1i and T3i. The values of time constants Tw, T2, and
T4 are set as 5, 0.05 s, and 0.05 s respectively (Abido, 2000).
Fig. 1. A D-shape zone in the left half of s-plane where
σi,j ≤ σ0 and ξi,j > ξ0
3. CUCKOO SEARCH (CS)
The CS algorithm is a population (nest) based efficient,
robust and simple heuristic search algorithm which has been
proposed by Yang and Deb (Xin-She and Deb, 2009). The
algorithm is inspired by breeding strategy of some cuckoo
species and in the meantime combining the Lévy flight
behaviour discovered in some birds and fruit flies. At basic
level, cuckoos lay their eggs in the nests of other host birds of
different species. The host bird may discover that the eggs are
not its own then they either throw away the alien egg or
abandon the nest completely. To apply this as an optimization
tool, Yang and Deb (Walton et al., 2011) used three idealized
rules:
 Each cuckoo lays one egg at a time and dumps it egg in a
random nest which represents a set of solution co-ordinates,
 The best nest with high quality/fitness of eggs will carry
over to the next generation;
 The number of available host nests is fixed and the alien
egg is discovered by the host bird with a probability pa ϵ (0,
1).
For simplicity, this last assumption can be approximated by
the fraction pa of the n nests are replaced by new nests (with
new random solutions). The steps involved in cuckoo search
from these rules are shown in Algorithm 1 (Xin-She and Deb,
2009).
When generating new egg or solutions in CS, a Lévy flight is
performed using the coordinates of an egg selected randomly.
This step can be represented as
( t  1) (t )
xi  xi    L evy (  )
where α > 0 is the step size which should be related to the
scales of problem of interests. In most of cases, we can use α
(7) = 1. In (8), first term represents the current location and
second term represents the transition probability given by
random walk of Markov chain principle and  represents
entry wise multiplication.
The Lévy flight essentially provides a random walk while the
random step length is drawn from a Lévy distribution
Lévy ~ u = t–λ, (1 < λ ≤ 3) (9)
which has an infinite variance with an infinite mean. Here the
steps essentially for a random walk process with power law
step-length distribution with a heavy tail (Xin-She and Deb,
2009) found that the convergence rate was not strongly
affected by the value of pa and they suggested setting pa =
0.25.
Algorithm 1 Cuckoo search (CS)
Objective function f(x), x = (x1, x2, ….., xd)T
Generate initial population of n host nests xi (i = 1, 2, ..., n)
for all xi do
Calculate the fitness Fi = f(xi)
end for
while (t < MaxGeneration) or (stop criterion)
do
Generate a cuckoo egg (xj) by taking Lévy flights from
random nest and evaluate fitness Fj = f(xj)
Choose a random nest among n (say, i)
if (Fj > Fi) then
xi ← x j
Fi ← Fj
end if
Abandon a fraction (pa) of worse nests
Built new nests at new locations by taking Lévy flights
to replace the nest lost ;
Evaluate the fitness of new nest and rank the solutions
with keep the best
end while
4. THREE-MACHINE NINE-BUS POWER SYSTEM
4.1 Test System
In this section, the CS algorithm is compared for designing
the PSS parameters with optimized PSS using GA and PSO.
In this example, the three-machine, nine-bus system (WSCC
system) shown in Fig. 2 is considered and whose data are
given in (Anderson and Fouad, 2003). Each machine is
represented by a fourth-order nonlinear model. To identify
the optimum location of PSS’s in multimachine system the
participation factor method (Hsu and Chen, 1987) and the
sensitivity of PSS effect method (Zhou et al. 1991) was used.
(8) Both methods result indicate that G2 and G3 are the optimum
location for installing PSS’s in WSCC system.
145
December 9-11, 2015. Delhi, India

146 Dhanraj Chitara et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 48-30 (2015) 143–148

the s-plane. The final value of the optimized parameters using

GA, PSO and CS are given in Table 4. With the optimal
values of the GAPSS, PSOPSS and CSPSS, the eigenvalues
and damping ratio with GAPSS and CSPSS for all four cases
are listed in Tables 5, 6 and 7 respectively.

Table 4. Optimal values of the GAPSS, PSOPSS and

CSPSS for G2 and G3
Generators K T1 T3
G2 (GAPSS) 9.6422 0.2115 0.1011
G3 (GAPSS) 0.0667 0.5792 0.5297
G2 (PSOPSS) 10.8368 0.1175 0.1857
G3 (PSOPSS) 0.1078 0.4306 0.8000
Fig. 2. Three-machine nine-bus power system G2 (CSPSS) 11.9427 0.1283 0.1835
G3 (CSPSS) 0.2148 0.6033 0.3121

4.2 PSS Design

Table 5. Eigenvalues and damping ratio with GAPSS
In this section for designing the CSPSS, base case and three
other operating conditions are considered. The operating Base Case Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
conditions of the generators and the loads at these four cases -2.65 ± j 16.56, -2.65 ± j 7.16, -3.10 ± j 8.32, -2.76 ± j 16.29,
0.15 0.34 0.34 0.16
are given in Tables 1 and 2 respectively. The system unstable
-3.52 ± j 10.93, -3.11 ± j 12.03, -3.60 ± j 15.44, -2.93 ± j 7.89,
poorly damped electromechanical mode eigenvalues and 0.30 0.25 0.22 0.34
damping ratio of without PSS with four different operating
conditions are given in Table 3. It is clear that these closed-
loop eigenvalue and damping ratio are poorly damped and in Table 6. Eigenvalues and damping ratio with PSOPSS
case 3, they are unstable. GA, PSO and CS algorithm are
Base Case Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
applied for optimization of PSS parameters so as to shift the
unstable or poorly damped electromechanical mode -3.68 ± j 9.37, -4.74 ± j 10.05, -4.82 ± j 7.88, -2.79 ± j 17.14,
0.36 0.42 0.52 0.16
eigenvalues associated with four cases to a D-shape zone in -3.92 ± j 7.29, -5.39 ± j 12.18, -6.52 ± j 13.07, -3.26 ± j 7.74,
the left half of the s-plane. 0.47 0.40 0.44 0.38

Table 1. Generating operating conditions

Table 7. Eigenvalues and damping ratio with CSPSS
Base Case Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
Gen
P Q P Q P Q P Q Base Case Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
G1 0.72 0.27 2.21 1.09 0.36 0.16 0.33 1.12 -4.20 ± j 9.66, -6.50 ± j 9.59, -5.31 ± j 8.31, -3.11 ± j 10.17,
0.39 0.56 0.53 0.29
G2 1.63 0.07 1.92 0.56 0.80 -0.11 2.00 0.57
-8.65 ± j 8.09, -8.84 ± j 8.02, -8.62 ± j 7.95, -6.95 ± j 10.62,
G3 0.85 -0.11 1.28 0.36 0.45 -0.20 1.50 0.38
0.73 0.74 0.73 0.54

Table 2. Loads From the comparison of Tables 5, 6 and 7, it is observed that

all the electromechanical mode eigenvalues and damping
Base Case Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
Load ratio for CSPSS indicate higher values than GAPSS and
P Q P Q P Q P Q
PSOPSS. This indicates the promising relative stability of
A 1.25 0.50 2.00 0.80 0.65 0.55 1.50 0.90 CSPSS over GAPSS and PSOPSS.
B 0.90 0.30 1.80 0.60 0.45 0.35 1.20 0.80
C 1.00 0.35 1.50 0.60 0.50 0.25 1.00 0.50 5. SIMULATIONS RESULTS
In this section, the promising effectiveness of the CSPSS’s as
Table 3. Eigenvalues and damping ratio without PSS compare to GAPSS and PSOPSS over a wide range of
Base Case Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 operating conditions is illustrated. A three-phase 6-cycle fault
-0.10 ± j 8.56, -0.06 ± j 8.37, -0.77 ± j 8.32, 0.34 ± j 8.33, disturbance at 1 sec on bus 7 at the end of line 5-7 with case 3
0.011 0.007 0.09 -0.040 is considered. The fault is cleared without tripping the line.
-0.65 ± j 13.01, -0.39 ± j 2.90, -1.37 ± j 12.60, -0.10 ± j 12.80, Figs. 3–5 show the response of Δw12, Δw23 and Δw31 due to
0.049 0.030 0.108 0.008 this disturbance for case 3 (worst loading condition).

The final value of the objective function J is zero indicate

that all the electromechanical mode eigenvalues and damping
ratio have been shifted to a D-shape zone in the left half of

146
December 9-11, 2015. Delhi, India
Dhanraj Chitara et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 48-30 (2015) 143–148 147
Fig. 3. Response of w12 (rad/sec) for case 3 load
Fig. 4. Response of w23 for case 3 load
Fig. 5. Response of w31 for case 3 load
From these figures, it can be seen that CSPSS have better
performance compared to GAPSS and PSOPSS for low
frequency oscillations under wide range of different operating
conditions and severe disturbances. Moreover, two
performance indices, Integral of the Squared Time Multiplied
Error (ISTE) and Integral Squared Error (ISE) are considered
for the proposed stabilizers and that reflects the settling time
and overshoot. Both indices are given as:
147
 ( t (|  w
2
IS T E  12 |  |  w 23 |  |  w 31 |)) dt (10)
0
t
 (|  w
2
IS E  12 | |  w 23 |  |  w 31 |) dt (11)
0
where Δw12 = Δw1 - Δw2, Δw23 = Δw2 - Δw3 and Δw31 = Δw3 -
Δw1
The ISTE and ISE are calculated for case 3 loading
conditions and the results are listed in Table 8.
Table 8. Performance indices for various algorithms
Performance Indices GAPSS PSOPSS CSPSS
ISTE 0.0452 0.0380 0.0325
ISE 0.0181 0.0162 0.0146
It is clear that the performance of CSPSS controller with
lower values of ISTE and ISE shows better control than the
GAPSS and PSOPSS based control.
6. CONCLUSIONS
This paper presents the CS algorithm to design robust PSS
parameters for multimachine system to improve
simultaneously the damping factor and damping ratio of low
frequency oscillations. The tuning of PSSs parameters
problem is developed as multiobjective function based on
eigenvalues. The presented objective function shifts
simultaneously the electromechanical mode eigenvalues and
damping ratio at wide range of operating conditions to a D-
shape zone in the left half of the s-plane. The main advantage
of CS algorithm is that the number of required parameters
(pa) to be tuned is less than that of GA and PSO thus it is
potentially more generic to adapt to a wider class of
optimization problem. It is the dominant effect of CS
algorithm as compare to other meta-heuristic algorithms.
Simulation results and performance indices demonstrate the
robustness and relative stability of the CSPSS, which is
promising with GAPSS and PSOPSS over a different
operating condition to reduce low frequency oscillations.
REFERENCES
Abdel-Magid, Y.L. and Aly, G.M. (1983). Two-Level
Optimal Stabilization in Multi-Machine Power Systems.
Journal of Electric Power Systems Research, 6, 3341.
Abdel-Magid, Y.L., Abido, M.A., and Mantawy, A.H.
(2000). Robust Tuning of Power System Stabilizers in
Multimachine Power System. IEEE Transactions on
Power System, 15 (2), 735–740.
Abdel-Magid, Y.L., Abido, M.A., Al-Baiyat, S. and
Mantawy A.H. (1999). Simultaneous Stabilization of
Multimachine Power Systems via Genetic Algorithms.
IEEE Transactions on Power System, 14, 1428–1439.
Abdel-Magid, Y. L. and Abido, M. A. (2003). Optimal Multi-
Objective Design of Robust Power System Stabilizers
Using Genetic Algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Power
System, 18 (3), 1125–1132.
December 9-11, 2015. Delhi, India

148 Dhanraj Chitara et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 48-30 (2015) 143–148

Abido, M.A. (2000). Robust Design of Multimachine Power Xin-She, Y and Deb, S. (2009). Cuckoo Search via Levy
System Stabilizers Using Simulated Annealing. IEEE Flights. World Congress on Nature & Biologically
Transactions on Energy Conversions, 15(3), 297–304. Inspired Computing, NaBIC, 210–14.
Abido, M.A. (2002). Optimal Design of Power System You, R., Eghbali, H.J. and Nehrir, M.H. (2003). An Online
Stabilizers Using Particle Swarm Optimization. IEEE Adaptive Neurofuzzy Power System Stabilizer for
Transactions on Power System, 17 (3), 406–413. Multimachine Systems. IEEE Transactions on Power
Abido, M.A. and Abdel-Magid, Y.L. (2002). Optimal Design System, 18 (1), 128–135.
of Power System Stabilizer Using Evolutionary Zhou E, Z., Malik, O.P. and Hope, G.S. (1991). Theory and
Programming. IEEE Transactions Energy Conversions, Method for Selection of Power System Stabilizer
17 (4), 429–436. Location. IEEE Transaction on Energy Conversion, 6
Anderson, P.M. and Fouad, A.A. (2003). Power System (1), 170–176.
Control and Stability. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press.
Bollinger, K. E., Laha A., Hamilton R. and Harras, T. (1975). APPENDIX
PSS Design Using Root Locus Methods. IEEE
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 94 (5), The system data are as shown below:
1484–1488.
Chow, J.H. and Sanchez-Gasca, J.J. (1989). Pole-Placement Excitation system parameters: KA = 100; TA = 0.05 s.
Designs of Power System Stabilizers. IEEE Transactions The following GA parameters were used in the search:
on Power System, 4, 271–277.
DeMello, F.D. and Concordia, C. (1969). Concepts of Population size = 100; maximum number of generations =
Synchronous Machine Stability as Affected by 100; crossover probabilities = 0.75; mutation = adaptive
Excitation Control. IEEE Transactions on Power feasible.
Apparatus and Systems, 88 (2), 316–329.
Ghosh, A., Ledwich G., Malik O.P. and Hope G.S. (1984). The following PSO parameters were used in the search:
Power System Stabilizer Based on Adaptive Control Population size = 100; maximum number of generations =
Techniques. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus 100; c1 = c2 = 2; wmin = 0.4, wmax = 0.9.
and Systems, 103, 1983-1989.
Gibbard, M.J. (1991). Robust Design of Fixed-Parameter The following CS parameters were used in the search:
Power System Stabilizers over a Wide Range of
Operating Conditions. IEEE Transactions on Power Population size (n) = 100; maximum number of generations =
System, 6 (2), 794–800. 100; probability (pa) = 0.25.
Hsu, Y.Y. and Chan, W.C. (1983). Stabilization of Power
Systems Using Variable Structure Stabilizer. Journal
Electrical Power System Research, 6 (2).
Hsu, Y.Y. and Chen, C.L. (1987). Identification of Optimum
Location for Stabilizer Applications Using Participation
Factors. IEE Proceeding, Pt. C, 134 (3), 238–244.
Hsu, Y.Y. and Cheng, C.H. (1990). Design of Fuzzy Power
System Stabilizers for Multimachine Power Systems.
IEE Proceedings on Generation, Transmission,
Distribution, 137 (3), 233–238.
Hsu, Y.Y. and Chen, Chao-Rong (1991). Tuning of Power
System Stabilizer Using an Artificial Neural Network.
IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, 6 (4), 612-
618.
Kundur, P. (2011). Power System Stability and Control,
Twelfth reprint, Tata McGraw-Hill Education Pvt. Ltd.,
New Delhi, India.
Walton S., Hassan O., Morgan K. and Brown, M.R. (2011).
Modified Cuckoo Search: A New Gradient Free
Optimization, Chaos, Solutions & Fractals, 44 (9), 710-
718.
Wu, C.J. and Hsu, Y.Y. (1988). Design of Self-Tuning PID
Power System Stabilizer for Multimachine Power
Systems. IEEE Transactions on Power System, 3 (3),
1059-1064.

148