,&3'(1


Extended State Estimator Based Two Area Load Frequency Control

Dr.R.K Mehta1
Assoc. Prof. Electrical Dept.
NERIST, Arunachal Pradesh, India
rkm@nerist.ac.in

Likha Jully2
M.Tech. Electrical Dept.
NERIST, Arunachal Pradesh, India
likhajully@gmail.com

Lod Tapin3
Ph.D Scholars. Electrical Dept.
NERIST, Arunachal Pradesh, India
tapin.lod31@gmail.com

Artificial Intelligence techniques for one and two different area Power
system [9].

Abstract
This paper presents an Extended State Estimator based controller
for two area system. Using a state space Disturbance Observer has
been proposed without using any integral control directly, to
achieve constant rated frequency in the face of parameter
uncertainties and system disturbances. The controller is constructed
for a two-area power system which is identical in nature. The
dynamic model of the power system and the controller design based
on the model are elaborated in the report and the effectiveness of
the proposed method is illustrated using numerical analysis.
KeywordsLoad Frequency Controller, Two Area System, Integral
Controller and Extended State Observer.
I. INTRODUCTION
The load on the power system is seldom constant, it varies frequently.
The basic requirement of a power system is to meet the load demands
and satisfy the power flow equations [1]. The power system load
frequency control (LFC) problems are caused by small load
perturbations which continuously disturb the normal operation of
power system. Therefore the generation rate of generators must be
change until the frequency and tie-line power maintain close to
specified values. It is desirable that the deviations of frequency and tieline power system become zero. The output power of generator
controlled with mechanical input [2]. Also, the LFC problem is very
important in interconnected power system because the load
perturbation in any areas disturb the frequency of others [3]. The first
to present pioneer work on Optimal AGC were discussed in [4], where
two area interconnected power system consisting of two identical
power plants of Non Reheat thermal turbine was considered for
investigations.
The application of genetic algorithms for optimizing the parameters of
conventional automatic generation control (AGC) systems. A two-area
non reheat thermal system is considered to exemplify the optimum
parameter search. A digital simulation is used in conjunction with the
genetic algorithm optimization Q [5].
Design of AGC regulators using proportional-plus-integral control
strategy for two area interconnected thermal-thermal, hydrohydro and
hydro-thermal power systems with asynchronous tie-lines [6-8].
Load Frequency Control (LFC) to regulate the power Output of the
electric generator within an area in response to changes in system
frequency and tie line loading. It dealt with Control Adaption using

A new genetic algorithm based methods presented to obtain Optimal gains

of classical controllers involve in two area interconnected Power system.
PID controller structure is considered and its parameters are obtained
using genetic algorithms [10].
II. CONVENTIONAL TWO AREA LFC MODEL
The conventional model of Two-Area LFC is showed in Fig [1], where
two single areas connected through a power line called the Tie-Line. As
both areas are tied together, change in load in any single area affects the
output frequencies ( and respectively) of both areas as well as the
tie-line power flow [11]. The simulation step response of both frequency
and power deviation of conventional two areas LFC is shown in simulation
section [V].

Fig.1. Conventional Two Areas LFC.

STATE SPACE MODELLING OF TWO AREA SYSTEM:

The modern control theory approach to analysis and design of our complex
system is based on the concept of states called the state space analysis. The
differential equation governing the operation under normal condition
where we assume that the disturbances in the system are zero is given in
[12] as

(1)

Where,




,(((



Now,

 


 













(2)

(8)

Where  are the step type input disturbances.



Thus, the Extended Observer equation is given as

(3)

(4)

(9)
(10)

Where, Aa and Ba are augmented system matrix and control matrix

respectively. L is proportional gain, C is output matrix, Y is output
vector and U is control vector.
Block diagram representation of the above equations is

III. EXTENDED STATE OBSERVER

It is assumed that all the state variables are available for feedback, but
in most cases, not all the state variables are measured. It is not always
possible to measure all the state variables. In such cases the full state
feedback is replaced by the estimator. Now in two area system, for
extended estimator the method is based on augmenting the estimator to
include the estimates from external signals in a way that permits us to
cancel out their effects on the system error.

Therefore the augmented matrices are





 ;

Fig.2. Block diagram for extended estimator for two areas power system

The observer poles can be chosen to be faster than the controller poles
by a factor 2 to 6. Here, the Observer poles are made three times away
from the controller poles.
IV. SIMULATION AND RESULT

(5)

(6)

(7)

In chapter [III], we have designed the Extended State Observer for Two
Area LFC by augmentation method. The Q and R matrices were
selected manually to achieve required performances based on the
optimal control law.

(11)

(12)

The objective of the optimal regulator design is to determine a control law

u(x, t) which can transfer the system from its initial state to the nal state
by minimizing the performance index [2]. This helps in determining

controller poles of the system and the Matrix gain K of the optimal control
vector;
U (t) = K (t) x (t)

(13)

The simulink model of proposed ESO based two areas LFC is shown
as-

Fig.5. Power deviation step response i.e. , , and of the Test system, when a 0.01
p.u. step load is given to Area 1

From Fig [4-5], it is found that the settling time for the transient response
both for frequency and power was found to be approx. 25 sec., the
maximum overshoot of the frequency response was found to be 0.045 pu
and the maximum overshoot of the amplitude of power was found to be 13
103 pu MW.
B) Proposed Extended State Observer for Two Areas LFC
The Gain Matrix [K], Controller Poles [PC], Observer Poles [PO] and
Proportional Gain [L] are calculated asFig.3. Simulink model of proposed ESO based two areas LFC.

In this section, the simulation will carried out for conventional two
areas LFC and the proposed extended state observer two areas LFC
using Table [1].
Table [1]
Parameters

Area 1

Area 2

0.1sec

0.1 sec

0.4 sec

0.4 sec

0.5 sec

0.5 sec

3 Hz/pu MW

3 Hz/pu MW

1 Hz/pu MW

1 Hz/pu MW

1sec

1sec

A) Conventional Two Areas LFC

Form Table [1], the simulation step response of both frequency and
power deviation of conventional two areas LFC is shown in Fig [4-5].

 

(14)

(15)

 




 
 





  





(17)




The simulations are carried out under four different cases and their
transient responses were observed accordingly. The cases are:
Fig.4. Frequency deviation step response of Area 1 () and Area 2 () of the Test system,
when a 0.01 p.u. step load is given to Area 1.

1. Case I: 0.01 pu of Load on Area 1

Fig.6. Frequency deviation step response of Area 1 () and Area 2 () of the Test system,
When a 0.01 p.u. step load is given to Area 1

Fig.7. Power deviation step response i.e. , , and of the Test system, when a 0.01
p.u. step load is given to Area 1.

2. Case II: 0.01 pu Load on Area 2

3. Case III: 0.01 pu Load on both Area 1 and Area 2

Fig.10. Frequency deviation step response of Area 1 () and Area 2 () of the Test system,
When a 0.01 p.u. step load is given to both Area 1 and Area 2

Fig.11. Power deviation step response i.e. , , and of the Test system, when a 0.01
p.u. step load is given to both Area 1 and Area 2.

4. Case IV: 0.01pu Load given to both Area1 and Area 2

Simultaneously

Fig.8. Frequency deviation step response of Area 1 () and Area 2 () of the Test system,
When a 0.01 p.u. step load is given to Area 2

Fig.12. Frequency deviation step response of Area 1 () and Area 2 () of the Test system,
when a 0.01 p.u. step load is given to both Area 1 and Area 2 simultaneously

Fig.9. Power deviation step response i.e. , , and of the Test system, when a
0.01 p.u. step load is given to Area 2.

Fig.13. Power deviation step response i.e. , , and of the Test system, when a
0.01 p.u. step load is given to both Area 1 and Area 2 simultaneously.

Fig [6] shows the deviations of f1 and f2 in response to step load of

0.01 pu applied to area1. While Fig [7] states the corresponding variation
of P1, P2 and Ptie. Similarly, Fig [8] and Fig [9] indicate variations in
f1, f2, P1, P2 and Ptie in response to step load change applied to
area2.
Fig [10] and Fig [11] shows variations in f1, f2, P1, P2 and Ptie
when step load of 0.01 pu at t=0 applied to area1 and 0.01 pu at t=5 sec.
Fig [12] and Fig [13] shows variations in f1, f2, P1, P2 and Ptie in
response to step load of 0.01 pu applied to both area1 and area2.
The results have been sum up in Table [2] as
Table [2]
Cases I to IV
Load on Area 1

Settling Time (Sec)

4.2 sec

Overshoot (p.u)
0.0065

Load on Area 2

4.2sec

0.0081

Load on Area1
& Area2 at a step
time of 10 sec
Load on Area1 &
Area2
Simultaneously

6 sec

0.0072

4sec

0.096

C) Actual and estimated states of the plant under step load of

Fig.15.The Actual Plant States and Estimated state of Area 2 () when a load of 0.01p.u is
Given to Area 1

0.01pu

Fig.16.The Actual Plant States and Estimated state of Area 1 () when a load of 0.01p.u is
Given to Area 1

Fig. 14.The Actual Plant States and Estimated state of Area 1 () when a load of 0.01p.u is
Given to Area 1.
Fig.18.The Actual Plant States and Estimated state of Area 2 () when a load of 0.01p.u
Is given to Area 1

Fig [14-21] shows how the observer estimates the dynamic response of
the system. The response pattern of the original response and the
estimated response in Fig [14] to Fig [21] are nearly same but are
slightly differ as there exists very small error between them which
indicate that the estimated value will not be exactly like the original
value. Therefore, the proposed control scheme shows the ability to
measure all the states. Thus, the requirement of mechanical sensors is
eliminated and reduces cost effects.
Besides above, the simulation of the control inputs u1 and u2 which is
directly related to actuator and it tries to rotate the motor thus the speed
changer which provides upward and downward vertical movements
proportional to the change in speed has been shown.
Fig.19 The Actual Plant States and Estimated state of Area 1 () when a load of 0.01pu is
Given to Area 1

Fig.20.The Actual Plant States and Estimated state of Area 2 () when a load of 0.01pu is
Given to Area 1

Fig.21.The Actual Plant States and Estimated state of Tie-Line ( ) when a load of 0.01pu is
Given to Area 1

Fig.23. Control input signal u1 and u2 for a step load of 0.01 p.u given to Area 1

Fig.24.Control input signal u1 and u2 for a step load of 0.01 p.u given to Area 2.

VI. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a new concept is proposed for estimating the
unmeasurable states in two areas Load Frequency Control (LFC). It is
based on an extended state observer (ESO), where the capability of
estimating the unmeasurable states using Extended State Observer has
been presented. The simulation results verified the effectiveness,
stability and robustness of proposed strategy under parameter
variations and external disturbances.
Fig.22.The error signal showing the difference between the output of the Plant and the
Observer i.e

REFRENCES
[1]

O. I. Elgerd, Control of electric power systems, IEEE Control Syst.Mag., vol. 1, no.
2, pp. 416, 1981.
[2] H. Saadat, Power System Analysis , McGraw-Hill, 2002.
[3] Kundur, P.:'Power system stability and control', McGraw Hill, New York, 1994.
[4] FoshaC.E. and Elegard O.L., "The Mega Watt Frequency Control Problem: A New
Approach via Optimal Control Theory", IEEE Trans., Power Apparatus and System89, 1970, PP.563-577.
[5] Y. L. Abdel-Magid, M. M. Dawoud, Genetic algorithms applications in load
frequency ontrol, Proc.IEE Conference publication No. 414, Shetheld, U.K., pp.207212, . 1995.
[6] Ibraheem, P Kumar and S Ahmad,Dynamic Performance Enhancement of HydroPower Systems with Asynchronous Tie-lines. IE (I) Journal Vol. 85, June 2004 pp.
23-34.
[7] Ibraheem, Prabhat Kumar, Study of Dynamic Performance of Power Systems with
Asynchronous Tie-lines considering Parameter Uncertainties, IE (I) Journal vol 83,
June 2004, pp.35-42.
[8] Ibraheem, Prabhat Kumar,Current Status of the Indian Power Systems and Dynamic
Performance Enhancement of Hydro Power Systems with Asynchronous Tie Lines,
Electric Power Components and Systems 2003, pp.605-626.
[9] Mohamed M. Ismail M. A. Mustafa Hassan, "Load Frequency Control Adaptation
using Artificial Intelligence Techniques for One and Two different Area Power
System", International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, Vol. 1, No. 1,
2012.
[10] Armin Ebrahimi Milani, Babak Mozafari, "Genetic Algorithm based Optimal Load
Frequency Control in Two Area Interconnected Power System", Global Journal of
Technology and Optimization, Trans. On Power System Optimization, Vol. 2, June
2012. PP. 6-10.
[11] S. Mohapatra, "Load Frequency Control in Two Area Power system", Thesis,
Department of Electrical Engineering, NIT Rourkela.
[12] Nilaykumar N. Shah, Chetan D. Kotwal, The State Space Modeling of Single, Two
And Three ALFC of Power System Using Integral Control and Optimal LQR Control
Method, IOSR Journal of Engineering Mar. 2012, Vol. 2(3) pp: 501-510.

LIST OF SYMBOLS
A
B
C
D
F
L
M
Q

System matrix.
Control matrix.
Output matrix.
Damping Coefficient of power system.
State system matrix.
Proportional gain.
Load change of constant magnitude (MW).
Positive semi-definite symmetric state cost weighting
Matrix.
R
Positive definite symmetric control cost weighting
Matrix.
U
Control vector.
X
State vector.
Y
output vector.
Frequency Deviations in Areas 1&2.
f1 & f2
Regulations of Governors in Areas 1, 2.
R1 & R2
Control Inputs in Areas 1& 2.
u1 & u2
Pg1 & Pg2 Deviations in Governor Power Outputs in Areas 1 &
2.
Pref1 & Pref2 Deviations in Reference power in Areas 1 & 2.
PT1 & PT2 Deviations in Turbine Power Outputs in Areas 1 & 2.
PV1 & PV2 Deviations in Valve Power Outputs in Areas 1 & 2.
Load Disturbances in Areas 1& 2.
PL1 &PL2
Power System Constants in Areas 1&2.
KP1&KP2
Power System Time Constants in Areas 1& 2.
TP1&TP2
B1 & B2
Tie Line Frequency Bias in Areas 1&2.
Synchronizing Coefficients for Tie Lines between
TO12
Pair of Areas for the Two-Area System.
Governor Time Constants for Areas 1 & 2.
TH1 & TH2
TT1 & TT2
Turbine Time Constants for Areas 1 & 2.