1186

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 26, NO. 3, AUGUST 2011

A Nonlinear Voltage Regulator With One Tunable Parameter for Multimachine Power Systems
Gurunath Gurrala, Graduate Student Member, IEEE, and Indraneel Sen
AbstractThis paper proposes a nonlinear voltage regulator with one tunable parameter for multimachine power systems. Based on output feedback linearization, this regulator can achieve simultaneous voltage regulation and small-signal performance objectives. Conventionally output feedback linearization has been used for voltage regulator design by taking innite bus voltage as reference. Unfortunately, this controller has poor small-signal performance and cannot be applied to multimachine systems without the estimation of the equivalent external reactance seen from the generator. This paper proposes a voltage regulator design by redening the rotor angle at each generator with respect to the secondary voltage of the step-up transformer as reference instead of a common synchronously rotating reference frame. Using synchronizing and damping torques analysis, we show that the proposed voltage regulator achieves simultaneous voltage regulation and damping performance over a range of system and operating conditions by controlling the relative angle between the generator internal voltage angle and the secondary voltage of the step up transformer. The performance of the proposed voltage regulator is evaluated on a single machine innite bus system and two widely used multimachine test systems. Index TermsFeedback linearization, power system stabilizers, small-signal stability, transient stability.

d, q-axis components of stator current. d, q-axis open circuit time constants. d, q-axis reactances. Field voltage. Voltage measured at the generator terminal. Voltage measured at the secondary of the transformer. Reference voltage. PSS input. Armature resistance. Transformer and transmission line reactances. d, q-axis components of terminal voltage. Gain and time constants of static excitation system. Inertia constant of machine. Power factor at the transformer bus. Real and reactive powers at machine and transformer secondary terminals. PSS AVR FBL SMIB GEN, SYS Power system stabilizer. Automatic voltage regulator. Feedback linearization. Single machine innite bus system. Generator, system. I. INTRODUCTION RADITIONALLY, the automatic voltage regulator (AVR) and power system stabilizer (PSS) have been designed separately using the linearized models of power system. The AVR tries to modulate reactive power and PSS tries to modulate real power, since both strategies are executed through eld voltage, simultaneous achievement of both goals is not possible [1], [2]. The linearized models on which the controllers are based depend upon the system operating condition. Any significant deviation from this nominal operating condition can considerably degrade the performance of the controllers. In order to overcome these difculties, feedback linearization (FBL) technique has been widely used for generator excitation system design [3][9]. Most of the nonlinear control

NOMENCLATURE Rotor angle (in electrical radians). Rotor (electrical) speed, corresponding to the time derivative of . Rotor angle with respect to the secondary voltage of the transformer. Slip speed .

w.r.t. center of inertia (COI) . w.r.t. center of inertia . Mechanical and electrical torques. Damping coefcient. Transient induced voltages due to eld ux-linkages.
Manuscript received December 25, 2009; revised January 01, 2010, January 05, 2010, April 09, 2010, and July 02, 2010; accepted July 20, 2010. Date of publication October 14, 2010; date of current version July 22, 2011. Paper no. TPWRS-01007-2009. The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012, India (e-mail: gurunath@ee.iisc.ernet.in; sen@ee.iisc.ernet.in). Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TPWRS.2010.2069930

0885-8950/$26.00 2010 IEEE

GURRALA AND SEN: NONLINEAR VOLTAGE REGULATOR WITH ONE TUNABLE PARAMETER

1187

designs based on FBL have formulated the excitation control problem as a regulator problem and terminal voltage regulation was not considered in the design objective. As this formulation results in poor voltage regulation [2], [8], [10], [11], researchers have proposed several alternative methods for voltage regulation in addition to FBL, such as using observed decoupled state space, switching an additional controller after the fault, etc. [2], [5][8], [11][14]. Most of these controllers require complete system information for the design, and at least two variables need to be tuned for better performance. It is always desirable to have a single controller with minimum tunable parameters that can simultaneously achieve better terminal voltage regulation and good small signal performance. The rst attempt in this direction was made in [10]. Unfortunately, this controller has poor small-signal performance and cannot be applied to multimachine systems without the estimation of equivalent external reactance seen from the generator terminals. In [15], a power system stabilizer based on feedback linearization has been proposed by taking secondary voltage of the step up transformer as reference instead of the innite bus voltage. This PSS tries to control the oscillations by controlling , the angle between generator internal the angle , and secondary voltage of the step up transformer voltage . This work has been patented [16] with hardware implementation details. In [17], this concept has been used for developing xed parameter power system stabilizers for multimachine systems. In this paper, a nonlinear voltage regulator design for multimachine systems has been proposed by taking the secondary voltage of the step-up transformer (high-voltage bus) as reference [16], [17] instead of a common synchronously rotating reference frame [innite bus voltage in the case of single machine innite bus system (SMIB)]. Using the concepts of synchronizing and damping torques, it has been shown that the tuning parameter of the proposed controller can be varied in a wide range as opposed to the controller in [10] which allows effective tradeoff between the voltage regulation and small-signal performance objectives. The performance of the proposed voltage regulator has been evaluated on an SMIB test system and two most widely used multimachine test systems, IEEE ten-generator 39-bus system and IEEE 16-generator 59-bus system over a wide range of operating conditions. II. PROPOSED APPROACH In this paper, a generator connected to an external power system through a step-up transformer as shown in Fig. 1 has been considered for the nonlinear AVR design [15], [17]. In the present design, IEEE Model 1.0 [18], [19] is used to represent the synchronous generator. This results in a third-order dynamic model for a power system. The use of third-order model is justied as it sufciently represents the essential dynamics of the

system. In systems equipped with static excitation systems, the complexity of higher order models is largely due to the presence of amortisseur windings which always contribute to positive damping. The adequacy of third-order model has been experimentally veried recently in [20] and a large number of nonlinear excitation controllers are designed based on this model [17], [21]. The generator rotor angle with respect to the secondary of the transformer is dened as . voltage are given below [17]. Subscript The expressions for refers to the th machine in a multimachine environment:

(1) where power factor angle at the high-voltage bus: and is

(2) The expressions for and are as follows:

(3) where

Now the expression for terminal voltage is given by (4) at the bottom of the page. The variables have standard meaning as indicated in the nomenclature. We use input-output feedback linearization to derive the nonlinear control law for the eld voltage. For a with output , control afne system the basic approach of the input-output feedback linearization is to differentiate the output function repeatedly until the input appears and then design to cancel the nonlinearity. The number of differentiations required for the input to appear is called the relative degree of the system. Dening the tracking

(4)

1188

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 26, NO. 3, AUGUST 2011

Solving the error dynamics equation, one can get the nonlinear as given in the folcontrol law from (5) for eld voltage lowing:

(8) The subscript 0 indicates initial operating condition. The proposed control structure has been shown in Fig. 1. The control law tries to control instead of . The proposed controller can assess the system disturbances such as changes in system concomguration or load variations based on the deviations in puted from the power ow and voltage at the high-voltage bus of the step-up transformer [15], [17]. In general, it is very difin the eld. However, cult to get the measurements of and the proposed approach enables us to realize the control law in multimachine environment by computing (1)(3) from and measurements at the high-voltage bus of each machine. This makes the control law decentralized. Usage of (1) and (2) for power system control applications has been patented [16]. The conventional nonlinear AVR proposed in [10] and the proposed AVR have the same control format except that the and the later is a function of former is a function of . The proposed controller has shown much better performance than the conventional nonlinear AVR and the linear controller. In the following section, the concepts of synchronizing and damping torques have been used to understand the reason for better performance of the proposed controller. III. ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED NONLINEAR AVR To understand the small-signal behavior of the proposed nonlinear AVR at different operating conditions, the control law (8) is linearized using the conventional Taylor series approximation. The analysis is performed for SMIB system (subscript i is dropped). Linearization of (8) gives (6)

Fig. 1. Generator connected to external network through a step-up transformer and proposed control structure.

error as , where is the desired output, a can be chosen such that the error xed gain parameter as . Solving the error dynamics dynamics equation gives the nonlinear control law as

(5) Derivatives of the output (4) are taken successively until the control input appears in the equation. In this case, relative degree is one. Taking derivative of (4), we get

Equation (6) can be written in control afne form as (9) (7) Here the output to be tracked is the steady-state terminal voltage (the reference voltage). So the tracking error is dened as . Following assumptions are made in the design. is replaced with . This 1) is to enable a damping torque component to be produced on the rotor. . This assumption is to avoid singularity in the 2) nonlinear control law during sudden changes in terminal voltage. In implementing the nonlinear control law (8), terminal voltage is obtained from the measurements at the generator terminals, so the linearized equation of is (10) (11) (12)

GURRALA AND SEN: NONLINEAR VOLTAGE REGULATOR WITH ONE TUNABLE PARAMETER

1189

While linearizing , it is considered as a function of and . While linearizing , we consider and as state varias a variable quantity. So linearizing given in ables and (3) results in

(13) It can be observed that an additional term expression to account for the variations in and : constants are functions of also comes in the and the respective

(14)
Fig. 2. Proposed feedback linearization based AVR.

substituting (10) and (13) in (9) and rearranging the terms, one and can arrive at (15) where . This equation can be rewritten as (15) and (16) at the bottom of the page. Fig. 2 shows the block diagram representation of (16). From the block diagram, the proposed controller can be interpreted , fast exciter with negligible delay. It has as a high gain four components negatively affecting the torque angle loop, two and relative components due to the deviations in rotor angle rotor angle denoted by and , respectively. One comdenoted by ponent due to the deviations in ux linkages and one component denoted by due to the deviations in . and are voltage magnitude of the high-voltage bus standard Heffron Phillips model parameters [23]. It also confrom the deviations in slip tains an additional component as shown with dashed circle in Fig. 2. This compospeed contributes positively to the torque angle loop just like nent a power system stabilizer. In case of a conventional FBLAVR and are contributed by and the com,the components is zero as is constant. ponent and have difFor simplifying the analysis, though ferent magnitudes, one can combine the effect of these com. This does not affect the ponents by taking

synchronizing and damping torques analysis as and are in-phase quantities. and are plotted by Variations of parameters from 0.5 p.u. to 1.1 p.u. for various varying generator power . The terminal voltage is xed at 1 p.u. Figs. 3 values of and , respectively, and 4 show the variations of of the proposed controller is xed at 20 so with . Gain that the variation of and is almost the same as that of the and . Observe that and are linear AVR parameters and on the other hand can be positive or always positive. negative (see Fig. 3). Here the negative damping contribution of has to be compensated by the component for damping. These plots for conventional FBLAVR are not shown due to space limitations; however, they are observed to be more or less identical to that of the proposed FBLAVR. with for different values Fig. 5 shows the variation of . Solid lines show the variations for the proposed nonof linear AVR. Dashed lines show the variation for the conventional nonlinear AVR. It can be seen that the damping component of conventional FBLAVR reduces signicantly with inand with increase in system crease in external impedance

(15) (16)

1190

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 26, NO. 3, AUGUST 2011

Fig. 3. Variation of

G ;K

with

for various values of

X.

Fig. 5. Variation of FBLAVR.

with

of proposed FBLAVR and conventional

A. Synchronizing and Damping Torques Analysis The component of electrical torque produced by voltage regcan be ulator action due to variations in rotor angle through expressed as [26]

(17)

Fig. 4. Variation of

G ;K

with

for various values of

X.

can be treated as the torque that The rst component would have been produced by a static AVR with a gain equal and low time constant. The second component to can be considered as the torque produced by due to the non(complex eigenlinear AVR action. Substituting value corresponding to the rotor mode of system matrix that , one can obcan be easily obtained) and tain the following expressions for synchronizing and damping torque coefcients [26]:

loading. However, the damping term contribution of the proposed AVR is more or less constant with increase in loading as well as system external reactance. The proposed controller, therefore, offers good damping performance over a wide range of operating and system conditions. It has been observed that for in the range of 0.2 p.u. to 0.8 p.u., lies between 620 and 950. Higher values of gain give higher synchronizing torque and better voltage regulation but at the expense of damping , which represents the torque [23]. It has been observed that effect of variation in the magnitude of the voltage of the transformer bus, varies between 5e-4 to 13e-4. It means that the variation in voltage magnitude of the high-voltage bus on system dynamic performance is not of much signicance. Neglecting variation while deriving the proposed control law (assumption 2) is thus justied.

(18)

(19) Total synchronizing torque coefcient can be obtained by adding to (18). Figs. 6 and 7 show the variation of total synchronizing and and with for various damping torque coefcients

GURRALA AND SEN: NONLINEAR VOLTAGE REGULATOR WITH ONE TUNABLE PARAMETER

1191

Fig. 6.

of proposed FBLAVR and conventional FBLAVR.

Fig. 8. Variation of damping factor  , proposed FBLAVR.

can be case of proposed FBLAVR, the tuning parameter varied in a wider range than the conventional nonlinear AVR , the damping factor is 0.17786 for because even at p.u., which is quite acceptable for power systems. This allows an effective trade-off between voltage regulation and damping improvement. IV. SIMULATION RESULTS A. SMIB System The performance of the proposed AVR (8) has been extensively evaluated on a SMIB system studied in [23]. Data for the steam input SMIB given in [23] have been used here. Several operating conditions are created to test the performance of the from 0.2 p.u. to 0.8 proposed voltage regulator by varying from 0.5 p.u. to 1 p.u. by keeping and conp.u. and stant at 1 p.u. Results of only a few representative test cases are shown here. Figs. 9 and 10 show the terminal voltage and the eld voltage responses of the nominal SMIB system ( p.u., p.u., p.u.) for a 0.1 p.u. step change in . The system is operated with 1) nonlinear AVR proposed in , 2) static [10] (conventional FBLAVR), (linear ), and 3) proposed nonlinear AVR (proposed FBLAVR or FBLAVR), . The system is unstable with linear AVR alone. The system becomes stable with all the three controllers. It can be observed that the performance of the proand the posed controller is comparable to the linear conventional nonlinear AVR. Observe that all the controllers are able to track the reference voltage perfectly. In Fig. 10, observe that the control effort due to the proposed voltage regulator is . similar to that of the linear It has been observed in simulations that if assumption 1 is not considered, then the performance of the proposed controller is exactly the same as the conventional nonlinear AVR. Assumption 1 is very crucial in this design as this enables the proposed AVR to achieve good small signal performance. Fig. 11 shows the responses of the SMIB with the same confault cleared after two cycles ditions as above, following a by tripping one of the parallel lines. After the fault is cleared, the system becomes weak with an equivalent external reactance

Fig. 7.

of proposed FBLAVR and conventional FBLAVR.

values of . It can be observed that the variation of the proposed AVR is the same as that of a conventional nonlinear . decreases with increase in AVR except for for both controllers; however, for the proposed AVR, the is always positive and much higher than that of the conventional over the entire range of operating condiFBLAVR. Positive tions accounts for the better performance of the proposed nonlinear AVR. Now we analyze the damping factor obtained from the total and using the following expression [26]: (20) Fig. 8 shows the comparison of with increase in for the proposed FBLAVR and the conventional FBLAVR. Observe that , the variation in for both the controllers at every value of at damping factor has an inverted v-shape. The value of which maximum damping occurs decreases with increase in . Observe that variation with the proposed AVR is always posoccurs at itive. The maximum damping factor for the nominal operating condition ( p.u., p.u., and p.u.). This is much of conventional FBLAVR. In the higher than

1192

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 26, NO. 3, AUGUST 2011

Fig. 9.

response, 10% step change in V

Fig. 12. SYS.

of GEN-9 for a 0.02 p.u. step change in V

at GEN-9, 10 GEN

Fig. 10.

response, 10% step change in V

Fig. 11.

 response, 3 fault at transformer bus, cleared by line tripping.

. The system is more oscillatory with conventional nonlinear AVR. The performance of the proposed AVR is better . than the performance of the linear B. Ten-Generator 39-Bus System This is a most widely used test system, for validating control designs. The data for the system are taken from [19]. Though

the controller is developed for third-order model, here the simulations are carried out using IEEE model 1.1 [18] neglecting transient saliency. All the static excitation systems of the tengenerator (GEN) system except GEN-2, which is an equivalent representation of external network, are replaced with the proposed nonlinear AVR. The performance of the proposed nonlinear AVR is compared with the performance of the system equipped with linear AVR+PSS at varied operating conditions. is selected such that the terminal voltage response of each generator for a 0.02 p.u. is within % of the nal value [24]. Simstep change in ulation results of a few test cases are shown in this section. Fig. 12 shows terminal voltage responses of GEN-9 with input the proposed AVR for a 0.02 p.u. step change in of GEN-9. The gure also contains the responses obtained with a linear AVR and linear AVR+PSS. It can be observed that the system is unstable with the linear AVR alone. The response with the proposed AVR is comparable to that of the performance. Observe that the response of linear the proposed voltage regulator is much faster than linear AVR and linear AVR+PSS. For this case, 0.1% steady-state error is observed in the nal value. From extensive simulation studies, the lines 2122, 2629, and 2829 are found to be critical for system stability, and few results corresponding to contingencies on these lines are responses of presented. Fig. 13 shows the terminal voltage fault of 80 ms duration on bus 29 followed GEN-9 for a by tripping of 2928. In this case, the system with linear is more oscillatory. The voltage dynamics are considerably improved with the proposed controller, and the steady-state error in the post fault voltage is 0.003 p.u. responses of GEN-7 to GEN-10 Fig. 14 shows the under heavy loading conditions. All the loads are increased by 15%, and generation at generators 5 to 10 is increased by fault of 70 ms duration on bus 21 followed by 15%. A tripping of 2122 is created. In this case, the system is more . It has been observed oscillatory with linear that the voltage dynamics are considerably improved. The percentage voltage regulation calculated as the percentage deviation from prefault voltage to the postfault voltage w.r.t. the

GURRALA AND SEN: NONLINEAR VOLTAGE REGULATOR WITH ONE TUNABLE PARAMETER

1193

Fig. 13. V of GEN-9 for a 3 fault of 80 ms at bus 29 cleared by tripping line 2928, nominal loading, 10 GEN SYS.

Fig. 15.  of GEN-1 to GEN-3 for a 3 fault of 100 ms at bus 11 cleared by tripping line 11-2, light loading, 10 GEN SYS.

Fig. 14. S of GEN-7 to GEN-10 for a 3 fault of 70 ms at bus 21 cleared by tripping line 2122, heavy loading, 10 GEN SYS.

Fig. 16. IEEE 14-generator 59-bus test system.

prefault voltage at all generators except at GEN-2 is given by which is less than %. Under nominal loading conditions, the terminal voltage regulation %. One can still obtain better voltage is always less than with little compromise regulation by increasing the gain on the damping performance; even then, the performance of the . proposed AVR would be better than the linear of GEN-1 to Fig. 15 show the rotor angle responses GEN-3 w.r.t. center of inertia with the proposed AVR for a fault of 100 ms duration on bus 11 followed by tripping of 11-2 under light loading conditions (all loads are decreased by 20% and generation at GEN-3 to 10 are decreased by 20%). The gure also contains the responses obtained with a linear AVR+PSS. It can be observed that the damping performance of the proposed controller is similar to the performance of the . linear C. The 14-Generator 59-Bus System This is a simplied model of the southern and eastern Australian network as shown in Fig. 16. It consists of ve areas in which areas 1 and 2 are closely coupled. The system data are taken from [25]. The six operating conditions given in [25] are

studied extensively. A few representative results corresponding to case 1 (heavy load) and case 4 (light load) are given here. For this system, also IEEE model 1.1 [18] is used for synchronous generators including transient saliency. The nonlinear AVR gain is selected for simulations. of area-3 genFig. 17 shows the slip speed responses erators GEN-6 and GEN-7 w.r.t. center of inertia for a 0.1 p.u. at GEN-6. This simulation corresponds to step change in case-1 operating condition. The small-signal performance of the proposed nonlinear AVR is better than the linear controller which are designed using the complete system information. At case-1 operating condition, the line 2931 is a heavily loaded line carrying 2760 MW. Fig. 18 shows the responses fault at bus 31 cleared after 35 ms by tripping one of for a the parallel lines between 31-29. The slip speed responses of area-5 generators GEN-13 and GEN-14 w.r.t. the GEN-9 of area-4 are shown. The responses are well damped with the proHz) posed controller within 5 s. The inter area mode ( oscillations of small magnitude persist until 20 s in the case of . With increase in fault clearing times belinear yond 35 ms, both of the controllers eventually fail to stabilize

1194

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 26, NO. 3, AUGUST 2011

Fig. 17. S responses of GEN-6 and GEN-7 for a 0.1 p.u. step change in V at GEN-6, case-1, 14 GEN SYS.

Fig. 19. S responses of GEN-12 to GEN-14, 3 fault at bus 55 cleared after 100 ms by tripping the line 55-57, case-4, 14 GEN SYS.

Fig. 18. S responses of GEN-13 and GEN-14 w.r.t. GEN-9, 3 fault at bus 31 cleared after 35 ms by tripping the line 31-29, case-1, 14 GEN SYS.

transformer as reference instead of a common synchronously rotating reference frame. Though the controller is designed using third-order model, it has been validated on higher order models. The proposed controller has shown better performance when compared to the conventional AVR proposed in [10] as . From the synchronizing and damping well as static torques analysis, it is observed that the proposed AVR always produces a positive damping torque and allows considerable variation in the tuning parameter so as to get effective trade off between the voltage regulation and small signal performance objectives. The implementation of this controller is very simple as it requires only local measurements. The proposed approach for the nonlinear AVR design can replace the conventional structure, as tuning a single parameter is always easier than tuning multiple parameters of a power system structure. stabilizer in the REFERENCES

the system. This simulation clearly shows the ability of the proposed nonlinear AVR in damping the interarea mode of oscillations. For this condition, a maximum terminal voltage deviation of 3.7% has been observed at bus 36. Fig. 19 shows the responses for a fault at bus 55 for case-4, which is a light loading condition. The fault is cleared after 100 ms by tripping one of the parallel lines between the buses 55 responses of GEN-12 to GEN-14 are and 57. Here the shown. The responses are well damped in about 3 s with the proposed FBLAVR, whereas the oscillations persist until 6 s . with the linear Extensive simulation studies on multimachine systems have clearly established the superiority of the proposed AVR in damping interarea modes when compared to the conventional . nonlinear AVR and linear V. CONCLUSION A nonlinear voltage regulator has been proposed in this paper for multimachine power systems using output feedback linearization approach by redening the rotor angle at each generator with respect to the secondary voltage of the step-up

[1] K. T. Law, D. J. Hill, and N. R. Godfrey, Robust controller structure for coordinated PowerSystem voltage regulator and stabilizer design, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 220232, Sep. 1994. [2] C. Zhu, R. Zhou, and Y. Wang, A new nonlinear voltage controller for power systems, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst., vol. 19, pp. 1927, 1997. [3] R. Marino, An example of a nonlinear regulator, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. AC-29, no. 3, pp. 276279, Mar. 1984. [4] Q. Lu and Y. Sun, Nonlinear stabilizing control of multimachine systems, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 236241, Feb. 1989. [5] 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. Power Syst., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 830839, Aug. 1993. [6] C. A. King, J. W. Chapman, and M. D. Ilic, Feedback linearizing excitation control on a full-scale power system model, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 11021109, May 1994. [7] Y. Guo, D. J. Hill, and Y. Wang, Global transient stability and voltage regulation for Power systems, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 678688, Nov. 2001. [8] D. J. Hill, Y. Guo, M. Larsson, and Y. Wang, Global Control of Complex Power Systems, ser. Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences. Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Springer, 2004, vol. 293. [9] B. K. Kumar, S. Singh, and S. Srivastava, A decentralized nonlinear feedback controller with prescribed degree of stability for damping power system oscillations, Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 77, no. 34, pp. 204211, Mar. 2007.

GURRALA AND SEN: NONLINEAR VOLTAGE REGULATOR WITH ONE TUNABLE PARAMETER

1195

[10] F. K. Mak, Design of nonlinear generator excitors using differential geometric control theories, in Proc. 31st IEEE Conf. Decision Control, Tuscon, AZ, 1992, pp. 11491153. [11] Y. Wang, D. J. Hill, R. H. Middleton, and L. Gao, Transient stability enhancement and voltage regulation of power systems, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 620627, May 1993. [12] T. Lahdhiri and A. T. Alouani, Nonlinear excitation control of a synchronous generator with implicit terminal voltage regulation, Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 36, pp. 101112, 1996. [13] L. Gao, L. Chen, Y. Fan, and H. Ma, A nonlinear control design for power systems, Automatica, vol. 28, pp. 975979, 1992. [14] C. Zhu, R. Zhou, and Y. Wang, A new decentralized nonlinear voltage controller for multi-machine power systems, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 211216, Feb. 1998. [15] M. Nambu and Y. Ohsawa, Development of an advanced power system stabilizer using a strict linearization approach, IEEE. Trans. Power Syst., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 813818, May 1996. [16] M. Nambu, United states patent 5 604 420, Feb. 1997. [17] G. Gurrala and I. Sen, Power system stabilizers design for interconnected power systems, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., accepted for publication. [18] IEEE Task Force, Current usage and suggested practices in power system stability simulations for synchronous machines, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. EC-1, no. 1, pp. 7793, 1986. [19] K. R. Padiyar, Power System Dynamics Stability and Control. New York: Wiley/Interline, 1996. [20] M. Arjona, R. Escarela-Perez, G. Espinosa-Perez, and J. Alvarez-Ramirez, Validity testing of third-order nonlinear models for synchronous generators, Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 79, pp. 953958, 2009. [21] Q. Lu, Y. Sun, and S. Mei, Nonlinear Control Systems and Power System Dynamics. Norwell, MA: Kluwer, 2001. [22] J. J. E. Slotine and W. Li, Applied Nonlinear Control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1991.

[23] F. P. Demello and C. Concordia, Concepts of synchronous machine stability as affected by excitation control, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-88, no. 4, pp. 316329, 1969. [24] I. A. Erinmez, Generator excitation system performance requirements arising from grid system considerations, in Proc. IEE Colloq. Excitation and Stability of Generators, Jan. 28, 1992, pp. 19. [25] M. Gibbard and D. Vowels, Simplied 14-Generator Model of the SE Australian Power System, The University of Adelaide, Tech. Rep. Revision 2, 21, May 2008. [Online]. Available: http://www.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au/Groups/PCON/PowerSystems. [26] P. S. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994.

Gurunath Gurrala (GS09) received the B.Tech degree in electrical and electronics engineering from S.V.H. College of Engineering, Nagarjuna University, Guntar, India, in 2001 and the M.Tech degree in electrical power systems from J.N.T.U. College of Engineering, Anantapur, India, in 2003. He is currently pursuing the Ph.D. at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India. He worked as an Assistant Professor in Anil Neerukonda Institute of Technology and Sciences (ANITS), Visakhapatnam, India, from 2003 to 2005. His research interests include power system stability, grid integration of renewables, exible AC transmission systems, articial intelligence applications to power systems, and nonlinear and adaptive control of power systems.

Indraneel Sen received the Ph.D. degree from IISc, Bangalore, India, in 1981. He is currently an Associate Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. His research interests include power system stability, adaptive control, and energy management systems.