AbstractIn restructured power systems, load following is

considered to be one among the many ancillary services

necessary to support the transmission of electric power. This
paper investigates the performance of a load following
controller on each generator involved in bilateral contracts. A
suitable control strategy is also proposed for the generators
taking part in load following to share a portion of the
uncontracted power demanded by the customers. Simulation
studies carried out on a two-area interconnected power system
show that the proposed control schemes are very effective for
the generators taking part in load following.
I. INTRODUCTION
ESTRUCTURING of electric power systems has lead
to several technical challenges with respect to its
conceptualization and integrated operation. The major
difference between conventional monopolistic electricity
market and the restructured competitive market is that
electricity in the former case is considered as merely energy
supply sector whereas in the latter case, it is treated as a
service sector and is to be marketed as any other commodity.
In the conventional market, the single utility is responsible
for maintaining physical flow of electricity, satisfying
customers demand at the proper voltage and frequency
level, maintaining security, economy and reliability of the
system and all other measures for the proper functioning of
the system. In the new competitive electricity market, many
of these tasks are treated as separate services called ancillary
services, in addition to the primary task of ensuring the
power transactions all the time.
Authors of [1] have discussed in length, different issues
of load frequency control after restructuring. The differences
between the load frequency control operation in a vertically
integrated industry and a horizontally integrated industry
have been reported in [2]-[3]. The market structure proposed
by them is kept generic enough to capture all possibilities

Manuscript received February 10, 2009.
This work was supported by the All India Council for Technical
Education (A. I. C. T. E), New Delhi, India in the form of National
Doctoral Fellowship (NDF 2003) awarded to Rajesh Joseph Abraham for
his Doctoral studies at Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India.
Rajesh Joseph Abraham is currently working as Reader with the
Department of Instrumentation & Control Engineering at Manipal Institute
of Technology, Manipal 576 104, Karnataka, India (phone: 91-820-
2925152; e-mail: rajeshja@gmail.com).
D. Das & Amit Patra are Professors with the Department of Electrical
Engineering at Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur 721 302, West
Bengal, India.
in marketing load following capability. Reference [4] has
also reformulated the two-area AGC model in a restructured
environment similar to that of [2]-[3]. The feasibility of
providing load following competitively has been
demonstrated in [5]. Also, they have attempted to
decentralize the market for load following.
In view of the above developments, the present work aims
(1) to look into the performance of a load following
controller on each generator involved in bilateral contracts
and (2) to suggest a suitable control scheme such that a
generator taking part in load following can also share the
portion of uncontracted load demanded by the customers.
II. RESTRUCTURED ENVIRONMENT
In a restructured environment, a customer can contract
individually with a supplier for power. The Generation
companies (Gencos) supply power to various Distribution
companies (Discos) at competitive prices. Thus, Discos may
or may not have contracts with the Gencos in their own areas
as they have the freedom to choose Gencos in other areas
too. For the sake of clarity, consider a two-area system as
shown in Fig. 1.
DISCO
1
DISCO
2
Unit
1
Unit
2
GENCO
1
DISCO
3
DISCO
4
Unit
3
Unit
4
GENCO
2
Tie-Line

Fig.1. Schematic of a two-area interconnected power system in restructured
environment
In area-1, there is one generation company GENCO
1
with
two generating units Unit
1
and Unit
2
and two distribution
companies designated DISCO
1
and DISCO
2
. Similarly, in
area-2, there is only one generation company GENCO
2
with
two generating units Unit
3
and Unit
4
. DISCO
3
and DISCO
4

are the two distribution companies in area-2. Following the
concept given in [2]-[4], to make the realization of contracts
much easier, we formulate the Disco Participation Matrix
(DPM) as given by (1) where cpfs are the contract
participation factors and represent the fraction of the total
load contracted out by a Disco to a generating unit of
GENCO
1
or GENCO
2
. The sum of all the entries in any
column of the DPM matrix is unity. In DPM, the number of
rows is equal to the number of generating units while the
Bilateral Load Following in a Restructured Power System with
Local Controllers
Rajesh Joseph Abraham, D. Das and Amit Patra, Member, IEEE
R
Proceedings of the 7th Asian Control Conference,
Hong Kong, China, August 27-29, 2009
FrC2.1
978-89-956056-9-1/09/2009 ACA
1199




number of columns is equal to the number of Discos.

DPM =
(
(
(
(
(

44 43 42 41
34 33 32 31
24 23 22 21
14 13 12 11
cpf cpf cpf cpf
cpf cpf cpf cpf
cpf cpf cpf cpf
cpf cpf cpf cpf
(1)

The scheduled steady state power flow on the tie-line is
given as

P
tie12,sch
= (Demand of Discos in area-2 from generating
units in area-1) (Demand of Discos in area-1 from
generating units in area-2) (2)

The tie-line power error is the difference between the actual
power flow and the scheduled power flow and is given as

P
tie12,error
= P
tie12,actual
- P
tie12,sch
(3)

At steady state, the tie-line power error P
tie12,error
vanishes as
the actual tie-line power flow reaches the scheduled power
flow. This error signal is used to generate the respective
Area Control Error (ACE) signals as in the traditional
scenario. i.e.,

ACE
1
= B
1
f
1
+ P
tie12,error
(4)
ACE
2
= B
2
f
2
+ a
12
P
tie12,error
(5)

where a
12
= -(P
r1
/P
r2
), with P
r1
and P
r2
being the rated area
capacities of area-1 and area-2.
III. BLOCK DIAGRAM REPRESENTATION
Fig. 2 shows the block diagram representation of the two-
area system shown in Fig. 1. Each area is equipped with an
AGC controller. In addition, each unit of the Genco is
equipped with an individual load following controller. For
example, in area-1, a demand signal P
gc1
that arrives
directly from the load is compared with the power output of
Unit
1
(P
g1
) to yield a mismatch and this mismatch is given
as an input to a reset controller (load following controller)
that will force the mismatch to zero so that the generator
follows the load. P
L1,LOC
and P
L2,LOC
are part of the power
system model, but not part of AGC. P
L1,LOC
is the total local
demand in area-1 and P
L2,LOC
is its counterpart in area-2.
There is a possibility that a Disco violates a contract by
demanding more power than that specified in the contract.
This excess power is not contracted out to any Genco. This
uncontracted power must be supplied by the Genco in the
same area as the Disco that violates the contract. In the block
diagram, P
L1,UC
and
PL2,UC
are the uncontracted power
demanded by Discos in area-1 and area-2 respectively. In
each area, the ACE participation factors (apfs) decide the
distribution of uncontracted power in the steady state among
various generating units. In each area, two nonreheat thermal
units, each with a Generation Rate Constraint (GRC) of 10%
per min. are considered as in [6] and [7].
T1 sT 1
1
+
T2 sT 1
1
+
G1 sT 1
1
+
G2 sT 1
1
+
apf1
1
1
R
2
1
R
apf2
s
KI1
B1
+
s
T
12
2
+
+
+
f1
P2
P2
sT 1
K
+
s
KI2
B2
a12
+
+
+
u1
u2

a12
P1
P1
sT 1
K
+
error tie12,
P +

scheduled tie12,
P
actual tie12,
P
+
+

LOC L1,
P
UC L1,
P
+
LOC L2,
P

+
gc1
P
gc2
P
+
+
T3
sT 1
1
+
T4
sT 1
1
+
G3
sT 1
1
+
G4
sT 1
1
+
apf3
3
1
R
apf4
+

gc3
P
+
+
gc4
P
4
1
R
+
s
K
1
+

s
K
2
+

s
K
3
+

+
s
K
4
+

+
g1
P
g2
P
g3
P
g4
P
gv1
P
gv2
P
gv3
P
gv4
P
f2
v1
v2
v3
v4
1
ACE
2
ACE
+
UC L2,
P
+

Fig. 2. Two-area interconnected system
IV. STATE SPACE REPRESENTATION
The state space equation for Fig. 2 can be described as

X

= AX + BU + B'V + P + 'P' (6)

where X is the state vector, U and V are the control vectors,
P and P' are the disturbance vectors, A, B, B', and ' are
real constant matrices of appropriate dimensions associated
with them (as given in Appendix) which inturn depend upon
the system parameters and the operating point.
The AGC integral control law for ith area is given by

= dt ACE K - u
i Ii i
(7)

and the integral control law for load following for jth unit is
given by

= dt ) P - P ( K v
gj gcj j j
(8)

where K
Ii
= integral gain setting for AGC controller of the ith
area. K
j
= integral gain setting of the load following
controller of jth generating unit.
7th ASCC, Hong Kong, China, Aug. 27-29, 2009
FrC2.1
1200




V. SIMULATION RESULTS
A. Case 1
Let us assume that Unit
2
and Unit
4
are under load following
contract only and Unit
1
and Unit
3
are under AGC only. All
the Discos have a total demand of 0.005 pu MW each, which
is contracted out to the various generating units as per the
DPM given in (9).

(
(
(
(

=
40 . 0 25 . 0 90 . 0 75 . 0
0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0
60 . 0 75 . 0 10 . 0 0.25
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
DPM (9)
0 50 100 150
-0.08
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
0.02
0.04
0.06

0 50 100 150
-0.08
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
0.02
0.04
0.06

0 50 100 150
-3.5
-3
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
x 10
-3


Fig. 3. Variations in area frequency deviations and tie-power fluctuations

It may be noted that, since Unit
1
and Unit
3
are not in load
following, the corresponding rows in DPM have all zero
entries. Also, there is no uncontracted power demand in both
the areas. i.e., P
L1,UC
= P
L2,UC
= 0 pu MW. Since in each
area, only one generating unit is under AGC, its ACE
participation factor is unity. i.e., apf
1
=1.0 and apf
3
=1.0. The
ACE participation factors for the units under load following
only are zero. i.e., apf
2
= 0 and apf
4
= 0. The steady state
power generations of the generating units are
0 50 100 150
-2
0
2
4
6
8
x 10
-3

0 50 100 150
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
x 10
-3


Fig.4. Variations in generated powers of Unit1 and Unit2 of GENCO1 and
Unit3 and Unit4 of GENCO2.

P
g1,ss
= 0 pu MW, P
g2,ss
= 0.0085 pu MW, P
g3,ss
= 0 pu
MW and P
g4,ss
= 0.0115 pu MW. The scheduled tie-line
power flow is given by (2) and is P
tie12,sch
= -0.0015 pu
MW.
Figs. 3 and 4 show the dynamic responses for this case and
are as desired. In this case, the AGC controllers have some
effect on the transient behavior of the responses but have no
effect on the steady state performance.
B. Case 2
In this case, the role of the generating units is the same as
in case 1. The contracted demand of the Discos, DPM and
ACE participation factors are also as above. However, in
addition to the contracted demand of 0.005 pu MW for
DISCO
1
, it also demands an additional power of 0.005 pu
MW which is uncontracted. i.e., P
L1,UC
= 0.005 pu MW.
When an excess demand occurs and is not contracted out to
any Genco, the change in load appears only in terms of the
Area Control Errors. Hence the additional demand or
shortfall of generation has to be shared by all the Gencos of
the area in which contract violation occurs and the
generation in other areas remains unaffected. Thus, at steady
state, the unit generations get modified to

(
(
(
(
(

(
(
(
(
(

=
(
(
(
(
(

gc4
gc3
gc2
gc1
UC L4,
UC L3,
UC L2,
UC L1,
ss g4,
P
ss g3,
ss g2,
ss g1,
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
APF
P
P
P
(10)

where
Time (s)
Time (s)

f
2

(
H
z
)

T
i
e
-
l
i
n
e

p
o
w
e
r

(
p
u

M
W
)


Error

Actual

f
1

(
H
z
)

Time (s)
Time (s)
Time (s)
P
g1
[Unit
1
]
P
g2

[U it ]
P
g3
[Unit3]
P
g4
[Unit4]

P
g
3

&

g
4

(
p
u

M
W
)

P
g
1

&

g
2

(
p
u

M
W
)

7th ASCC, Hong Kong, China, Aug. 27-29, 2009
FrC2.1
1201




0 50 100 150
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1

0 50 100 150
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1

0 50 100 150
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
x 10
-3


Fig. 5. Variations in area frequency deviations and tie-power variations

0 50 100 150
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
x 10
-3

0 50 100 150
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
x 10
-3


Fig. 6. Variations in generated powers of Unit1 and Unit2 of GENCO1 and
Unit3 and Unit4 of GENCO2


4
3
2
1
apf 0 0 0
0 apf 0 0
0 0 apf 0
0 0 0 apf
APF
(
(
(
(

= (11)

As expected, at steady state, the uncontracted power demand
is met by the generating unit under AGC in area-1 itself. i.e.
by Unit
1
. Thus, P
g1,ss
= (apf
1
P
L1,UC
) + P
gc1
= (1
0.005) + 0.0 = 0.005 pu MW. It may be noted that, the
generations of other Gencos at steady state are same as in the
above case. At steady state, the tie-line power error,
P
tie12,error
vanishes to zero. The corresponding dynamic
responses are shown in Figs. 5 and 6 respectively. Due to
uncontracted power demand, oscillations are more in tie-
power responses but steady state values are not affected.
VI. CONTROL SCHEME FOR SHARING UNCONTRACTED
LOAD

apf
1
2
1
R
apf
2
s
K
I1

+ u
1
1
1
R
G1
sT 1
1
+
gv1
P
G2
sT 1
1
+
gv2
P
s
K
2
v
2
+
+

g2
P
gc2
P
1
ACE
f
1 f
1

Fig. 7. Control scheme that enables Unit2 of GENCO1 to share some
desired portion of uncontracted power demand.

In the above case, it was seen that, the uncontracted power
demand in area-1 was met completely by Unit
1
since it was
the only unit under AGC in that area. However, if it is so
desired that, some portion of the uncontracted demand be
taken up by the other unit (assuming that it has some reserve
capacity), then a different control scheme is required. This
control scheme is shown in Fig. 7.
In this strategy, a fraction of the output of the AGC
controller in area-1 i.e.,(apf
2
u
1
) is given as an input to the
load following controller of Unit
2
such that Unit
2
generation
can chase the contracted power demand plus this fraction of
the uncontracted power demand. If the ACE participation
factors are chosen as apf
1
= 0.8 and apf
2
= 0.2, then with all
other conditions remaining the same as in Case 2, the
uncontracted demand in area-1 will be shared in proportion
to the ACE participation factors of the units in area-1. Then
Time (s)
Time (s)
Time (s)

f
1

(
H
z
)

f
2

(
H
z
)

T
i
e
-
l
i
n
e

p
o
w
e
r

(
p
u

M
W
)


Error

Actual
Time (s)
Time (s)

P
g
1

&

P
g
2

(
p
u

M
W
)

P
g
3

&

g
4

(
p
u

M
W
)

P
g3
[Unit3]
P
g4

[Unit4]

P
g3
[Unit1]
P
g4



7th ASCC, Hong Kong, China, Aug. 27-29, 2009
FrC2.1
1202




0 50 100 150
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1

0 50 100 150
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1

0 50 100 150
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
x 10
-3


Fig. 8. Variations in area frequency deviations and tie-power fluctuations

0 50 100 150
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
x 10
-3

0 50 100 150
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
x 10
-3


Fig. 9. Variations in generated powers of Unit1 and Unit2 of GENCO1 and
Unit3 and Unit4 of GENCO2

according to (10), at steady state, Unit
1
and Unit
2
will
respectively generate P
g1,ss
= 0.004 pu MW and P
g2,ss
=
0.0095 pu MW. The steady state generations of Unit
3
and
Unit
4
remain the same at 0 pu MW and 0.0115 pu MW
respectively. Further, at steady state, the tie-power error is
zero.
For this case, the variations in area frequency deviations and
tie-power fluctuations are as expected and are given in Fig.
8. The generations of Unit
1
and Unit
2
of GENCO
1
and Unit
3

and Unit
4
of GENCO
2
which generate the desired powers at
steady state are depicted in Fig. 9.
Thus, with this new control scheme, the units under load
following can also be made to share any desired portion of
an uncontracted power demand in the system provided,
sufficient reserve capacity is available. Units under load
following are expected to have less generation reserve and
hence can be assigned lower ACE participation factors so
that, the major portion of an uncontracted power demand is
taken up by those units which are under AGC only.
VII. CONCLUSION
In this work, a two-area interconnected model of AGC and
load following in the restructured environment has been
proposed by considering AGC controllers as well as load
following controllers. Different cases of load following have
been examined and it was found that the generating unit
taking part in load following generates the required
contracted power in the steady state. It was also observed
that, atleast one generating unit in each area must be under
AGC to force the frequency deviation and tie power error to
zero in the steady state. Further, a new control scheme has
also been proposed for those units taking part in load
following so that they can also share the uncontracted power
demand in proportion to their ACE participation factors.
APPENDIX
All the notations carry the usual meanings.
P
R1
=P
R2
= 1200 MW,
T
P1
= T
P2
= 20s
K
P1
= K
P2
= 120 Hz/pu MW
T
T1
= T
T2
= T
T3
= T
T4
= 0.3 s,
T
12
= 0.0866,
T
G1
= T
G2
= T
G3
= T
G4
= 0.08 s
R
1
= R
2
= R
3
= R
4
= 2.4 Hz/pu MW
B
1
= B
2
= 0.425 pu MW/Hz
D
1
= D
2
= 8.33 10
-3
pu MW/Hz
K
I1
= K
I2
= 0.05,
K
2
= K
4
= 0.09, K
1
= K
3
= 0

The state vector is a 11 1 column vector and is given by
X = [ f
1
f
2
P
g1
P
g2
P
g3
P
g4
P
tie12,actual
P
gv1
P
gv2

P
gv3
P
gv4
]
T


The system matrix is a 11 11 matrix whose non zero
entries are given as
Time (s)
Time (s)
Time (s)

f
1

(
H
z
)

f
2

(
H
z
)

T
i
e
-
l
i
n
e

p
o
w
e
r

(
p
u

M
W
)


Error

Actual
Time (s)
Time (s)

P
g
1

&

g
2

(
p
u

M
W
)

P
g
3

&

g
4

(
p
u

M
W
)

P
g3
[Unit3]
P
g4



Pg1 [Unit1]
Pg2 [Unit2]

7th ASCC, Hong Kong, China, Aug. 27-29, 2009
FrC2.1
1203




A(1,1) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

P1
T
1
; A(1,3) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
P1
P1
T
K
; A(1,4) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
P1
P1
T
K
;
A(1,7) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

P1
P1
T
K
; A(2,2) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

P2
T
1
; A(2,5) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
P2
P2
T
K
;
A(2,6) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
P2
P2
T
K
; A(2,7) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

P2
12 P2
T
a K
;
A(3,3) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

T1
T
1
; A(3,8) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
T1
T
1
; A(4,4) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

T2
T
1
;
A(4,9) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
T2
T
1
; A(5,5) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

T3
T
1
; A(5,10) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
T3
T
1
;
A(6,6) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

T4
T
1
; A(6,11) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
T4
T
1
; A(7,1) =
12
2 ;
A(7,2) =
12
2 - ; A(8,1) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

G1
1
T R
1
;
A(8,8) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

G1
T
1
; A(9,1) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

G2
2
T R
1
;
A(9,9) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

G2
T
1
; A(10,2) =;
|
|
.
|

\
|

G3
3
T R
1
;
A(10,10) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

G3
T
1
; A(11,2) =;
|
|
.
|

\
|

G4
4
T R
1
;
A(11,11) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

G4
T
1
;
The input matrix B is of the order 11 2 whose nonzero
elements are
B(8,1) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
G1
1
T
apf
; B(9,1) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
G2
2
T
apf
; B(10,2) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
G3
3
T
apf
;
B(11,2) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
G4
4
T
apf
;
The matrix B' is of the order 11 4 whose nonzero elements
are
B'(8,1) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
G1
T
1
; B'(9,2) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
G2
T
1
; B'(10,3) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
G3
T
1
;
B'(11,4) =
|
|
.
|

\
|
G4
T
1
;
The matrix is of the order 11 2 whose nonzero e lements
are
(1,1) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

P1
P1
T
K
; (2,2) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

P2
P2
T
K
;
The matrix ' is of the order 11 2 whose nonzero elements
are
'(1,1) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

P1
P1
T
K
; '(2,2) =
|
|
.
|

\
|

P2
P2
T
K
;
The control vector U is of the order 2 1 and is given by
U = [u
1
u
2
]
T


The control vector V is of the order 4 1 and is given by
V = [v
1
v
2
v
3
v
4
]
T

The disturbance vector P is of the order 2 1 and is given by
P = [P
L1,LOC
P
L2,LOC
]
T


The disturbance vector P' is of the order 2 1 and is given
by P' = [P
L1,UC
P
L2,UC
]
T


REFERENCES
[1] R. D. Christie and A. Bose, Load frequency control issues in power
system operations after deregulation, IEEE Trans. Power Systems,
vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 1191-1200, 1996.
[2] J. Kumar, K. H. Ng and G. Sheble, AGC simulator for price-based
operation part 1: a model, IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 12, no.
2, pp. 527-532, 1997.
[3] J. Kumar, K. H. Ng and G. Sheble, AGC simulator for price-based
operation part 2: case study results, IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol.
12, no. 2, pp. 533-538, 1997.
[4] V. Donde, M. A. Pai and I. A. Hiskens, Simulation and optimization
in an agc system after deregulation, IEEE Trans. Power Systems,
vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 481-489, 2001.
[5] E. Nobile, A. Bose and K. Tomsovic, Feasibility of a bilateral
market for load following, IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 16, no.
4, pp. 782-787, 2001.
[6] IEEE Committee Report, Dynamic models for steam and hydro
turbines in power system studies, IEEE Trans. Power Apparatus and
Systems, vol. PAS-92, no. 6, pp. 1904-1915, 1973.
[7] IEEE Working Group on Power Plant Response to Load Changes,
MW response of fossil-fuelled steam units, IEEE Trans. Power
Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-92, no. 2, pp. 455-463, 1973.




7th ASCC, Hong Kong, China, Aug. 27-29, 2009
FrC2.1
1204