Load Frequency Control For Interconnected Systems Using Optimal Controller

1
ABSTRACT
The need for satisfactory operation of power stations running in parallel and
the relation between system frequency and the speed of the motors has led to the
requirement of close regulation of power system frequency. Power systems are
frequently subjected to varying load demands. The perturbation in generated power
must match the load perturbations if exact nominal state is to be maintained. A
mismatch in the real power affects primarily the system frequency. For an efficient
and successful power system operation in the wake of area load changes and
abnormal conditions, such mismatches have to be corrected via supplementary
control.
In this project work, a detailed investigation on load frequency control
problem for both the isolated power system and interconnected power system has
been carried out. In case of interconnected power system, a two area system model
is taken into consideration for simplicity. Conventional Transfer function approach
and State Space approach are adopted to analyze the dynamic performance of the
system. The response obtained by the two approaches are verified by using
MATLAB.
Firstly the system studies have been carried without proportional feed
back controllers, later the proportional plus integral strategy is implemented to
obtain an improved response for the system. Also the effect of + 50% variation in
system parameters from their nominal values on the dynamic performance of the
system has been studied by obtaining the response plots of frequency deviation of
disturbed area.
Finally, the techniques of Optimal control theory are applied to
develop an optimal feed back controller for enhancing the system dynamic
performance of both Isolated and Interconnected power systems. Numerical
examples have been considered to demonstrate the effectiveness of optimal
controller over the PI controller and the results are presented and duly discussed.
ka
2
CONTENTS
Abstract
1. Introduction
1.1 Introduction ……1
1.2 Load Frequency Problem ……2
1.3 Literary review ……3
2. Load Frequency Control of Isolated Power Systems
2.1 Introduction …….4
2.2 Modeling of Power system components ..…..4
2.2.1 Modeling of speed governing system …….4
2.2.2 Modeling of turbine ..…..8
2.2.3 Modeling of Generator-Load ..…..9
2.2.4 Block Diagram of an Isolated Power system ……11
2.3 Dynamic Response without feedback PI Control ……12
2.3.1 Transfer Function Approach ……13
2.3.2 State Space Approach ……
16 2.4 Dynamic Response with PI Control ……
25
2.4.1 Control strategy ……25
2.4.2 Transfer Function Approach ……
27
2.4.3 State Space Approach ……30
2.5 Case Studies ……36

2.6 Discussions ……46
3. Load Frequency Control of Interconnected Power
Systems
3.2 Modeling of Multi Area Power Systems ……48
3
3.3 Modeling of Two Area Systems ……50
3.4 Dynamic Response of Two Area Systems
with PI control …….52
3.4.1 Area Control Error …….52
3.4.2 State Space Approach …….55
3.5 Case Studies …….64
3.6 Discussions ……..73
4. Load Frequency Control for Interconnected
Systems using Optimal Controller
4.2 Optimal Control Theory …….74
4.2.1 System State x …….75
4.2.2 System Cost C …….75
4.2.3 Optimal Controller .……76
4.2.4 Calculation of the Optimal controller K .……76
4.2.5 Snag of Optimal Control
…….78
4.3 Application of Optimal Control to an
Isolated Power System …….79
4.3.1 Isolated Power System with
Reheater constraint
…….83 4.3.2 Isolated Power System with
Reheater
constraint using Optimal controller …….85
4.4 Application of Optimal Control to
Interconnected Systems ……89
4.5 Discussions …….95
5. Conclusions
…….96
4
References …….99
5
INTRODUCTION
The continuous growth in size and complexity of electric power
systems along with increase in power demands has motivated the power
control engineers to put their best efforts in the area of Power System
Control. The operation of an interconnected power system usually leads to
improved system security and economy of operation. In addition, the
interconnection permits the utilities to take the advantage of the most
economical transfer of power. The benefits have been recognized from
beginning and interconnections continue to grow. The various areas or
power pools are interconnected through tie-lines. These tie-lines are utilized
6
for contractual energy exchange between areas and provide inter-area
support in case of abnormal conditions.
1.1 Introduction
Normally, the power systems operate in nominal system state which is
characterized by constant system frequency and voltage profile with certain
specified system reliability. The change in frequency and voltage from their
nominal values change when there is any mismatch in real and reactive
power generations and demands. It can be proved by sensitivity analysis that
a mismatch in the real power balance affects primarily the system frequency,
but leaves the bus voltage essentially unaffected. Also a mismatch in the
reactive power balance affects only the bus voltage magnitudes, but leaves
the system frequency essentially unaffected.
Automatic generation control (AGC) of interconnected power systems is
defined as the regulation of power output of generators within a prescribed
area, in response to change in system frequency, tie line loading, or the
relation of these to each other, so as to maintain scheduled system frequency
and/or established interchange with other areas within predetermined limits.
Over the years, many automatic generation control (AGC) schemes have
been suggested to deal this problem efficiently and effectively. The main
requirement of AGC is to ensure that:
1) Frequency of various bus voltages and currents are maintained at near
specified nominal values.
2) Tie line power flows among the interconnected areas are maintained at
specified levels
3) Total power requirement on the system as a whole is shared by
individual generators economically in optimum fashion.
1.2 Load Frequency Problem

7
Consider two machines S1 and S2 running in parallel .
S1 S2
~ ~
Load Load
Fig 1 Two Plants connected through a tie-line
The possibility of sharing the load by the two machines is as follows: Say,
there are two stations S1 and S2 interconnected through a tie-line. If the
change in load is either at S1 or S2 and if the generation of S1 alone is
regulated to adjust this change so as to have constant frequency, the method
of regulation is called Flat Frequency Regulation. Under such situations
station S2 is said to be operating on base load. the major draw back of flat
frequency regulation is that S1 must absorb all load changes for entire system
thereby the tie line between the two stations would have to absorb all load
changes at station S2 since the generator at S2 would maintain its output
constant.
The other possibility of sharing the change in load is that both S1 and S2
would regulate their generations to maintain the frequency constant. This is
known as Parallel frequency Regulation.
The third possibility is that the change in a particular area is taken care of by
the generator in that area thereby the tie-line loading remains constant.
This method of regulating the generation for keeping constant frequency is
known as Flat-Tie line loading Control. This arrangement has the advantage
that load swings on station S1 and the tie line would be reduced as compared
with the flat frequency regulation.
The application of modern control theory to AGC problem of
interconnected power system has been the subject wide range of applications
over the past three and half decades. Among the various types of automatic
8
generation controllers, the most widely employed are the conventional
proportional integral (PI) controller and the state feedback controllers based
on optimal control theory to achieve better system dynamic performance.
9
LOAD FREQUENCY CONTROL

OF AN ISOLATED POWER SYSTEM
2.1 Introduction
The main objective for the load frequency control is to exert
control of frequency and at the same time exchange of real power via the
Tie-lines. The change in frequency and tie-line real power are sensed which
is a measure of the change in rotor angle δ, i.e. the error ∆δ to be corrected.
The error signals i.e. ∆f and ∆Ptie are amplified mixed and transformed into a
10
real power command signal ∆PC which is sent to the prime mover to call for
an increment in the torque. The prime mover therefore brings in the
generator output by an amount ∆PG which will change the values of ∆f and
∆Ptie. The process continues till deviation ∆f and ∆Ptie are well below the
specified tolerances.
2.2 Modeling of Power System Components
Modeling of different power system components i.e. Speed

governing system, Turbine, Generator-load are described and the various
block diagrams representing the components are presented in this section.
2.2.1 Modeling of Speed Governing System
The schematic diagram of speed governing system which controls the real
power flow in the power system is shown in fig 2.1.
steam
Lower X
Direction
Speed
changer of positive
movement
C D To
Raise B
turbine
A l2 l3 l4 E
l1
Pilot valve
High
pressure
oil
Speed
governor
11
Fig:2.1 Speed Governing System
The Speed Governing System consists of the following parts:-

1. Speed Governor: This is a fly-ball type of speed governor and
constitutes the heart of the system as it senses the change in speed or
frequency. With the increase in speed the fly ball move outwards and the
point B on linkage mechanism moves downwards and vice versa.
2. Linkage Mechanism: ABC and CDE are the rigid links pivoted at B
and D respectively. The mechanism provides a movement to the control
valve in the proportion to change in speed. Link4 (l4) provides a feed back
from the steam valve movement.
3. Hydraulic Amplifier: This consists of the main piston and pilot valve.
Low power level pilot valve movement is converted into high power level
piston valve movement which is necessary to open or close the steam valve
against high pressure steam.
4. Speed Changer: The speed changer provides a steady state power
output setting for the turbine. The downward movement of the speed
changer opens the upper pilot valve so that more steam is admitted to the
turbine under steady condition. The reverse happens when the speed changer
moves upward.
Consider the steady state condition by assuming that linkage

mechanism is stationary, pilot valve closed, steam valve opened by definite
magnitude, the turbine output balances the generator output and the
turbine/generator is running at a normal speed or at a normal frequency
f° ,the generator output PGO and let the steam valve setting corresponding to
these conditions be XE.
12
Let the point A of the speed changer lower down by an amount
∆XA as a result the commanded increase in power ∆PC then ∆XA = K1∆PC.
The movement of linkage point A causes small position changes ∆XC and
∆X D of the linkage points C and D. With the movement of D upwards by
∆X D high pressure oil flows into the hydraulic amplifier from the top of the
main piston thereby the steam valve will move downwards a small distance
∆XE which results in increased turbine torque and hence power increase,
∆PG. This further results in increase in speed and hence the frequency of
generation. This increase in frequency ∆f causes the link point B to move
downward a small distance ∆XB proportional to ∆f. Assume the
movements are positive if the points move downwards.
Two factors contribute to the movement of C:

i) Increase in frequency causes B to move by ∆XB when the frequency
changes by ∆f as then the fly-ball moves outward and B is lowered by ∆X B .

Therefore, this contribution is positive and is given by K1∆f.
ii) The lowering of the speed changer by an amount ∆XA lifts the
point C upwards by an amount proportional to ∆XA, i.e. K2∆PC.
∆XC = K1∆f - K2∆PC …………………..2.1

Where K1 and K2 are the positive constants depends upon the
length of the linkage arms AB and BC and upon the proportional constants
of the speed changer and the speed governor.
The movement of D is contributed by the movement of C and

E. Since C and E move downwards when D moves upwards,
13
therefore, ∆X D= K3∆XC + K4∆XE ……………………2.2
Where K3 and K4 are positive constants depend upon the length of the
linkage CD and DE
Let the oil flow into the hydraulic cylinder is proportional to position
∆X D
of the pilot valve, the value of ∆XE is given by
t
∆XE=K5 ∫ -(∆X D )dt

0
……………………2.3
Where the constant K5 depends upon the fluid pressure and the
geometries of the orifice and the cylinder.
Taking Laplace transforms to equations 2.1, 2.2 & 2.3
∆XC (s)= K1∆F(s) - K2∆PC(s)
∆X D (s)= K3∆XC (s)+ K4∆XE (s)
∆XE (s)= -K5∆X D (s) /s
= -K5 (K3.( K1∆F(s) - K2∆PC (s))+ K4∆XE (s))
s
Eliminating the variables ∆XC and ∆X D ,

∆XE (s) = K2K3 ∆PC(s) - - K3 K1∆F(s)
K4+s/K5
∆XE(s)= K G [∆PC (s) -∆F(s)/R] ……………….2.4

1+sTG
Where R = K2/K1 → speed regulation of governor.

K G = K2K3/K4 → gain of speed governor.
TG = 1/K4K5 → time constant of speed governor.
The above equation 2.4 can be represented as a block diagram shown in
fig2.2
14
KG
∆PC
+ ∆XE(s)
- 1+sTG
1/R
∆F(s)
Fig. 2.2 Block diagram of speed governing system for steam

turbine
2.2.2 Modeling of Turbine

The turbine power increment ∆P T depends entirely upon the
valve power increment ∆Pv and the response characteristics of the turbine. A
non-reheat turbine with a single gain factor K T and a single time constant T T
is considered and in the crudest model representation of the turbine the
transfer function is given as
G T (s)= ∆P T (s) = KT ….……………..2.5

∆XE (s) 1+sT T
The above transfer function is represented in the form of Block diagram
along with the governor as shown in fig 2.3
∆PT(s)
KG ∆XE(s) KT
∆PC
+
-
1+sTG 1+sTT
1/R
∆F(s)
Fig.2.3 Block diagram of power control mechanism of

turbine
15
2.2.3 Modeling of Generator-Load

The model gives relation between the change in
frequency as a result of change in generation when the load changes by a
small amount.
Let ∆PD be the change in load demand, as a result the generation also swings
by an amount ∆PG. The net power surplus at the busbar is ∆PG-∆PD and this
power will be absorbed by the system in two ways
a) Rate of increase of stored kinetic energy in generator rotor
Let Wo be the Kinetic Energy before change in load occurs when
the frequency is f o.
Let ∆f be the change in frequency.
Let W be the Kinetic Energy when the frequency is ∆f+ f o.
As K.E. is proportional to square of the speed of the generator
2
W= W° f° +∆f
f°
→ W=W° (1+2∆f/f°) (neglecting the higher terms)…………2.6

By Differentiating equation 2.6,
dW = 2W° . d (∆f) ………………2.7
dt f° dt
b) The load on the motors increases with increase in speed. The load
on the system being mostly motor load the rate of change of load w.r.t.
frequency can be regarded as nearly constant for small changes in
frequency,
i.e. D=∂PD where D, Load Frequency Constant, can be obtained empirically
∂f
Therefore, the net power surplus at the busbar is given by

∆PG-∆PD = 2W° . d (∆f) +D ∆f ………………2.8
f° dt
16
Let H be the inertia constant of the generator in MW-sec/MVA
Let P be the rating in MVA, then W° =H*P.
Substituting W° in equation 2.8,
∆PG-∆PD =2HP. d (∆f) +D ∆f ……………….2.9

f° dt
Dividing equation 2.9 throughout by P,
∆PG (p.u.)-∆PD (p.u.) = 2H . s∆F(s) +D(s)∆F(s)
f°
= ∆F(s){D(s)+2Hs/f°}
i.e. ∆F(s) = ∆PG (s)-∆PD (s)
D(s)+2Hs/f°
Or ∆F(s) = [∆PG (s)-∆PD (s) ] KP ……………..2.10

1+sTP
Where Tp=2H/Df° →power system time constant

Kp=1/D →power system gain
The transfer function in equation 2.10 is represented in the form of a

block diagram as shown in fig 2.4
∆PG KP
+ ∆F(s)
- 1+sTP
∆PD
Fig2.4 Block diagram of Generator- Load model

17
2.2.4 Block diagram of an Isolated Power System
The models of speed governor, turbine, generator-load

are combined to represent complete block diagram of an isolated power
system for Load Frequency Control and is represented in fig 2.5
∆PD(S)
KG KT KP
+- - ∆F(S)
+
∆PC(S) 1+sTG 1+sTT 1+sTP
1/R
Fig 2.5 Block Diagram of an Isolated Power System for load

frequency control
From the block diagram in fig 2.5, the change in ∆F is due to
1) either change in speed changer setting(∆Pc)
2) or Load Demand(∆PD)
Consider a fixed setting in speed changer i.e. ∆Pc =0, which is known
as free governor operation, and a sudden change in load (i.e. step disturbance
in load) and so ∆PD(s)= ∆PD/s
18
By representing the block diagram in fig 2.5 in the form of a
transfer function ∆F(s) ,
∆F(s) = KP * (∆PD /s) ………2.11

(1+sTp)+ K G KT KP/R
(1+sTG)(1+sTT)
2.3 Dynamic Response without Feedback PI Control
To obtain the dynamic response giving change in frequency as a

function of the time for a step change in load, there are two different
approaches
1) Transfer Function approach
2) State Space approach
2.3.1 Transfer Function Approach
To obtain transient response or frequency response analysis of

single input and single output linear systems, the conventional transfer
function representation forms a useful model. The transfer function of a
linear time-invariant system is defined as the ratio of the laplace transform
of the output variable to the laplace transform of the input variable under the
assumption that all initial conditions are zero. The highest power of the
complex variable s in the denominator of the transfer function determines
the order of the system.
19
When the transfer function of a physical system is determined,
the system can be represented by a block. It describes the input and output
behaviour of the system and does not give any information concerning the
internal structure of the system.
Recalling the equation 2.11,
∆F(s) = KP * ( ∆PD/s) ……………2.12

(1+sTG)(1+sTT)
By simplifying the equation 2.12 and assuming K G KT ~ 1
∆F(s) = R (1+sTG) (1+sTT)

1+{(1+sTG) (1+sTT) (2Hs+D) R}
= R(1+s2TT TG+s(TT+ TG)

1+[{1+ s2TT TG+s(TT+ TG)}{2Hs+D}R]
∆F(s) = s2 TTTG+s(TT+TG)+1
s3TTTG2H+s2{TTTGD+2HTT+2HTG}+s{DTT+2H+DTG}+
{D+1/R}
To obtain the response of isolated power system without feedback by the

transfer function approach using Matlab programming. The following is the
program to use in MATLAB
Program For Transfer Function Model(Protfsa.m):
T=input('TOTAL RATED CAPACITY in MW :');

R=input('ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR(R)in
Hz/puMw:’);
20
F=input('ENTER SYSTEM FREQUENCY(F) in Hz :');
H=input('ENTER INERTIA CONSTANT(H) in sec :');
D=input('ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT(D)in puMW/Hz:');
TG=input('ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF GOVERNOR in sec :');
TT=input('ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF TURBINE in sec :');
Pp=input('ENTER THE CHANGE IN LOAD DEMAND IN TERMS OF %
INCREASE:');
dP=Pp*0.01;
R=R/F;
Num=[TG*TT TT+TG 1]*-dP;
Den=[TT*TG*H (TT*TG*D+2*H*TT+2*H*TG) (D*TT+2*H+D*TG)

(D+1/R)];
Tf=tf(Num,Den);
step(Num,Den);
Tf
>> Protfsa
TOTAL RATED CAPACITY in MW :250
ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR(R) in Hz/puMw :3
ENTER SYSTEM FREQUENCY(F) in Hz :60
ENTER INERTIA CONSTANT(H) in sec :5
ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT(D) in puMw/Hz :0.8
ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF GOVERNOR in sec :0.2
ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF TURBINE in sec :0.5

21
ENTER THE CHANGE IN LOAD DEMAND IN TERMS OF % INCREASE :20
Transfer function:
-0.02 s^2 - 0.14 s - 0.2
-----------------------------------
0.5 s^3 + 7.08 s^2 + 10.56 s + 20.8
Fig 2.6 Response plot for an isolated power system

without PI feedback control by Transfer Function
approach
2.3.2 State Space Approach
The state variable approach is a powerful technique for the analysis and
design of control systems and which has a lot of advantages over transfer
functional approach. The state variable analysis can be applied to multi input
and multi output systems.
The transient analysis can be carried with initial conditions and can be
carried on multiple input and multiple output systems. In this method of
22
analysis, it is not necessary that the state variables represent physical
quantities of the system. The variables that do not represent physical
quantities and those that are neither measurable nor observable may be
chosen as state variables.
The state model of a system consist of state equation output equation.
*
x (t)= Ax(t)+Bu(t) ………..state equation
y(t) = Cx(t)+Du(t) ……….output equation
where
A→ n x n Sate Distribution Matrix
B→ n x m Control Distribution Matrix
C→ Output matrix
D→ Transition Matrix
Analysis of State Space Equation:

23
∆PD(S)
+- KG
∆XG
KT -
1 x1 ∆F(S)
u 1+sTG x3 1+sTT x2 +
2Hs+D
1/R
Fig 2.7 Block diagram of an isolated power system for

analyzing state space equations
The state space equations can be derived by considering

the intermediate states and from the block diagram
x1=∆f, change in frequency
x2=∆PG, change in power generation
x3=∆XG, change in governor position
x1=( x2-u) 1 …………….2.13

2Hs+D
x2= x3/(1+sTT) …………….2.14
x3=- x1 1 ……………2.15
R (1+sTG )
from equation 2.14 x2+TTs x2= x3
x2+ x 2 TT = x3
*
→ ……………2.16
24
from equation 2.15, - x3R- x3R TGs= x1
*
→ - x3R- x 3RTG = x1
……………..2.17
from equation 2.13, x1*2Hs+ x1D= x2-u
→ x 1 2H+x1D= x2-u
*
…………….2.18
By solving the equations 2.16, 2.17 and 2.18,
x 1 =(- x1D- x2-u)/2H

*
……………….2.19
x 2 =(- x2+ x3)/ TT
*
………………2.20
*
x 3 = (-x1- x3R)/(R* TG) ………………2.21
Writing the equations 2.19, 2.20 and 2.21 in Matrix form ,
-1/2H
x1
-D/2H 1/2H 0 0
1 = + u
0 -1/TT 1/TT x2 0
2
3 -1/RTG 0 -1/TG x3
-D/2H 1/2H 0 -1/2H

B=
where A= 0 -1/TT 1/TT 0
-1/RTG 0 -1/TG 0
C=(1 0 0) and D= ( 0 )
25
To obtain the response of isolated power system without feedback by the
state space approach using Matlab programming. The following is the
program to use in MATLAB.
Program for State Space Model(Prosssa.m)
R=input('ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR(R) in Hz/puMw:');
D=input('ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT(D) in puMW/Hz: ');
TG=input('ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF GOVERNOR in sec : ');
TT=input('ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF TURBINE in sec :');

INCREASE:');
dP=Pp*0.01;
R=R/F;
A=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 ;0 -1/TT 1/TT ;-1/(R*TG) 0 -1/TG];
B=[-dP/(2*H) ; 0 ; 0 ];
C=[1 0 0 ]; D=[0 ];
fprintf('THE MATRICES A,B,C,D ARE:- ');
step(A,B,C,D);
26
>> Prosssa
ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR(R) in Hz/puMw :3
ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT(D) in puMw/Hz :0.8
ENTER THE CHANGE IN LOAD DEMAND IN TERMS OF % INCREASE :20
THE MATRICES A,B,C,D ARE:-
A =
-0.0800 0.1000 0
0 -2.0000 2.0000
-100.0000 0 -5.0000
B =
-0.0200
27
0
C =
1 0 0
D =
Fig 2.8 Response plot of Isolated Power System without PI

feedback control by State Space Approach
28
2.4 Dynamic Response with PI Control
With the primary LFC loop, a change in the system load will
result in a steady state frequency deviation depending on the governor
speed regulation. In order to reduce the frequency deviation to zero, a reset
action is to be provided. The reset action can be achieved by introducing an
integral controller to act on the reference setting to change the speed set
point. The integral controller increases the order of the system by one.
2.4.1 Control Strategy
Uncontrolled system is subject to steady state errors and so

control strategy is required. The control specifications are
1) Control loop must be characterized by a sufficient degree of stability
2) Following a step load change, the frequency error should return to

zero. This is referred to as isosynchronous control. Magnitude of transient
frequency must be minimized.
3) Integral of the frequency error should be minimized.
4) The individual generators of the control area should divide the total
load for optimum frequency.
29
Let ∆Pc be the negative feed-back signal drawn from frequency
deviation. Suppose, if it was not an integral feedback, i.e. if ∆Pc=-K1∆F(s)
where k1→gain for proportion control
Recollecting the system response from equation 2.11
∆F(s) = KP * ( ∆PD /s)

(1+sTG)(1+sTT)
→ ∆F(s)= - KP(1+sTG)(1+sTT) ∆PD(s) {assuming KG KT~ 1} ….2.22

(1+sTG)(1+sTT) (1+sTP)+(K1 +1/R)KP
i.e. Steady state frequency error,
∆FSS = Lt ∆F(s)= -KP ∆PD

S→0 1+(K1+1/R)KP
i.e. As ∆Fss→0, K1→∞, which is not suitable for proportional control and so
cannot be recommended for control
So, if ∆Pc(t)=-KI ∫ ∆f(t)dt
∆Pc(s)=-KI∆F(s)/s
So , ∆F(s)= -KP∆PD(s)
s(1+sTP)+(K2+s/R)
∆FSS= Lt s. ∆F(s) =0
s→0
30
Thus by using Integral control strategy, steady state error can be
eliminated(i.e.∆Fss=0). Thus PI controller when introduced improves the
transient performance and ensures better stability.
The complete block diagram with integral control for an isolated power
system is shown in figure 2.9
∆PD(S)
KT KP ∆F(S
+- KG
1+sTT +
- )
1+sTG 1+sTP
∆PC(S)
1/
R
KI/s
Fig 2.9 Block Diagram of an Isolated Power System with PI

controller
The dynamic response for a step change in load, with integral

control can be obtained by two different approaches
2.4.2 Transfer Function Approach
From the above block diagram shown in fig 2.9 the system equation can be
written as
∆F(s)= - KP * ∆PD ………….2.23

(1+sTP)+( 1 + KI ) * KP o
R s ( 1+sTG)(1+sTT)
But D=1/Kp and Tp=2H/D
Hence on simplifying, equation 2.23 becomes

31
∆F(s)= Rs( 1+sTG)(1+sTT)
s[(1+sTG)(1+sTT) (1+sTp)+s/R+KI
→∆F(s)= s3 TTTG+s2 (TT+TG)+s

s4TTTG2H+s3{TTTGD+2HTT+2HTG}+s2{DTT+2H+DTG}+s{D+1/R}
+KI
From the above equation, the response in the transfer function

approach can be obtained by a program using MATLAB.
Program for Transfer Function Model(Protfsawi.m)
T=input('TOTAL RATED CAPACITY :');
R=input('ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR(R) in HZ/puMW:');
D=input('ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT in puMw/Hz :');
Tg=input('ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF GOVERNOR in sec :');
Tt=input('ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF TURBINE in sec :');
Ki=input('ENTER THE INTEGRAL GAIN :');
Pp=input('ENTER THE CHANGE IN LOAD DEMAND IN TERMS OF

%INCREASE:');
dP=Pp*0.01;
R=R/F;
Num=[0 Tg*Tt (Tg+Tt) 1 0]*(-dP);
Den=[Tg*Tt*2*H Tg*Tt*D+Tg*2*H+Tt*2*H)(2*H+Tg*D+Tt*D)(D+1/R)
Ki];
32
Tf=tf(Num,Den);
Tf
step(Num,Den);
>> Protfsawi
TOTAL RATED CAPACITY :250
ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR(R) in puMW/Hz:3
ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT in puMw/Hz :0.8
ENTER THE INTEGRAL GAIN :7
ENTER THE CHANGE IN LOAD DEMAND IN TERMS OF % INCREASE:20
Transfer function:
-0.02 s^3 - 0.14 s^2 - 0.2 s
---------------------------------------
s^4 + 7.08 s^3 + 10.56 s^2 + 20.8 s + 7

33
Fig 2.10 Response Plot of an Isolated Power System

with PI control
using Transfer function Approach
The block diagram with different states required for analyzing

the state equations is shown in fig 2.11
∆PD(S)
x KT KP ∆F(S)
KG
4
+-
1+sTG
x 1+sTT x +
-
1+sTP x
∆PC(S)
3 2 1
1/R
KI/s
34
Fig 2.11Block Diagram with PI Control in State Space
Representation
*
x 1=( x2/2H)-( x1D/2H)-(u/2H) …………………..2.24
*
x 2=-( x2/TT)+(x3/ TT) …………………..2.25
x3=( x4-1/R) 1/(1+sTG) → x3 (1+s TG)= - x4 – x1/R
*
i.e. x 3= -( x4/ TG) –( x1/R TG)-( x3/ TG) ……………………2.26
x4= x1Ki/s
*
i.e. x 4= x1Ki ……………………2.27
So the standard form of equations are
-1/2H
x1
-D/2H 1/2H 0 0
1
0 -1/TT 1/TT 0 x2 0 u
2 =
-1/RTG 0 -1/TG 1/TG
+ 0
3 x3
4 0
Ki 0 0 0 x4
To obtain the response of isolated power system with PI control by the

state space approach using Matlab programming, the following numerical
example is illustrated
35
Program for State Space Model(Prosssawi.m):-
T=input('TOTAL RATED CAPACITY in MW :’);
R=input('ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR in Hz/puMw :');
H=input('ENTER INERTIA CONSTANT(H)in sec :');
%INCREASE:');
dP=Pp*0.01;
R=R/F;
A=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/Tt 1/Tt 0;-1/(R*Tg) 0 -1/Tg

-1/Tg;Ki 0 0 0];
B=[-dP/(2*H) ; 0 ; 0 ; 0 ];
C=[1 0 0 0];
D=[0 ];
disp('THE MATRICES A,B,C,D ARE AS FOLLOWS:-');
step(A,B,C,D);
>> prosssawi
36
ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR(R) in Hz/puMW :3
ENTER INERTIA CONSTANT(H)in sec :5
ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT in puMw/Hz :0.8
THE MATRICES A,B,C,D ARE AS FOLLOWS:-
A =
-0.0800 0.1000 0 0
0 -2.0000 2.0000 0
-100.0000 0 -5.0000 -5.0000
7.0000 0 0 0
B =
-0.0200
37
0
C =
1 0 0 0
D =
Fig 2.12 Response plot for an isolated Power System with PI

control using State Space Approach
38
2.5 Case Studies
There are several parameters which effect the dynamic response of a

system and they are
Case 1 : Governor Speed Regulation
Case 2: Time Constant of the Govenor
Case 3: Time Constant of the Turbine
Case 4: Integral Gain
Case 5: Load Disturbance
Different Case Studies have been carried by varying the above parameters.
The variations are depicted by using MATLAB programming for an Isolated
Power System with PI controller. The dynamic response for different cases
is obtained by considering the example with ± 50% changes in the parameter
values.
39
Program for Case studies in Singe area (prosacs.m):-
F=input('ENTER SYSTEM FREQUENCY(F)in Hz :');
D=input('ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT in puMw/Hz:');
disp('ENTER THE PARAMETER IN WHCICH THE VARIATION IS TO BE

SOUGHT:')
disp('1.CHANGE IN SPEED REGULATION(R)\n');
disp('2.CHANGE IN GOVERNOR TIME CONSTANT(Tg)\n');
disp('3.CHANGE IN TURBINE TIME CONSTANT(Tt)\n');
disp('4.CHANGE IN INTEGRAL GAIN(Ki)\n');
disp('5.CHANGE IN LOAD DEMAND(dP)\n\n');
value=input('ENTER A VALUE :');
switch(value)
case {1}
Tg=input('ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF GOVERNOR IN SEC :');

% INCREASE:');
R=input('ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR(R) in

Hz/puMW');
dP=Pp*0.01;
r=R/F;
A1=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/Tt 1/Tt 0;-1/

(r*Tg) 0 -1/Tg -1/Tg; Ki 0 0 0];
A2=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/Tt 1/Tt 0;-1/

(r*1.5*Tg) 0 -1/Tg -1/Tg;Ki 0 0 0];
40
A3=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/Tt 1/Tt 0;-1/
(r*0.5*Tg) 0 -1/Tg -1/Tg;Ki 0 0 0];
case {2}
Pp1=input('ENTER THE CHANGE IN LOAD DEMAND IN TERMS OF

%NCREASE:');

Hz/puMW:');
dP1=Pp1*0.01;r=R/F;
A1=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/Tt 1/Tt 0;-1/(r*Tg)

0 -1/Tg -1/Tg;Ki 0 0 0];
A2=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/Tt 1/Tt 0;-1/

(r*Tg*1.5) 0 -1/(Tg*1.5) -1/(Tg*1.5);Ki 0 0 0];
A3=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/Tt 1/Tt 0;-1/

(r*Tg*0.5) 0 -1/(Tg*0.5) -1/(Tg*0.5);Ki 0 0 0];
case {3}
R=input('ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR(R) in HZ/puMW

:');
Pp1=input('ENTER THE CHANGE IN LOAD DEMAND IN TERMS OF

% INCREASE:');
dP1=Pp1*0.01; r=R/F;
A1=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/Tt 1/Tt 0;-1/(r*Tg)

0 -1/Tg -1/Tg;Ki 0 0 0];
A2=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/(Tt*1.5) 1/(Tt*1.5)

0;-1/(r*Tg) 0 -1/(Tg) -1/(Tg);Ki 0 0 0];
A3=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/(Tt*0.5) 1/(Tt*0.5)

0;-1/(r*Tg) 0 -1/(Tg) -1/(Tg);Ki 0 0 0];
41
case {4}
R=input('ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR(R) in puMW/Hz

:');
%INCREASE:');
dP=Pp*0.01; r=R/F;
A1=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/Tt 1/Tt 0;-1/(r*Tg)

0 -1/Tg -1/Tg;Ki 0 0 0];
A2=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/Tt 1/Tt 0;-1/(r*Tg)

0 -1/Tg -1/Tg;Ki*1.5 0 0 0];
A3=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/Tt 1/Tt 0;-1/(r*Tg)

0 -1/Tg -1/Tg;Ki*0.5 0 0 0];
case {5}

puMW/Hz :');
Pp1=input('ENTER THE CHANGE IN LOAD DEMAND IN TERMS OF %

INCREASE:');
dP1=Pp1*0.01;
dP2=Pp1*0.5*0.01;
dP3=Pp1*1.5*0.01;
r=R/F;
42
A=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/Tt 1/Tt 0;-1/
(r*Tg) 0 -1/Tg -1/Tg;Ki 0 0 0];
B=[-dP1/(2*H) -dP2/(2*H) -dP3/(2*H); 0 0 0 ; 0 0

0; 0 0 0];
C=[1 0 0 0];
D=[0 0 0];
step(A,B,C,D);
break;
otherwise ,
end
B=[-dP/(2*H); 0; 0; 0];
C=[1 0 0 0]; D=[0];
sys1=ss(A1,B,C,D);
sys2=ss(A2,B,C,D);
sys3=ss(A3,B,C,D);
step(sys1,sys2,sys3);
Dynamic Response after execution is as follows:
>> prosacs
ENTER SYSTEM FREQUENCY(F)in Hz :60
ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT in Hz/puMw :0.8
ENTER THE PARAMETER IN WHCICH THE VARIATION IS TO BE SOUGHT:
1.CHANGE IN SPEED REGULATION(R)\n

43
2.CHANGE IN GOVERNOR TIME CONSTANT(Tg)\n
3.CHANGE IN TURBINE TIME CONSTANT(Tt)\n
4.CHANGE IN INTEGRAL GAIN(Ki)\n
5.CHANGE IN LOAD DEMAND(dP)\n\n
ENTER A VALUE :1
ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF GOVERNOR IN SEC :0.2

44
Fig2.13 Response plot of an Isolated Power System with

PI controller with variation
in Governor Speed Regulation
ENTER A VALUE :2

45
PI controller with variation
in Time Constant of Governor
ENTER A VALUE :3

46
Fig2.15 Response plot of an Isolated Power System

with PI controller with
variation in Time Constant of Turbine
ENTER A VALUE :4
ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR(R) in Hz/puMW:3

47

PI controller with
variation in Integral Gain
ENTER A VALUE :5

48

PI controller with
variation in Load Disturbance
2.4 Discussions
49
• The response of an isolated power system without integral feedback

control when subjected to load change are shown in figs 2.6&2.8.
From these figs. it is clear that response for the isolated power system
obtained by the transfer function and state space approaches. Also the
settling time is 8 secs and the steady state frequency deviation is .
0095Hz/pu.
• The response of an Isolated Power System with PI controller when
subjected to a load change are shown in figs 2.10&,2.12. From these
figures, it is clear that the settling time is 15 seconds and the steady
state frequency deviation is zero. Hence it can concluded that the feed
back control reduces the steady state deviation to zero.
• The response for the variation in different parameters are obtained in
section 2.5. The response for + 50% variation in speed regulation of
governor is shown in figure 2.13. From this figure, it can be observed
that when R is increased the settling time decreases but frequency
deviations increases and vice versa.
• The response for + 50% variation in Time constant of governor is
shown in figure 2.14. From this figure, it is clear that when TG is
decreased the settling time decreases and frequency deviations
decreases and vice versa.
• The response for + 50% variation in Time Constant of Turbine is
shown in figure 2.15. From this figure, it is evident that when TT is
increased the settling time decreases and frequency deviations
decreases and vice versa.
• The response for + 50% variation in Integral Gain is shown in figure
2.16. From this figure, it is evident that when Ki is increased the
settling time increases and frequency deviations increases.
• The response for + 50% variation in Load disturbance is shown in
figure 2.17. From this figure, it can be observed that when dP is
increased the frequency deviation increases with no considerable
change in settling time.
50
CHAPTER-3
51
LOAD FREQUENCY CONTROL OF INTERCONNECTED
SYSTEMS
3.1 Introduction
All power systems today are tied together with neighboring

areas and the problem of load-frequency control becomes a joint
undertaking. By considering a practical system with a number of generator
stations and loads, it is possible to divide an extended power system into sub
areas in which the generators are tightly coupled together so as to form a
coherent group. Such a coherent area is called a control area in which the
frequency is assumed to be the same throughout in static as well as dynamic
conditions. The important advantages can be derived by pool operation are
a) to improve system security and economy of operation
b) the interconnection permits the utilities to make economy transfers
The basic operating principles for interconnecting systems are
a) under normal operating conditions each pool member or control area

should strive to carry its own load, except such scheduled portions of the
other members’ loads as have been mutually agreed upon.
b) Each control area must agree upon adopting regulating and control
strategies and equipment that are mutually beneficial under both normal and
abnormal situations. The advantages belonging to a pool are particularly
evident under emergency conditions.
52
The Problems of frequency control of interconnected areas are more
important than those of isolated areas. The objective of load frequency
control of interconnected power systems is two fold: minimizing the
transient error deviations in both frequency and tie line power and ensuring
zero steady state errors of these two quantities. By a simple proportional
integral control law the above mentioned objective is achieved. This chapter
presents proportional control for minimizing the transient error and the
integral control for zero steady state error.
3.2 Modeling of Multi area Power Systems
In an isolated control area case, the incremental power (∆PG-∆PD) was

accounted by the rate of increase of stored kinetic energy in or out of an
area. Changes in the Tie-line power flows also affect the power balance in
corresponding areas.
Consider any area i in an n area power system corresponding to

change in load demand ∆PD.
Let ∆ Ptie, i be the tie line schedule deviation
n
∆ Ptie, , i = ∑
j =1
∆ Ptie, , ij ………………..3.1
where ∆ Ptie,, ij is the change in tie line power flow over the line connecting
areas i and j
Ptie, , ij= Vi Vj sin[(δi + ∆ δi )- (δj + ∆ δj ) ] ……………….3.2

Xij
where Vi,Vj → voltage magnitudes at the tie-line ends in areas i and j

respectively
Xij → Reactance of the same tie-line
δi , δj → Nominal bus voltage phase angles

53
∆ δi , ∆ δj → Changes in the phase angles
Expanding equation 3.2,
∆ Ptie, , ij = Vi Vj sin[(δi - δj )+ Vi Vj cos (δi ° - δj ° )(∆ δi -∆ δj ) …….3.3

Xij Xij
but we have Pmax = Vi Vj / Xij
So from the Equation 3.3
∆ Ptie, , ij = Pmax sin(δi - δj )+ Pmax cos (δi ° - δj ° )(∆ δi -∆ δj )

= Ptie,°, ij + Pmax cos (δi ° - δj ° )(∆ δi -∆ δj )
Synchronizing Coefficient Tij is given as
Tij = Ptie, , ij - Ptie,° , ij = Pmax cos (δi - δj )
(∆δi -∆ δj)
So, ∆ Ptie, ij = Tij (∆δi - ∆ δj ) ….……….3.4
where ∆ Ptie, , ij = Ptie,, ij- Ptie °, ij
For Frequency Deviation (∆f i) in the ith area ,
t t
Ptie, ij = 2Π Tij ( ∫ ∆ f i dt - ∫ ∆ f j dt )
0 0
…………..3.5
By applying d/dt to the equation 3.5

n
d (∆Ptie,, ij ) = 2Π ∑j =1
Tij (∆f i -∆ f j) …………….3.6
dt
Applying Laplace Transform to the Equation 3.6

54
n
∆ Ptie,, i(s) = (2Π/s) ∑ Tij {∆ Fi (s)-∆ F j (s)}

j=
1
……………..3.7
j≠i
Thus for the case of a multi-area interconnected systems,
∆PGi -∆PDi = Di + 2Hi - d (∆fi ) + ∆Ptie, i

fs dt
Taking Laplace transform on both side of equation and rearranging terms,
∆ Fi (s)= KPi [ ∆PGi(s)-∆PDi(s)- Ptie,, i(s)] ……………..3.8

(1+sTPi)
3.3 Modeling of Two-Area Systems
In fact, a Two Area system is a case of multi area system,

where the areas are connected through the tie line power exchange. The
reasons for choosing the two-area system as the object of our study are
1. It is the simplest form of multi area systems.
2. Because the few papers published on multiple-area control have

limited their analysis to two area-systems and the results can be compared.
3. before understanding the larger systems, it is of paramount

importance that the two area case must be thorough commanded.
From Equation 3.8 we have
∆F1(s)= KP1 [ ∆PG1(s)-∆PD1(s)- Ptie, , 1(s)] (for area1 i.e. i=1 )………..3.9
(1+sTP1)
∆F2(s)= KP2 [ ∆PG2(s)-∆PD2(s)- Ptie,, 2(s)] (for area2 i.e. i=2 )………..3.10
(1+sTP2)
55
from Equation 3.7 assigning i=1 and j=2
∆ Ptie, 1(s) = 2ΠT12 [∆F1 (s)- ∆F2(s)] ……………..3.11

s
∆ Ptie,, 2(s) = -2Π T12 a 12 [∆F1 (s)- ∆F2(s)] …………….3.12

s
where a12 is the area-size ratio coefficient and it is the negative

ratio between the rated Megawatts of areas 1 and 2, respectively. .ie.a 12 ~
-Pr1/ Pr2 . It must be include in the block diagram because the term ∆ Ptie,, 1
represents the tie-line power exchange out from area i expressed in per unit
of area rating Pri . We have the following relation for the two tie line powers
∆ Ptie, 2 ~ a12 ∆ Ptie, 1
Combining the block diagrams of two single areas (fig

2.4) with synchronizing coefficient and area-size ratio coefficient, the block
diagram for uncontrolled two area system is shown in fig 3.1
1/R1
∆PL1(S)
- KG KT - 1
+- 2H1s+D1
1+sTG1 1+sTT1
+
T12 /S -
+ 1
- KG KT +-
1+sTG2 1+sTT2 2H2s+D2
∆PL2(S)
1/R2
Fig 3.1 Block Diagram of two-area system without PI

feedback control
56
Dynamic Response of Two-Area System with PI Control
The feedback control without PI controller is not used, as it is

not satisfying the minimum specifications which are
1) the static frequency error following a step load change must be zero
2) the transient frequency swings should be normal.
Hence the control strategy is used to meet the above

requirements and is of linear and integral form i.e. the Proportional Integral
(PI) control is used to study the dynamic response of the 2 area system.
3.4.1 Area Control Error(ACE)
By using the integral control, let the speed changer be

commanded by a signal obtained by first amplifying and then integrating the
frequency error, i.e. ∆Pref ∆ -Ki ∫ ∆f dt.
Where the unit for Ki is puMw/Hz/sec. The signal fed to the integrator is
referred to as area control error (ACE), i.e. ACE ∆ ∆f
Integral control will give rise to zero static frequency error

following a step load change because as long as an error remains, the
integrator output will increase, causing the speed changer to move. The
integrator output, and thus the speed changer position, attains a constant
value only when the frequency error has been reduced to zero.
In case of two area systems, the tie-line bias control is based on

the principle that all operating members must contribute their share to
frequency control in addition to taking care of their own net exchange
57
In applying the reset control method to the two area system, the control error
for each area consists of a linear combination of frequency and tie-line error
i.e. ACE1= ∆ Ptie , 1 +b1f1 …….. …..………..3.13
Where the constant b1 is called area frequency bias constant
Applying Laplace transform to equation 3.19
ACE1(s)= ∆ Ptie,, 1 (s)+b1F1(s) …………………..3.14
Similarly for control area-2
ACE2(s)= ∆ Ptie , 2 (s)+b2F2(s) ..………………...3.15
Combining the basic blocks of two diagrams with ∆PC1(s) and ∆PC2(s)
generated by integrals of respective ACEs and employing the block diagram
from the fig 3.1 a new block diagram is obtained which is shown in fig 3.2
1/R1
b1 ∆PL1(S)
- K1/s - - 1
- + KG KT +- 2H1s+D1
1+sTG1 1+sTT1
1/s
T12 +
-
1/s
+ K2/s KT + 1
-
+- KG +
1+sTT2 - 2H2s+D2
1+sTG2
b2 ∆PL2(S)
1/R2
58
fig 3.2 Block diagram of Two-area system
with PI controller
Let the step changes in loads ∆PD1 and ∆PD2 be simultaneously

applied in areas 1 and areas2, respectively. When Steady state conditions are
reached, the output signals of all integrating blocks will become constant
and in order for this to be so, their input signals must be zero.
So from fig 3.6,
∆ Ptie , 1 +b1f1 =0 ……… …………3.16
and ∆ Ptie , 2 +b2f2 =0 ……..……..……3.17
∆f1-∆f2=0(input of integrating block-(2ΠT12/s)…………3.18
From equations 3.10 and 3.11 we have
∆ Ptie, 1 = - T12 = - 1 = constant …………3.19
∆ Ptie, 2 -T21 a12
Hence the Equations 3.16, 3.17, 3.18 and 3.19 are simultaneously satisfied
for
∆ Ptie, 1 = ∆ Ptie, 2 =0
∆f1 =∆f2 =0
Thus under steady state condition change in tie line power and frequency of
each area is zero. This has been achieved by integration of ACEs in the feed
back loops of each area.
59
The dynamic performance of two area system with proportional

Integral Controller is obtained first by using the state space approach.
The steady state space analysis is carried out by using the block
diagram(fig 3.3) and developing the state space equations.
1/R1
b1
∆PL1(S)
x4
-
x3 KT
x2 1
x1
- K1/s + KG -
- +-
2H1s+D1
1+sTG1 1+sTT1
1/s
T12 +
-
x9
1/s
x8
KG x7 KT x6 + 1
+ K2/s +-
-
1+sTG2 1+sTT2
+
- 2H2s+D2 x5
b2 ∆PL2(S)
1/R2
60
Fig 3.3 Block diagram of Two-Area system with PI Controller
to represent the states
So from the block diagram 3.7, we have the equations
*
x1=( x2-d1- x9)(1/2 H1s+ D1) → x 12 H1+ x1 D1= x2- d1- x9
*
→ x 1= -( x1 D1/2 H1)+( x2/2 H1) -( x9/2 H1) -( d1/2 H1) ……………….3.20
x2= x3/(1+s TT1)
*
→ x 2=-( x2/ TT1)+( x3/ TT1) …………………..3.21
x3=( x4- x1/ R1).1/(1+s TG1)
*
→ x 3=-( x1/ R1 TG1)-( x3/ TG1)+( x4/ TG1) ….………………3.22
x4=-( b1 x1+ x9).Ki1/s
*
→ x 4=- Ki1 b1 x1- Ki1 x9 ………………….3.23
x5=( x5+ x7- d2)/(2 H2s+ D2)
*
→ x 5=-( x5 D2/2 H2)+( x6/2 H2)+( x9/2 H2)-( d2/2 H2) …………………3.24
x6= x7/(1+s TT2)
*
→ x 6=-( x6/ TT2)+( x7/ TT2) ………………….3.25
x7=( x8- x4/ R2).1/(1+s TG2)
*
→ x 7=-( x5/ R2 TG2)-( x7/ TG2)+( x8/ TG2) …………………..3.26
*
x 8=- Ki2 b2 x5+ Ki2 x9 …………………..3.27
61
x9=( x1/s) T12-( x5/s) T12
*
→ x 9= x1 T12- x5 T12 ..…………………3.28
So combining equations from 3.26-3.34 and writing in standard matrix form,

we have
*
x1 -D1/2 H1 1/2 H1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1/2 H1 x1
*
x2 0 -1/ TT1 1/ TT1 0 0 0 0 0 0
x2
*
x3 -1/ R1 TG1 0 -1/ TG1 1/ TG1 0 0 0 0 0 x3
*
x4 -K i1 b1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
x4
* =
x5 0 0 0 0 - D2/2H2 1/2H2 0 0 1/2H
+2
x5
*
x6 0 0 0 0 0 -1/ TT2 1/ TT2 0 0
x6
*
x7 0 0 0 0 -1/ R2TG2 0 -1/ TG2 1/ TG2 0
x7
*
x8 0 0 0 0 -K 2 b2 0 0 0 K2
x8
*
x9 T12 0 0 0 - T12 0 0 0 0
x9
*
- d1/2H1 0 y 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 x1
*
0 0 y 2 = 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 x7
62
*
0 0 y 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 x9
0 0
and B= 0 - d2/2H2 which is of the standard form

*
0 0 x =Ax+Bu
*
0 0 y =Cx+Du
0 0
0 0
A Solution to the above system of equations represented is obtained

by writing a MATLAB program and applied to numerical example, which is
illustrated as
Program for Two-Area with PI Controller

(prossmapi.m):-
F=input('ENTER THE SYSTEM FREQUENCY in Hz :');
R1=input('ENTER THE GOVERNOR SPEED REGULATION OF AREA1 in

Hz/puMw :');

Hz/puMw :');
H1=input('ENTER THE INERTIA CONSTANT OF AREA 1 in secs :');
Tg1=input('ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF GOVERNOR OF AREA1 in

sec:');
Tg2=input('ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF GOVERNOR OF AREA 2 in

sec :');
63
Tt1=input('ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF TURBINE OF AREA 1 in
sec :');

sec :');
D1=input('ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT OF AREA 1 in

puMw/Hz :');
D2=input('ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT OF AREA 2 in

puMw/Hz :');
b1=input('ENTER THE FREQUENCY BIAS CONSTANT OF AREA 1 in

puMw/Hz :');
b2=input('ENTER THE FREQUENCY BIAS CONSTANT OF AREA 2 in

puMw/Hz :');
Ki1=input('ENTER THE INTEGRAL GAIN OF AREA 1 :');
T12=input('ENTER THE SYNCHRONISING POWER COEFFICIENT in

puMw: ');
Pp=input('ENTER THE CHANGE IN LOAD IN TERMS OF PERCENTAGE

INCREASE:');
dP=Pp*0.01;
r1=R1/F;
r2=R2/F;
A=[-D1/(2*H1) 1/(2*H1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1/(2*H1);0 -1/Tt1 1/Tt1

0 0 0 0 0 0;-1/(r1*Tg1) 0 -1/Tg1 1/Tg1 0 0 0 0 0;-Ki1*b1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 -Ki1;0 0 0 0 -D2/(2*H2) 1/(2*H2) 0 0 1/(2*H2);0
0 0 0 0 -1/Tt2 1/Tt2 0 0; 0 0 0 0 -1/(r2*Tg2) 0 -1/Tg2
1/Tg2 0;0 0 0 0 -Ki2*b2 0 0 0 Ki2;T12 0 0 0 -T12 0 0 0 0];
B=[-dP/(2*H1) ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0; 0;0 ];

64
C=[1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0];
D=[0 ;0 ];
step(A,B,C,D);
The execution is as follows:-

>>prossmapi
ENTER THE SYSTEM FREQUENCY in Hz :60
ENTER THE GOVERNOR SPEED REGULATION OF AREA 1 in Hz/puM:2.4
ENTER THE GOVERNOR SPEED REGULATION OF AREA2 in Hz/puMw:2.4
ENTER THE INERTIA CONSTANT OF AREA 1 in secs :5
ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF GOVERNOR OF AREA1 in sec :0.08
ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF GOVERNOR OF AREA 2 in sec :0.08
ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF TURBINE OF AREA 1 in sec :0.3
ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT OF AREA1 in puMw/Hz :

0.00833
ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT OF AREA 2 in puMw/Hz :

0.00833
ENTER THE FREQUENCY BIAS CONSTANT OF AREA 1 in puMw/Hz :

0.425

0.425
ENTER THE INTEGRAL GAIN OF AREA 1 :1

65
ENTER THE SYNCHRONISING POWER COEFFICIENT in puMw :0.545
ENTER THE CHANGE IN LOAD IN TERMS OF PERCENTAGE INCREASE:20
Fig 3.4 Response plot of Two-Area system with PI controller

with a load disturbance in area-1
66
Case Studies
There are several parameters which effect the dynamic response

of a system. They are Governor Speed Regulation, Time Constant of the
Governor, Time Constant of the Turbine, Integral Gain, Load Disturbance,
Frequency Bias Constant and Synchronizing Coefficient. The first four case
studies have been discussed in section 2.5. These case studies can be applied
in two-area systems also, but the case studies that have been made by the
two area system are
case 1: Variation in Frequency Bias Constant
case 2: Variation in Synchronizing Coefficient
case 3: Variation in Load disturbance
Different Case Studies are depicted by using MATLAB programming

for an Two area Power System with PI controller. The dynamic response for
different cases with ± 50% changes in the parameter values are obtained by
67
considering the numerical example. The MATLAB programming for this
case is as follows.
Program for Case Studies in Multi Area

System(prossmacs.m)
F=input('ENTER THE SYSTEM FREQUENCY in Hz :’);

Hz/puMw:');

Hz/pumw:');

sec:');

sec :’);
Tt1=input('ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF TURBINE OF AREA1 in

sec :');
Tt2=input('ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF TURBINE OF AREA2 in

sec :');
D1=input('ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT OF AREA1 in

puMw/Hz');
D2=input('ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT OF AREA2 in

puMw/Hz');
68
b1=input('ENTER THE FREQUENCY BIAS CONSTANT OF AREA1 in
puMw/Hz');

puMw/Hz');

puMw :');

INCREASE:');
disp('ENTER THE PARAMETER IN WHICH THE VARIATION IS TO BE

sOUGHT')
disp('1.CHANGE IN FREQUENCY BIAS CONSTANT(b)');
disp('2.CHANGE IN SYNCHRONISING COEFFICIENT (T12)');
disp('3.CHANGE IN LOAD DEMAND(dP)');
dP=Pp*0.01;
r1=R1/F;
r2=R2/F;
value=input('ENTER A VALUE :');
switch(value)
case {1}
A=[-D1/(2*H1) 1/(2*H1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1/(2*H1);0

-1/Tt1 1/Tt1 0 0 0 0 0 0;-1/(r1*Tg1) 0 -1/Tg1 1/Tg1 0 0 0 0
0;-Ki1*b1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -Ki1;0 0 0 0 -D2/(2*H2) 1/(2*H2) 0
69
0 1/(2*H2);0 0 0 0 0 -1/Tt2 1/Tt2 0 0; 0 0 0 0 -1/(r2*Tg2)
0 -1/Tg2 1/Tg2 0;0 0 0 0 -Ki2*b2 0 0 0 Ki2;T12 0 0 0 -T12
0 0 0 0];
A1=[-D1/(2*H1) 1/(2*H1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1/(2*H1);0

-1/Tt1 1/Tt1 0 0 0 0 0 0;-1/(r1*Tg1) 0 -1/Tg1 1/Tg1 0 0 0 0
0;-Ki1*0.5*b1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -Ki1;0 0 0 0 -D2/(2*H2) 1/
(2*H2) 0 0 1/(2*H2);0 0 0 0 0 -1/Tt2 1/Tt2 0 0; 0 0 0 0 -1/
(r2*Tg2) 0 -1/Tg2 1/Tg2 0;0 0 0 0 -Ki2*0.5*b2 0 0 0 Ki2;T12
0 0 0 -T12 0 0 0 0];
A2=[-D1/(2*H1) 1/(2*H1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1/(2*H1);0

-1/Tt1 1/Tt1 0 0 0 0 0 0;-1/(r1*Tg1) 0 -1/Tg1 1/Tg1 0 0 0 0
0;-Ki1*1.5*b1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -Ki1;0 0 0 0 -D2/(2*H2) 1/
(2*H2) 0 0 1/(2*H2);0 0 0 0 0 -1/Tt2 1/Tt2 0 0; 0 0 0 0 -1/
(r2*Tg2) 0 -1/Tg2 1/Tg2 0;0 0 0 0 -Ki2*1.5*b2 0 0 0 Ki2;T12
0 0 0 -T12 0 0 0 0];
case {2}
A=[-D1/(2*H1) 1/(2*H1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1/(2*H1);0

-1/Tt1 1/Tt1 0 0 0 0 0 0;-1/(r1*Tg1) 0 -1/Tg1 1/Tg1 0 0 0 0
0;-Ki1*b1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -Ki1;0 0 0 0 -D2/(2*H2) 1/(2*H2) 0
0 1/(2*H2);0 0 0 0 0 -1/Tt2 1/Tt2 0 0; 0 0 0 0 -1/(r2*Tg2)
0 -1/Tg2 1/Tg2 0;0 0 0 0 -Ki2*b2 0 0 0 Ki2;T12 0 0 0 -T12
0 0 0 0];
A1=[-D1/(2*H1) 1/(2*H1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1/(2*H1);0

-1/Tt1 1/Tt1 0 0 0 0 0 0;-1/(r1*Tg1) 0 -1/Tg1 1/Tg1 0 0 0 0
0;-Ki1*b1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -Ki1;0 0 0 0 -D2/(2*H2) 1/(2*H2) 0
0 1/(2*H2);0 0 0 0 0 -1/Tt2 1/Tt2 0 0; 0 0 0 0 -1/(r2*Tg2)
0 -1/Tg2 1/Tg2 0;0 0 0 0 -Ki2*b2 0 0 0 Ki2;T12*0.5 0 0 0
-T12*0.5 0 0 0 0];
A2=[-D1/(2*H1) 1/(2*H1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1/(2*H1);0

-1/Tt1 1/Tt1 0 0 0 0 0 0;-1/(r1*Tg1) 0 -1/Tg1 1/Tg1 0 0 0 0
0;-Ki1*b1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -Ki1;0 0 0 0 -D2/(2*H2) 1/(2*H2) 0
70
0 1/(2*H2);0 0 0 0 0 -1/Tt2 1/Tt2 0 0; 0 0 0 0 -1/(r2*Tg2)
0 -1/Tg2 1/Tg2 0;0 0 0 0 -Ki2*b2 0 0 0 Ki2;T12*1.5 0 0 0
-T12*1.5 0 0 0 0];
case{3}
dP2=Pp*0.01*0.5;
dP3=Pp*0.01*1.5;
A=[-D1/(2*H1) 1/(2*H1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1/(2*H1);0

-1/Tt1 1/Tt1 0 0 0 0 0 0;-1/(r1*Tg1) 0 -1/Tg1 1/Tg1 0 0 0 0
0;-Ki1*b1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -Ki1;0 0 0 0 -D2/(2*H2) 1/(2*H2) 0
0 1/(2*H2);0 0 0 0 0 -1/Tt2 1/Tt2 0 0; 0 0 0 0 -1/(r2*Tg2)
0 -1/Tg2 1/Tg2 0;0 0 0 0 -Ki2*b2 0 0 0 Ki2;T12 0 0 0 -T12
0 0 0 0];
B=[-dP/(2*H1) ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0; 0;0 ];
C=[1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0];
D=[0 ;0 ];
B1=[-dP2/(2*H1) ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0; 0;0 ];
B2=[-dP3/(2*H1) ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0; 0;0 ];
sys1=ss(A,B,C,D);
sys2=ss(A,B1,C,D);
sys3=ss(A,B2,C,D);
otherwise,
end;
B=[-dP/(2*H1) ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0; 0;0 ];
C=[1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0];

71
D=[0 ;0 ];
sys1=ss(A,B,C,D);
sys2=ss(A1,B,C,D);
sys3=ss(A2,B,C,D);
The execution of the program is as follows

>>promacs
ENTER THE GOVERNOR SPEED REGULATION OF AREA 1 in Hz/puMw :

2.4
ENTER THE GOVERNOR SPEED REGULATION OF AREA 2 in hz/puMw :

2.4
ENTER THE INERTIA CONSTANT OF AREA 2:in secs :5

0.00833

0.00833
72
0.425

0.425
ENTER THE SYNCHRONISING POWER COEFFICIENT in puMw :0.545
ENTER THE CHANGE IN LOAD IN TERMS OF % INCREASE:20
ENTER THE PARAMETER IN WHCICH THE VARIATION IS TO BE SOUGHT:
1.CHANGE IN FREQUENCY BIAS CONSTANT(b)
2.CHANGE IN SYNCHRONISING COEFFICIENT (T12)
3.CHANGE IN LOAD DEMAND(dP)
ENTER A VALUE :1
fig 3.12 response plot of in area-2 with variation in frequency bias constant
73
Fig 3.5 Response plot in Area-1 with variation in Frequency

Bias Constant

Bias Constant
>> ENTER A VALUE :2;

74
Fig 3.7 Response plot in Area-1 with variation in

Synchronizing Coefficient

Bias Constant
ENTER A VALUE :3
75
Fig 3.9 Response plot in Area-2 with variation in Load

Disturbance in Area-1
76
Fig 3.10 Response plot in Area-2 with variation in
Load Disturbance in Area-1
Discussions
• The response of a Two Area Power System with PI controller when

subjected to a load change in area-1 is shown in figs 3.4. From these
figures, it is clear that the settling time for both the areas is 250
seconds and the steady state frequency deviation is zero. But the peak
value of the transient response in area-1 is0.0095 Hz/pu and in area-2
is 0.0062 Hz/pu. Hence it can be concluded that the feed back control
reduces the steady state deviation to zero.
• The response for the variation in different parameters is obtained in

section 3.5. The response for + 50% variation in Frequency Bias
Constant is shown in figure 3.5 for area 1 and in fig 3.6 for area-2
with a load disturbance in area-1. From these figures, it can be
observed that when b is increased the settling time decreases and
frequency deviations increases for both the areas and vice versa.
• The response for + 50% variation in Synchronizing Coefficient is

shown in figure 3.7 for area-1 and in fig 3.8 for area-2 with a load
77
disturbance area-1. From these figures, it is evident that when T12 is
increased the settling time decreases where as the frequency
deviations increases and vice versa.
• The response for + 50% variation in Load disturbance in area-1is

shown in figure 3.9 for area-1 and in fig 3.10 for area-2. From these
figures, it is evident that when dP is increased the frequency deviation
increases with no considerable change in settling time for both the
areas.
78
LOAD FREQUENCY CONTROL OF INTERCONNECTED

SYSTEMS USING OPTIMAL CONTROLLER
4.1 Introduction
The classical design techniques used so far utilize the plant

output for feed back with a dynamic controller. In this chapter, Modern
control designs that require the use of all state variables to form a linear
static controller are employed. Optimal Control is a branch of modern
79
control theory that deals with designing controls for dynamic systems by
minimizing a performance index. This is also called as linear quadratic
regulator (LQR) problem. The object of the optimal controller design is to
determine the optimal control vector uopt(x,t) which can transfer the system
from its initial state to the final state such that a given performance index is
minimized. The performance index used in optimal control design is known
as the Quadratic Performance Index and is based on minimum-error and
minimum-energy criteria.
4.2 Optimal Control Theory
The problem in optimal control theory can be explained as follows:
Given the linear time invariant system represented by the state

variable differential equation
*
x (t)=Ax(t)+Bu(t) …………………4.1
where x→ n X 1 state vector
u→ m X 1 control vector
A→ n X n State Distribution matrix
B→ n X m Control Distribution Matrix
The objective is to find the control vector uopt which minimizes the
cost function
C= ½ ∫ (x´Qx+u´Ru) dt …………………4.2
where Q → n X n positive semi-definite symmetric state cost weighting

matrix
R → m X m positive definite symmetric control cost weighting matrix

80
x´ and u´ → transpose of x and u respectively.
4.2.1 System State x:
If the system is linear and time invariant , the state x can be

represented in the form of equation 4.1 with the state variables x1,x2,…..,xn
are the components of the state vector x. these state variables are the
minimum number of variables containing sufficient information about the
previous state of the system, assuming the control inputs are known. The
state variables are not purely mathematical but have true physical meaning.
4.2.2 System Cost C:
The performance of the system is specified in terms of a cost that is to

be minimized by the optimal controller. The components Q and R can be
chosen mathematically by the way the system is to be performed. There are
two cases in choosing Q and R which are
1) If R=0 but require Q≠0 then it means there is no charge for the control
effort used but the state for being nonzero is penalized. Here the best control
strategy would be in the form of infinite impulses. This control would drive
the state to zero in the shortest possible time with the greatest effort.
2) If Q=0 and R≠0 then the control effort is penalized but do not charge for
the trajectory the state x follows. In this case , the best control is to use u=0
i.e. not to provide any control effort at all.
These two cases are the extreme cases, but they emphasize the
importance in choosing the components of Q and R.
4.2.3 Optimal Controller:

81
The optimal controller that minimizes the cost C of the system
in state variable form is a function of the present states of the system
weighted by the components of a constant gain matrix K of dimension m
X n:
u(t)= -Kx(t) …………………4.3
This optimal gain matrix is determined by solving the

differential equation, the matrix Riccati equation. For the infinite time
problem, the Riccati equation has a steady solution. Since the gain matrix is
a constant, the optimally controlled system can be expressed in the closed
form. x=Acx
Ac ~ A-BK
4.2.4 Calculating the value of optimal controller K:
Consider the plant described from the equations 4.1 and 4.2
The objective function is to: minimize C= ½ ∫ (x´Qx+u´Ru) dt
*
with the constraint: Ax(t)+Bu(t)= x
To obtain the formal solution, Lagrange
multipliers method is applied. The constraint problem is solved by
augmenting the equation 4.1 into equation 4.2 using an n-vector of Lagrange
multipliers, λ . The problem reduces to the minimization of the following
unconstrained function. L (x,λ,u,t) = [x´Qx+u´Ru]+λ[Ax+Bu-
*
x] …………………4.4
The optimal values(denoted by opt) are found by partial differentiating

the Lagrangian function w.r.t. λ, u, x and equating them to zero
*
i.e. ∂L /∂λ = Axopt+Buopt- x opt=0
*
→ x opt = Axopt+Buopt ………………………..4.5
82
∂L/∂u = 2Ruopt+λ´ B =0
→ uopt= ½R-1λ B ………………………..4.6
∂L/∂x = 2xoptQ+λ’´ +λ´ A=0
→ λ’ = 2Qxopt – A´λ ………………………..4.7
Assuming there exists a symmetric, time-varying positive

definite matrix P(t) satisfying
λ = 2P(t)xopt ……………………….4.8
substituting equation 4.3 into equation 4.6 gives the optimal closed-loop
control law
uopt (t)= -R-1B´ P(t)xopt …………………. ……4.9
by derivating equation 4.8,
λ’ = 2(P’xopt+px’opt) ………………………..4.10
Finally equating 4.7 with 4.10,
P’(t)= -P(t)A-A´P(t)-Q+P(t)BR-1B´P(t) ……………………….4.11
The above equation is referred to as the matrix Riccati

Equation. The boundary condition for equation 4.11 is P(tf) =0. Therefore,
Equation 4.11 must be integrated backward in time. Since a numerical
solution is performed forward in time, a dummy variable τ = tf-t is replaced
for time t. Once the solution to equation 4.11 is obtained the solution to the
state equation 4.5 in conjunction with the optimal control equation 4.9 is
obtained.
The optimal controller gain is a time varying state-variable feed

back. the time –varying optimal gain K(t) is replaced by its seady value, as
its inconvenient to implement time varying feedback. For linear time-
invariant systems, since p’=0, when the process is of infinite duration, that is
tf→∞ ,Equation 4.11 reduces to the algebraic Ricatti equation
83
PA+A´P+Q-PBR-1B´P=0……………………….4.12
4.2.5 Snag of optimal Control
The Optimal control determined by the above equations is quite

often impractical due to the following reasons:-
1) The optimal control is a function of all the states of the system. In

practice, all the states may not be available. The inaccessible states or
missing states are required to be estimated
2) It may not be economical to transfer all the information over long

distances.
3) The control which is a function of the states in turn is dependent on

the load demand. Accurate prediction of the load demand may be essential
for realizing the optimal controller.
4) The optimal control is also dependent on the weighting matrices

which are not unique.
4.3 Application of Optimal Control to an Isolated Power System
The optimal controller is applied to isolated power

system so as to enhance the dynamic performance of the system. In case of
84
an Isolated Power System the order of matrices Q and R is 4 x 4 and 1 x 1
respectively.
The dynamic response to an Isolated Power System with PI controller

and with Optimal Controller is illustrated by the following MATLAB
program, considering the same example in section 2.4
Program with Optimal Controller to Isolated power system

(Prosawioc.m)
T=input('TOTAL RATED CAPACITY :');

puMW/Hz:');
D=input('ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT in puMW/HZ :');

INCREASE:');
dP=Pp*0.01;
R=R/F;
A=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0;0 -1/Tt 1/Tt 0;-1/(R*Tg) 0 -1/Tg

-1/Tg;Ki 0 0 0];
B=[-dP/(2*H) ; 0 ; 0 ; 0 ];
C=[1 0 0 0];
85
D=[0 ];
sys1=ss(A,B,C,D);
disp('ENTER THE STATE COST WEIGHTING MATRIX(Q)IN n X n

FORM:');
for i=1:4
for j=1:4
temp=input('');
Q(i,j)=temp(1);
end
end
R=input('ENTER THE CONTROL COST WEIGHTING MATRIX IN m X

m FORM:');
Bc=B/dP;
[K,P]=lqr2(A,Bc,Q,R);
disp('THE RICCATI EQUATION SOLUTION (P) IS :'); P
disp('THE OPTIMAL GAIN MATRIX (K) IS :'); K
Ac=A-Bc*K;
sys2=ss(Ac,B,C,D);
step(sys1,sys2);
The Execution is as follows

86
>> prosaoc
ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT in puMW/Hz :0.8
ENTER THE STATE COST WEIGHTING MATRIX(Q)IN n X n FORM:
20 0 0 0
0 15 0 0
0 0 10 0
0 0 0 5
Q =
20 0 0 0
0 15 0 0
0 0 10 0
0 0 0 5
ENTER THE CONTROL COST WEIGHTING MATRIX IN m X m FORM:0.15
THE RICCATI EQUATION SOLUTION (P) IS :
P =
149.0273 -3.7741 -6.7772 9.2148
-3.7741 3.3239 0.6093 0.0968
-6.7772 0.6093 0.9375 -0.0661

87
9.2148 0.0968 -0.0661 7.3990
THE OPTIMAL GAIN MATRIX (K) IS :
K =
-99.3515 2.5161 4.5181 -6.1432

88
Fig 4.1 Response Plot of an Isolated power system with PI
and Optimal Controller
4.3.1 Isolated Power System with Reheater Constraint:
A case study has been carried out using the optimal

controller i.e. to a thermal system in real terms. A simplified model of
turbine is shown in fig2.3 i.e. a non-reheat turbine. Practically, to increase
the overall efficiency the turbine is often divided into two or several stages.
Between the stages the steam is reheated in reheaters. Considering the two
stage turbine, The reheater represents a delay Tr , and the Total Turbine
model is represented by the transfer function as
GT(s) = (1-s Kr ) KT
(1+s Tr) (1+s TT )
where Tr → reheating Time Constant
Kr → Gain of reheats in Thermal unit
The transfer function corresponding to the Reheater constraint

is added to the Block diagram in fig2.5 and the new Block diagram is
represented below
89
∆PD(S)
x3
x5 x1
+
- KG KT
1-s K
r
- 1 ∆F(S)
+
1+sTG 1+sTT x2 2Hs+D
∆PC(S) x4 1+sT
r
1/R
KI/s
Fig 4.2 Block diagram of an Isolated power system with

Reheater constraint
Analysis of state space Equations:
The state space analysis is carried to the model shown in fig5.2

and the state equations are
*
x1=( x2- d)(1/2Hs+ D) → x 12 H+ x1 D= x2- d
*
→ x 1= -( x1 D/2H)+( x2/2H) -( d/2H) …………………..4.13
* *
x2= (1-s Kr)x3 → x2+ x 2 Tr = x3- x 3Kr
(1+s Tr)
*
→ x 2= -( x2/ Tr)+ (x3/ Tr)-( x3’ Kr/ Tr) ..………………..4.14
x3= x4/(1+sTT )
*
→ x 3=-( x3/ TT)+( x4/ TT) ……….…………
4.15
x4=( x5- x1/R) 1/(1+sTG) → x3 (1+s TG)= - x4 – x1/R

*
→ x 4= -( x4/ TG) –( x1/R TG)-( x5/ TG) …………………4.16
x5= x1KI/s
90
*
i.e. x 5= x1KI …………………4.17
The above equations 4.13 to 4.17 can be written in standard form as

*
x1 -D/2H 1/2H 0 0 0 x1
-dP/2H
*
x2 0 -1/ Tr (1+ Kr)/( TrTT) -(Kr/ TrTT ) 0 x2
0
*
x3 = 0 0 -1/TT 1/TT 0 x3 u
+ 0
*
x4 -1/RTG 0 0 -1/ TG 1/TG x4 0
*
x5 KI 0 0 0 0 x5
0
and the output equation is
C=[ 1 0 0 0 0] and D=[0]
4.3.2 Isolated Power System with Reheater Constraint using Optimal

Controller :
The application of optimal control is done to attain the

frequency a steady state value after a disturbance.
The application of optimal controller is illustrated through MATLAB

programming and the dynamic response is obtained for the example and is
as follows
Program for Isolated Power System with Reheater Constraint

(prosahc.m)
R=input('ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR IN Hz/puMW(R)

:');
91
F=input('ENTER SYSTEM FREQUENCY(F)in Hz :');
Kr=input('ENTER THE GAIN OF REHEATS IN THERMAL UNIT :');
Tr=input('ENTER THE REHEAT TIME CONSTANT in sec :');
Ki=input('ENTER THE PROPORTIONAL INTEGRAL GAIN :');
Pp1=input('ENTER THE CHANGE IN LOAD DEMAND IN TERMS OF %

INCREASE:');
dP1=Pp1*0.01;
r=R/F;
A=[-D/(2*H) 1/(2*H) 0 0 0;0 -1/Tr 1/Tr+(Kr/(Tr*Tt)) -Kr/

(Tr*Tt) 0;0 0 -1/Tt 1/Tt 0;-1/(r*Tg) 0 0 -1/Tg
-1/Tg;Ki 0 0 0 0];
B=[-dP1/(2*H) ; 0 ; 0 ; 0;0 ];
C=[1 0 0 0 0];
D=[0 ];
sys1=ss(A,B,C,D);

FORM:');
for i=1:5
for j=1:5
temp=input('');
Q(i,j)=temp(1);
end
end

m FORM:');
92
Bc=B/dP1;
Ac=A-Bc*K;
sys2=ss(Ac,B,C,D);
step(sys1,sys2);
The execution is as follows
>> prosahcoc
ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR IN puMW/Hz(R) :3
ENTER SYSTEM FREQUENCY(F)in Hz :60
ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT in Hz/puMw :0.8
ENTER THE GAIN OF REHEATS IN THERMAL UNIT :0.5
ENTER THE REHEAT TIME CONSTANT in sec :10
ENTER THE PROPORTIONAL INTEGRAL GAIN :7
20 0 0 0 0
0 15 0 0 0
0 0 10 0 0
0 0 0 5 0
0 0 0 0 0
93
Q =
20 0 0 0 0
0 15 0 0 0
0 0 10 0 0
0 0 0 5 0
0 0 0 0 0
ENTER THE CONTROL COST WEIGHTING MATRIX IN m X m FORM:0.15
P =
112.1477 -4.1513 -4.5221 -5.7077 5.3851
-4.1513 65.1044 5.3891 0.6167 -0.2692
-4.5221 5.3891 2.6981 0.6112 -0.2339
-5.7077 0.6167 0.6112 0.7725 -0.2900
5.3851 -0.2692 -0.2339 -0.2900 0.3334
K =
-74.7652 2.7675 3.0148 3.8051 -3.5900

94
Fig 4.3 response plot of an isolated power system with

heat constraint and with PI
and with optimal controller
From fig 4.3, it is observed that without optimal control the steady
state value of frequency deviation is increasing and with the optimal control,
the steady state value of frequency deviation is zero with minimum peak
value of transient frequency.
4.5 Application of Optimal Control to Interconnected Systems

95
The Theory of Optimal control can be applied to two area
systems also to enhance the dynamic performance of the system. The block
diagram of two area system is shown in figure 4.4
1/R1
b1 ∆PL1(S)
- K1/s - - 1
- + KG KT +- 2H1s+D1
1+sTG1 1+sTT1
1/s
T12 +
-
1/s
+ K2/s KT + 1
-
+- KG +
1+sTT2 - 2H2s+D2
1+sTG2
b2 ∆PL2(S)
1/R2
fig 4.4 Block diagram of Two-area system

with PI controller
The block diagram and the state space Equations with PI controller
are same and also can be applied with optimal controller. In this chapter only
the State Cost Weighting Matrix(Q), of order n X n , and Control Cost
Weighting Matrix(R), of order m X m are introduced to enhance the
response of the system. In a Two Area Power System the values of n and m
are 9 and 1 respectively.
The optimal control theory is applied to a example(which was

discussed in section 3.4) and is illustrated in the form of MATLAB
programming
96
Program for Two-Area System with optimal control (Promaoc.m)
F=input('ENTER THE SYSTEM FREQUENCY in Hz :');
R1=input('ENTER GOVERNOR SPEED REGULATION OF AREA1 in

Hz/puMw :');
R2=input('ENTER GOVERNOR SPEED REGULATION OF AREA2 in

Hz/puMw :');
H2=input('ENTER THE INERTIA CONSTANT OF AREA 2:in secs :');
Tg1=input('ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF GOVERNOR OF AREA 1 in

secs :');

secs :');

secs :');

secs :');
D1=input('ENTER LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT OF AREA1 in puMw/Hz

:');
D2=input('ENTER LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT OF AREA 2 in

puMw/Hz :');

puMw/Hz:');

puMw/Hz:');

puMw :');

INCREASE:');
dP=Pp*0.01;
97
r1=R1/F;
r2=R2/F;
A=[-D1/(2*H1) 1/(2*H1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1/(2*H1);0 -1/Tt1 1/Tt1

0 0 0 0 0 0;-1/(r1*Tg1) 0 -1/Tg1 1/Tg1 0 0 0 0 0;-Ki1*b1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 -Ki1;0 0 0 0 -D2/(2*H2) 1/(2*H2) 0 0 1/(2*H2);0
0 0 0 0 -1/Tt2 1/Tt2 0 0; 0 0 0 0 -1/(r2*Tg2) 0 -1/Tg2
1/Tg2 0;0 0 0 0 -Ki2*b2 0 0 0 Ki2;T12 0 0 0 -T12 0 0 0 0];
B=[-dP/(2*H1) ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0; 0;0 ];
C=[1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0];
D=[0 ;0 ];
sys1=ss(A,B,C,D);

FORM:');
for i=1:9
fprintf('row %d :',i);
for j=1:9
temp=input('');
Q(i,j)=temp(1);
end
end

m FORM:');
Bc=B/dP;
Ac=A-Bc*K;
sys2=ss(Ac,B,C,D);
step(sys1,sys2);
>> prossmaoc
98
ENTER THE INERTIA CONSTANT OF AREA 2:in secs :5
ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF GOVERNOR OF AREA2 in sec :0.08
ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF TURBINE OF AREA1 in sec :0.3
ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF TURBINE OF AREA2 in sec :0.3
ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT OF AREA1 in puMw/Hz :
0.00833
0.00833
0.425
0.425
ENTER THE SYNCHRONISING POWER COEFFICIENT in puMw :
0.545
ENTER THE CHANGE IN LOAD IN TERMS OF PERCENTAGE INCREASE:20
row1 : 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
row 2 :0 1.545 0 0 0 -0.545 0 0 0
row 3 :0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
row 4 :0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
row 5 :0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
row 6 :0 -0.545 0 0 0 1.545 0 0 0
row 7 :0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
row 8 :0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
row 9 :0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Q =
99
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1.5450 0 0 0 -0.5450 0 0 0
0 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 -0.5450 0 0 0 1.5450 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 0 0 0 0
ENTER THE CONTROL COST WEIGHTING MATRIX IN m X m FORM:1
P =
231.66 1.25 -0.84 -9.231 -38.615 0.134 0.114 1.534 -1.188
1.250 0.26 0.051 -0.0491 0.3975 -0.074 -0.015 -0.0158 -0.046
-0.84 0.051 0.053 0.0341 0.1773 -0.0144 -0.003 -0.0070 -0.008
-9.23 -0.049 0.0341 0.5981 1.5160 -0.0047 -0.004 -0.2622 0.189
-38.6 0.397 0.1773 1.5160 463.207 5.8628 -0.007 -18.421 0.162
0.13 -0.074 -0.0144 -0.004 5.8628 0.4076 0.085 -0.2317 0.229
0.114 -0.015 -0.003 -0.0043 -0.0073 0.0858 0.0629 0.0009 0.060
1.534 -0.015 -0.007 -0.2622 -18.421 -0.2317 0.0009 0.9570 -0.338
-1.18 -0.046 -0.008 0.1897 4.162 0.2291 0.0607 -0.338 20.13
K =
-23.16 -0.125 0.0847 0.923 3.8615 -0.0135 -0.0114

-0.153 0.118
100
Fig 4.4 Response plot of area-1 with a step load

disturbance in area-1
with PI and Optimal controller
101
Fig 4.5 Response plot of area-2 with a step load
disturbance in area-1
with PI and Optimal controller
o Discussions
• The response of an Isolated Power System when subjected to

load change with PI and optimal controller is shown in fig 4.1
From this fig it is clear that the settling time without optimal
controller is 14 secs and with optimal controller is just 6 secs. It
can also be observed that the peak value of transient frequency
with and without optimal controller is 0.0145Hz/pu and 0.0016
Hz/pu.
• The response of an Isolated Power System with Reheater
Constraint when subjected to load change with PI and optimal
controller is shown in fig 4.2 From this figure, it is evident
that a steady state value of frequency deviation without optimal
control is not reached where as when optimal control is applied,
a steady state value is reached within 2.2 seconds.
• The response of an Two Area Power System when subjected to
a load change in area-1 is shown in figs 4.4 and 4.5. From these
figures, it is clear that there is no considerable change the
settling time for both the areas for with PI and optimal
controller (i.e. 250 secs) but a vast difference in the peak value
of transient frequency deviation is observed. i.e. the value for
without optimal controller is 0.009 Hz/pu and for with optimal
control is 0.045Hz/pu. for area-1.
102
103
CONCLUSIONS
An exhaustive study on load frequency control problem of both

isolated and interconnected power systems has been carried out. Necessary
computer programs have been developed to carry out these studies by
Transfer function approach, State space approach and finally verified by
using Matlab.
The techniques of PI control and optimal control have been
employed to enhance the dynamic performance of both the isolated and
interconnected power systems. The dynamic response for a step load change
and response plots for variation in the system parameters from their nominal
values have been presented.
The results of the response plots obtained for the isolated power
system without PI controller, with PI and optimal controller are presented in
a tabular form below.
System Maximum Frequency Settling Time in Steady State error

Deviation in Hz/pu seconds In Hz/pu
Isolated Power System without PI
0.0138 7.5 0.01
feedback Control
Isolated Power System with
0.0142 14 0
PI controller
Isolated Power System with Optimal
0.0012 6.5 0
controller
Isolated Power System with Reheater using
∞ ∞ ∞
PI control
Isolated Power System with Reheater using
0.0012 3.7 0
Optimal control
Table 5.1 Results of response plots for step load change in
isolated power system
104
From the table 5.1, It is observed that the dynamic response with PI
controller decreases the steady state frequency deviation to zero compared to
the system without PI controller whereas the settling time increases. With
the optimal control the maximum value of frequency deviation is decreased
for the system in addition to decrease in settling time. In case of Isolated
Power System with Reheater, the frequency deviation is drastically
increasing even with PI controller without any settling time. By adopting
Optimal Controller, the steady state frequency error is zero with a decrease
in settling time.
The results of the response plots for various case studies (i.e.,50%
increase in parameter values) carried out for the isolated power systems are
presented in a tabular form below.
Table 5.2 Results of response plots of Different Case Studies

for isolated power system
Case Max Frequency Deviation Settling Time
Increase in Governor Speed
Increases Decreases
Regulation(R)
Increase in Time Constant of
Increases Increases
Governor(TG)
Increase in Time Constant of
Decreases Decreases
Turbine (TT)
Increase in Proportional Integral
Increases Increases
Gain (KI)
From the table 5.2, It is clear that for isolated power systems for
normal operation settling time should be low for which the Governor speed
regulation should be high, the Governor time Constant should be small, the
Turbine time constant should be high and the Proportional Integral gain
should be low.
105
The results of the response plots, with PI and optimal controller obtained, for
the two area power system are presented in a tabular form below
Table 5.3 Results of the response plots of the two

Maximum Frequency Settling Time Steady State
System
Deviation in Hz/pu in seconds error in Hz/pu
Two Area Power System with
0.0095 260 0
PI controller (Area-1)
0.0064 260 0
PI controller (Area-2)
0.0045 260 0
Optimal Controller(Area-1)
0.0035 260 0
Optimal Controller(Area-2)
area system
From table 5.3, it is clear that there is no change in settling time in

case of two area-systems with PI controller and Optimal controller, but the
maximum frequency deviation decreases incase of optimal controller.
The results of response plots for various case studies (i.e.,50%
increase in parameter values) carried out for two area systems are presented
in a tabular form below
Table5.4 Results of response plots for Different Case
Studies for Two Area system
Case Max Frequency Deviation Settling Time

Increase in Frequency Bias
Decreases Decreases
Constant(b)
Increase in Synchronizing
Increases No considerable change
Torque Coefficient(T12)
From table 5.4, it can be inferred that for normal operation of

two area power systems, the frequency bias constant should be high and the
synchronizing torque coefficient should be low.
106
In totality, it can be concluded that optimal controller gives a
better performance in terms of settling time as well as frequency deviation
compared to PI controller not only in the case of isolated system but also for
interconnected system.
REFERENCES
1) O.I.Elgerd and C.E.Fosha, “Optimum Megawatt-Frequency

Control of Multiarea Electric Energy Systems”, and “The Megawatt-
Frequency Problem: A New Approach Via Optimal Control Theory,” IEEE
Trans. Power System Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-89, No.4, April
1970 pp. 556-576.
2) N.N.Benjamin and W.C.Chan , “Multilevel Load Frequency Control
of Interconnected Power Systems”, IEE vol. 125, No. 6 , June -1978.
3) M.M.Adibi, J.N.Borkoski, R.J.Kkafka, and T.L.Volkman, “Frequency
Response of Prime Movers during Restoration”, IEEE Trans. Power System
Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-14, No.2, May 1999 pp. 751-756.
4) Ibraheem and P Kumar, “Study of Dynamic Performance of Power
Systems with Asynchronous Tie-Lines Considering Parameter
Uncertainties”, IE(I) Journal –EL , vol. 85, June-2004.
5) Hadi Saadat , “ Power system analysis ”, first edition, Tata Mc Graw
Hill publications.
6) Olle l. Elgerd , “ Electric energy systems theory”, second
Edition(1983), TMH publications.
7) C.L.Wadhwa, “Electric power systems” third edition., Tata Mc Graw-
Hill Publications
107
8) P.S.R. Murthy, “Power system operation and control”, First Edition,
TMH publications
9) I.J.Nagarath and J.P. Kothari, “Modern power system analysis”. third
edition, Tata Mc Graw Hill Publications.
108
109
110
111

Load Frequency Control For Interconnected Systems Using Optimal Controller

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

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

Load Frequency Control For Interconnected Systems Using Optimal Controller

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

1

2.5 Case Studies ……36

1.2 Load Frequency Problem

LOAD FREQUENCY CONTROL

2.2 Modeling of Power System Components

Modeling of different power system components i.e. Speed

2.2.1 Modeling of Speed Governing System

Fig:2.1 Speed Governing System

The Speed Governing System consists of the following parts:-

Consider the steady state condition by assuming that linkage

Two factors contribute to the movement of C:

changes by ∆f as then the fly-ball moves outward and B is lowered by ∆X B .

∆XC = K1∆f - K2∆PC …………………..2.1

The movement of D is contributed by the movement of C and

∆XE=K5 ∫ -(∆X D )dt

Eliminating the variables ∆XC and ∆X D ,

∆XE(s)= K G [∆PC (s) -∆F(s)/R] ……………….2.4

Where R = K2/K1 → speed regulation of governor.

Fig. 2.2 Block diagram of speed governing system for steam

2.2.2 Modeling of Turbine

G T (s)= ∆P T (s) = KT ….……………..2.5

Fig.2.3 Block diagram of power control mechanism of

2.2.3 Modeling of Generator-Load

→ W=W° (1+2∆f/f°) (neglecting the higher terms)…………2.6

Therefore, the net power surplus at the busbar is given by

∆PG-∆PD =2HP. d (∆f) +D ∆f ……………….2.9

Or ∆F(s) = [∆PG (s)-∆PD (s) ] KP ……………..2.10

Where Tp=2H/Df° →power system time constant

The transfer function in equation 2.10 is represented in the form of a

Fig2.4 Block diagram of Generator- Load model

2.2.4 Block diagram of an Isolated Power System

The models of speed governor, turbine, generator-load

Fig 2.5 Block Diagram of an Isolated Power System for load

From the block diagram in fig 2.5, the change in ∆F is due to

1) either change in speed changer setting(∆Pc)

∆F(s) = KP * (∆PD /s) ………2.11

2.3 Dynamic Response without Feedback PI Control

To obtain the dynamic response giving change in frequency as a

1) Transfer Function approach

2) State Space approach

2.3.1 Transfer Function Approach

To obtain transient response or frequency response analysis of

Recalling the equation 2.11,

∆F(s) = KP * ( ∆PD/s) ……………2.12

By simplifying the equation 2.12 and assuming K G KT ~ 1

∆F(s) = R (1+sTG) (1+sTT)

= R(1+s2TT TG+s(TT+ TG)

To obtain the response of isolated power system without feedback by the

Program For Transfer Function Model(Protfsa.m):

T=input('TOTAL RATED CAPACITY in MW :');

Num=[TG*TT TT+TG 1]*-dP;

Den=[TT*TG*H (TT*TG*D+2*H*TT+2*H*TG) (D*TT+2*H+D*TG)

ENTER THE SPEED REGULATION GOVERNOR(R) in Hz/puMw :3

ENTER SYSTEM FREQUENCY(F) in Hz :60

ENTER INERTIA CONSTANT(H) in sec :5

ENTER THE LOAD FREQUENCY CONSTANT(D) in puMw/Hz :0.8

ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF GOVERNOR in sec :0.2

ENTER THE TIME CONSTANT OF TURBINE in sec :0.5

-0.02 s^2 - 0.14 s - 0.2

0.5 s^3 + 7.08 s^2 + 10.56 s + 20.8

Fig 2.6 Response plot for an isolated power system

2.3.2 State Space Approach

Num=[TGTT TT+TG 1]-dP;

Den=[TTTGH (TTTGD+2HTT+2HTG) (DTT+2H+D*TG)

A=[-D/(2H) 1/(2H) 0 ;0 -1/TT 1/TT ;-1/(R*TG) 0 -1/TG];

Num=[0 TgTt (Tg+Tt) 1 0](-dP);