Ijeet Paper

International Journal of Electrical Engineering and Technology (IJEET),
ISSN 0976 6545(Print), ISSN 0976 6553(Online) Volume 1, Number 1, May - June (2010), IAEME

47

SMALL SIGNAL STABILITY ANALYSIS USING FUZZY
CONTROLLER AND ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK
STABILIZER
A.padmaja
EEE Dept., GIT, Gitam University
Visakhapatnam-530 045
Email: padmaja_a14@yahoo.co.in

V.s.vakula
Email: vakulavs@yahoo.com

T.Padmavathi
Email:tadipadma@gmail.com

S.v.Padmavathi
Email: sv.padmavathi@gmail.com

ABSTRACT:
Power system Stabilizers are used in order to damp out the low frequency
oscillations which are due to disturbances. This paper attempts to investigate the
performance of Conventional Power System Stabilizer (CPSS), Fuzzy Logic Power
System Stabilizer (FLPSS) and Artificial Neural Network based Power System Stabilizer
(ANNPSS) under Prefault and Postfault conditions for different loadings. The parameters
of Conventional Power System Stabilizer (CPSS) is designed using Pole-Placement
Technique and the parameters of Fuzzy logic Power System Stabilizer (FLPSS) is tuned
to their optimal values in order to minimize the overshoot in step response of rotor angle
International Journal of Electrical Engineering
and Technology (IJEET), ISSN 0976 6545(Print)
ISSN 0976 6553(Online), Volume 1
Number 1, May - June (2010), pp. 47-70
IAEME, http://www.iaeme.com/ijeet.html

IJEET
I A E M E

48
deviation using Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) technique whereas Artificial Neural
network based Power System Stabilizer (ANNPSS) is trained by Linear Optimal Control
(LOC) theory. Designed power system stabilizers are applied to a single machine infinite
bus system and are tested in four operational conditions; normal load, heavy load, light
load and solid 3-phase fault occurrence in a transmission line. The simulation study
reveals that the performance of Linear Optimal Control (LOC) based Artificial Neural
Network Power System Stabilizer is much improved with Artificial Neural Network
based Power System Stabilizer under different operating conditions.
Key words: Power System Stabilizer, Fuzzy Logic Controller, Particle Swarm
Optimization, Artificial Neural network, Pole placement technique, Linear Optimal
Control.
1. INTRODUCTION
Power Systems experience low frequency oscillations which are in the range of
0.1 to 2.5Hz due to disturbances which may grow and lead to dynamic instability of the
system if the applied damping torque is insufficient and may limit the ability to transmit
power. Power System Stabilizer (PSS) provides required damping by producing an
electrical torque component in phase with rotor speed deviation to enhance the system
stability from low frequency oscillations by controlling the excitation using auxiliary
stabilizing signals. PSS should be provided with appropriate phase lead circuits to
compensate for the phase lag between the exciter input and electrical torque. In this
paper, the pole placement technique is considered to determine the parameters of
Conventional Power System Stabilizer (CPSS) in order to stabilize a single machine
connected infinite bus system. However, conventional PSS which is designed at certain
operating point does not provide satisfactory results for all operating conditions due to
approximation in modeling and variation of the system topology due to error occurrence.
Therefore, in recent years, soft computing methodologies like fuzzy logic and
neural networks have been investigated for designing the PSS. The fuzzy Logic based
Power System Stabilizers (FLPSS) have great potential in increasing the damping of
generator oscillations. The inputs to the FLPSS are , &and

. The first step in

the design of FLPSS is to design conventional PID (Proportional-Integral-Derivative)

49
power system stabilizer which is based on a linear approximation of a nonlinear power
plant around the operating point. The main disadvantage with the classical PID controller
is that it cannot successfully control a plant with strong non-linearities and various
operating conditions. During a major disturbance such as a fault, the operating point of a
power system drifts; conventional PID controllers do not work well under such
conditions. A nonlinear controller such as proposed Fuzzy controller will be more
effective to cover a wider range of operating conditions. Design of Fuzzy Logic Power
System Stabilizer is not an easy task. It is very important to appropriately tune the
parameters used in FLPSS. In this paper, Particle Swarm optimization (PSO) is used to
tune the parameters of FLPSS. The main advantage of PSO over other Global Search
techniques is its algorithmic simplicity as it uses few parameters and easy to implement.
Stabilizing method based on Linear Optimal Control (LOC), make a suitable damping at
different loading condition, but also this method needs determination of all system states
that seems to be very difficult. In recent years Artificial Neural Network (ANN)
methodology has widely used in power system engineering. In an attempt to cover a wide
range of operating conditions, Artificial Neural Network Power system stabilizer
(ANNPSS) have been proposed which is trained by Linear Optimal Control.
The efficacy of the stabilizer is tested on a single machine infinite bus bar system
under four operational conditions; normal load, heavy load and light load, and in the case
of fault occurrence in a transmission line. This paper is organized as follows. The
problem is formulated in section 2. A brief explanation about the design of different
stabilizers i.e the design of Conventional Power System Stabilizer (CPSS) using Pole-
placement technique, the design of Fuzzy Logic Power system stabilizer using Particle
Swarm Optimization (PSO) technique and design of Artificial Neural Network based
Power System Stabilizer using Linear Optimal Control (LOC-ANNPSS) is presented in
section 3. Finally, to evaluate the effectiveness of proposed LOC-ANNPSS, simulation
results are provided in section 4 for various operating conditions and conclusions are
given in section 5.


50
2. PROBLEM FORMULATION
Figure 1 shows the power system under study [1] is a Synchronous machine
connected to a large power system through a transformer and a double circuit
transmission lines. Figure 2 shows the single line schematic of the system including the
Conventional Power System Stabilizer (CPSS), Fuzzy Logic Power System Stabilizer
(FLPSS) and proposed Linear Optimal Control based Artificial Neural Network Power
System Stabilizer (LOC-ANNPSS), where they are discussed in the next sections. In this
paper, for the analysis and design of control system, the system may be linearized, since
the disturbance considered being small. During low frequency oscillations, the current
induced in a damper winding is negligibly small; hence damper windings are completely
ignored in the system model. The natural oscillating frequency for d-axis and q-axis
armature windings being extremely high, their eigen modes will not effect the low
frequency oscillations. Hence can be ignored. Finally the field winding which is directly
connected to excitation system, and has low eigen mode frequency is taken into account
in system modeling. The performance of CPSS, FLPSS and LOC-ANNPSS is evaluated
in four operational conditions; normal, heavy, light loads, and in the case of solid 3-phase
fault occurrence at bus 2 in second circuit.

Figure 1 Single machine infinite bus system

51

Figure 2 Schematic of the SMIB with different power system stabilizers

Figure 3 Linearized model of SMIB with Conventional PSS
The linearized state equations for single machine connected to infinite bus are given as:

x A x Bu = + &

y Cx Du = +
(1)
Where
T
q fd
x E E ( =

The state matrix can be written as:

52
0
1 2
4
3
5 6
0 0 0
0 0
1 1
0
1
0
do do do
E E
E E E
k k
M M
k A
k
k k k k
T T T

(
(
(
(
(
=
(

(
(
(
(

0
0
0
E
E
B
k
T
(
(
(
= (
(
(
(

, [ ] 0 1 0 0 C = , [1] D = (2)
Constants
1
k to
6
k represent the system parameters at certain operating condition
[2,3]. Analytical expressions for these parameters as function of loading (P, Q) are
derived in [4]. System data is given in APPENDIX
To cover multi-operating conditions of the machine under study normal, heavy
and light loading regimes are selected (pu): And also the performance of conventional
PSS for prefault and postfault conditions under all above loading conditions is analyzed.
The Constants k
1
to k
6
for multioperating conditions are tabulate in Table.1
Table 1 k
1
to k
6
for multioperating conditions
3. DESIGN OF POWER SYSTEM STABILIZERS (PSS)
3.1 Design of Conventional power System Stabilizer (CPSS) using Pole-
placement technique
Now, the problem is defined as follows:
Given system (1), the transfer function of the system can be obtained using transfer
matrix
B A sI C s G
1
) ( ) (

= (3)
The Linearised incremental model of synchronous machine with an exciter and power
system stabilizer is as shown in Fig 3. The technique for selection of stabilizer parameters
is explained by considering the (small Signal) transfer function (Fig 5) from the voltage
Constants Loading
condition
Fault
Condition
1
k
2
k
3
k
4
k
5
k
6
k
Prefault 1.146 1.1775 0.3361 1.7784 0.1175 0.516 Normal
load Postfault 0.6588 0.6722 0.38617 1.468 0.10711 0.6726
Prefault 1.3 1.135 0.3361 1.7146 0.12027 0.57176 Heavy
Load Postfault 1.116 0.6367 0.38617 1.4145 0.1087 0.73233
Prefault 1.14076 0.88164 0.3361 1.332 0.13756 0.566 Light
Load Postfault 1.027 0.7364 0.38617 1.111 0.1266 0.67113

53
regulator reference of the machine where the stabilizer is to be applied to the speed
deviation of that machine. Such a transfer function can be obtained from the linearised
state space equations of single machine infinite bus system.

Figure 4 Block diagram of system transfer function with out PSS
The state space equations include a reasonable representation of excitation system
dynamics. The poles of G(s) are exactly the eigen values of the linearized single machine
system without the present stabilizer. The effect of adding a stabilizer with transfer
function H(S) to the system can be seen by considering the block diagram shown in
Figure 5.

Figure 5 Block diagram of system transfer function with PSS
The modified transfer function now becomes the closed loop transfer function

( )
( )
1 ( ) ( )
c
G s
G s
G s H s
=
(4)
The Eigen values of the system including the Stabilizers on the machine are the
poles of this closed loop transfer function, and satisfy the closed loop characteristic
equation:

1 ( ) ( ) 0 G s H s =
(5)
If we now specify a pair of desired complex eigen values (complex conjugates of
each other), we can substitute one of these into above equation which, upon separation
into real and imaginary parts, will yield two equations in the three unknown stabilizer
parameters
pss
K
,

1
T and
2
T in H(s).
These equations can then be solved to determine the stabilizer parameters. Since
there are two equations with three unknown parameters, the additional degree of freedom
can be used to control to some extent the locations of the eigen values other than the
G(s)

V
ref
H(S)
G(s)
V
ref
-

+


54
primary desired complex pair. The objective is to design a single stage PSS in the form
of
( )
ref
V
G s
(6)

1
2
1
( )
1 1
w
pss
w
sT sT
H s K
sT sT
| | +
=
|
+ +
\
(7)
This stabilizes the system by placing the poles at desired location so as to stabilize
the system at various operating conditions. The washout time constant
w
T is taken as
10sec and the Time constant
2
T is taken as 0.05 sec. using the pole-placement technique
the desired poles are -0.30868+j7.8516 and -0.30868-j7.8516.The variables
pss
K and T
1

are calculated and tabulated in Table.2.
Table 2 Parameters of Conventional power System Stabilizer
pss
K
1
T (sec)
2
T (sec)
10.75 0.485 0.05
The Linearized model of the Single Machine Infinite Bus system with
Conventional power System Stabilizer is shown in Figure 3.
3.2 Design of Fuzzy Logic power System Stabilizer (FLPSS) using PSO
3.2.1. Fuzzy Logic Controller (FLC)
The change in load causes the variation of the generator dynamic characteristics
so that the different operating conditions are obtained. Power system stabilizer must be
capable of providing appropriate stabilization signals over a broad range of operating
conditions and disturbances. Traditional power system stabilizers rely on linear design
methods. On the other hand, a conventional PSS is designed for a linear model
representing the generator at a certain operating point and it does not cover wide range of
operating conditions effectively. During a major disturbance such as a fault, the operating
point of a power system drifts; conventional controllers do not work well under such
conditions whereas a non-linear controller can perform well under such situations. Hence
a Fuzzy Logic Controller (FLC), which has non-linear structure, is proposed in order
improve the system stability by minimizing the maximum overshoot. A simple Fuzzy

55
logic Controller can be depicted using the block diagram shown in Figure 6. The steps
followed in designing Fuzzy Logic Controller (FLC) are summarized [12] below:
1. Identify the variables (inputs, states and output) of the plant.
2. Partition the universe of discourse or the interval spanned by each variable into a
number of fuzzy subsets, assigning a linguistic label.
3. Determine or assign a membership function for each fuzzy subset.
4. Form the rule base i.e., assigning the fuzzy relationships between the inputs or states
fuzzy subsets on the one hand and the outputs fuzzy subsets on the other hand.
5. Choose appropriate scaling factors for the input and output variables in order to
normalize the variables to the [0, 1] or the [-1, 1] interval.
6. Fuzzify the inputs to the controller
7. Use fuzzy approximate reasoning to infer the output contributed from each rule.
8. Aggregate the fuzzy outputs recommended by each rule.
9. Apply defuzzification to form a crisp output.

Figure 6 Structure of Fuzzy Logic Controller
The implementation of fuzzy controller in a PSS structure is shown in Fig.6 and
its illustrations can be explained as the following steps [5]:
Step 1: In the scheme, , &and

are used as the input signals and

s
V as
output signal of the controller. The coefficients
p
K ,
i
K and
d
K are used to keep the
signals within allowable limit. These coefficients are known as scaling factors which

56
transform the real value scale to required value in decision limit. The output signal (
s
V ) is
injected at the summing point of the exciter as the supplementary signal.
Step 2: Identical membership functions have been chosen for each of input and
out put variables in order to achieve normalization on the physical variables.
Normalization allows the controller to associate equitable weight to each of the rules and
to calculate the stabilizing signal correctly.
Step 3: Each of the input fuzzy variables
i
x is assigned three linguistic fuzzy
subsets such as Negative (N), Zero (Z), Positive (P) and output fuzzy variables, is
assigned seven linguistic fuzzy subsets such as Large Negative (LN), Medium Negative
(MN), Small Negative (SN), Zero (Z), Small Positive (SP), Medium Positive (MP) and
Large Positive (LP). Symmetrical and normalized triangular membership functions for
input and output fuzzy variables are shown in Fig.4.14 and 4.15

Figure 7 Membership functions for input variables

Figure 8 Membership functions for output variables.
Step 4: The range of each fuzzy variable is normalized between -1 to 1 by
introducing a scaling factor to represent the actual signal.
Step 5: Formation of rule base i.e., the set of decision rules which gives all
possible combinations of inputs and outputs is based on the previous experience in the

57
field. The decision table made up of (3 X 3 X 3 =) 27 rules expressed using the same
linguistic labels as those of the inputs is shown in Table.3.
Table.3 Rule base for three input Fuzzy Controller
1 N N N PL
2 N N Z P
3 N N P P
4 N Z N P
5 N Z Z P
6 N Z P Z
7 N P N P
8 N P Z Z
9 N P P N
10 Z N N P
11 Z N Z P
12 Z N P Z
13 Z Z N P
14 Z Z Z Z
15 Z Z P N
16 Z P N Z
17 Z P Z N
18 Z P P N
19 P N N P
20 P N Z Z
21 P N P N
22 P Z N Z
23 P Z Z N
24 P Z P N
25 P P N N
26 P P Z N
27 P P P NL
Step 6: Centroid method of defuzzification is applied to convert fuzzy output to
crisp out put signal
s
V which is added at the summing junction of the exciter as the
supplementary signal.
Figure 9 depicts the implementation of fuzzy controller in a Linearized model of SMIB

58

Figure 9 Linearized model of SMIB with FLPSS
3.2.2. Overview of PSO
Particle swarm optimization (PSO) is an evolutionary computation technique
developed by Dr. Eberhart and Dr.Kennedy in 1995, inspired by social behavior of bird
flocking or fish schooling. PSO is a population based optimization tool. As shown in
Fig.10, the system is initialized with a population of random solutions and searches for
optima by updating generations. All the particles have fitness values, which are evaluated
by the fitness function to be optimized, and have velocities, which direct the flying of the
particles. The particles are flown through the problem space by following the current
optimum particles. PSO is initialized with a group of random particles (solutions) and
then searches for optima by updating generations. In every iteration, each particle is
updated by following two best values. The first one is the best solution (fitness) it has
achieved so far. (The fitness value is also stored.) This value is called pbest. Another
best value that is tracked by the particle swarm optimizer is the best value, obtained so
far by any particle in the population. This best value is a global best and called gbest.
When a particle takes part of the population as its topological neighbors, the nbest value
is a local best and is called lbest. After finding the two best values, the particle updates its
velocity and positions with following equations:
* 1* () * ( ) 2 * () * ( )
id id id id id id
V W V c rand P X c rand P X = + + ----------(8)

59
i d i d i d
X X V = + ------------------------------------------------(9)
V
id
is the particle velocity; X
id
is the current particle (solution). P
id
and P
gd
are
pbest and gbest. rand ( ) is a random number between (0, 1). 1 c , 2 c are learning factors.
Now, the problem is defined as follows:
Given system (1), the objective is to design a single stage PSS in the form of
( )
( )
( )
( )
i
s U c p d
I
c P D
K
V K G s K K s
s
K
G s K K s
s
= + +
= + +
----------------------------(10)
Where
P
K ,
D
K and
I
K are the proportional, derivative and Integral gains,

p
K ,
i
K ,
d
K and
U
K are the input and out put gains or scaling factors

Figure 10 Flow Chart for PSO


60
The input gains
p
K ,
i
K ,
d
K and output gain
U
K are tuned to their optimal values
by solving the min-max optimization problem defined in (11) using Particle Swarm
optimization Technique.
Minimize J =
( )
max
max
ss ss
t (

selected regimes ------------------(11)
Where J represents worst overshoot over selected regimes, ( )
max
t and
ss
represents
respectively the maximum and steady state values of torque angle deviation. Table.4
gives the PSO Optimized parameters for FLPSS
Table 4 PSO Optimized parameters of FLPSS
P
K
I
K
D
K
U
K
0.35 -52 0.012 1.025
3.3 Design of Artificial Neural Network Power System Stabilizer
(ANNPSS)
The use of Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) is the most powerful approach in
Artificial Intelligence. ANNs are information processing structures which emulate the
architecture and operational mode of the biological nervous tissue. Any ANN is a system
made up of several basic entities (named neurons) which are interconnected and operate
in parallel transmitting signals to one another in order to achieve a certain processing
task. One of the most outstanding features of ANNs is their capability to simulate the
learning process. They are supplied with pairs of input and output signals from which
general rules are automatically derived so that the ANN will be capable of generating the
correct output for a signal that was not previously used.
3.3.1 Linear Optimal Control (LOC)
Stabilizing method based on linear optimal control [6], make a suitable damping
at different loading condition, but also this method needs determination of all system
states that seems to be very difficult. Using of ANN to self tuning of stabilizers
parameters is introduced. In the proposed PSS designed in this work, the ANN is trained
by LOC-PSS. This stabilizer uses the linear optimal control theory to design a linear state
feedback control loop.

61
There are two important steps in the successful design of such a controller. One is
to have a precise mathematical model of the controlled system. Another is to select a
suitable weighting matrix in the performance index.
The stabilization problem is to design a stabilizer which provides a
supplementary stabilizing signal to increase the damping torque of the system. The
design linear optimal stabilizer is based on the theory of linear optimal regulator. In order
to formulate the problem of stabilization using linear optimal control theory, a set of state
variables must be first selected. Then the state equation for the system is written in the
vector matrix differential equation form
Bu Ax x + = &
(12)
Where x is the state n vector, u is the control m vector, A and B are constant
matrices of dimensions n x n and n x m respectively. Suppose that the performance index
is to minimize the integral

( )dt Ru u Qx x J
T T
+ =
0
2
1
(13)
Where Q is the positive semi-definite matrix and R is a positive definite matrix,
then the optimal control for the system with performance index is given by
Kx u = (14)
Where P B R K
T 1
= (15)
and P is the solution of the algebraic matrix Riccati equation
0
1
= + +

Q P B PBR P A PA
T T
(16)
Riccati equation is the key to the design of the linear optimal control systems.
Once the matrices Q and R are known, the matrix P can be obtained by solving above
equation and then the optimal control signal U is calculated. The traditional way to select
Q, R matrices is to use trial and error method. Many simulation studies have to be done in
time domain with different weighting matrices to choose the ones that provide desired
performance. Because of the complexity, the matrices Q and R are commonly chosen as
diagonal matrices.
The Single Machine Connected to Infinite Bus with Linear Optimal Controlled
ANNPSS is shown in Figure 11.

62

Figure 11 Linearized model of SMIB with LOC-ANNPSS
3.3.2 Design of Artificial Neural Network Power System Stabilizer
(ANNPSS) using Linear Optimal Control (LOC)
In the proposed PSS, the ANN is trained by using Linear Optimal Control theory
to make a suitable damping at different loading condition. Taking active power (P),
reactive power (Q),Terminal Voltage(V
t
) and the line reactance (X
e
) as input layers and
the optimal feedback gain matrix K = [ K
1
K
2
K
3
K
4
] as output layer the training
data is obtained for 180 operating conditions. Using this data a neural network is trained
with different algorithms and found that the cascaded forward feed back propagation
learning algorithm is capable of giving the best results with least error.
The ANN is trained using Neural Networks tool box GUI/MATLAB environment
and the trained network is shown in Figure 12.

63

Figure 12 Trained Neural network
The same network has been simulated to obtain state feedback gains for prefault
and postfault conditions under multi-operating conditions i.e., heavy, normal and light
loads. ANNPSS is designed using the feed-back gains from all states and stabilizes the
Single Machine Infinite Bus System as shown in Figure 11.
Table 5 shows the PSS parameters computed off-line and with ANN for different
operating conditions.
Inputs(p.u) State feed-back gains
computed with LOC
State feed-back gains
computed with ANN
Loadi
ng
condit
ion
Fault
Condi
tion
P Q V X
e
K
1
K
2
K
3
K
4
K
1
K
2
K
3
K
4
Prefau
lt 0.
7
0.
3 1
0.4
75
1.721
261
-
328.
04
6.22
697
0.028
655
1.754
567
-
327.
14
6.242
084
0.017
435
Light
Postfa
ult 0.
7
0.
3 1
0.6
5
1.693
238
-
346.
36
5.62
658
0.026
433
1.573
387
-
346.
58
5.670
416
0.018
584
Prefau
lt
1 0 1
0.4
75
1.446
592
-
179.
89
5.21
851
0.024
879
1.409
395
-
180.
94
5.613
755
0.014
357
Norm
al
Postfa
ult
1 0 1
0.6
5
1.192
353
-
202.
66
4.75
860
0.023
082
1.099
083
-
203.
00
4.936
068
0.015
271
Prefau
lt 1.
2
0.
2 1
0.4
75
1.651
396
-
308.
40
7.06
922
0.031
656
1.665
965
-
315.
25
7.217
78
0.016
549
Heav
y
Postfa
ult 1.
2
0.
2 1
0.6
5
1.388
625
-
335.
62
6.37
813
0.029
203
1.359
244
-
345.
43
6.791
326
0.018
064
Table 5 PSS parameters computed off-line and with ANN for different operating
conditions.

64
4. RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS
The performance of CPSS, FLPSS and LOC-ANNPSS for Prefault and Postfault
conditions is investigated under three different loading conditions [3] shown in Table 6
at a unit step disturbance of. 5 %.
Table 6 Loading Conditions
Loading Conditions P Q

Normal 1.0 0.0
Heavy 1.2 0.2
Light 0.7 0.3
The Constants
1
k to
6
k constants for multi-operating conditions tabulated in Table 7.
Table 7
1
k to
6
k constants for multi-operating conditions
Constants Loading
condition
Fault
Condition
1
k
2
k
3
k
4
k
5
k
6
k
Prefault 1.146 1.1775 0.3361 1.7784 0.1175 0.516 Normal load
Postfault 0.6588 0.6722 0.38617 1.468 0.10711 0.6726
Prefault 1.3 1.135 0.3361 1.7146 0.12027 0.57176 Heavy Load
Postfault 1.116 0.6367 0.38617 1.4145 0.1087 0.73233
Prefault 1.14076 0.88164 0.3361 1.332 0.13756 0.566 Light Load
Postfault 1.027 0.7364 0.38617 1.111 0.1266 0.67113
The performance of CPSS, FLPSS and LOC-ANNPSS is evaluated in
MATLAB/SIMULINK for Prefault i.e., before the occurrence of a solid 3-phase fault at
bus 2 and postfault i.e., after the clearance of fault by line outage. The efficacy of PSS
can be studied only after the clearance of fault by opening the circuit breakers at both
ends simultaneously. These simulation studies are carried out under above loading
conditions.
Figure 13 to Figure 18 shows the rotor angle deviation response curves for a
disturbance of +5% in
m
T under Prefault and Postfault conditions for a solid three-phase
fault at bus 2 when the system is considered at multi-operating conditions.
It can be observed that Without Power System Stabilizer (WOPSS), the system in
unstable and the overshoot is minimized to negligible value and also settling time is
significantly reduced with Artificial Neural Network Power System Stabilizer (ANNPSS)
where as Conventional Power System Stabilizer (CPSS) and Fuzzy Logic Power System
Stabilizer (FLPSS) are stabilizing the system with small oscillations and overshoot.

65
Table 8 and Table 9 shows the comparison between WOPSS, CPSS, FLPSS and
LOC-ANNPSS in view of percentage peak over shoot and settling time respectively for
multi-operating conditions.
Table 8 Comparision between CPSS, FLPSS and LOC-ANNPSS (Percentage Peak
Overshoot)
Peak Overshoot (%) Loading Fault condition
CPSS FLPSS LOC-ANNPSS
Prefault 37.54 20.32 10.80 Light
Postfault 50.43 25.95 18.51
Prefault 31.22 21.18 10.30 Heavy
Postfault 46.08 28.785 9.49
Prefault 17.51 17.51 16.70 Normal
Postfault 34.33 27.66 15.40

Table.9 Comparision between CPSS, FLPSS and LOC-ANNPSS (Settling Time)
Settling Time (in sec.) Loading Fault condition
CPSS FLPSS LOC-ANNPSS
Prefault 8.6071 6.1801 1.0803 Light
Postfault 8.4227 4.8365 1.4974
Prefault 8.6135 7.8021 1.0491 Heavy
Postfault 6.0333 5.8179 1.2797
Prefault 6.7973 6.7973 1.6678 Normal
Postfault 6.06 5.7933 1.7354
From the comparision table, it can be observed that during postfault condition, the
electrical power transfer is more than the prefault condition and therefore the peak over
shoot is high compared to prefault condition.
The aim of the proposed work is to minimize the percentage peak over shoot and
settling time of the step response of generator rotor angle by optimally tuning the
parameters of ANNPSS using LOC. The performance of LOC-ANNPSS is compared
with CPSS and FLPSS. It can be observed from the presented results that the LOC-
ANNPSS minimizes the percentage peak overshoot and settling time under multi-
operating conditions compared with CPSS and FLPSS.
The eigen values of the system without any stabilizer, with CPSS and with Linear
Optimal Controller are tabulated in Table.10.


66
Table 10 Comparison of the Eigen values without stabilizer, with CPSS and with Linear
Optimal Controller
Loading
Conditi
on
Fault
condition
Without stabilizer With CPSS
(
pss
K =10.67,
1
T =0.485sec,
2
T =0.05sec)
With Linear
Optimal
Controller
(LOC)
Normal
(P=1.0,
Q=0.0)
Prefault
(
e
X =0.475)
-0.3008+ 7.8847i
-0.3008 - 7.8847i
-1.4997,-18.2672

-1.1853 + 9.0430i
-1.1853 - 9.0430i
-11.1119, -1.4510
-25.4352
-3.3561 +10.0684i
-3.3561 -10.0684i
-18.1229, -7.9728

Post fault
(
e
X =0.65)
-0.2664 + 7.1732i
-0.2664 - 7.1732i
-2.1621,-17.6289

-1.1914 + 8.0558i
-1.1914 - 8.0558i
-10.9766, -2.1769
-24.7873
-3.2754+ 9.3815i
-3.2754 - 9.3815i
-17.4974 , -7.8163

Light
(P=0.7,
Q=0.3)
Prefault
(
e
X =0.475)
-0.2289 + 7.8522i
-0.2289 - 7.8522i
-1.8612,-18.0496

-0.9343 + 8.6599i
-0.9343 - 8.6599i
-12.0411, -1.8439
-24.6150
-3.7982 +10.6229i
-3.7982 -10.6229i
-17.7740, -9.3256

Post fault
(
e
X =0.65)
-0.1923 + 7.4352i
-0.1923 - 7.4352i
-2.3117,-17.6275

-0.8604 + 8.0619i
-0.8604 - 8.0619i
-12.1704,-2.3390
-24.0936
-3.6296 +10.0587i
-3.6296 -10.0587i
-17.3978, -8.8831

Heavy
(P=1.2,
Q=0.2)
Prefault
(
e
X =0.475)
-0.2556 + 8.3825i
-0.2556 - 8.3825i
-1.8094,-18.0479

-0.9343 + 8.6599i
-0.9343 - 8.6599i
-12.0411, -1.8439
-24.6150
-4.0992 +11.4597i
-4.0992 -11.4597i
-17.5834,-10.4148

Post fault
(
e
X =0.65)
-0.2178 + 7.7581i
-0.2178 - 7.7581i
-2.5131,-17.3749

-0.8604 + 8.0619i
-0.8604 - 8.0619i
-12.1704, -2.3390
-24.0936
-3.9559 +10.7688i
-3.9559 -10.7688i
-16.9487,-10.0649

5. CONCLUSIONS
From the results listed in Table 8, Table 9 and Table.10, it is evident that a
Conventional Power System Stabilizer (CPSS) designed for certain operating point does
not cover all operating conditions effectively. Under this situation, a nonlinear controller
such as Fuzzy Logic Power System Stabilizer (FLPSS) can control the plant to some
extent but with small percentage overshoot in its response whereas Linear optimal
Control (LOC) based Artificial Neural Network Power System Stabilizer (LOC-
ANNPSS) can perform very well with least overshoot and negligible settling time.

67
The simulation studies reveal that the proposed Linear Optimal Control based
Artificial Neural Network Power System Stabilizer (LOC-ANNPSS) is very effective to
fault conditions and minimizes the overshoot and settling time.
From the Fig 13 to 18, it is evident that the dynamic performance of the proposed
Linear Optimal Control based Artificial Neural Network Power System Stabilizer (LOC-
ANNPSS) is also superior to that of CPSS and FLPSS.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
Time, t in sec ----->
R
o
t
o
r

A
n
g
l
e

D
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n

-
-
-
-
-
>

WOPSS
CPSS
FLPSS
LOCANN-PSS

Figure 13 Rotor Angle Deviation for a disturbance of +5% in
m
T under normal loading
for prefault condition
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
Time t in sec ---->
R
o
t
o
r

A
n
g
l
e

D
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n

-
-
-
-
-
>

WOPSS
CPSS
FLPSS
LOCANN-PSS

m
T under normal loading
for postfault condition


68
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
Time, t in sec ---->
R
o
t
o
r

A
n
g
l
e

D
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n

-
-
-
-
>

WOPSS
CPSS
FLPSS
LOC-ANNPSS

m
T under light loading for
prefault condition
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
Time, t in sec ---->
R
o
t
o
r

A
n
g
le

D
e
v
ia
t
io
n

-
-
-
-
>

WOPSS
CPSS
FLPSS
LOC-ANNPSS

m
T under light loading for
postfault condition

69
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
Time,t in sec ---->
R
o
to
r
A
n
g
le

D
e
v
ia
tio
n

--
--
>

WOPSS
CPSS
FLPSS
LOC-ANNPSS

m
T under heavy for
prefault condition
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
Time,t in sec ---->
R
o
to
r
A
n
g
le
D
e
v
ia
t
io
n
-
--
->

WOPSS
CPSS
FLPSS
LOC-ANNPSS

m
T under heavy for
postfault condition
APPENDIX
The System under study is a thermal generating station consisting of four
555MVA, 24KV, 60Hz units. The network reactances shown in Figure 1 are in p.u. on
2220MVA, 24KV base(referred to LT side of step-up transformer). Resistances are
assumed to be negligible.
Equivalent generator parameters in p.u:
d
X = 1.81,
d
X = 0.3,
q
X = 1.76,
do
T = 8sec, H = 3.5MJ/MVA, V
t
= 1.0
Exciter:
E
k = 25,
E
T = 0.05Sec.

70
REFERENCES
[1] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964.
[2] SAUER, P. W.PAI, M. A, Power System Dynamics and Stability, Prentice Hall,
1997.
[3] Hisham M.Soliman-Ehab H.E.Bayoumi, Mohamed F.Hassan (2008), PSO-based
power system stabilizer for minimal overshoot and control constraints, Journal of
Electrical Engineering, Vol.56, No.3, 153-156.
[4] H.M.Soliman, M.M.F.Sakr (1988), Wide-Range power system pole placer IEE
Proceedings, Vol.135, Pt.C, No.3.
[5] R.Hooshmand, M.Ataei (2006), An Auto Tuning of Fuzzy Logic PSS Design Under
Multi-operating Conditions Using Real coded Genetic algorithm, J.Electrical
systems 5-1.
[6] J. Ahmadian, M. Jalali, R. Pouaghababa, M. Nouhi (2008), Power System Stabilizers
Optimization Based On Neural Network Using Linear Optimal Contro, University
Of Pitesti Electronics And Computers Science, Scientific Bulletin, No. 8, Vol.2.
[7] R.J.fleming, M.A.Mohan, K.Parvateesam (1981), Selection of parameters of
stabilizers in multimachine power system, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus
and Systems, Vol.PAS-100, No.5.
[8] Francisco P.Demello (1969), Concepts of Synchronous Machine Stability as Affected
by Excitation Control, IEEE transactions on Power apparatus and systems,
Vol.PAS-88, No. 4.
[9] Wah-Chun Chan, Yuan-Yih Hsu (1983), An optimal variable structure stabilizer for
power system stabilization, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems,
Vol.PAS-102,No.6.
[10] P. Kundur (1964), Power System Stability and Control. New York: McGraw-Hill.
[11] P. M. Anderson and A. A. Fouad (1977), Power System Control and Stability.Ames,
IA:Iowa State Univ. Press.
[12] Timothy.J.Ross, Fuzzy Logic with engineering applications.
[13] Simon Haykins, Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation, 2nd edition

Ijeet Paper

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Ijeet Paper

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

International Journal of Electrical Engineering and Technology (IJEET),

. The first step in

are used as the input signals and

Вам также может понравиться