Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 6, No.

3, August 1 9 91
POWER SYSTEM OUTPUT FEEDBACK STABILIZER DESIGN VIA OPTIMAL SUBEIGENSTRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT T.L. HUANG

1035

S.C. CHEN

T.Y. HWANG

W.T. YANG

Department of Electrical Engineering, National Taiwan University

. P.O. BOX 23-72, Taipei, Taiwan, R. 0 C.

Abstract - This paper addresses a design of power system stabilizer using an optimal reduced order model whose state variables are torque angles and speeds. System damping can be improved by using eigenvalues assignment,and the coordination of stabilizers can be achieved through eigenvector assignment by maintaining system mode shapes. The proportional-integral PSS, will be derived by the optimal reduced order model instead of the whole system model. The effectiveness of this stabilizer is evaluated and this study reveals that by using the output feedback only, the result of eigenstructure assignment is more stable and much better than the assignment method based on the whole system model. Examples, one machine toinfinite bus system and a multimachine system are given to illustrate the advantages and effectiveness of the proposed approach. Results based on the whole system model are included for comparative analyses.

stabilizer and to prespecify the eigenstructure of the system. Study results reveal that by using the output states feedback only, the eigenstructure assignment based on the proposed method is more stable than that based on the former method [ 4 1 . This results from that the optimal reduced order model can retain the physical meanings of the output states. The attractive features of this paper are as follows

1. INTRODUCTION
The design of PSS, can be formulated as an optimal linear regulator control problem [ ] However, l. o the ililplco,rnLilLion~L~Liol~ i this teclmique requirecl the d e s i g n of estimators [21. This approach increases the imPlementation cost and reduces the reliability of the control system. These are the reasons that a control scheme us'es only some desired state variables such as torque angles and speeds. The approach based on output feedback control is, therefore, obtained [31. Output feedback is known to affect only some of the eigenstructures of the overall system C41. To prespecify the desirable eigenstructure via output feedback will always affect the rest of the eigenstructure and result in another undesirable eigenvalues which may be much poorer than the prespecified values although the prespecified values are achieved. This results from that no attempt is made to assess the effect on the rest of the eigenstructure. The method referred to as optimal reduced order models is obtained to retain the physical meanings of the However, the optimal desired state variables [51[6I. control scheme is also used, the determination of the parameters in the performance criterion is complex and not straight forward. And, the eigenvectors are not assigned though the eigenvalues are prespecified. However, the eigenvectors affect the coordination of stabilizers and the oscillation mode shapes of the system. And, in order to reduce the participation effects of high capacity machines, we need the assignment.s of eigenvectors [ 71. These drawbacks can be avoided by using the technique proposed in this paper. The optimal reduced order models are used to design the power system

1. The optimal reduced order model is used to retain the physical meanings of the desired state variables and the deleted modes are optimized. 2 . By using the output states feedback only, the system damping can be improved by the prespecified eigenvalues and the coordination of stabilizers can be achieved through eigenvector assignment by maintaining system mode shapes. 3 . The eigenstructure assignment is more stable than the former method [41, and no undesirable eigenstructure will be produced. 4 The output states feedback is used to design the . power system stabilizer and the type of the controller is simple and easy to implement.

2. PROBLEM FORMULATION
In general, considering a linear time invariant system described by the following equations: ?(t)
=

AX(t)

BU(t)

(1)

y(t) = CX(t) where X R n , UERm, y R r are called the state, control and output, respectively; A , B, C , are real constant matrices of appropriate dimensions. If system (1) is controllable and if rank[CI=r, then a linear feedback control law of the form U(t)
=

Fy(t)

(2)

can always be found and the theorem following ref.[41 is abbreviated as follows: Theorem

in

Given the controllable and observable system described by eqns. ( 1 ) - ( 2 ) and the assumptions that the matrices B and C are of full rank, then max(m,r) closed eigenvalues can be assigned. Max(m,r) eigenvectors can be partially assigned with min(m,r) entries in each vector arbitrarily chosen using gain output feedback. Assume Ad and vd are the eigenstructure desired to be assigned, then the best assignable eigenvector Va derived in ref.[4] is abbreviated here: Define then

(hdI - A ) - ~ B

(3)

91 WM 207-1 PWRS

A paper recommended and approved

Once, the hd and vd are assigned, the best possible assignable eigenvector Va can be derived from eqn.(&). In the power system, we are only interested in some special entry such as A w of the eigenvector, thus the design problem will become a partial specification condition.

by the IEEE Power System Engineering Committee of t h e IEEE Power Engineering Society for presentation at the IEEE/PES 1991 Winter Meeting, New York, New York, February 3-7, 1991. Manuscript submitted August 15, 1990; made available for printing January 3 , 1991.

0885-8950/91/0700-1035$01.00 0 1 9 IEEE 91

Authorized licensed use limited to: Tamkang University. Downloaded on March 15,2010 at 21:55:20 EDT from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

1036
I n such a c a s e , w s can reorder the e n t r i e s t o t h e l e a d i n g p o s i t i o n OK Vd, s u c h desirable as

z,z

c o n s t a n t m a t r i c e s of r e d u c e d o r d e r model w i t h a p p r o a p r i a L e d i h e n s i o n s

(5) where Zd i s t h e v e c t o r of and V, r e p r e s e n t s t h e v e c t o r O K Llie a s s i g n e d e n t r i e s , the unassigned p a r t s . confirm with

W a l s o r e o r d e r t h e rows of L t o e t h e r e o r d e r e d component o f V d , i . e .

L e t Ad and V b e t h e e i g e n s t r u c t u r e d e s i - r e d t o d be a s s i g n e d of t h e r e d u c e d o r d e r model. Obviously,Ad w i l l be p r e s p e c i f i e d t h e same' v a l u e s 3 s [lie ~3s:;igiicd ones b a s e d on tlie whole s y s r e i ~ lrlodcl : i n c l rid c o n t a i n s ~ LIIC: t l c s i r a b l c e n t r y Z,I i i z i sliown i n c q r i . ( 5 ) . W can reorder e t h e d e s i r a b l e e n t r i e s of v d t o the leading p o s i t i o n , such a s

(6)

where zd i s t h e a s s i g n e d e n L r y -g n . ( 5 ) , and e represents the

vx

oE vd a s d e f i n e d i n u n a s s i g n e d p a r t s of

I l e r e , Va is t h e b e s t p o s s i b l e a s s i g n a b l e e i g e n v e c t o r c o n c e r n i n g h d and Vd. As i l l u s t r a t e d i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e , t h e a c h i e v a b l e e i g e n v e c t o r Va is the p r o j e c t i o n of Vd o n t o t h e s u b s p a c e spanned by t h e a s d e p i c t e d i n F i g . 1 . Hence, columns Of (XdI-A)-'B

vd. Defined

t=

(Ad I -

A)-'%

(12)

Then t h e b e s t a s s i g n a b l e e i g e n v e c t o r ponding t o eqn.(lO) w i l l be

Ta

corres-

d '
SUBSPACE S P A N N E D BY COLUMNS of @,,I-A)-~B

I f we r e o r d e r t h e rows of i.e. r e o r d e r e d component o f

vd,

t o confirm with the

Then we h a v e

F i g . 1 G e o m e t r i c I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of v d , Va Where vd i s t h e D e s i r e d E i g e n v e c t o r and Va is the Achievable Eigenvector ?'lie v a l u e of va c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o t h e p r o j e c L i o n of vd o n t o t h e " a c h i e v a b i l i t y s u b s p a c e " m i n i m i z e s

metll0d always r c s u l t s i n undesirable llowever, L 1 1 j s e i g e n s t r u c t u r e s , e v e n though t h e p r e s p e c i f i e d e i g e n s t r u c t u r e s a r e achieved. T h i s w i l l b e improved f r o m t h e following study.

Here, V,is t h e b e s t assignable engenvector concerning i d and Vd. O b v i o u s l y , t h e a c h i e v a b l e e i g e n v e c L o r 8, i s Lhe p r o j e c t i o n of v d o n t o t h e s u b s p a c e s p a n n e d by Hence, t h e columns of ( A d I - T ) - l T a s d e p i c t e d i n F i g . 2 . t h e p r o j e c t i o n of 'jg o n t o t h e s u b s p a c e spanned by J d e f i n e d i n eqn. ( 9 1 , (xdI-A)-lB might n o t minimize b u t i t r e a l l y makes t h e s y s t e m more s t a b l e s i n c e c h e r e d u c e d o r d e r model r e t a i n s t h e w o r s t e i g e n s t - c t u r e ru [51. The g e o m e t r i c meanings o f v d , v,, v d , v , and V L a r e d e p i c t e d i n F i g . 2 a n d e x p l a i n e d a s Kollows:
V
'

3. BEST ASSIGNABLE EIGENVECTOR AND OUTPUT FEEDBACK

GALN COMPUTATION

d'
a

the desired eigenvector. s u b s p a c e s p a n n e d by t h e columns of (Ad I-A)-lB.

V : the b e s t achievable eigenvector i n the

3 . 1 Hest A s s i g n a b l e EigenvecLor
To a v o i d t h e drawback d e m o n s t r a t e d i n t h e a b o v e s e c ~ i o n . we s h o u l d u s e t h e o p t i m a l r e d u c e d o r d e r m o del d e r i v e d i n reLs.L5]161 t o r e t a i n the physical meanings o t t h e o u t p u t s t a t e s which a r e a l s o Llie
enLrles
in
V

t h e d e s i r e d e i g e n v e c t o r of t h e r e d u c e d o r d e r d . s y s t e m w i t h t h e same a s s i g n e d e n t r i e s a s V d, : t h e b e s t a c h i e v a b l e e i g e n v e c t o r i n tlie a s u b s p a c e s p a n n e d by t h e columlln of (Ad I-T)-'X* t h e p r o j e c t i o n of onto the subspacc s p a n n e d b y t h e columns of ( A ( 1 1 - A ) - I B

the

pLg'l1vector

we a r e i n t e r e s t e d

in.

vi:

va

By u s i n g t h e reduced o r d e r model, t h e system i n eqn. (1) c a n b e r e d u c e d t o t h e f o l l o w i n g f o r m :

x
where FcRmx1

= A X +B u
s t a t e v e c t o r t o be r e t a i n e d

(10)

Obviously, I I V ~ - V , ( ( < b u t the v e c t o r we a s s i g n e d w i l l make s y s t e m more s t a b l e b e c a u s e the reduced model c a n r e t a i n t h e w o r s t e i g e n s L r u c t u r e .

~IV~-V;II,

c o n s i s t i n g of t o r q u e a n g l e s 2 n d s p e e d s i n e l e c t r i c a l power s y s ~ e m

Authorized licensed use limited to: Tamkang University. Downloaded on March 15,2010 at 21:55:20 EDT from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

1037
SUBSPACE SPANNED B Y

rhen the results derived in ref.[4] gain matrix F as FG

S U B S P A C E SPANNED B Y COLUMNS OF ( A d I - A ) - ' B

give the feedback

(22)

=$

Fig.3 illustrates how the theory of the above regulator can be implemented by a PI controller.

Nref

X=AX + Bu

A6 ( a ) Output Feedback Regulator

Fig.2: Geometric Interpretations ofvdj va,

vd, va, va

3.2. Output Feedback Gain Computation

Transform the input matrix following form:
r
-A

of eqn.(lO)

to the
A6

(16)
(b) PI Power System Stabilizer
In order to obtain formation matrix 'T by this, we give
L~IC

transFig.3 PI Stabilizer Design Formulated A s an Output Feedback Regulator Problem

4. DECENTRALIZED POWER SYSTEM OPTIMAL OUTPUT FEEDBACK

where Using X

-=

is an arbitrary matrix such as rank [rl=m, T, we consider the change of coordinates

- A

STARILIZER DESIGN VIA SUBEIGENSTRUCTURE ASSIGNMENT

4.1. One Machine Infinite Bus System:

The system studied in this section is the one shown in Fig.4. It is an one machine-infinite-bus system. A block diagramof the study system is shown in Fig.5. The synchronous generator is equipped with an IEEE Typ-1 exciter. The data of the study system aregiven in Table I. This model has been extensively used and has been found in detail in ref.[8]. This study system is described by the state space representation form shown in eqn.(l) with the following state variables: XT
=

TX

(18)

Thus, the open loop system (10) is transformed to ?=il?+6u y where

=

(19)

e2

[A6,L\w Ae$,AOFD,AVR,AVE] denotes deviation from operating point torque angle speed voltage proportional to direct axis flux linkages exciter output voltage regulator output voltage excitation system stabilizer output

FT
are

where

A
6

Using this transformatiEn the eigenvalues identical and the eigenvector Va will become Va
A

w : e

--I-Va T

z^ [$"I
X

(20)

e~~

VR VE
U

supplementary control voltage The matrices A and B are as follows:

Authorized licensed use limited to: Tamkang University. Downloaded on March 15,2010 at 21:55:20 EDT from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

1038

are the electro-mechanical modes

this case, the modes that should be retained i-0.24 2 j 10.79) Forcomparativc reason, the desired eigenvalues are chosen to be -2 2 j 1 2 1 which are obtained from the closed loop eigenvalues using the optimal controller c] l. The optimal assignable eigenvector Va with the assigned component Zd=Aw = cl.01 will be evaluated from eqns. (3) to (7). And the result is

Va=[

-5 5 j31, 1.0, 13 ;j l 0 , 560 5 j933, -1179 2 j4448, 1 2 5 j25IT

where

zd

is an one component vector.

c = [ 1
0

0 1

0 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 0

With id = I - 2 + j121 and Va, the feedback gain matrix F can be evaluated from the process derived in ref-141. The result is shown in T a b l e m TableIII FEEDBACK GAINS AND CLOSED LOOP EIGENSTRUCTURE
Feedback
( I

-16.30523

= -0.3608

Gains

Eigenvalues

-7.9719 2 j 6.9240

-0.71L5

j 1.088

Fig.4 One Machine Infinite Bus System

I

Optimal
Assignable e 1genvec tor

(-5;

j 3 1 , 1.0,
j 25IT

1 3 < j l O , 5 6 0 i j 9 3 3 . -1?79tj444Bt

12

- 9 5 2 1 ~ j 2 9 3 5 ,8 + j 2 0 1 T
I I

prespecified eigenvalues

d undesirable eigenvalues From the methods proposed in refs C51161, the optimal reduced order model of this study system will be of the form as follows: X = T \ X + B u (23) -0.309

=AV

where
P3S

A
=

(-0.47

377

0
-3.38821

Fig.5 Block Diagram For the One Machine Infinite Bus System Table 1. PARAMETERS OF STUDY SYSTEM

B = L0.165
=

[AW,A~ lT

K1=l..4479 K 5-0.02%
K -1.3174
K -0.5257

KF=0.025 TF=l.O

D=O
K =-0.17

With X d = - 2 j12 and zd=AW=[l.o], the best assignable of the reduced order model and the eigenvector achieved eigenvector of the whole system can be derived from eqns.(10)-(22). The results are depicted in Table N.

va

K4=1.805

T =0.05

M=4.74

Umax=+ 0.12

The eigenvalues of the original system are given in I Table I . Table I. OPEN LOOP EIGENVALUES I

In the electrical power system the entries o f the eigenvector that we are interested in are the angular frequency deviation Aw, which represent the system oscillation mode shapes. Obviously, there is no physical meaning of eigenvector assignment in one machine system since the oscillation modes of A w only occur among L h e multiniachine system. In the study illustrated above, it is shown from Table III that some unclesirable eigenvalues may be much poorer than the values we assigned. This will mLi\<e the prespecif ication of eigenstructure nonsense. However, there are no undesired eigenvalues Pzoduced by using the proposed assigning method,

-8.13 -1.55

8.98

, -3.10

Authorized licensed use limited to: Tamkang University. Downloaded on March 15,2010 at 21:55:20 EDT from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

1039

although the prespecified values have a little change. Thus, the relative stability of the proposed method is much better than that of the whole system model method. In spite of the eigenvector (as stated above it is of no physical meaning in one-machine system), the reduced order model assigning method is more attractive. Table N FEEDBACK GAINS AND CLOSED EIGENSTRUCTURE USING REDUCED ORDER METHOD

@+

- tI
Fig.7. Multimachine System

The model given in C91 is

Feedback

a=-23.671819

i = A X + B u
B = -0.1109286

where
Closed
Eip.envalues

xT = CAW,,

A w ~ , Abl, Ab2, ne:,,

i2, neFD1, &21

0.0041

-3.52 5 j l 2
-2.73

-1.5958

ij

5.339

-7.2719
.0.244

0
-0.2473

-0.0147 0.178

0.0747
-0.178 D

-0.1431
-0.0433 O

0
0

0
0

0
377

-0.146

0
376.99

0
0
-0.046 0.056 -398.56 -677.39

0
0

0
0.046 0.0565 398.58 677.78

0
-0.455 0.1234 -19493.8

0 0
0.244

O r d e r Model
Achieved E i g e \ v e c t o r of the whce
system

0 0 0

0.13
-0.3061 -3967.0 -1336L.16

0 0 0
0.149

0
-50.0
0

I-8 T j 2 9 , 1 . 0 , 22
-20892
j 1347, 7

j l l , 408

2 j1706,

0
0

0
-50.0

-10234.22

2 j47IT

I
(0

0
The transient response of angular frequency deviation following a 5% load change is shown in Fig.6
hW

0 0

0 0

0 0

25000

o
0 0

25000,J

c=[z z : ; z , z j
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
the open l o o p system eigenvalues are given in Table V Table
-0.09

OPEN LOOP SYSTEM EIGENVALUES -25.17 -0.0017

j 67.8

2 j 9.84
j 30.31

-25.24

-0.243

-2.5;

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

I 1

The modes that should be retained are the modes {-0.09 j9.84, -0.0017, - 0 . 2 4 3 1 . The prespecified eigenvalues and components of eigenvector are given For comparative reason, the desired eigenbe{-0.6 2 j 10) which are also obtained from the closed loop eigenvalues using the I. In order to reduce the optimal controller [ ] participation effects of the machines, we can assign the eigenvector as needed [ 7 ] .
values are chosen t o

i 6 The Transient Response of Angular Frequency ~ . Deviation Following a 5% Load Change

in TableVL

- the
- _ -- - - -

proposed method assignment method ) the former iiirtliod

n.;.,1~,lllcnt

( subeigensLrcture

( cigcnhlructure )

fIOj lt,c

4.2. Multimachine

Case

TableVI THE PRESPECIFIED EIGENVALUES AND COMPONENTS OF EIGENVECTOR

To assess the proposed design method in the case of a multimachine system, the system shown in Fig.7, taken from [ S I , is studied. The procedure is identical to the previous case. Since the proposed design method is a decentralized feedback controller; that is the stabilizer only feedback the output signals of the machine itself, s o the design procedure is the same as one machine case.

Eigenvector

w2

1.0

/6

The final feedback gains and closed loop eigenvalues are shown in TableVD..

Authorized licensed use limited to: Tamkang University. Downloaded on March 15,2010 at 21:55:20 EDT from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

1040

TableVIIFEEDBACK GAINS AND CLOSED LOOP EIGENVALUES

Feedback Gains
/eI

7 2.1291
=

B~ = 0.0151

a2

3.1167

o2

-0.0051

3~

prespecif ied eigenvalues

# undesirable eigenvalues

(a) Machine 1 From the methods proposed in reEs.[51 C61, the optimal reduced order model of this study system will be of the form as eqn.(23) with -0.237 -0.059
A =[ 377

xl0-3

-0.007

-0.07 0.073
0.18
0 0 0

-0.188

0 377

-0.022

0.007

-0.029

[
L0.40

-0.15 0.23

0.11
-0.35

1
B1 = 0.436

(b) Machine 2 With hd = -0.6 f j 10 and zd = [Awl, AWZIT = /179.7O, 1.0 &IT, the best assignable eigenvector Pa of the reduced order model and the achieved eigenvector of the whole system can be derived from eqns.(10)-(22). The results are depicted in Table V m . Fig. 8 The Transient Responses of Angular Frequency Deviations Following a 5% Load Change in Machine 1 the Proposed method (suhei-genstruc turc assignment method )

TalileVm FEEDBACK GAINS AND CLOSED EIGENSTRUCTURE USING REDUCED ORDER METHOD
I
ectlback

o1 = 1 6 . 0 7 5 5
m 2 = 26.1556

R 2 = 0.4773
-21.3315
f

--:----I.I"sed I.C>P Elge""aluc.s

-1.5392 f j:,.llO1 -3.9291 114.48Y9

-23.8258

j25.2825 67,1509

opirnla!i t + s , s , , -

able i > ~ e n u e l u r of Priliircd Order

Lo.4

:10.no21,

1.0, 0.514

j1,,.(,757,

l i d e l

-1.4372

36.51861'
f

iic1ilci.ud Ilgrnv e c t o r of t h e

[-0.6,

1.0, -2.8
j21.2.

19.7, - 6 . h :

j24.2,

It is shown from Tablevn that this also results some undesirable eigenvalues in the !nulti-machine case. However, there is no undesirable value produced by using the reduced order assigning method as shown in T a b l e v m . Although there is a little change away from the prespccifird eigenvnlucs, the desired entries in the eigenvector are achieved. And, no undesirable eigenvalues appear. Obviously, the relative stability of the proposed method is much better.

vhole

SyJLClr

-13.4

1.0.6

j 6 4 . 2 , -1089.6

j1054.8.

5263.8 + j 5460.21'

5. CONCLUSION
For the purpose of the coordinated synthesis of decentralized stabilizations in the multimachine power systems, a modal control method is developed. Starting with the optimal reduced order model approach, the algorithm for designing decentralized dynamic output

The transient responses of angular frequency deviation in two machines following a 5% load change are shown in Fig. 8.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Tamkang University. Downloaded on March 15,2010 at 21:55:20 EDT from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

1041

feedback compensator is constructed. Though the coordination of stabilizers can be achieved by the conventional eigenstructure assignment techniques, the proposed design algorithm is much more Practical and results in more stable responses. After specifying a set of desired closed-loop eigenstructures, the optimal reduced order model is employed to retain the output states. Then, the algorithm for eigenstructure assignment is built up by using this reduced model and facing the drift problem of the unspecified eigenstructures. Finally, the algorithm for designing decentralized modal controllers is reached. Using the modal control algorithm, simultaneous tuning of multiple decentralized stabilizers can be carried out easily. This achicvemcnt comes up to our previous expectation and the algorithm is utilized in our PSS design. Combining the decentralized modal control algorithm with the participation concepts, we are in a position to deal with the design problem of coordinated synthesizing decentralized stabilizers in t h p m~ltimocl~inr power systcnls. t ~ y using the output states feedback only, the controller can be implemented easily by the well known proportional-integral controller. The eigenstructure assignment and tuning for single PSS and multiple PSS's are illustrated to present the whole PSS design procedure clearly.

TL .. Huang was born in Tainan, Taiwan, Republic of China, on July 4 , 1958. He received the B.S. and M.S. degree in Electrical Engineering from National Taiwan University, Since Taipei, in 1980 and 1982. 1982, he has been an associate professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering of Wa-Shia of Technology, Taipei, College Taiwan, Currently, he is pursuing '1 PI1.D. degree in Clectrical E n g l neering at Nationdl Taiwan Unlvcrsity. t l L s research interests arc in t h e ,ireas ol control theory and !)owcr system dynamics.

REFERENCES

Shih-Chang Chen was born in Taichung, Taiwan,Republic of China, on January 5, 1954. He received the B.S. and M.S. degree in Electronic Engineering from National Taiwan Institute of Technology, Taipei, in 1979 and 1981. Since 1982, he has been with the Department of Electrical Engineering, National Taipei Institute of Technology, Taipei Taiwan, where he is currently an Associate Professor, His research interests are in the areas ofcontrol and power system.

[I]

11.

A . bloussa, Y. Yu, "Optimal Power System Stabilization l'hrough Excitation and/or Governor Control." IEEE. Trans. Power App. Syst., Vol. PAS-91, ' pp. 1166-1174, 1972.

[ 2 1 D.G.

Luenberger, "Observers for Multivariable System" IEEE Trans. Automatic Control, Vol. AC-11, pi>. 190-197, 1966.

131 C.L. Chen, Y.Y. Hsu, , "Power System Stability Improvement Using Dynamic Output Feedback compensators," Electric Power System Research, Vo1.12, pp.37-39, 1987.
141 A . N .

Andry, E.Y. Shapiro, J.C. Chung, "EigenstrucLure Assignment for Linear Systems," IEEE Trans. Aerospace and Electronic Systems , Vol. A E S 19, No.5, p p . 771-729, 1983.

T.Y. Hwang was born in Chi-yi, Taiwan,Republic of China, on November 11, 1955. Re received the B.S. and M.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering from National Taiwan University, Taipei, in 1978 and 1984. Since 1984, he has been with the Department of Mechanical Engineering Wa-shia College of Technology, Taipei, Taiwan, where he is an Associate Professor. Currently he is pursuing a Ph.D. degree in Mechanical Engineering at National Taiwan University. His research interests are in the areas of control theory and mechanism.

C5l Ali Feliachi, Xiaofan Zhang et. al, "Power System stabilizers Design Using Optimal Reduced Order Models, Part I: Model Reductionii IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, Vo1.3 No.4, pp.1670-1675, 1988.

[ S I Ali Feliachi, Xianofan Zhang et. al, "Power System

Stabilizers Design Using Optimal Reduced Models, Part 11: Design" LEEE Trans. on Systems, Vo1.3 No.4 pp. 1676-1684, 1988. Order Power

[71 C.L. Chen, Y.Y. Hsu, "Coordinated Synthesis of Multimachine Power System Stabilizer Using an I:f f icient Uecentrolized Nodal Control (DMC) Algorithm,'1 IEEE Trans. PWRS-2, PP.543-551, 1987.

rf?]

F. P. Demello, P. J. Nolan, T. F. Laskowski, J. M. Undrill, "Coordinated Application of Stabilizers in Multimachine Power Systems." IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., Vol. PAS-99, pp. 892-901, 1980.

Dr. rang was born in Taichung, Taiwan le on May 24, 1932. Ile received L i B.C. degree in electrical englncering from NaLional laiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan in 1955; the M.E. degree in system cngineer1ng from Tokyo Institute or Technology, Tokyo, Japan, in 1967; and the Ph.D. degree in EC from the National Taiwan University in 1973. During 1956-1965, he was a senior engineer in Taiwan Power Com~ pany. During 1968-1987,he has been I. ~ I O T P S S Uin ~hc. DeparLmenL 01 Electrical Cnglneering, National Taiwan University, and since 1987 he is a prolessor in t h e instltute of informaLion engineering, Tamkang Universicy. His present interests are system analysis and sysLem dynamics.

191 Y.L. Abdel-Magid, G.M. Aly, "Two-Level Stabilization in Multimachine Power Systems, Electric Power Systems Research, Vo1.6, pp. 33-41, 1983.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Tamkang University. Downloaded on March 15,2010 at 21:55:20 EDT from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.