Proceedings of the National Power Systems Conference (NPSC) - 2018, December 14-16, NIT Tiruchirappalli, India
Load frequency control of a single area hybrid power
system by using integral and LQR based integral
controllers
Rajasi Mandal Kalyan Chatterjee
Department of Electrical Engineering Department of Electrical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology (ISM) Indian Institute of Technology (ISM)
Dhanbad, India Dhanbad, India
rajasi.iitdhanbad@gmail.com kalyanchatterjee@iitism.ac.in
Abstract—The paper presents a mathematical state space
model to design load frequency controllers for a single area
power system consisting of thermal, hydro, gas and doubly fed
induction generator based wind power generation sources. Load
frequency control maintains the frequency of a power system
within a prescribed limit. Different types of controllers can be
used for load frequency control (LFC) of the power system. In
this paper, two various kinds of controllers have used for LFC of
the system. Integral (I) controller is a classical approach of LFC
whereas linear quadratic regulator based integral (LQR-I)
controller optimally controls all the states through the full-state
feedback LQR controller. After studying and comparing the
results, it has been observed that LQR-I controller provides
better LFC in terms of settling time, overshoot etc and better
stability to the system compared to the integral (I) controller.
Keywords— doubly fed induction generator; eigen values;
linear quadratic regulator controller; load frequency control;
mathematical modeling; state space representation; wind turbine
I. INTRODUCTION
Load frequency control (LFC) technique is used to
maintain the balance between load and generation in a power
system. There is always some unpredictable and uncertain
disturbance i.e. change in load ∆Pd in the power system which
adversely affects the system frequency. Hence, LFC is
necessary to keep the frequency within a specific tolerance
limit, to maintain a constant tie line power (in multiple area
systems), to stabilize the grid power. Thus the frequency
deviation is minimized by adjusting the generated power
according to the load change to keep this issue within desired
limits and this technique is known as load frequency control
(LFC). LFC technique is used in various complex power
systems. T. C. Yang et al. [1], G. Ray et. al. [2] developed
mathematical state space models for LFC of inter-connected
multi-area power systems. In this work, a hybrid power system
model is presented, the mathematical state space modeling of
the system is developed, then controllers are designed for load
frequency control of the system and finally, the comparative
analysis is made for different types of load frequency
controllers.
In hybrid power systems, the powers produced by different
sources are combined and used to meet the demand or to
supply to the grid. The various power sources in a hybrid
power system may be non-renewable or renewable. Several
researchers have already designed controllers with advanced
frequency control scheme for the hybrid power systems
containing different non-renewable or conventional sources.
LFC of a two area hybrid power system with multiple
conventional sources like thermal, hydro and gas has been
978-1-5386-6159-8/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE
Bhavesh Kumar Patil
Department of Electrical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology (ISM)
Dhanbad, India
patilbhaveshkumar@yahoo.com
done by R. Shankar et al. [3]. A renewable power source of a
doubly fed induction generator based wind energy system is
also included in the hybrid power system model in this work.
Renewable power is extracted from inexhaustible natural
sources like sun, wind, hydro, biomass, geo-thermal, ocean
etc. which are naturally restored within a short time. Due to
environmental problems caused by the shortage of coal and
fossil energy resources and presence of large amount of
greenhouse gasses, nowadays, a huge amount of power is
being extracted from the non-conventional sources. The large
numbers of wind farms have been installed in power system in
many countries all around the globe. Wind is a clean source of
power and it is abundantly available in nature. Naturally, the
load frequency control of wind turbine generator based power
system has become an important issue in modern complex
power industries. Also, the high wind power penetration
affects the system stability and reliability due to uncertain
nature of wind speed over a day or over various seasons in a
year. Some sudden fluctuations in wind speed result in
variation in wind turbine power output which in turn, causes
some frequency change. Hence, LFC is important for
controlling the issues related to the integration of wind turbine
to a hybrid power system. T. H. Mohamed et al. [4] and M. M.
Ma et al. [5] simulated dynamic models of interconnected
power systems including doubly fed induction generator
(DFIG) based wind turbine. Therefore, considering various
problems, it is essential to develop a proper control
methodology for establishing an increased share of power
generation from a wind turbine in a hybrid power system;
specifically, LFC is required for stabilization of grid
frequency. The technology of a hybrid power system including
some renewable sources is at an exciting stage of
development. Research is going on to control the frequency
and voltage of the power generation system and maintains
their values within specific limits.
To get better dynamic response by applying LFC scheme,
an appropriate controller must be chosen among various
classical controllers such as integral (I) controller, proportional
integral (PI) controller, proportional integral derivative (PID)
controller etc or any modern advanced control techniques like
robust controller [6], fuzzy controller [7], artificial neural
network (ANN) controller, adaptive controller, optimal
controller, model predictive controller etc. [8-9]. In order to
overcome the problems faced by classical I or PI or PID
controller, a linear-quadratic regulator (LQR) optimal control
may be used to control the system. LQR is a control scheme
performs systematically in a best possible way when a
quadratic function composed of the state vectors and the
 Proceedings of the National Power Systems Conference (NPSC) - 2018, December 14-16, NIT Tiruchirappalli, India

control inputs is provided. LQR controller computes and X = X − X (5)

regulates the state parameters of a power system model when
the state equations of the model are known. R. Bhushan and K. Hydro power generation system is represented using the space
Chatterjee [10] developed a mathematical model of a DFIG equations from (6) to (8),
based wind energy system and optimized the system X =− ∆f − X + ∆P (6)

performance using an LQR controller. In this paper, the basic
design and mathematical model of a single area hybrid power X =− ∆f + 1− X − X +

system which generates power from thermal, hydro, gas, wind
and for controlling the designed system and to optimize the ∆P (7)

system performance both integral controller and linear
quadratic regulator based integral (LQR-I) controller have X = ∆f + − 1 X +2 + X −

been used in this work and the controller performances have
been compared. The main aims of the present work are – (i) X − ∆P (8)

incorporation of multi-sources thermal, hydro, gas, wind Gas power generation system is presented by the equations
energy together in a single area power system, as well as (ii) (3.9) to (3.12),
designing an LQR-I controller for the previously mentioned
multi-source system. X = − ∆f − (X +X +X )−

.
II. THE SINGLE-AREA HYBRID POWER SYSTEM X − X + ∆P + ∆P (9)

A small load change causes a transient frequency change in X = X − X (10)
the power system. The LFC technique maintains the frequency
to keep the system function properly. In the power system X =− X + 1+ X − X (11)

described in this paper, the power is generated from some
conventional non-renewable sources like thermal, hydro, gas X = X − X (12)
[3] as well as a non-conventional renewable source i.e. wind Wind power generation system is represented by the state
[4, 5]. Each power source contributes to the total generated space equations (13),
power in the hybrid power system. Fig. 1 shows the model of
X = ∆P − X (13)
the hybrid power system and all the system parameters are
defined in the Appendix A [3-5]. Deviation in total generated power is represented by,
∆P = X + X + X + 0.5 ω X X (14)
Area control error is given by,
ACE = β ∆f (15)
The entire system is represented in the form of
x = Ax + Bu (16)
y = Cx + Du (17)
where
State vector,
∆f
∆P
X
X
X
X
x= X (18)
X
Fig. 1 Transfer function model of single area power system X
X
III. MATHEMATICAL MODELING AND STATE-SPACE
X
REPRESENTATION OF THE MODEL
X
The state space model is to be formulated to make the study X
and control of the system easier.
From the block diagram, by properly arranging all the terms, Control vector or input vector,
the state space equation for frequency deviation, u = ∆P (19)
Output vector,
∆f = − ∆f + X +X +X + 0.5 ω X X −
∆f
∆P (1) X
X
Also, y= X (20)
∆P = β K ∆f (2)
0.5 ω X X
Thermal power generation system is presented using the state
space equation (3) to (5), ∆P
X =− ∆f − X + ∆P (3) IV. LINEAR QUADRATIC REGULATOR (LQR) CONTROLLER

X =− ∆f + − X − X + ∆P LQR controller is a very computationally efficient load

frequency controller. It minimizes the error signal in a smooth,
(4) precised and optimal manner. Thus LQR-I controller provides
 Proceedings of the National Power Systems Conference (NPSC) - 2018, December 14-16, NIT Tiruchirappalli, India

stability to the system and nullifies the oscillations - overshoots

and undershoots. To design an LQR controller from a state

Frequency Deviation (Hz) Integral Controller

space model, all the states and the outputs of the system should
be controllable as well as observable. The Fig. 2 represents a
block diagram of an LQR controller that controls a system
described by equation (16) and (17). In this case, there are 13
state variables as mentioned in (18).

(a)

Thermal Power Output (p.u.) Integral Controller

Fig. 2 Block diagram of the power system with LQR controller

The full-state variable feedback control is applied

through LQR technique by computing the state feedback gain (b)
matrix Klqr. The performance index [5] used for designing an
LQR controller is given by,

Hydro Power Output (p.u.) Integral Controller

J= (∆x Q ∆x + ∆u R ∆u ) dt (21)
Q (dimension 13×13) and R (dimension 2×2) are real positive
semi-definite and positive symmetric matrices respectively.
Matrices Q and R represent the relative importance of error
and the expenditure of the energy of the control signal
respectively. According to the linear optimal control law the
system input computed [5] by an LQR by multiplying the
states and the state feedback matrix Klqr, which minimizes the
(c)
performance index J by controlling the input parameters of the
system.
∆u (t) = −K ∆x(t)
Gas Power Output (p.u.) Integral Controller

(22)
For better performance, proper weights of Q and R matrices
are chosen. According to the Riccati equation, a positive-
definite matrix P is calculated [5] by,
A P + P A − P B R B P + Q = 0 (23)
If (A,B1) is controllable and (Q,A) is observable, then the
closed loop system (A - B1 Klqr) is asymptotically stable [5].
The optimal feedback gain matrix Klqr is given by,
K = R B P (24) (d)
The value of Klqr is acceptable only when the system remains
stable i.e. all the eigenvalues of the matrix (A - B1 Klqr) must
Wind Power Output (p.u.) Integral Controller

be located on left-half of complex plane i.e. the values have

negative real parts.
V. SIMULATION RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
When some disturbance ∆Pd occurs in the power system,
the disturbance causes a significant reduction of the power
system frequency. To bring back the frequency to it’s nominal
value LFC schemes are applied. Integral controller and LQR (e)
based integral controller are used to the power system by
MATLAB programming for LFC.
Total Power Output (p.u.) Integral Controller

A. System performance using an integral controller

Changes in the system frequency, the generated thermal,
hydro, gas, wind power output as well as the total power output
of the power system using an integral load frequency controller
against a step load change of 0.1 p.u. are shown below. The
values of integral constant Ki was taken as -0.023 as obtained
by auto-tuning. The graphs in Fig. 3 show deviation in (f)
frequency; thermal, hydro, gas and wind and total generated Fig.3 Deviation in (a) frequency and generated (b) thermal, (c)
power respectively due to the presence of integral controller in hydro, (d) gas, (e) wind and (f) total power of the power
the system. system with integral controller
 Proceedings of the National Power Systems Conference (NPSC) - 2018, December 14-16, NIT Tiruchirappalli, India

B. System performance using an LQR-I controller

Wind Power Output (p.u.) LQR based Integral Controller

The main advantage of an LQR-I control scheme is that it
controls and optimizes all the system parameters to make the
system perform better. The same step load change ∆Pd = 0.1
p.u. is considered again for the same system. After adding an
LQR-I controller to the single area hybrid power system model,
the values of two matrices i.e. Ailqr, Cilqr get modified so that the
LFC process improves.
,P ,E = lqr(A , B, Q, R) K (e)
A = A − (B ∗ K )

Total Power Output (p.u.) LQR based Integral Controller

C = C − (D ∗ K )
Q should be a square matrix with no of rows and columns
equal to the no of state variables in the system or state matrix
Ai. R should have dimensions equal to the no of inputs i.e.
equal to the no of columns of input matrix B. The values of Q,
R, Klqr etc matrices are provided in Appendix B.
Deviations in the system frequency, generated thermal,
hydro, gas, wind power output and total power output of the (f)
power system when an LQR-I controller is applied for LFC of Fig. 4 Deviation in (a) frequency and generated (b) thermal,
the system is depicted in Fig. 4. The eigen values (E) of the
(c) hydro, (d) gas, (e) wind and (f) total power of the power
system matrix A with an integral controller and the eigen
values of the modified system for an LQR-I controller i.e. Elqr system with LQR based integral controller
are enlisted in next section V. (C). Also, the damping factors
for both the cases are shown in the table. Clearly, a better C. Comparison of the system performance for I and LQR-I
performance is observed in this case as presented below. controllers
The output characteristics of the system under the influence
of different types of load frequency controllers have been
Frequency Deviation (Hz) Integral LQR Controller

plotted in the same graph. Fig. 5 is the most important graph in

this paper because it depicts and compares how the incremental
change in frequency ∆f is controlled by integral and LQR based
integral controllers. The change in frequency of the single area
power system without controller (i.e. secondary loop is absent)
is also shown in the same graph. In all the three cases the
amount of step load changes i.e. ∆Pd = 0.1 p.u. were
(a) considered. Clearly, a better response is obtained by applying
LQR based integral controller than normal integral controller in
Thermal Power Output (p.u.) LQR based Integral Controller

terms of settling time and peak overshoot.

(b)
Hydro Power Output (p.u.) LQR based Integral Controller

Fig. 5 Deviation in frequency of the system with integral and

integral LQR LFC controllers and without controller

The values of the state matrices are provided in Appendix B.

(c)
The eigen values and damping factors corresponding to each
state of the system i.e. the eigen values and damping factors of
Gas Power Output (p.u.) LQR based Integral Controller

A matrix for both cases are given in Table 1. As the system is

stable, the locations of all of the eigen values are on the left
half of the complex s-plane. Higher the magnitude of negative
real part of the eigen values, more is the system stability.
Damping factor less than 1 denotes under damped system and
unity damping factor denotes critically damped system. Due to
the use of LQR-I controller the system behaves more like a
critically damped system.
(d)
 Proceedings of the National Power Systems Conference (NPSC) - 2018, December 14-16, NIT Tiruchirappalli, India

Table 1
REFERENCES

Integral controller, E Integral LQR controller, [1] T. C. Yang, H. Cimen, Q. M. Zhu, Decentralised load-frequency
E_lqr controller design based on structured singular values, IEE Proc
Eigen values Damping Eigen values Damping Gener. Transm. Distrib., 145, 1, 1998 pp. 7-14.
Factor Factor [2] G. Ray, A.N. Prasad, G.D. Prasad, A new approach to the design of
∆f -19.7182+0.0000 i 1.0000 -19.7194+0.0000 i 1.0000 robust load-frequency controller for large scale power systems,
Electric Power Systems Research (Elsevier), 51, 1999, pp. 13–22.
∆Pc -14.8684+0.0000 i 1.0000 -13.0169+0.0000 i 1.0000
XT1 -0.2260+ 4.6012 i 0.7939 -5.4659+3.3905 i 0.9255 [3] R. Shankar, K. Chatterjee, R. Bhushan, Impact of energy storage
system on load frequency control for diverse sources of
XT2 -0.2260–4.6012 i 0.7939 -5.4659–3.3905 i 0.9255 interconnected power system in deregulated power environment,
XT3 -5.9268+0.0000 i 1.0000 -6.6411+0.0000 i 1.0000 Elect Power and Energy Systems (Elsevier), 79, 2016, pp. 11–26.
XH1 -5.0000+0.0000 i 1.0000 -5.0000+0.0000 i 1.0000
[4] T. H. Mohamed, J. Morel, H. Bevrani, T. Hiyama, Model predictive
XH2 -4.0804+0.0000 i 1.0000 -4.0853+0.0000 i 1.0000 based load frequency control design concerning wind turbines, Elect
XH3 -2.1551+0.0000 i 0.0491 -2.0639+0.0000 i 1.0000 Power and Energy Systems (Elsevier), 43, 2012, pp. 859-867.
XG1 -1.0248+0.0000 i 0.0491 -1.0105+0.0000 i 0.8498 [5] M. M. Ma, X. J. Liu, C. Zhang, LFC for multi-area interconnected
XG2 -0.1938+0.1484 i 1.0000 -0.2868+0.1174 i 0.8498 power system concerning wind turbines based on DMPC, IET
XG3 -0.1938+0.1484 i 1.0000 -0.2868–0.1174 i 1.0000 Gener Transm Distrib, 11, 10, 2017, pp. 2689-2696.
XG4 -0.1525+0.0000 i 1.0000 -0.1126+0.0000 i 1.0000 [6] M. Azzam, An optimal approach to robust controller design for
XW1 -0.0343+0.0000 i 1.0000 -0.0347+0.0000 i 1.0000 load-frequency control, IEEE, 2002, pp. 180-183.
[7] E. Ozbay, M. T. Gencoglu, Load Frequency Control for Small
Hydro Power Plants Using Adaptive Fuzzy Controller, IEEE, 2010,
VI. CONCLUSION pp. 4217-4223.
This paper deals with LFC of a single-area hybrid power [8] H. Shayeghi, H. A. Shayanfar, A. Jalili, Load frequency control
system consisting of thermal, hydro, gas and DFIG based strategies: A state-of-the-art survey for the researcher, Energy
power generation units. Two different controllers are designed Conversion and Management (Elsevier), 50, 2, 2009, pp. 344-353.
for LFC purpose - integral controller and LQR based integral [9] R. Shankar, S. R. Pradhan, K. Chatterjee, R. Mandal, A
controller and their performances are compared. comprehensive state of the art literature survey on LFC mechanism
for power system, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
From the simulation results it has been observed that an (Elsevier), 76, 2017, pp. 1185–1207.
LQR-I controller has better performance in terms of settling [10] R. Bhushan, K. Chatterjee, Mathematical modeling and control of
time, overshoot etc. than that of an integral controller. The DFIG-based wind energy system by using optimized linear
eigen values of the system matrices represent LQR-I controller quadratic regulator weight matrices, Int Trans Elect Energy Syst.,
27, 11, 2017, pp. 1-23.
has better stability than a conventional integral controller.

APPENDIX A
Nomenclature and Values of the Simulink Model Variables

f (Nominal system frequency), ∆ (Small deviation of a state variable), ∆f (Incremental frequency deviation), ∆Pd (Incremental
load change), ∆Pg (Incremental generation change), ∆Pgt (Incremental generation change in thermal power), ∆Pgh (Incremental
generation change in hydro power), ∆Pgg (Incremental generation change in gas power), ∆Pgw (Incremental generation change in
wind power), ACE (Area control error), R (Droop characteristics of the governor for thermal and hydro power generators
(Primary Loop)) = 2.4, Rg (Droop characteristics of the governor for gas power generators (Primary Loop)) = 10, β (Frequency
bias constant for ACE (Secondary Loop) = 0.425, Tp (Power system time constant) = 20 s, Kp (Power system gain) = 120.

Thermal: Tgt (Thermal governor time constant) = 0.08 s, Tt (Thermal turbine time constant) = 0.3 s, Krt (Reheat turbine gain) =
10/3, Trt (Reheat turbine time constant) = 10 s.

Hydro: Tw (Water time constant) = 1 s, Tgh (Hydro governor time constant) = 0.2 s, T1 (Hydro governor time constant for transient
droop compensation) = 5 s, T2 (Hydro governor time constant) = 28.75 s.

Gas: X (Gas governor constant) = 0.6, Y (Gas governor constant) = 1, a (Valve position constant) = 1, b (Valve position constant)
= 0.05, c (Valve position constant) = 1, Tcr (Compressor process time constant) = 0.3 s, Tf (Fuel time constant) = 0.23 s, Tcd (Time
delay associated with compressor discharge system) = 0.2 s.

Wind: Te (Electrical torque), Tm (Mechanical torque), iqr (q-axis component of rotor current), vqr (q-axis component of rotor
voltage), ωr (Rotational speed of wind turbine), ωs (Synchronous speed of wind turbine) = 1.2 p.u., ωopt (Operating point of
rotational speed) = 1 p.u., Ht (Equivalent inertia constant of wind turbine) = 4.32 s, Lm (Magnetizing inductance) = 2.9 p.u., Lr / Ls
(Self-inductance) = 3.06/3.08 p.u., Rr (Rotor resistance) = 0.016 p.u., X0 (Rotor conductance or rotor admittance (X0=1/Rr)) = 62.5
p.u., Twt (Wind turbine power generator time constant (Twt = (Lr + Lm2/Ls) / (ωs/Rr)) = 2.304 s.
 Proceedings of the National Power Systems Conference (NPSC) - 2018, December 14-16, NIT Tiruchirappalli, India

APPENDIX B

A, B, C, D matrices are obtained from the mathematical model of the system. The Ai, B, Ci, D matrices represent the single area
hybrid power system including the integral controller for LFC purpose. The value Klqr is computed when an LQR controller is
added to the system with integral controller. Using the value of Klqr the Ai and Ci matrices are modified as Ailqr and Cilqr.

 - 0.0500 0 0 0 6.0000 0 0 6.0000 2.8247  0 0 0 6.0000  - 6.0000 

 - 0.0097 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 0 0 0  0 
  
 - 5.2083 12.5000 - 12.5000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0   0 
   
 - 17.3611 41.6667 - 41.5667 - 0.1000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0   0 
 0 0 0 3.3333 - 3.3333 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0   0 
   
 - 2.0833 5.0000 0 0 0 - 5.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0   0 
Ai =  - 0.3623 0.8696 0 0 0 - 0.8348 - 0.0348 0 0 0 0 0 0  B=  0 
   
 0.7246 - 1.7391 0 0 0 1.6696 2.0696 - 2.0000 0 0 0 0 0   0 
 - 0.0970 1.0000 0 0 - 0.3600 0 0 - 0.3600 - 1.0000 0 0 - 0.3600 - 0.1695   0.3600 
   
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20.0000 - 20.0000 0 0 0   0 
   
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 26.0870 30.4348 - 4.3478 0 0   0 
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.0000 - 5.0000 0   0 
   
 0 27.1271 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0.4340   0 

 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0
  0
 0 0 0 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0
 
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0   0
Ci =   D= 
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.0000 0 
 0
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4708  0
   
 0 0 0 0 1.0000 0 0 1.0000 0 0 0 1.0000 0.4708  0

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
R = [1]
 
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
 
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Q = 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
 
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
 
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
 
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
 
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

K lqr = [ - 1.5505 44.7859 0.3290 0.0874 - 0.4208 0.0442 0.1039 - 0.6241 0.2420 0.0172 - 0.0864 - 0.5928 - 0.0931 ]

 - 9.3530 268.7156 1.9740 0.5246 3.4752 0.2651 0.6233 2.2557 1.4523 0.1035 
- 0.5183 2.4431 2.2658
 - 0.0097 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 0 0
 
 - 5.2083 12.5000 - 12.5000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
 
 - 17.3611 41.6667 - 41.5667 - 0.1000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
 0 0 0 3.3333 - 3.3333 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
 
 - 2.0833 5.0000 0 0 0 - 5.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
Ailqr = - 0.3623 0.8696 0 0 0 - 0.8348 - 0.0348 0 0 0 0 0 0 
 
 0.7246 - 1.7391 0 0 0 1.6696 2.0696 - 2.0000 0 0 0 0 0 
 0.4612 - 15.1229 - 0.1184 - 0.0315 - 0.2085 - 0.0159 - 0.0374 - 0.1353 - 1.0871 - 0.0062 0.0311 - 0.1466 - 0.1359 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20.0000 - 20.0000 0 0 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 26.0870 30.4348 - 4.3478 0 0 
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.0000 - 5.0000 0 
 
 0 27.1271 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0.4340

 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
 0 0 0 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
 
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 
C ilqr = 
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.0000 0 
 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4708
 
 0 0 0 0 1.0000 0 0 1.0000 0 0 0 1.0000 0.4708

Eigen values of the matrices Ai and Ailqr i.e. E and Elqr respectively; are already provided in Table 1 in section V. (C).