IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 24, NO.

1, FEBRUARY 2009

271

The Spanish AGC System: Description and Analysis

Ignacio Egido, Fidel Fernndez-Bernal, and Luis Rouco, Member, IEEE
AbstractThis paper describes and analyzes the Spanish AGC system. The differences with respect to a standard hierarchical structure are explained. A simple model useful for simulation is proposed. Using this model, the performance of the system and the inuence of several parameters in system response is evaluated. The paper also suggests some changes in the conguration and parameter settings of the system to improve its performance. Index TermsAutomatic generation control (AGC), frequency domain analysis, transfer function identication.

I. INTRODUCTION

OAD-FREQUENCY regulation is one of the ancillary services of a power system. The objective of load-frequency regulation is to maintain the system frequency at its scheduled value changing power generation so that the equilibrium between generation and demand is achieved [1]. The load-frequency regulation system is implemented in three different control loops, primary, secondary and tertiary regulation, each one operating in different time scales. The time scale of primary regulation control (droop control) is in the range of several seconds whereas the secondary regulation (integral control to eliminate frequency and area interchange deviations) is in the range of tens/hundreds of seconds. The tertiary control (aimed to restore secondary regulation reserve) is in the range of tens of minutes [2], [3]. This paper focuses on the secondary regulation loop. Power systems are usually organized into areas, each one with its own generation and demand and with scheduled power interchanges between them. The purpose of the secondary regulation loopusually known as automatic generation control (AGC)is to keep both the system frequency and the power interchanges at their scheduled values. AGC achieves this by an integral action that is applied to the area control error (ACE). Each area of the system computes its own ACE taking into account two different terms, one related to frequency deviation and the other one to its power interchange deviation with neighboring areas. If every area in the system makes zero its own ACE, system frequency and power interchanges between areas will remain at their scheduled values. In particular, most of the European power systems are interconnected forming a set of control areas ruled by common consent (23 countries and 36 national operators) through an organManuscript received July 20, 2007; revised June 27, 2008. First published December 12, 2008; current version published January 21, 2009. Paper no. TPWRS-00521-2007. The authors are with the Universidad Ponticia Comillas, 28015 Madrid, Spain (e-mail: egido@iit.upcomillas.es; delf@upcomillas.es, luis.rouco@iit. upcomillas.es).; Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TPWRS.2008.2007003

ization called UCTE (Union for the Co-ordination of Transmission of Electricity). The Spanish power system is part of UCTE. Although most of the power systems follow to certain extent the former general AGC scheme and rules, there are important differences among them in the details. In the particular case of the UCTE power systems, the UCTE has tried to clarify to some extent these differences grouping different schemes into some general structures [4]. Centralized: there is a unique regulation zone within the area, with a unique regulator that controls every unit in the area and which is in charge of complying with area AGC objectives. Pluralistic: there are different regulating zones within the area, each one with its own regulator and controlling its own units. Only one of these zones is selected as responsible of complying with area AGC objectives. Hierarchical: there are different regulating zones within the area, each one with its own regulator and controlling its own units as in pluralistic structure. In contrast to the pluralistic structure, there is a central regulator in the area that is in charge of complying with area AGC objectives. The area regulator commands the zone regulator and the zone regulator commands the zone units. However, that general classication is of little help for researchers in AGC eld and companies trying to commercialize AGC products for generating companies in different countries. The reason is that differences in the details are enormous and for an efcient and competitive AGC control the devil is in the detail. On the other hand, the detailed explanation of each power system is usually ruled by legal and obscure regulations in the native language of the country. Therefore, developers and researchers nd difcult to compare and analyze AGC systems in detail in other countries. This paper tries to give some light for the Spanish system which is a system operating under an electricity market. Although the structure of the Spanish AGC system is based on the hierarchical structure, it exhibits some important differences with respect to the standard structure. A detailed description of the operation of the Spanish power system will be given in the paper, clearly pointing out these differences. In addition, a new simulation model is presented. Using this model, a deep analysis of the system performance by means of frequency response analysis, including parameter variation, will be presented. Finally, some changes are proposed based on the previous analysis to improve system performance. II. STRUCTURE OF THE SPANISH AGC SYSTEM The Spanish power system is one of the areas of the European system supervised by the UCTE. The Spanish area is divided into several zones, each one corresponding to a gener-

0885-8950/$25.00 2008 IEEE

272

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 24, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2009

Fig. 1. General hierarchical structure of an AGC system. (a) Standard structure. (b) Spanish AGC system structure. Differences are marked in bold letters and lines in lower diagram.

ating company, and the AGC is operated using a modied hierarchical structure. The Spanish peninsular power system is interconnected with the French, Portuguese and Moroccan systems. Under normal operation, it controls its net interchange with the French system to a targetits scheduled interchange with the French system biased by an UCTE-assigned interconnection. The area regulator is operated by the Spanish system operator (Red Elctrica de Espaa, REE) [5], [8], and determines an area regulation requirement signal. Then, it distributes regulating requirements among the zones. AGC frequency support component is operated in the Spanish power system based on the results of a secondary reserve (that associated to secondary regulation) market. This market determines the amount of reserve assigned to each zone in the system and therefore the participation factor of each zone in the regulating requirements [9], [10]. A. Differences Between the Spanish AGC System and a Standard Hierarchical System In a standard hierarchical system [see Fig. 1(a)], area regulator computes area based on frequency deviation and power interchange deviations with neighboring areas. The is distributed among the zones according to the zone , which add up to 1), thus obtaining participation factors ( the control signal that is sent to zone regulators . Zone based on the control regulator then computes its own signal sent by central area regulator and on power interchange deviation with neighboring zones of the area. Finally, this ACE is used as an input to the AGC process of the zone to calculate . For the sake of simplicity, participathe unit setpoint tion factors to dispatch ACE among the units are used in Fig. 1. The basic structure of the Spanish AGC system is presented in Fig. 1(b), where the differences with the traditional structure have been highlighted in bold letters and lines. The Spanish notation for some variables that will be used later in Section II-B and Fig. 2 is shown in square brackets. The rst difference is (instead that frequency deviation is incorporated at the ) calculation. This comes from the of

original structure of the Spanish power system where the different zones corresponded to geographical areas weakly interconnected and has not been changed after the introduction of the current market structure. Another difference is that not power interchange deviation with neighboring zones but the deviation between zone real generation (PI) and scheduled generation (NSI) is used when cal. Moreover, this deviation is also introduced culating calculation. In both cases, generation deviation in before being used to from scheduled is divided by a gain . Gain was xed as a rule of thumb to compute the current value, , when the AGC system was rst put into operation in the early 1980s. Experience has shown that this is a sensible value. The objective of introducing such a gain is briey explained in Section II-B. However, the work presented in this paper is the rst one in which the inuence of has been checked rigorously on the Spanish system. Finally, zone partici, are calculated based on secondary reserve pation factors market results as proportional to the amount of secondary reserve assigned to each zone. This structure allows complying with area AGC objectives while it assures that, in steady state, each zone will be generating its scheduled power plus a variation due to AGC regulation equal to the total area power variation multiplied by zone participation factor. The notation used in the Spanish AGC system can be confusing in other environments. For example, NSI stands for net schedule interchange between zones in NERC (North American Electric Reliability Corporation) notation but in the Spanish case is the net schedule generation xed by the day-ahead market for each generating unit [9], [10]. Initially the AGC system was working under a zone interchange scheme and NERC notation was used. Later, the system changed to a unit generation scheme. Although the interchange concept was substituted by a generation concept, notation was kept. B. Block Diagram and Modeling of the Spanish AGC System A block diagram modeling the Spanish AGC system is presented in Fig. 2. A discrete time model has been selected because the Spanish AGC system runs with a time period of 4 s. Some differences exist with the model in the lower diagram in Fig. 1 because a more detailed representation is used. On the left of Fig. 2 there is a power balance model of the system resulting in the power interchange deviation for the . is computed from total whole Spanish area generation, including scheduled and deviation from scheduled (sumNID), demand, generation and demand variation due to primary regulation control (droop control), and scheduled interchange (area interchange deviation can be set to zero if frequency control mode is selected). In the center of Fig. 2, a simple model of the Area regulator operated by the Spanish system operator is shown. Before using to calculate area ACE (known as PRR, peninsular regulating request), it is ltered using a nonlinear lter. The objectives of this lter are to avoid unnecessary control actions and to minimize inadvertent interchange. To fulll such requirements, is selected based on and the gain of the lter integral of (inadvertent interchange) values as shown in (1) at the bottom of the next page.

EGIDO et al.: THE SPANISH AGC SYSTEM: DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS

273

Fig. 2. Detailed block diagram of Spanish AGC system.

The ltered value of is compensated with sumNID/G to obtain area ACE (PRR). This compensation is necessary because zone control regulators calculate their own ACE dividing their NID by gain as will be explain later. Then, PRR is distributed among the different zones (CRR) using zone participation factors (K , K , K , and K in Fig. 2) that are obtained from secondary reserve market results as the quotient between zone assigned secondary reserve and the total system secondary reserve (thus, zone participation factors add up to one). On the right of Fig. 2 there are the control zone models assuming that the system includes four control zones (it is the most common situation in the Spanish system since this is the number of large generating companies giving AGC service). A simplied representation of the zones has been adopted. The transfer function between the zone ACE and the zone power

variation has been modeled as an integrator with an adjustable gain. This is due to the fact that the response criteria imposed by the Spanish system operator to every zone in the system implies that its closed-loop response has to be similar to that of a rst order linear system with a time constant between 4 and 100 s [9], [10]. REE checks it in real time and, if a generating company fails to comply with this, it is economically penalized, and in the end it could be even put apart of secondary ancillary market [11]. Thus, in order to meet this criterion, the open-loop response has where to be that of an integrator with a gain equal to can vary from 4 to 100 s [11]. The output of the zone model in Fig. 2 is the output power deviation from scheduled due to AGC operation (PGC, power generation under control). Total zone deviation from scheduled generation is calculated as zone scheduled generation minus zone power output, corre-

(1)

274

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 24, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2009

sponding to in Fig. 2, and is known as NID (net interchange deviation). In Fig. 2 each zone calculates its ACE using

(2) Gain in (2) does not have any effect in the overall system response as will be shown later in Sections III and IV-B, because it is compensated with sumNID/G in the Area regulator (see Fig. 2). However it affects the dynamic PGC sharing among zones. Initially, it was thought as a way to transfer to some extent sudden lost of generation in one zone to the others (if a zone has lost generation, it is of no use to increase only its own ACE but to also increase ACE of other zones). The inuence of this parameter is deeply analyzed in Section IV-B. Note that, for the whole system, sum of (2) for all different zones, by substituting for NID and CRR, becomes the standard ACE dened for the tie-line bias (with France) or constant frequency control depending on the position of the switch in Fig. 2. III. OVERALL SYSTEM PERFORMANCE: FREQUENCY RESPONSE ANALYSIS The model presented in previous section can be used to perform different analysis of AGC operation in the Spanish power system, including the inuence of parameter variation. This section studies the overall performance of the model using frequency domain analysis. Frequency response analysis of measured signals (frequency deviation and demand) is rstly undertaken. In addition, frequency response analysis of the proposed simulation model is addressed. A. Frequency Domain Analysis of Measured Signals The frequency domain analysis of measured demand and frequency deviation signals allows determining the frequencies to focus on when analyzing the Spanish AGC system response. Power spectral density (PSD) has been calculated for demand and frequency deviation from signals recorded during system operation (around four hours of data with a 4 s sampling time for each set of data). These signals are common in generating company control centers in Spain. The results obtained for three different days are shown in Fig. 3. Highest PSD of the demand deviation (upper gure), is found at frequencies lower than 1 mHz (period greater than 17 min). Highest PSD of frequency deviation (lower gure) is found at frequencies lower than 2 mHz (period greater than 8 min). B. Frequency Domain Analysis of the Simulation Model 1) Response of PGC to Demand Variations: Using block diagram transformation from Fig. 2, and xing nonlinear lter gain equal to unity and the same value for constant in every zone, the discrete time transfer function between demand and total PGC area variation ( in Fig. 2) results to be is the estimated spectral density of the input and is the estimated cross spectral density between input and output, both obtained using Welch method [14], [15]. The input signal used in every simulation will be a random phase multi-sine signal with a minimum frequency equal to . Only frequencies given by (5) will be included in order to allow nonlinearities detection [13]. The same amplitude is selected for every frequency as follows: (5) Transfer function between demand and PGC has been identied using this method and setting a value for every zone. The results obtained for different peak to peak values of demand input signal are presented in Fig. 4, together with the transfer function corresponding to the linear system (gain of the nonlinear lter set to one). As can be seen in Fig. 4, the smaller the peak to peak value of the input signal is, the greater is the inuence of the nonlinear lter. In case of input signals with a small peak to peak value, the nonlinear lter causes an increase in gain for low frequencies and a decrease in gain for higher ones. The delay between input and output takes place at lower frequencies for small peak to peak input values. However, the inuence of the nonlinear lter below 1 mHz is small and it does not affect signicantly in real operation. where

Fig. 3. Power spectral density (PSD) calculated for demand (up) and frequency deviation (down) from scheduled signals recorded during real operation.

Transfer function (3) corresponds to a discrete rst order linear model with a steady state gain equal to one and a time constant equal to . Thus, the model of Fig. 2 successfully responds . For to demand variations with a period greater than , then . Note . that the highest PSD in real demand was at The inuence of the nonlinear lter in the system response is analyzed by means of simulations of block diagram in Fig. 2. Transfer function between demand and PGC is estimated from simulation input and output using correlation method [12], [13] as follows:

(4)

(3)

EGIDO et al.: THE SPANISH AGC SYSTEM: DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS

275

Fig. 4. Transfer functions estimated between demand and total PGC for different peak to peak values of demand input signal.

Fig. 5. Transfer functions estimated between frequency deviation and PGC for different peak to peak values of frequency deviation input signal.

2) Response of PGC to Frequency Deviation Variations: Using block diagram transformation from Fig. 2, and xing nonlinear lter gain equal to unity and the same value for constant in every zone, the discrete time transfer function and total PGC area variation between frequency deviation results to be

for low frequencies while the delay between input and output also takes place at lower frequencies. Unlike the demand, inuence of the nonlinear lter below 2 mHz for frequency deviation is signicant for small peak to peak values. IV. ZONE RESPONSE TO DEMAND VARIATIONS This section evaluates the zone response in case of demand variations. Precisely, we study how the PGC is distributed among the zones in both steady-state and transient conditions. ACE area control signal (PRR in the Spanish System, see Fig. 2) is distributed among zones using participation factors , that are obtained from secondary reserve market outcome ( , , and in Fig. 2). Ideally, PGC zone variation should be proportional to the associated secondary reserve market participation factor, but feedback loops make actual sharing different. This is due to the different zone speed of response (different values of constant in Fig. 2) modulated by the value of parameter (currently set to 5 for all the zones, see Fig. 2). Actual sharing of total PGC among zones is analyzed in this section taking into account zone speed of response and the inuence of parameter . A. Effect of Zone Speed of Response To assess actual PGC sharing, actual participation factors are calculated. These actual participation factors are compared to the market ones (that obtained from market results and used for area ACE sharing) for every zone in the area. Actual participation factor of a zone is dened as the rate between its PGC variation and the total area PGC variation for a certain demand variation. Thus, the transfer function between demand variations and PGC variations is calculated for the whole area and for every individual zone. Actual participation factor is then obtained for every zone dividing the gain of its transfer function by the gain of the areas one for every frequency in the frequency response. The results obtained are presented in Fig. 6. The response of zone A has been set twice faster than that of the other zones

(6) is frequency bias for zone (in MW/0.1 Hz) and NZ where is the number of AGC zones in the area. Transfer function in (6) corresponds to a discrete rst order linear model with a steady state gain equal to and a time constant equal to . Thus, the system successfully responds to frequency deviations with a period greater . For , then . than Note that most of the power in real frequency deviation was at . Transfer function between frequency deviation and PGC taking the nonlinear lter into account has been obtained using the procedure presented before. Different peak to peak values of frequency deviation signal have been used and the results are shown in Fig. 5 together with the transfer function corresponding to the linear system (gain of the nonlinear lter set to one). For the sake of simplicity, peak to peak values presented in the legend and frequency response magnitude in Fig. 5 are referred to the steady state power variation expected corresponding to frequency deviation as follows:

(7) As can be seen in Fig. 5, the inuence of the nonlinear lter is more important for small peak to peak values of frequency deviation input signal. It causes an increase in transfer function gain

276

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 24, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2009

Fig. 6. Actual and market participation factors of the four zones in Fig. 2. The response of zone A is twice faster than that of the other zones.

Fig. 7. Actual and market participation factors for the four zones in Fig. 2 and for different values of parameter . The response of zone A is twice faster than that of the other zones.

( , ). Peak to peak value of demand input signal has been set to 50 MW. As can be seen in Fig. 6, actual participation factors are similar to market ones for low frequencies but the difference increases for high frequencies. As zone A has a faster response, its actual participation factor increases while the ones of the other zones decrease. B. Effect of Value
Fig. 8. Transfer functions estimated between demand and area PGC for different values of parameter .

As stated before and presented in Fig. 2, generation deviation from scheduled is divided by a parameter before being used in ACE calculation. To analyze the inuence of this parameter in PGC sharing among zones, actual participation factors have been computed in case of three values of (1, 5, and 20). As in Fig. 6, the response of zone A has been set twice faster than that , ). The acof the other zones ( tual participation factors obtained for each value of parameter are presented in Fig. 7 together with the market ones. As can be seen in Fig. 7, the difference between actual and market participation factors is more important for greater values of parameter . Fig. 7 shows that a smaller value of parameter would improve area PGC sharing among units. However, it is important to determine if a change in this parameter will modify global area response. Transfer function between demand and total area PGC has been obtained as for Fig. 4 but for the same values of parameter used in Fig. 7. The results obtained, presented in Fig. 8, show that parameter value does not inuence global area response to demand variation, as the lines for every value of nearly overlap. V. ZONE RESPONSE TO FREQUENCY DEVIATION VARIATIONS As has been shown in Figs. 1(b) and 2, frequency deviation is measured and compensated in the zones but is not considered by the area regulator. Therefore, the conclusions presented in

previous section regarding area response to demand variation only can be directly applied to area response to frequency deviation under one important assumption. This assumption is that the quotient between zone frequency bias and area frequency for every zone has to be equal to its secbias ondary reserve market participation factor (that obtained from secondary reserve market results). However, zone frequency bias values are assigned yearly and do not change through the year, while market participation factors change every hour because reserve market is hourly cleared. For that reason, previous assumption is hardly met and usually frequency bias quotients and market participation factors are different. The effect of this mismatch in area response to frequency deviation is presented in this section. A. Effect of Frequency Bias Quotient and Market Participation Factors To evaluate this effect, actual participation factors for the zones have been calculated from simulations as in previous section. Peak to peak value of frequency deviation input signal has been set to obtain an output oscillation in PGC of 50 MW [calculated using (7)]. The parameters of the system are presented in are different Table I, where market participation factors

EGIDO et al.: THE SPANISH AGC SYSTEM: DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS

277

TABLE I MODEL PARAMETERS USED IN SIMULATIONS

Fig. 10. Actual participation factors for the four zones in Fig. 2 in response to frequency deviation. Frequency bias quotient and market participation factors are different for B, C, and D. Zone A is twice faster than the others.

Fig. 9. Actual participation factors for the four zones in Fig. 2 in response to frequency deviation. Frequency bias quotient and market participation factors are different for zones B, C, and D. Fig. 11. Total actual participation factor in response to frequency deviation for different values of parameter . Frequency bias quotient and market participation factors are different for zones B, C, and D.

from frequency bias quotient and the speed of response is the same for every zone . Calculated actual participation factors are presented in Fig. 9, together with the addition of all actual participation factors (Total). As can be seen in Fig. 9, real participation factors increase for low frequencies for every zone except for A (same bias quotient and market participation factor). It leads to a total participation factor greater than one. This means that the addition of PGC oscillation amplitude for every zone in the area is greater than area PGC oscillation amplitude implying an increase in system regulation effort that is not needed. This is due to a delay between the responses of the different zones (their responses are not in phase) [16]. B. Inuence of Different Zone Speed of Response To analyze the inuence of a different speed of response of zones (a usual situation), the response of zone A has been set twice faster than that of the other zones ( , ). The actual participation factors obtained have been presented in Fig. 10, together with the addition of all actual participation factors (Total). Fig. 10 shows a greater increase in system regulation effort at low frequencies compared with the situation of all zones having the same speed of response (Fig. 9). C. Inuence of Parameter Value

parameter . For a value of there is nearly no increase in system regulation effort and thus setting a small value of parameter will improve system performance. VI. CONCLUSIONS Spanish peninsular power system is an area within the European system under UCTE organization. The Spanish area is divided into several zones and the structure of the AGC is hierarchical: an area regulator calculates areas regulation requirements and sends control signals to zone regulators (which corresponds to generating company regulators). Although the structure of Spanish AGC system is hierarchical, there are some differences with respect to the standard hierarchical one: 1) frequency deviation is introduced into all the ACE zone regulators calculation (instead of area ACE calculation); 2) deviation between zone real generation (PI) and scheduled generation (NSI) is used when calculating zone ACE (moreover, this deviation is also introduced in area ACE calculation); 3) generation deviation from scheduled is divided by a parameter (with a current value of 5) before being used to compute ACE. On the other hand, the sharing of areas ACE among zone regulators is done using participation factors that are obtained from the results of a secondary reserve market. A detailed model of the system has been developed to analyze the Spanish AGC system performance. Analysis and simulation of such model has conrmed that the system properly meets the secondary regulation objectives. The effect of the nonlinear lter has been analyzed. Unlike for demand deviation, the inuence of the nonlinear lter for frequency deviation harmonics below 2 mHz is signicant for small peak to peak values.

Finally, the inuence of parameter value is analyzed calculating total actual participation factor for simulations with different values for this parameter. The system parameters used in the simulations are those in Table I and has been set to 1, 5, and 20. The results presented in Fig. 11 show that the increase of total actual participation factor (and thus of system regulation effort) at low frequencies is greater for greater values of

278

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 24, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2009

Sharing of area PGC variations among zones should be proportional to market participation factors. However, this is only true for low frequency components. As frequency increases, the faster the response of the zone (smaller value of in Fig. 2), the greater the increase in sharing from market participation inuences this sharing, befactor. The value of parameter coming closer to market participation factors for lower values seems to be very sensible. Besides, of . A value of value does not inuence global area response to demand variation. are usually difFrequency bias quotients ferent from market participation factors. This mismatch causes an unnecessary increment in area regulation effort at low frequencies due to a delay between zones responses to frequency deviation, which can be minimized using lower values of parameter . The results obtained show that system performance can be optimized: 1) using a lower value of parameter , for instance (current value of 5); 2) changing the system structure and including frequency deviation in area ACE calculation, instead of in the ACE calculation of zones. If frequency measurement is made by the system operator (and not by the zones, removing all calculation) and is added directly to the area ACE (PRR), then frequency deviation control is proportional to market participation factors. In addition, it avoids the different control actions that would produce highly probable different frequency measurements.

[11] I. Egido, F. Fernandez-Bernal, and L. Rouco, Evaluation of automatic generation control (AGC) regulators by performance indices using data from real operation, IET Gen., Transm., Distrib., vol. 1, pp. 294302, 2007. [12] G. Keith, Perturbation Signals for System Identication. New York: Prentice-Hall, 1993. [13] P. Rik and S. Johan, System identication, in A Frequency Domain Approach. New York: IEEE Press, 2001. [14] K. M. Sanjit and F. K. James, Handbook for Digital Signal Processing. New York: Wiley, 1993. [15] D. S. Robert and E. K. Donald, First Principles of Discrete Systems and Digital Signal Processing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1988. [16] I. Egido, Diseo de reguladores para el control automtico de la generacin, in Instituto de Investigacin Tecnolgica. Madrid, Spain: Univ. Ponticia Comillas, 2005. Ignacio Egido was born in vila, Spain, in 1976. He received the M.S. degree and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the Universidad Pontificia Comillas, Madrid, Spain, in 2000 and 2005, respectively. He is currently a Researcher of the Instituto de Investigacin Tecnolgica, Universidad Ponticia Comillas, where he has been involved in several research projects related to AGC and power system stability. His interests include control system design and power systems stability and control.

REFERENCES
[1] K. Prahba, Power System Stability and Control. Palo Alto, CA: McGraw-Hill, 1994. [2] F. P. DeMello and J. M. Undrill, Automatic generation control, IEEE Tutorial Course on Energy Control Center Design, pp. 1727, 1977. [3] N. Jaleeli, L. S. VanSlych, D. N. Ewart, L. H. Fink, and A. G. Hoffmann, Understanding automatic generation control, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 11061112, Aug. 1992. [4] Union for the Co-Ordination of Transmission of Electricity UCTE. Brussels, Belgium: UCTE Operation Handbook, 2004. [5] J. I. d. l. Fuente, J. L. Zamora, and A. M. Calmarza, Technical and economic improvements of the AGC Spanish scheme, in Proc. 2001 Power Tech, Porto, Portugal, 2001. [6] V. Garca-Echave, L. Pradinas, J. M. Ferrer, F. L. Heras, and J. J. Gonzales, Regulation system for the coordination of the multiple AGCs of the Spanish peninsular utilities as a unique control area. Description and eld experiences, in Proc. Cigr Session, Paris, France, 1984. [7] L. O. Camacho, J. I. de la Fuente Len, J. L. Z. Macho, R. R. Pecharromn, A. M. Calmarza, and J. Moreno, New design for the Spanish ACG scheme using an adaptive gain controller, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 152837, Aug. 2004. [8] Regulacin Compartida Del Sistema Peninsular. Descripcin tcnica. Borrador. Madrid, Spain: Red Elctrica de Espaa REE, 2002. [9] P. O. 7.2. Servicio Complementario de Regulacin Secundaria, Ministerio de Industria y Energa, 1998, BOE 197/1998. [10] M. C. Rodolfo, Ancillary services markets in Spain, in EES-UETP Reliability Under Restructuring. Madrid, Spain: Ancillary Services Markets, 1999.

Fidel Fernndez-Bernal was born in Madrid, Spain, in 1968. He received the B.S. degree, the M.S degree, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the Universidad Ponticia Comillas, Madrid, in 1990, 1994, and 2000, respectively. From 1988 to 1992, he worked as a Programmer and System Manager in different companies. From 1990 to 2000, he was Lecturer at the Universidad Ponticia Comillas. Currently, he works as a Professor in the Electrical Department and as a Researcher in the Institute of Applied Research of the Universidad Ponticia Comillas. Dr. Fernndez-Bernal was recipient of the Best B.S. degree in Electrical Engineering in Spain in 1990 prize and the Honorable Mention for his M.S. degree.

Luis Rouco (S89M91) received the Ingeniero Industrial and Doctor Ingeniero Industrial degrees from Universidad Politcnica de Madrid, madrid, Spain, in 1985 and 1990, respectively. He is a Professor of electrical engineering in the School of Engineering of the Universidad Ponticia Comillas, Madrid, attached to the Department of Electrical Engineering. He served as Director of the Department of Electrical Engineering form 1999 through 2005. He develops his research activities at Instituto de Investigacin Tecnologica (IIT), where he has supervised a number of research and consultancy projects for Spanish and foreign companies. He has published more than 50 papers in conferences and journals. He has been a Visiting Researcher at Ontario Hydro (Toronto, ON, Canada), MIT (Cambridge, MA), and ABB Power Systems (Vasteras, Sweden). His areas of interest are modeling, analysis, simulation, and identication of electric power systems. Prof. Rouco is member of Cigr, Vice-president of the Spanish Chapter of the IEEE Power Engineering Society, and a member of the Executive Committee of Spanish National Committee of Cigr.