Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 14 September 2012
Received in revised form 13 December 2012
Accepted 30 December 2012
Available online 1 February 2013
Keywords:
Load Frequency Control (LFC)
Governor dead-band nonlinearity
Generation Rate Constraint (GRC)
Parallel 2-Degree Freedom of ProportionalIntegral-Derivative (2-DOF PID) controller
Differential Evolution (DE) algorithm
a b s t r a c t
In this paper, design and performance analysis of Differential Evolution (DE) algorithm based parallel 2Degree Freedom of Proportional-Integral-Derivative (2-DOF PID) controller for Load Frequency Control
(LFC) of interconnected power system is presented. A two area thermal system with governor dead-band
nonlinearity is considered for the design and analysis purpose. The design problem is formulated as an
optimization problem and DE is employed to search for optimal controller parameters. Conventional
and modied objective functions are used for the design purpose. Conventional objective functions
employed in the paper are Integral of Time multiplied by Squared Error (ITSE) and Integral of Squared
Error (ISE). In order to further increase the performance of the controller, a modied objective function
is derived using Integral Time multiply Absolute Error (ITAE), damping ratio of dominant eigenvalues,
settling times of frequency and peak overshoots with appropriate weight coefcients. The superiority
of the proposed approach has been demonstrated by comparing the results with a recently published
technique, i.e. Craziness based Particle Swarm Optimization (CPSO) for the same interconnected power
system. Further, sensitivity analysis is performed by varying the system parameters and operating load
conditions from their nominal values. It is observed that the proposed controllers are quite robust for
a wide range of the system parameters and operating load conditions from their nominal values. Finally,
the proposed approach is extended to a more realistic power system model by considering the physical
constraints such as time delay, reheat turbine, Generation Rate Constraint (GRC) and governor dead band.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The growth in size and complexity of modern electric power
systems along with increase in power demand has necessitated
the use of intelligent systems that combine knowledge, techniques
and methodologies from various sources for the real-time control
of power systems. A modern power system network consists of a
number of utilities interconnected together and power is exchanged between utilities over tie-line by which they are interconnected. For the stable operation of power systems, both constant
frequency and constant tie-line power exchange should be maintained. In each area, a Load Frequency Controller (LFC) monitors
the system frequency and tie-line ows, computes the net change
in the generation required (generally referred to as Area Control
Error-ACE) and changes the set position of the generators within
the area so as to keep the time average of the ACE at a low value
[1]. Therefore ACE, which is dened as a linear combination of
power net-interchange and frequency deviations, is generally
taken as the controlled output of LFC. As the ACE is driven to zero
Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 9439702316.
E-mail addresses: rksahu123@gmail.com (R.K. Sahu), panda_sidhartha@rediffmail.
com (S. Panda), umesh6400@gmail.com (U.K. Rout).
0142-0615/$ - see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2012.12.009
by the LFC, both frequency and tie-line power errors will be forced
to zeros [2].
The researchers in the world over are trying to employ several
strategies for LFC of power systems in order to maintain the system
frequency and tie line ow at their scheduled values during normal
operation and also during disturbance conditions. In [3], a critical
literature review on the LFC of power systems has been presented,
where various control aspects concerning LFC problem have been
studied. There has been considerable research work attempting
to propose better LFC control systems based on modern control
theory [4], neural network [5,6], fuzzy system theory [7], reinforcement learning [8] and ANFIS approach [9]. From the literature survey, it may be concluded that there is still scope of work on the
optimization of controller parameters to further improve the system performance. For this, various novel controller structures
and evolutionary optimization techniques can be proposed and
tested for comparative optimization performance study. New articial intelligence-based approaches have been proposed recently
to design a controller. Nanda et al. [10] have shown that Bacterial
Foraging Optimization Algorithm (BFOA) optimized controller provides better performance as compared to classical and Genetic
Algorithm (GA) based controllers for an interconnected power system. Ali and Abd-Elazim [11] have recently presented a BFOA
20
R.K. Sahu et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 49 (2013) 1933
governor valve positions (p.u.); TT1 and TT2 are the turbine time
constant in sec; DPT1 and DPT2 are the change in turbine output
powers; DPD1 and DPD2 are the load demand changes; DPTie is
the incremental change in tie line power (p.u); KPS1 and KPS2 stands
for the power system gains; TPS1 and TPS2 represent the power system time constant in sec; T12 is the synchronizing coefcient and
Df1 and Df2 are the system frequency deviations in Hz. The relevant parameters are given in Appendix A.
The speed governor dead band has a great effect on the dynamic
performance of electric energy system. For more realistic analysis
the governor dead band has to be included which makes the system non-linear. Governor dead band is dened as the total amount
of a continued speed change within which there is no change in
valve position. Steam turbine dead band is due to the backlash in
the linkage connecting the servo piston to the camshaft. Much of
this appears to occur in the rack and pinion used to rotate the camshaft that operates the control valves. Due to the governor dead
band, an increase/decrease in speed can occur before the position
of the valve changes. The speed-governor dead band has makes
the system oscillatory. A describing function approach is used to
include the governor dead band nonlinearity.
The governor dead-band nonlinearity causes sustained sinusoidal oscillation of natural period of about T0 = 2 s, i.e. the frequency
of oscillation f0 = 0.5 Hz. The governor dead-band nonlinearity
equations are linearized in terms of change and rate of change in
the speed. The governor dead-band nonlinearity is dened as:
_
e Fg; g
g A sin2 p f 0 t
_ F0 K1g
Fg; g
K 2 dg
2 p f 0 dt
Gg
0:8 0:2
p s
1 sT g
R.K. Sahu et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 49 (2013) 1933
21
Fig. 1. Transfer function model of two-area thermal system with governor dead band.
F s
C s
K P K D N s2 K P N K I s K I N
s s N
J 1 ISE
t sim
22
R.K. Sahu et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 49 (2013) 1933
J 2 ITSE
t sim
i
Df1 2 Df2 2 DPTie 2 t dt
J3
t sim
min
Pn
i1 1
fi
x3 T S x4 OS
where Df1 and Df2 are the system frequency deviations; DPTie is the
incremental change in tie line power; tsim is the time range of simulation; TS is the sum of the settling times of frequency and tie line
power deviations; OS is the sum of the peak overshoot of frequency
and tie line power deviations; x1x4 are weighting factors. Inclusion of appropriate weighting factors to the right hand individual
terms helps to make each term competitive during the optimization
process. Wrong choice of the weighting factors leads to incompatible numerical values of each term involved in the denition of tness function which gives misleading result. The weights are so
chosen that numerical value of all the terms in the right hand side
of Eq. (9) lie in the same range. Repetitive trial run of the optimizing
algorithms reveals that numerical value of ITAE lie in the range 0.6
0.05, minimum damping ratio lies in the range 0.050.25, total settling times of Df1, Df2 and DPTie lies in the range 1550 and overshoot value lie in the range 0.0080.0016. To make each term
competitive during the optimization process the weights are chosen
as: x1 = 400, x2 = 1.5, x3 = 1.0 and x4 = 15,000.
The problem constraints are the controller parameter bounds.
Therefore, the design problem can be formulated as the following
optimization problem.
Minimize J
10
11
where J is the objective function (J1, J2, J3) and KPmin, K Imin ; K P max , K Imax
and K D min , K Dmax are the minimum and maximum value of the
control parameters, PW min , DWmin and PWmax, DWmax are the minimum and maximum values of proportional and derivative set point
weights respectively, Nmin and Nmax are the minimum and maximum values of derivative lter coefcient.
The controller gains must be chosen small enough so that the
area generators do not chase load offsets of short durations [2].
To satisfy the above requirement, the minimum and maximum values of PID controller parameters are chosen as 0 and 1.0. The same
range of PID controller parameters is generally used for an AGC
system [10]. The set points weights PW and DW control the control
action when a reference change takes place and lie in the range of
5. The derivative lter time constant N is generally a value greater
than one [19]. In view of the above, the ranges of PW, DW and N are
taken as 0 and 1.0, 0 and 5 and 10 and 300 respectively.
4. Differential Evolution
Differential Evolution (DE) algorithm is a search heuristic algorithm introduced by Stron and Price [14]. It is a simple, efcient,
reliable algorithm with easy coding. The main advantage of DE
over GA is that GA uses crossover operator for evolution while
DE relies on mutation operation. The mutation operation in DE is
based on the difference of randomly sampled pairs of solutions
in the population. An optimization task consisting of D variables
can be represented by a D-dimensional vector. A population of NP
solution vectors is randomly initialized within the parameter
bounds at the beginning. The population is modied by applying
mutation, crossover and selection operators. DE algorithm uses
two generations; old generation and new generation of the same
population size. Individuals of the current population become target vectors for the next generation. The mutation operation produces a mutant vector for each target vector, by adding the
weighted difference between two randomly chosen vectors to a
third vector. A trial vector is generated by the crossover operation
by mixing the parameters of the mutant vector with those of the
target vector. The trial vector substitutes the target vector in the
next generation if it obtains a better tness value than the target
vector. The evolutionary operators are described below [15,20,21].
4.1. Initialization of parameter
DE begins with a randomly initiated population of size NP of D
dimensional real-valued parameter vectors. Each parameter j lies
within a range and the initial population should spread over this
range as much as possible by uniformly randomizing individuals
within the search space constrained by the prescribed lower bound
X Lj and upper bound X Uj .
23
R.K. Sahu et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 49 (2013) 1933
Table 1
Tuned 2-DOF-PID controller parameters for different objective functions.
12
where Xi,G is the given parameter vector, Xr1,G Xr2,G Xr3,G are randomly selected vector with distinct indices i, r1, r2 and r3, Vi,G+1is
the donor vector and F is a constant from (0, 2).
4.3. Crossover operation
After generating the donor vector through mutation the crossover operation is employed to enhance the potential diversity of
the population. For crossover operation three parents are selected
and the child is obtained by means of perturbation of one of them.
In crossover operation a trial vector Ui,G+1 is obtained from target
vector (Xi,G) and donor vector (Vi,G). The donor vector enters the
trial vector with probability CR given by:
U j;i;G1
V j;i;G1
if
randj;i 6 CR or
j Irand
X j;i;G1
if
randj;i > CR or
jIrand
13
with randj,i U(0, 1), Irand is a random integer from (1, 2, . . . , D),
where D is the solutions dimension, i.e. number of control variables. Irand ensures that V i;G1 X i;G .
4.4. Selection operation
To keep the population size constant over subsequent generations, selection operation is performed. In this operation the target
vector Xi,G is compared with the trial vector V i;G1 and the one with
the better tness value is admitted to the next generation. The
selection operation in DE can be represented by:
X i;G1
U i;G1
X i;G
14
Objective function/controller
parameters
J1 (ISE)
J2 (ITSE)
J3
(Proposed)
0.5409
0.9708
0.5144
180.6983
2.0832
0.6462
0.4935
0.7619
0.3007
177.4023
0.5997
2.5641
0.4299
0.7103
0.4193
169.4177
1.0881
0.1892
24
R.K. Sahu et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 49 (2013) 1933
Table 2
System modes, minimum damping ratio and errors.
Objective function
System modes
Errors
185.25
185.24
0.47 7.37i
0.97 7.23i
1.30 1.55i
0.94 1.07i
0.30
0.0631
ISE
0.8940 104
6.6544
6.6456
0.1747 2.8449i
0.6568 1.6041i
1.0751
0.3045
0.4242
0.0613
ISE
22.4086 104
181.78
181.75
0.47 7.30i
1.35 7.24i
0.42
0.65 1.07i
1.34 0.76i
0.0640
ITSE
1.0125 104
6.6314
6.6080
0.1650 2.8129i
0.5705 1.5379i
0.9516
0.4703
0.6343
0.0586
ITSE
36.2505 104
172.61
172.61
1.18 6.13i
1.67 5.89i
1.26 1.61i
0.93 1.12i
0.31
0.1896
ISE
ITSE
ITAE
IAE
1.2229 104
0.8173 104
5.9727 102
2.6784 102
6.3575
6.1150
0.4664 2.6254i
0.4947 0.7799i
1.2789
0.5465 0.0984i
0.1749
ISE
ITSE
ITAE
IAE
43.8016 104
83.1849 104
58.2969 102
21.875 102
40
(a) - Proposed J3 : DE 2DOF PID
35
30
25
20
15
d
10
5
b c
d
b
f2
f1
Ptie
The system dynamic responses with controller parameters obtained using ISE and ITSE objective functions are shown in Figs.
68. For comparison, the simulation results with CPSO optimized
25
R.K. Sahu et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 49 (2013) 1933
x 10-3
Peak Overshoot
e
d
c
3
2
f
d
a
0
f1
f2
Ptie
0.005
0
f1 (H z)
-0.005
-0.01
-0.015
J1 - DE : 2DOF PID
-0.02
J2 - DE : 2DOF PID
-0.025
J1 - CPSO : PI [12]
-0.03
J2 - CPSO : PI [12]
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
Time (S)
Fig. 6. Frequency deviation of area-1 for 1% change in area-1 with ISE and ITSE objective function.
0.005
0
f2 (H z)
-0.005
-0.01
-0.015
J1 - DE : 2DOF PID
-0.02
J2 - DE : 2DOF PID
-0.025
J1 - CPSO : PI [12]
-0.03
J2 - CPSO : PI [12]
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
Time (S)
Fig. 7. Frequency deviation of area-2 for 1% change in area-1 with ISE and ITSE objective function.
controller compared to the recently reported results [12]. The system responses with controller parameters obtained using proposed
objective function J3 are shown in Figs. 911. Here the results are
compared with claimed improved results of recently reported
26
R.K. Sahu et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 49 (2013) 1933
x 10
-3
Ptie (P.U.)
-1
-2
-3
-4
J1 - DE : 2DOF PID
-5
J2 - DE : 2DOF PID
-6
J1 - CPSO : PI [12]
-7
-8
J2 - CPSO : PI [12]
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
Time (S)
Fig. 8. Tie line power deviation for 1% change in area-1 with ISE and ITSE objective function.
0.005
0
f1 (H z)
-0.005
-0.01
-0.015
-0.02
Proposed J3 : DE 2DOF PID
-0.025
-0.03
-0.035
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
Time (S)
Fig. 9. Frequency deviation of area-1 for 1% change in area-1 with proposed objective function.
0.005
0
-0.005
f2 (H z)
-0.01
-0.015
-0.02
-0.025
Proposed J3 : DE 2DOF PID
-0.03
-0.035
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
Time (S)
Fig. 10. Frequency deviation of area-2 for 1% change in area-1 with proposed objective function.
1% (0.01 p.u.) in Fig. 12. The performance of the proposed controller is further investigated for simultaneous load disturbance at
both areas. A simultaneous step increase in demand of 1% in
area-1 and 3% in area-2 is considered at t = 0.0 s and the system responses are shown in Figs. 1315. It is evident from Figs. 1315
that the designed controllers are robust and perform satisfactorily
when the location of the disturbance changes.
27
R.K. Sahu et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 49 (2013) 1933
-3
x 10
0
Ptie (P.U.)
-2
-4
-6
Proposed J3 : DE 2DOF PID
-8
-10
10
12
14
16
18
20
Time (S)
Fig. 11. Tie line power deviation for 1% change in area-1 with proposed objective function.
0.03
u1 : J3 - DE : 2DOF PID
u2 : Obj. function 1 CPSO : PI
u1, u2
0.02
u2 : J3 - DE : 2DOF PID
0.01
-0.01
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
Time (S)
Fig. 12. Comparison of controll efforts for 1% step increase in demand in area-1.
f1 (H z)
-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
-0.08
-0.1
-0.12
-0.14
10
12
14
16
18
20
Time (S)
Fig. 13. Frequency deviation of area-1 for 1% change in area-1 and 3% change in area-2 with proposed objective function.
28
R.K. Sahu et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 49 (2013) 1933
0.02
0
f2 (H z)
-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
-0.08
Proposed J3 : DE 2DOF PID
-0.1
-0.12
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
Time (S)
Fig. 14. Frequency deviation of area-2 for 1% change in area-1 and 3% change in area-2 with proposed objective function.
x 10
-3
20
Proposed J3 : DE 2DOF PID
Obj. function 1 : CPSO PI [12]
Obj. function 2 : CPSO PI [12]
Ptie (P.U.)
15
10
0
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
Time (S)
Fig. 15. Tie line power deviation for 1% change in area-1 and 3% change in area-2 with proposed objective function.
Table 3
Sensitivity analysis.
Parameter variation
% Change
Performance index
ITAE 10
2
ISE 10
4
4
2
ITSE 10
IAE 10
Df1
Df2
Df1
Df2
Loading condition
+50
+25
25
50
5.9697
5.9712
5.9742
5.9757
1.2121
1.2174
1.2284
1.2339
0.8121
0.8146
0.8199
0.8227
2.6739
2.6762
2.6807
2.6829
5.20
5.20
5.19
5.19
5.50
5.51
5.55
5.57
8.69
8.68
8.68
8.69
0.0014
0.0014
0.0015
0.0015
0.0001
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.1914
0.1905
0.1887
0.1877
TG
+50
+25
25
50
6.2171
6.0215
6.0148
6.1150
1.6497
1.4152
1.0680
0.9468
1.1068
0.9275
0.7569
0.7325
2.9712
2.7842
2.6360
2.6166
6.14
4.88
5.23
5.33
6.36
5.91
5.77
5.74
8.62
8.67
8.74
8.81
0.0031
0.0021
0.0010
0.0008
0.0009
0.0004
0.0001
0.0000
0.1515
0.1697
0.2131
0.2465
TT
+50
+25
25
50
6.0430
5.9379
6.0389
6.2023
1.7239
1.4482
1.0426
0.9027
1.1304
0.9361
0.7535
0.7294
2.9593
2.7746
2.6189
2.6017
5.27
4.93
5.31
5.47
5.50
5.97
2.81
2.99
8.52
8.62
8.77
8.89
0.0029
0.0019
0.0011
0.0009
0.0007
0.0004
0.0001
0.0000
0.1880
0.1925
0.1787
0.1595
T12
+50
+25
25
50
4.8897
5.2908
7.1371
9.4416
1.2123
1.2141
1.2408
1.2716
0.8019
0.8037
0.8463
0.8980
2.5891
2.6132
2.7807
2.9415
5.12
5.12
5.47
7.14
3.66
5.11
6.49
7.41
7.94
8.23
9.47
10.86
0.0014
0.0014
0.0015
0.0014
0.0004
0.0003
0.0000
0.0000
0.1508
0.1697
0.2101
0.2311
the operating conditions and system parameters varies. The frequency deviation response for 1% change in area-1 with these varied conditions is shown in Figs. 1619, respectively. It can be
observed from Figs. 1619 that the effect of the variation of operating loading conditions and system time constants on the system
DPTie
29
R.K. Sahu et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 49 (2013) 1933
Table 4
System modes for each case.
Loading condition (%)
System modes
TG (%)
System modes
TT (%)
System modes
T12 (%)
System modes
+50
172.61
172.61
1.20 6.14i
1.8 0.05.90i
1.26 1.60i
0.93 1.12i
0.31
+50
171.54
171.54
0.77 5.05i
1.33 4.65i
0.31
1.37 1.49i
0.97 1.16i
+50
1.7155
1.7154
0.93 4.85i
1.58 4.43i
0.31
1.49 1.46i
0.99 1.20i
+50
1.7261
1.7260
0.96 6.29i
1.67 5.89i
1.46 1.73i
0.93 1.12i
0.36
+25
172.61
172.61
1.19 6.13i
1.67 5.90i
1.26 1.60i
0.93 1.12i
0.31
+25
171.97
171.96
0.95 5.50i
1.47 5.19i
1.32 1.55i
0.95 1.14i
0.31
+25
171.97
171.97
1.06 5.39i
1.63 05.07i
1.37 1.54i
0.31
0.95 1.16i
+25
172.61
172.61
1.07 6.21i
1.67 5.89i
1.36 1.67i
0.93 1.12i
0.34
25
172.61
172.61
1.18 6.12i
1.66 5.89i
1.26 1.61i
0.93 1.13i
0.30
25
173.69
173.68
1.54 7.05i
1.98 6.89i
1.21 1.65i
0.91 1.11i
0.30
25
173.67
173.67
1.31 7.20i
1.72 7.03i
1.16 1.65i
0.90 1.09i
0.30
25
172.61
172.61
1.30 6.06i
1.67 5.89i
1.16 1.52i
0.93 01.12i
0.26
50
172.61
172.61
1.17 6.12i
1.66 5.88i
1.26 1.61i
0.93 1.13i
0.30
50
175.86
175.85
2.17 8.55i
2.58 8.48i
1.15 1.69i
0.89 1.09i
0.30
50
175.80
175.79
1.79 8.85i
1.45 8.95i
1.08 1.68i
0.88 1.07i
0.30
50
172.61
172.61
1.42 5.99i
1.67 5.89i
0.21
1.07 14.1i
0.93 1.12i
-3
x 10
f1 (Hz)
-5
-10
-15
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
Time (S)
Fig. 16. Frequency deviation of area-1 for 1% change in area-1 with varying load conditions.
J4
tsim
min
1
Pn
i1 1
fi
x3 T S x4 OS
ju1 j ju2 j t dt
t sim
x5
15
The weights x1x5 are so chosen that numerical value of all the
terms in the right hand side of Eq. (15) lie in the same range. Repet-
30
R.K. Sahu et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 49 (2013) 1933
-3
x 10
f1 (Hz)
-5
+50% of T12
-10
+25% of T12
-25% of T12
-50% of T12
-15
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
Time (S)
Fig. 17. Frequency deviation of area-1 for 1% change in area-1 with varying tie line time constant.
x 10
-3
f1 (Hz)
-5
+50% of TT
-10
+25% of TT
-25% of TT
-15
-50% of TT
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
Time (S)
Fig. 18. Frequency deviation of area-1 for 1% change in area-1 with varying turbine time constant.
-3
x 10
f1 (Hz)
-5
+50% of TG
-10
+25% of TG
-25% of TG
-15
-50% of TG
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
Time (S)
Fig. 19. Frequency deviation of area-1 for 1% change in area-1 with varying speed governor time constant.
itive trial runs of the optimizing algorithms are done to nd out the
range of each term of objective function and selection of appropriate weights. The weights are chosen as: x1 = 1.0, x2 = 0.2, x3 =
0.02, x4 = 150, x5 = 0.03. The optimum parameters are obtained
as explained in Section 5.1. The optimal parameters are:
KP = 0.08, KI = 0.0794, KD = 0.0724, N = 271.0989; PW = 2.9079,
DW = 1.1739
A step increase in demand of 1% is applied at t = 0 s in area-1
and the system dynamic responses is shown in Fig. 20. It is evident
31
R.K. Sahu et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 49 (2013) 1933
-0.01
-0.02
f1
-0.03
f2
Ptie
-0.04
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Time (S)
Fig. 20. System response for 1 % change in area-1 with physical constraints (time delay, reheat turbine, GRC and governor dead band).
Table 5
Sensitivity analysis with time delay, reheat turbine, GRC and governor dead band.
Parameter
variation
%
Change
Performance index
ITAE 102
ISE 104
ITSE 104
IAE 102
Peak Overshoot
(OS)
Df1
Df2
DPTie
Df1
Df2
0
+50
205.53
203.69
47.730
45.627
112.40
106.85
30.402
29.769
26.18
26.28
20.31
20.47
43.70
43.69
0.0066
0.0058
0.0058
0.0049
0.0887
0.0936
63.0491
63.0531
+25
25
50
204.60
206.49
207.52
46.654
48.858
50.043
109.53
115.47
118.76
30.081
30.732
31.076
26.22
26.16
26.16
20.39
20.23
20.18
43.69
43.71
43.73
0.0062
0.0070
0.0074
0.0053
0.0063
0.0069
0.0911
0.0863
0.0838
63.0511
63.0471
63.0451
TG
+50
+25
25
50
213.56
208.24
204.00
203.23
54.559
50.908
44.974
42.600
133.39
121.48
105.52
100.38
32.491
31.278
29.746
29.263
26.32
26.29
26.32
26.24
20.22
20.04
20.30
20.59
43.54
43.65
43.79
43.86
0.0096
0.0079
0.0056
0.0048
0.0113
0.0085
0.0055
0.0052
0.0439
0.0632
0.1215
0.1602
63.0549
63.0519
63.0463
63.0437
TT
+50
+25
25
50
221.19
210.082
203.171
202.605
57.990
52.401
43.842
40.625
146.36
126.41
102.71
96.13
33.894
31.765
29.427
28.847
26.76
26.34
26.32
26.40
20.57
20.17
20.23
20.67
43.47
43.59
43.85
43.97
0.0108
0.0084
0.0054
0.0043
0.0132
0.0095
0.0053
0.0046
0.0411
0.0603
0.1320
0.1955
63.0582
63.0535
63.0448
63.0407
T12
+50
+25
25
50
Unstable
223.302
211.914
264.350
48.732
48.979
53.290
122.20
116.60
139.73
31.837
30.595
34.203
33.17
27.54
38.56
31.02
19.85
35.35
44.52
44.88
47.98
0.0106
0.0097
0.0126
0.0086
0.0070
0.0089
0.0631
0.1276
0.1944
63.0787
63.0037
62.9268
Normal
Loading
condition
0.005
0
f1 (Hz)
-0.005
-0.01
-0.015
-0.02
-0.025
-0.03
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Time (S)
Fig. 21. Frequency deviation of area-1 for 1% change in area-1 with physical constraints (time delay, reheat turbine, GRC and governor dead band) and varying load
conditions.
32
R.K. Sahu et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 49 (2013) 1933
0.01
f1 (Hz)
-0.01
+50% of TG
-0.02
+25% of TG
-25% of TG
-0.03
-50% of TG
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Time (S)
Fig. 22. Frequency deviation of area-1 for 1% change in area-1 with physical constraints (time delay, reheat turbine, GRC and governor dead band) and varying speed governor
time constant.
0.01
f1 (Hz)
-0.01
+50% of TT
-0.02
+25% of TT
-25% of TT
-0.03
-50% of TT
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Time (Hz)
Fig. 23. Frequency deviation of area-1 for 1% change in area-1 with physical constraints (time delay, reheat turbine, GRC and governor dead band) and varying turbine time
constant.
0.02
0.01
f1 (Hz)
-0.01
+50% of T12
-0.02
+25% of T12
-25% of T12
-0.03
-50% of T12
-0.04
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Time (S)
Fig. 24. Frequency deviation of area-1 for 1% change in area-1 with physical constraints (time delay, reheat turbine, GRC and governor dead band) and varying tie line time
constant.
introduced, the variations in performance index are more prominent. So it can be concluded that in the presence of time delay,
GRC and reheat turbine, the system becomes highly non-linear
R.K. Sahu et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 49 (2013) 1933
frequency deviation response of area-1 for the above varied conditions are shown in Figs. 2124. From Table 5 and Figs. 2124 it
can be seen that when nonlinearity is introduced, the effect of
change in loading conditions and governor time constant is minimum on system dynamic performance. It is also evident from Table
5 that the changes in performance index are more prominent to
change in T12 and system becomes unstable when T12 is increased
by +50%.
7. Conclusion
This study presents the design and performance analysis of parallel 2-Degree Freedom of Proportional-Integral-Derivative (2-DOF
PID) controller optimized employing Differential Evolution (DE)
algorithm for Load Frequency Control (LFC) of interconnected
power system. A widely used standard test system which is a
two area thermal system with governor dead-band nonlinearity
is considered for the design and analysis purpose. First it has been
demonstrated that objective function plays an important role on
the performance of the controller by comparing the results with
controller parameters obtained using conventional ISE and ITSE
objective functions. Further, a modied objective function is proposed which includes a conventional error criterion, damping ratio
of dominant eigenvalues, settling times of frequency and peak
overshoots with appropriate weight coefcients. The results obtained from the simulations demonstrate that the proposed control
strategy optimized with modied objective function achieves better dynamic performances than the standard objective functions.
The superiority of the proposed approach has been shown by
comparing the results with a recently published Craziness based
Particle Swarm Optimization (CPSO) technique for the same interconnected power system. Additionally, sensitivity analysis is performed by varying the system parameters and operating load
conditions from their nominal values. It is observed that the proposed controllers are quite robust for a wide range of the system
parameters and operating load conditions from their nominal values. Finally, the proposed approach is further extended to a more
realistic power system model by considering the physical constraints such as time delay, reheat turbine, GRC and governor dead
band and the objective function is further modied to include to
control efforts minimization. It is observed that when physical constraints are introduced, the variations in performance index are
prominent and the system becomes unstable when T12 increases
by +50%.
Acknowledgement
The authors wish to thank the reviewers and the editor for providing critical comments to improve the quality of the paper.
Appendix A
Nominal parameters of the system investigated are: PR = 2000
MW (rating), PL = 1000 MW (nominal loading); f = 60 Hz, B1, B2 =
33
0.425 p.u. MW/Hz; R1 = R2 = 2.4 Hz/p.u.; TG1 = TG2 = 0.2 s; TT1 = TT2 =
0.3 s; KPS1 = KPS2 = 120 Hz/p.u. MW; TPS1 = TPS2 = 20 s; T12 = 0.0707 p.u.;
a12 = 1, Kr1 = Kr2 = 0.5, Tr1 = Tr2 = 10.
References
[1] Kundur P. Power system stability and control. 8th ed. New Delhi: Tata
McGraw-Hill; 2009.
[2] Elgerd OI. Electric energy systems theory. An introduction. 2nd ed. New
Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill; 2007.
[3] Ibraheem, Kumar P, Kothari DP. Recent philosophies of automatic generation
control strategies in power systems. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2005;20:34657.
[4] Shoults RR, Jativa Ibarra JA. Multi area adaptive LFC developed for a
comprehensive AGC simulation. IEEE Trans Power Syst 1993;8:5417.
[5] Demiroren A, Zeynelgil HL, Sengor NS. Application of ANN technique to load
frequency control for three area power system. In: IEEE power tech. conf.,
Porto; 2001.
[6] Chaturvedi DK, Satsangi PS, Kalra PK. Load frequency control: a generalized
neural network approach. Int J Elect Power Energy Syst 1999;21:40515.
[7] Talaq J, Al-Basri F. Adaptive fuzzy gain scheduling for load frequency control.
IEEE Trans Power Syst 1999;14:14550.
[8] Ahamed TPI, Rao PSN, Sastry PS. A reinforcement learning approach to
automatic generation control. Elect Power Syst Res 2002;63:926.
[9] Khuntia SR, Panda S. Simulation study for automatic generation control of a
multi-area power system by ANFIS approach. Appl Soft Comput 2012;12:
33341.
[10] Nanda J, Mishra S, Saikia LC. Maiden application of bacterial foraging based
optimization technique in multiarea automatic generation control. IEEE Trans
Power Syst 2009;24(2):6029.
[11] Ali ES, Abd-Elazim SM. Bacteria foraging optimization algorithm based load
frequency controller for interconnected power system. Int J Elect Power
Energy Syst 2011;33:6338.
[12] Gozde H, Taplamacioglu MC. Automatic generation control application with
craziness based particle swarm optimization in a thermal power system. Int J
Elect Power Energy Syst 2011;33:816.
[13] Saikia LC, Nanda J, Mishra S. Performance comparison of several classical
controllers in AGC for multi-area interconnected thermal system. Int J Elect
Power Energy Syst 2011;33:394411.
[14] Stron R, Price K. Differential evolution a simple and efcient adaptive scheme
for global optimization over continuous spaces. J Global Optim 1995;11:
34159.
[15] Das S, Suganthan PN. Differential evolution: a survey of the state-of-the-art.
IEEE Trans Evol Comput 2011;15:431.
[16] Sncheza J, Visioli A, Dormido S. A two-degree-of-freedom PI controller based
on events. J Process Control 2011;21:63951.
[17] Zhao YM, Xie WF, Tu XW. Performance-based parameter tuning method of
model-driven PID control systems. ISA Trans 2012;51:3939.
[18] Ogatta K. Modern control engineering. NJ (USA): Prentice Hall; 1990.
[19] Tan Wen. Unied tuning of PID load frequency controller for power systems
via IMC. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2010;25(1):34150.
[20] Panda S. Differential evolution algorithm for SSSC-based damping controller
design considering time delay. J Franklin Inst 2011;348(8):190326.
[21] Panda S. Robust coordinated design of multiple and multi-type damping
controller using differential evolution algorithm. Int J Elect Power Energy Syst
2011;33:101830.
[22] Gozde H et al. Comparative performance analysis of Articial Bee Colony
algorithm in automatic generation control for interconnected reheat thermal
power system. Int J Elect Power Energy Systs 2012;42:16778.
[23] Parmar KPS et al. Load frequency control of a realistic power system with
multi-source power generation. Int J Elect Power Energy Syst 2012;42:42633.
[24] Golpra H, Bevrani H, Golpra H. Application of GA optimization for automatic
generation control design in an interconnected power system. Energy Convers
Manage 2011;52:224755.
[25] Sudha KR, Raju YB, Sekhar AC. Fuzzy C-means clustering for robust
decentralized load frequency control of interconnected power system with
generation rate constraint. Int J Elect Power Energy Syst 2012;37:5866.