The Fourth International Conference on Control and
Automation (ICCA’03), 10-12 June 2003, Montreal, Canada
A NEW DECENTRALIZED NONLINEAR VOLTAGE CONTROLLER
FOR MULTIMACHINE POWER SYSTEMS
Chunlei Zhu Rujing Zhou
School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 639798
ABSTRACT
A new decentralized nonlinear voltage controller for multimachine
power systems is proposed in this paper. The nonlinear n-machine
power system model is first linearized and decoupled over the whole
operating region by using the direct feedback linearization (DFL)
technique. Then a decentralized nonlinear voltage controller is
developed by use of the robust control theory. Performance of the
proposed controller in a three-machine example system is simulated.
The simulation results show that both voltage regulation and system
stability enhancement can be achieved with this proposed controller
regardless of the system operating conditions.
Keywords: power system stability, voltage regulation, nonlinear
control, robust control.
1. INTRODUCTION
Voltage quality is very important for power system operation. The
generator excitation system is the most important means of voltage
control in a power system, which should maintain the generator
terminal voltage as stable as possible under normal operating
conditions and regulate it to its prefault steady value quickly and
effectively after a fault occurs [1-4]. In recent years, considerable
efforts have been devoted to the enhancement of power system
stability, but less attention has been paid to the voltage controller
design [2]. This paper concentrates on the design of a new
decentralized nonlinear voltage controller which can achieve both
voltage regulation and system stability enhancement.
Power systems are large scale nonlinear systems, but the
conventional excitation controllers are usually designed based on
the approximately linearized single-machine to infinite-bus power
system models which are dependent on given operating condition,
and may not work properly where multimachine power systems are
considered and when the operating conditions change [5].
Recently, nonlinear control theories have been employed to take
into account the nonlinearities of the controlled power systems [5-
13]. Most of the nonlinear excitation controllers are designed based
on the nonlinear feedback linearization (NFL) technique [5-12]. By
using the NFL technique, a nonlinear power system model can be
directly transformed to a system whose closed-loop dynamics are
linear over a wide operating region and thus linear control theories
0-7803-7777-X/03/$17.00 © 2003 IEEE 525
WA04-2
Youyi Wang
can be applied to this feedback linearized model to design an
effective feedback control law. Usually, the third-order feedback
linearized generator model obtained by the NFL technique is
represented by the new state vector which consists of the power
angle δ( t ) , rotor speed ω( t ) and electrical power Pe (t ) (or ω
& (t ) ).
Therefore the feedback control law developed by using linear
control theories consists of the feedback of these three variables,
and the stability enhancement of large power systems can be
guaranteed [7-12]. However, the common drawback of the existing
nonlinear excitation controllers is that the feedback of power angle
is inevitably involved in the controllers, whereas the generator
terminal voltage Vt ( t ) is not included in the feedback control law.
As described in [6], only system stability enhancement can be
achieved with the use of these nonlinear controllers, while
satisfactory voltage regulation cannot be guaranteed.
In this paper, a new control strategy is proposed to solve the voltage
regulation problem. We will first use the DFL technique [6-8], one
of the NFL approaches, to linearize and decouple a nonlinear n-
machine power system to n independent DFL compensated models
which are represented by the local generator Vt ( t ) , ω( t ) and
Pe ( t ) . Then by incorporating the robust control theory [7], we
propose a decentralized nonlinear voltage controller to achieve an
effective trade-off between voltage regulation and system stability
enhancement.
The proposed controller is applied to a three-machine example
system to test its performance. The system responses under a
symmetrical three phase short circuit fault and a step increase of the
mechanical input power of the generator are simulated. The
simulation results show that the proposed nonlinear voltage
controller can achieve both voltage regulation and system stability
enhancement.
2. DYNAMIC MODEL
The actual dynamic response of a synchronous generator in the
practical power system is very complex when a fault occurs, and is
very difficult to be dealt with in the controller design unless some
simplifications are made [3,4]. It has been pointed out in [3-5] that
the classical third-order single-axis dynamic generator model can be
used when designing the excitation controller, whereas other
differential equations, which represent the dynamic property with
very short time constants, can be neglected.
For a n-generator power system, the third-order single-axis dynamic
model of the ith generator can be written as follows (Note that the
system has already been reduced into a network retaining only
generator nodes) [3]:
Mechanical Equations:
δ& i ( t ) = ωi ( t ) − ω0 (2.1)
 Di ω0 This DFL compensated system (3.2)-(3.4) is valid over the operating
ω
& i (t ) = − ( ωi ( t ) − ω0 ) + ( Pmi − Pei ( t )) (2.2) region except when I qi ( t ) = 0 (which is not in the normal working
2Hi 2Hi
region for a generator).
Generator Electrical Dynamics
1 ′ ( t ) , I di ( t ) and I qi ( t ) can be calculated from
Remark 3.1: E qi
E& qi′ (t ) = ( E fi (t ) − Eqi (t )) (2.3)
′
Tdoi Pei ( t ) , Qei ( t ) I fi ( t ) which are all local available
and
Electrical Equations: measurements. The differentiation I&qi ( t ) can also be obtained from
E qi ( t ) = E qi
′ ( t ) + ( x di − x ′di ) I di ( t ) (2.4)
I qi ( t ) [9, 10]. Therefore, the DFL compensating law (3.1) is
E fi ( t ) = k ci u fi ( t ) (2.5)
practically realizable.
n
I qi ( t ) = ∑ E qj
′ ( t )( Bij sin δ ij ( t ) + Gij cos δ ij ( t )) (2.6) The linear LQ optimal control theory can be applied to the model
j =1 (3.2)-(3.4) to design an optimal feedback control law v fi ( t ) :
n
I di ( t ) = ∑ E qj
′ ( t )( Gij sin δ ij ( t ) − Bij cos δ ij ( t )) (2.7) v fi ( t ) = − k δi ∆δ i ( t ) − kωi ∆ωi ( t ) − k pi ∆ Pei ( t ) (3.5)
j =1
′ ( t ) I qi ( t )
Pei ( t ) = E qi (2.8) The DFL nonlinear controller (3.1) and (3.5) can achieve effective
′ ( t ) I di ( t )
Qei ( t ) = E qi (2.9) transient stability enhancement of multimachine power systems and
the performance is independent of the operating conditions [12].
Eqi ( t ) = x adi I fi ( t ) (2.10)
From (3.5) it can be seen that the equilibrium point is well defined
′ ( t ) − x ′di I di ( t )
Vtqi ( t ) = E qi (2.11)
for ωi ( t ) and Pei ( t ) (respectively, ω0 and Pmi ), but the reference
Vtdi ( t ) = x ′di I qi ( t ) (2.12) angle δ i 0 can be determined only by a full-scale load flow. This
2 2 problem places severe limit on the operation of the nonlinear
Vti ( t ) = Vtqi ( t ) + Vtdi ( t ) (2.13)
excitation controller, since any change in the system demands the
change of the steady-state power angle in order for the generator to
The symbols used in the above equations are given in Appendix.
satisfy the generator terminal voltage constraint. If δ i 0 is kept as
Remark 2.1: Since the system model considered in this paper has constant, the generator will operate at a constant power angle, while
already been reduced into a system retaining only generator nodes, the terminal voltage will become a function of the system operating
the signals ωi ( t ) , Pei ( t ) , Qei ( t ) and I fi ( t ) are the measurements conditions [9]. It can be seen from the simulation results given in
at the generator terminals. Section 5 that when such a DFL nonlinear controller is employed,
the power angle is quickly stabilized to its prefault steady value, but
Remark 2.2: In the case that several generating units are connected satisfactory voltage regulation cannot be achieved when there is a
to a bus terminal, this common bus is also eliminated to guarantee permanent change in the system. This performance is unacceptable
that only generator nodes are retained in the final system model. in practice operations.

3. EXISTING NONLINEAR EXCITATION CONTROLLERS 4. THE NEW DECENTRALIZED NONLINEAR VOLTAGE

AND THEIR VOLTAGE PROBLEM CONTROLLER DESIGN
From the model given in Section 2, it can be found that the It is well known that the generator terminal voltage Vti ( t ) is easy
synchronous generator is nonlinear through the excitation loop. to measure and the equilibrium point for Vti ( t ) is well defined. The
Employing the DFL technique and choosing the DFL compensating
law as [12]: operating point of a third-order synchronous generator can be
1 defined uniquely by Vti ( t ) , ωi ( t ) and Pei ( t ) . Furthermore,
u fi ( t ) = ( v fi ( t ) − Td′ 0i E qi′ ( t ) I&qi ( t ) satisfactory voltage regulation can be expected by the feedback
k ci I qi ( t ) control of Vti ( t ) , and the system stability enhancement can be
1 guaranteed by the feedback control of ωi ( t ) and Pei ( t ) .
+ Pmi ) + ( x di − x ′di ) I di ( t ) (3.1)
Therefore, if a DFL compensated model can be represented
k ci
by Vti ( t ) , ωi ( t ) and Pei ( t ) , an effective feedback control law
the nonlinear generator model (2.1)-(2.3) can be linearized and
decoupled as follows: v fi ( t ) = − k vi ∆Vti ( t ) − kωi ∆ωi ( t ) − k pi ∆ Pei ( t ) (4.1)
∆δ& i ( t ) = ∆ωi ( t ) (3.2) can be developed to simultaneously solve the control problems of
system stability enhancement and voltage regulation.
Di ω0
∆ω
& i (t ) = − ∆ωi (t ) − ∆Pei (t ) (3.3) To develop a new DFL control law (4.1), we rewrite (2.13)
2 Hi 2 Hi
1 1 n
∆P&ei ( t ) = − ∆Pei ( t ) + v (t ) (3.4) ′ ( t ) − x ′di ∑ E qj
Vti ( t ) = {[ E qi ′ ( t )( Gij sin δ ij ( t ) − Bij cos δ ij ( t ))] 2
Td′ 0i Td′ 0i fi j =1
n
where: v fi ( t ) is the new input. +[ x ′di ∑ E qj
2 1/ 2
′ ( t )( Gij cos δ ij ( t ) + Bij sin δ ij ( t ))] }
j =1

526
 ′ ( t ), δ j ( t ), E qj
= f ( δ i ( t ), E qi ′ ( t )) ( j ≠ i ) (4.2) From equations (4.6)-(4.7), it can be found that f i1 ( t ) and f i2 ( t )
are dependent on the operating conditions, but bounded within a
To simplify the analysis, we make the following assumption: certain operating region:
As in [13], when we consider the ith generator, we assume that f i1min ≤ f i1 ( t ) ≤ f i1max , f i 2 min ≤ f i 2 ( t ) ≤ f i 2 max
′ ( t ) are constant and neglect the effect of ω j ( t ) ( where
E qj
j ∈ {1, 2, K, i -1, i + 1, K, n}). After the bounds of f i1 ( t ) and f i2 ( t ) have been obtained, the DFL
compensated system (4.9) can be rewritten as follows:
Then we get from (4.2) T
X& i ( t ) = ( Ai + ∆Ai ) X i ( t ) + ( Bi + ∆Bi )ui ( t ) = ( Ai + ri1 ( t )Gi E i1
∂V (t ) ∂V (t ) & T
V&ti (t ) ≈ ti δ& i (t ) + ti E qi′ (t ) (4.3) + ri 2 ( t )Gi E i 2 ) X i ( t ) + ( Bi + ri 2 ( t )Gi Fi T )ui ( t ) (4.10)
∂δ i (t ) ∂E qi′ (t ) where:
 f i2 
From (2.8) and the above assumption we also have
0 f i1 − 
∂P (t ) ∂P (t ) &  Td′ 0 i 
P&ei (t ) ≈ ei δ& i (t ) + ei E qi′ (t ) (4.4)  Di ω   f 1 
∂δ i (t ) ∂E qi′ (t ) Ai =  0 − − 0  Bi =  i 2 0 
'
Combining (4.3) and (4.4), with considering the facts that  2 Hi 2 Hi   Td′ 0 i Td 0 i 
 1 
Bii >> Gii , I qi ( t ) >> E qi′ ( t ) Gii 0 0 − ' 
we have
 Td 0 i 
V&ti ( t ) ≈ f i1 ( t ) ∆ωi ( t ) + f i 2 ( t ) P&ei ( t ) (4.5) T
f i 2 max − f i 2
E i1 = [0 f i1max − f i1 0] Fi =
with Td′ 0 i
2
′ Bii )[ − E qi′ ( t ) Bii − Qi ( t )]Vtqi ( t )
(1 + xdi T
f i1 ( t ) ≈ −  f i 2 max − f i 2  T
Vti ( t ) I qi ( t ) Ei2 =  0 0 −  Gi = [1 0 0]
 ′
Td 0 i 
x ′di (1 + x ′di Bii ) Pei ( t )
− (4.6) f ( t ) − f i1 f (t ) − f i2
Vti ( t ) ri1 ( t ) = i1 ri 2 ( t ) = i 2
′ Bii )Vtqi ( t ) f i1max − f i1 f i 2 max − f i 2
(1 + xdi
f i 2 (t ) ≈ (4.7)
Vti ( t ) I qi ( t ) X i (t) and ui ( t ) are the same as in equation (4.9). f i1 and f i2
are the averaging values of f i1 ( t ) and f i 2 ( t )
Employing the DFL compensating law (3.7), we get from (4.5):
To solve the robust control problem for the uncertain DFL
f i 2 (t ) f i 2 (t ) compensated model (4.10) involves solving the following Riccati
∆V&ti ( t ) ≈ f i 1 ( t ) ∆ωi ( t ) − ∆Pei ( t ) + v fi ( t ) (4.8)
Td′ 0i Td′ 0i equation [7]:
T T
Selecting X i ( t ) = [∆Vti ( t ), ∆ωi ( t ), ∆Pei ( t )] as the new vector,
T Pi ( Ai − λ i 2 Bi Ri −1 Fi E i 2 ) + ( Ai − λ i 2 Bi Ri −1 Fi E i T2 ) Pi
the DFL-compensated model can be written as follows: 1 1 λi2
+ Pi ( Gi Gi T + Gi Gi T + Bi Ri −1 Fi Fi T Ri −1 Bi T
X& i ( t ) = Ai X i ( t ) + Bi ui ( t ) (4.9) λ i1 λi2εi εi
Where: 2 T T
 f i 2 (t )  − Bi Ri −1 Bi T ) Pi + λ i1 E i1 E i1 + λ i 2 ε i E i 2 E i 2 + Qi = 0 (4.11)
0 f i1 ( t ) −  εi
 Td′ 0i 
 If there exists a stabilizing solution Pi > 0 to the Riccati equation
Di ω0 
Ai =  0 − −  (4.11), a stabilizing feedback control law (4.1) can be obtained from
 2 Hi 2 Hi  1 −1 T
 1  ui ( t ) = v fi ( t ) = − Ri Bi Pi X i ( t ) (4.12)
− εi
0 0 
 Td′ 0i  Since the system stability enhancement and voltage regulation are
 f (t ) considered simultaneously in the controller design, the successful
i2 1  achievement of both goals can be guaranteed.
Bi =  0  ui ( t ) = v fi ( t )
 Td′ 0i Td′ 0i  Here, we summarise the proposed design procedure as follows:
A new DFL compensated system which is represented by the vector (1) The DFL compensating law (3.1) and the DFL compensated
T model (4.9) are developed.
[∆Vti ( t ), ∆ωi ( t ), ∆Pei ( t )] has now been developed. Since the
uncertain f i1 ( t ) and f i2 ( t ) are involved, the robust control theory (2) The bounds of f i1 ( t ) and f i 2 ( t ) are estimated.
[7] will be applied to find the feedback control gain of (4.1).

527
(3) Adequate parameters λ i1 , λ i 2 , ε i , Ri and Qi are chosen and
the Riccati equation (4.11) is solved to get a stabilizing solution
Pi > 0 , as shown in [7].
(4) The feedback control law (4.1) is obtained from equation (4.12)
to form the proposed decentralized nonlinear voltage controller,
(3.1) with (4.1),
5. SIMULATION RESULTS
To simplify the simulation, a three-machine power system model,
which is shown in Figure 5.1, is chosen to demonstrate the
efficiency of the proposed controller.
#1
DFL nonlinear controller. Select Q1 = Q2 = diag ( 500,100,20 )
and R1 = R2 = 1 , we have the DFL feedback control laws:
v f 1 ( t ) = 22.4∆δ1 ( t ) + 12.8∆ω1 ( t ) − 82.5∆Pe1 ( t ) (5.1)
v f 2 ( t ) = 22.4∆δ 2 ( t ) + 14.2∆ω2 ( t ) − 82.6∆Pe 2 ( t ) (5.2)
From the design procedure proposed in Section 4, the uncertainty
bounds of f i1 ( t ) and f i 2 ( t ) should be estimated to design the
proposed controller. In this research, the change of network
structure is also taken into account when we estimate the uncertainty
ranges of f i1 ( t ) and f i 2 ( t ) and a bound of Bii is used to estimate
the uncertainty of the system structure:
Bii = (1 + α i ) Bii 0
#2 where: Bii 0 is the value of Bii at a certain steady operating
condition. α i is a proportional parameter.

In this paper, the following operating region are considered:

2x12 −30% ≤ α i ≤ 30% , 0.2 ≤ I qi ( t ) ≤ 1.0 , . ≤ Pei ( t ) ≤ 1.2 ,
01
0 0
′ ( t ) ≤ 13
−0.2 ≤ Qei (t ) ≤ 1.0 , 0.8 ≤ Eqi . , 5 ≤ δ qti ( t ) ≤ 45 ,
2x12
x13 0.8 ≤ Vti ( t ) ≤ 11
. ( u fi ( t ) usually reaches limit when Vti ( t ) <0.8)
x23
Then the bounds of f i1 ( t ) and f i 2 ( t ) can be found as:
-3.526 ≤ f11 ( t ) ≤ -0.259, 0.266 ≤ f12 ( δ, Pe ) ≤ 3.794
-2.832 ≤ f 21 ( t ) ≤ -0.233, 0.241 ≤ f 22 ( δ, Pe ) ≤ 3.670
#3
Figure 5.1 Three-machine example system Following the design procedure given in Section 4, the robust
feedback control laws are obtained as:
The system parameters are as follows: v f 1 ( t ) = −31.4∆Vt1 ( t ) + 13.7∆ω1 ( t ) − 49.7∆Pe1 ( t ) (5.3)
x d 1 = 1863
. p.u., x d′ 1 = 0.657 p.u., x T 1 = 0.129 p.u., v f 2 ( t ) = −32.6∆Vt 2 ( t ) + 13.5∆ω2 ( t ) − 51.7∆Pe 2 ( t ) (5.4)
Td′01 = 6.9 sec., H1 = 4.0 sec., D1 = 5.0 p.u.,
k c1 = 1.0 p.u., x ad1 = 1.712 p.u., ω0 = 314.159 rad/sec., In the simulation, two types of controllers, the decentralized
nonlinear controller proposed in this paper and the DFL nonlinear
x d 2 = 2.36 p.u., x d′ 2 = 0.719 p.u., xT 2 = 0.127 p.u., controller are tested separately. The following two different cases
Td′02 = 7.96 sec., H2 = 5.1 sec., D1 = 3.0 p.u., are considered.
kc 2 = 1.0 p.u., x ad 2 = 1.712 p.u., x12 = 0.7 p.u., Case 1. Permanent serious fault
x13 = 0.93 p.u., x23 = 0.9 p.u. A symmetrical three phase short circuit fault occurs on one of the
transmission lines between Generator #1 and Generator #2 at t=0.1
In order to evaluate the performance of the proposed controller more second, the fault is removed by opening the breaker of the faulted
accurately, the physical limit of the excitation voltage and the line at t=0.25 second and the system is in a postfault state. We use λ
saturation effect of the synchronous generator are also considered in to represent the fraction of the fault. If λ=0, the fault is at Generator
the simulation. The physical limits of the excitation voltage #1’s bus. λ=0.5 puts the fault in the middle of the line, and so on.
considered in the simulation are:
 k c1u f 1≤6.0 p.u.,  kc 2 u f 2 ≤6.0 p.u. Case 2. Step increase of the mechanical input power
The mechanical input power of the generator #1 has a 0.15 p.u. step
When the saturation effect of the synchronous generator is taken increase at t=0.1 second.
into account, the equation (3) can be rewritten as [14]: Two different operating points are also considered in the simulation:
1
E& qi′ ( t ) = ′ ) I di ( t ) − k fi E qi′ ( t ))
( E fi ( t ) − ( xdi − xdi (1) Operating point 1: δ10 = 47.30 , Vt10 = 1.0 , Pm10 = 0.4 ;
Td′ 0i . 0 , Vt 20 = 1.0 2, Pm20 = 0.8 .
δ 20 = 671
bi
where k fi = 1 + ( E qi′ ( t ))
ni −1 . 0,
(2) Operating point 2: δ10 = 721 Vt10 = 1.0 2, Pm10 = 0.85 ;
ai 0
δ 20 = 57.3 , Vt 20 = 1.0 , Pm20 = 0.5 .
The saturation parameters are chosen as
a1 = a 2 =0.95, b1 = b2 =0.051, n1 = n 2 =8.727 The simulation results are shown in Figure 5.2 and Figure 5.3.

In order to compare the proposed controller with the DFL nonlinear

controller, we first use the LQ optimal control theory to design a

528
 Generator #1 Generator #2 Generator #1 Generator #2
(a) Power angle (in degree) responses (Operating point 1) (b) Terminal voltage (in p.u.) responses (Operating point 1)

Generator #1 Generator #2 Generator #1 Generator #2

(b) Terminal voltage (in p.u.) responses (Operating point 1) (c) Power angle (in degree) responses (Operating point 2)

Generator #1 Generator #2
Generator #1 Generator #2
(c) Power angle (in degree) responses (Operating point 2)
(d) Terminal voltage (in p.u.) responses (Operating point 2)
Figure 5.3 System responses for mechanical
input power step increase
: Proposed controller : DFL controller

The simulation results when the fault in located in the middle of the
line (λ=0.50) have been given in Figure 5.2. Here we also test the
ability of the proposed controller to maintain the system transient
stability at different fault location. The simulation results are shown
Generator #1 Generator #2 in Figure 5.4
(d) Terminal voltage (in p.u.) responses (Operating point 2)
Figure 5.2 System responses for a permanent fault (λ=0.50)
: Proposed controller : DFL controller

Generator #1 Generator #2
Figure 5.4 Power angle (in degree) responses for a permanent fault
: λ=0.20 : λ=0.80

Generator #1 Generator #2
(a) Power angle (in degree) responses (Operating point 1) It can be concluded from the simulation results that
(1) The DFL nonlinear controller can achieve excellent system
stability enhancement and the performance is independent of the

529
operating points. However, the voltage regulation can not be
achieved when there is a permanent change in the system operating
conditions, as shown in Figure 5.2 and Figure 5.3.
(2) The proposed controller can improve the system stability
effectively and regulate the generator terminal voltage to its prefault
value quickly at the same time, regardless of the operating points
and fault conditions, as shown in Figure 5.2 and Figure 5.4. When
there is a step change in the mechanical input power, the proposed
controller can also achieve effective voltage regulation, as shown in
Figure 5.3
6. CONCLUSION
This paper proposes a new decentralized nonlinear voltage
controller for multimachine power systems to achieve both voltage
regulation and system stability enhancement. For the ith generator
in a n-machine power system, a new DFL compensated model with
uncertainties which is represented by the local measurements
T [13] Q. Lu and Y. Z. Sun, “Nonlinear Stabilizing Controller of
[∆Vti ( t ), ∆ωi ( t ), ∆Pei ( t )]
has been developed and the design
procedure of the proposed controller has been given. The proposed
nonlinear controller is practically realizable since it uses only local
measurements which are easy to measure.
The performance of the proposed controller has been tested through
simulation in different cases. The simulation results show that the
proposed controller can achieve system stability enhancement and
voltage regulation simultaneously regardless of the system operating
points and fault conditions.
REFERENCES
[1] P. Kundur, “Power System Stability and Control”, McGraw-
Hill, Inc., 1994.
[2] K.T. Law, D.J. Hill and N.R. Godfrey, “Robust Controller
Structure for Coordinated Power System Voltage Regulator
and Stabilizer Design”, IEEE Trans. on Control Systems
Technology, Vol. 2, No. 3, 1994, pp. 220-232.
[3] Y.N. Yu, “Electric Power System Dynamics”, Academic Press,
1983.
[4] P.M. Anderson and A.A. Fouad, “Power System Control and
Stability”, IEEE Press, 1994.
[5] Y.J. Cao, L. Jiang, S.J. Cheng, D.D. Chen, O.P. Malik and
G.S. Hope, “A Nonlinear Variable Structure Stabilizer for
Power System Stability”, IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion,
Vol.9, No. 3, 1994, pp. 489-495.
[6] Y.Y. Wang, D.J. Hill, L. Gao and R.H. Middleton, “Transient
Stability Enhancement and Voltage Regulation of Power
System”, IEEE trans. on Power systems, PWRS-8, No.2, 1993,
pp. 620-627.
[7] Y.Y. Wang, L.H. Xie, D.J. Hill and R.H. Middleton, “Robust
Nonlinear Controller Design For Transient Stability
Enhancement of Power Systems”, Proc. 31st Conf. Dec.
Control, 1992, pp. 1117-1122.
[8] L. Gao, L. Chen, Y.S. Fan and H.W. Ma, “A Nonlinear Control
Design for Power Systems”, Automatica, Vol.28, No.5, 1992,
pp. 975-979.
530
[9] J.W. Chapman, M.D. Ilic, C.A. King, L. Eng and H.
Kaufman, “Stabilizing a Multimachine Power System via
Decentralized Feedback Linearizing Excitation Control”,
IEEE Trans. on Power system, Vol. 8, No. 3, 1993, pp. 830-
839.
[10] F.K. Mak, “Design of Nonlinear Generator Exciters Using
Differential Geometric Control Theories”, Proc. 31st Conf.
Dec. Control, 1992, pp. 1149-1153.
[11] M. D. Ilic, X. Liu and J. W. Chapman, “Control of the
Interarea Dynamics Using FACTS Technologies in Large
Electric Power Systems”, Proc. of IEEE Conf. on Decision
and Control, San Antonio, TX, 1993, pp. 2370-2379.
[12] Y.Y. Wang, G.X. Guo, D.J. Hill and L. Gao, “Nonlinear
Decentralized Control for Multimachine Power System
Transient Stability Enhancement”, Proc. Int. Sys. on Electric
Power Eng., Stockholm, Sweden, 1995.
Multimachine Systems”, IEEE Trans. on Power systems,
PWRS-4, 1989, pp. 236-241.
[14] J. Arrillaga and C. P. Arnold, “Computer Analysis of Power
Systems”, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 1990.
APPENDIX
δ i ( t ) : power angle, in radian; ωi (t ) : rotor speed, in radian/second;
ω0 : synchronous machine speed, in radian/second; Pmi : mechanical
input power, in p.u.; Pei (t ) : active electrical power, in p.u; Di :
damping constant, in p.u; Hi : inertia constant, in second; E qi ′ (t ) :
transient EMF in the q- axis, in p.u; E qi ( t ) : EMF in the q- axis, in
p.u; E fi ( t ) : equivalent EMF in excitation coil, in p.u; Td′ 0i : d- axis
transient short circuit time constant, in second; I fi ( t ) : excitation
current, in p.u; I qi ( t ) : q- axis current, in p.u; I di ( t ) : d- axis
current, in p.u; Qei ( t) : reactive electrical power, in p.u; Vti ( t ) :
generator terminal voltage, in p.u; kci : gain of generator excitation
amplifier, in p.u; u fi ( t ) : input of the SCR amplifier, in p.u; x di : d-
axis reactance, in p.u; x ′di : d- axis transient reactance, in p.u;
x adi : mutual reactance between the excitation coil and the stator
coil, in p.u; Yij = Gij + jBij : the ith row and jth column element of
nodal admittance matrix, in p.u; δ qti ( t ) : the phase angle difference
′ ( t ) and Vti ( t ) , in radian; Ri : a symmetrical positive
between E qi
definite matrix; Qi : a positive definite matrix; ε i > 0, λ i1 > 0 ,
λ i2 > 0 ; ∆δ i ( t ) = δ i ( t ) − δ i 0 ; ∆ωi ( t ) = ωi ( t ) − ω 0 ;
∆Pei ( t ) = Pei ( t ) − Pmi ; ∆Vti ( t ) = Vti ( t ) − Vti 0 .
Note: the subscript i means the ith generator.