See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/278660324

Dynamic Stability Enhancement of Power System Using Intelligent Power

System Stabilizer

Chapter · January 2015

DOI: 10.1007/978-81-322-2217-0_46

CITATION READS

1 1,551

3 authors, including:

Piyush Sharma Ajit Sharma

SS College of Engineering, Udaipur Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University
9 PUBLICATIONS   21 CITATIONS    3 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Speed control of induction motor by scaler method View project

Investigation on Modeling and Control of Non Linear System View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Piyush Sharma on 12 July 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Dynamic Stability Enhancement of Power
System Using Intelligent Power System
Stabilizer

Swati Paliwal, Piyush Sharma and Ajit Kumar Sharma

Abstract The destabilizing effect of high gain in voltage regulators persists in

power system. The power oscillations of small magnitude and high frequency,
which often persisted in power system, present the limitation to the amount of
power transmitted within the system. In this paper, a linearized Heffron–Phillips
model of a single machine infinite bus (SMIB) is developed using different con-
trollers like fuzzy logic power system stabilizer (FPSS), PID controller, particle
swarm optimization (PSO)-based PID controller for analyzing the stability
enhancement in power system. For FPSS, speed deviation and acceleration devi-
ation are taken as inputs. Comparison of the effectiveness (steady-state error, ess,
overshoot (Mp), and settling time (ts) for a different controller has been done. The
performance of the SMIB system using FPSS has been analyzed when comparing
with conventional controllers used in SMIB. Similarly the PSO is done using
different iterations on conventional PID controller. The results of the simulation
show that for low frequency oscillations, FPSS is more effective in damping
compared to conventional controllers, and similarly PSO-based PID controller is
more effective than a conventional PID controller.

S. Paliwal (&)
Electrical and Electronics Engineering Department, Amity University,
Noida, India
e-mail: [email protected]
P. Sharma
Electrical Engineering Department, SS College of Engineering, Udaipur,
Rajasthan, India
A.K. Sharma
Electrical and Electronics Engineering Department,
Northern India Engineering College, Delhi, India
e-mail: [email protected]
A.K. Sharma
e-mail: [email protected]

© Springer India 2015 571

K.N. Das et al. (eds.), Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on Soft
Computing for Problem Solving, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing 335,
DOI 10.1007/978-81-322-2217-0_46
572 S. Paliwal et al.

Keywords Heffron–Phillips model Power system stabilizer Fuzzy logic power



system stabilizer Reduced rule fuzzy logic power system stabilizer Controller



Membership functions PID controller and particle swarm optimization

1 Introduction

Stability of electric power system is one of the most significant concerns in any
electric power system network. This can be traced from the fact that in steady state,
the average electrical speed of the generators must be in synchronism. The power
system may be broadly defined as that property of power system that enables it to
remain in a state of operating equilibrium under normal operating condition and to
regain an acceptable state of equilibrium after being subjected to a disturbance.
Power system stability [1] can be classified into: Transient stability and Small
signal stability. Transient stability of a system was conventionally suppressed using
automatic voltage regulator (AVR), has the electric system, and has been seen with
oscillations of frequencies ranging from 0.1 to 2 Hz. These regulators have high
gain leading to destabilizing effect on power system and also these are designed for
specific operating condition hence limiting to specific level of performance [2]. The
solution to this problem is provided by using different controllers like fuzzy logic
controller, PID controller. This paper also investigates the optimization in PID
controller through particle swarm optimization (PSO) technique using different
iterations. Under PSO technique, the best probabilities are considered for PID
controllers. Fuzzy logic [3–5] has the features of simple concept, easy implemen-
tation, and computational efficiency. This provides an easy method to draw the
definite conclusion from hazy, uncertain, or inexact information. Also, the PID
controller has the ability to reduce both peak overshoot as well as the settling time
of a system. So in this paper, the fuzzy logic-based power system stabilizer model
and PID controller are evaluated on a single machine infinite bus (SIMB) power
system, and then, the performance of conventional power system stabilizer (CPSS),
fuzzy logic-based power system stabilizer (FPSS) is compared, also there will be a
comparison between the PID controller together with PSO-based PID controller.

2 Modeling of Power System

Synchronous generators from the principle source of electric energy in power

system. SMIB system consists of a synchronous machine connected to an infinite
bus through a transmission line (Fig. 1).
Figure 2 shows the block diagram of SMIB power system model. This diagram
was developed by Heffron and Phillips so to represent a single synchronous
generator connected to the grid through a transmission line. Heffron–Phillips model
Dynamic Stability Enhancement of Power System … 573

Fig. 1 Single machine infinite bus system (SMIB)

Speed Deviation

Power Angle Deviation

1 Wb
M.s+D
s
Pm Pe Transfer Fcn Wb / s
K1
1
K2 K1 K4 K5
K2 K5
1 1 1
K3 K4

K3*Tdo'.s+1 KA
Delta Eq' K3 Ta.s+1
Delta Efd KA
K6
1
K6

Fig. 2 MATLAB/SIMULINK model of Heffron and Phillips without controller

[6] is a linear model. It is quite accurate for studying LFOs and stability of power
systems. It has also been successfully used for designing classical power system
controllers, which are still active in most power utilities.

3 Controllers

Controller is a gadget fabricated in a chip form, analogue electronics, or computer

that supervise and actually alters the working conditions after checking the errors of
a considered dynamical system. This paper deals with different types of power
system controllers discuss below.
574 S. Paliwal et al.

3.1 Conventional Power System Stabilizer (CPSS)

The power system stabilizer (PSS) is used to provide a sufficient damping to

electromechanical oscillations in SMIB energy system. So CPSS [7–11] is used to
achieve desired transient behavior and low steady-state error. The input to con-
troller is speed deviation ðDxÞ. The PSS as represented in Fig. 3 has three com-
ponents. They are phase compensation block, signal washout block, and gain block.
The controller gain Ks is an important factor as the damping provided by the
PSS increases in proportion to an increase in the gain up to a certain critical gain
value, after which the damping begins to decrease. The phase compensator block is
used to make the system “settle down” quickly. The outcome value of the controller
has to be gradually drawn toward zero in steady-state condition. Therefore, a
washout transfer function [Tw.S/(Tw.S+1)], which has a steady-state gain zero is
used. The value of washout time constant Tw, may be in the range of 1–20 s.

3.2 Fuzzy Logic Controlled Power System Stabilizer (FPSS)

The fuzzy power system stabilizer is a two-input component which have single
output. These inputs are angular speed deviation and angular acceleration while
output of fuzzy logic controller is a voltage signal.

3.2.1 Fuzzy Logic Control System

Concept of fuzzy logic has been given by Lotfi Zadeh in 1965. This logic is used in
many applications in the industry because of some advantages: simple and faster
tactic, reduce a propose enlargement cycle, simple to execute, reduce hardware cost,
improve the control performance, simplify design convolution. So it is used as a
controller in a power system as a fuzzy power system stabilizer [12–20]. The
designing process is carried out with the help of MATLAB 2009a. A fuzzy con-
troller comprises of three stages: fuzzification, fuzzy rule, and defuzzification
(Table 1).

Output
Input
Tw.S T1.S+1
Ks
Tw.S+1 T2.S+1

Gain Wash out Lead-Lag

Fig. 3 Structure of conventional lead-lag controller

Dynamic Stability Enhancement of Power System … 575

Table 1 49 Rule base of

fuzzy logic controller Acceleration
NH NM NS ZR PS PM PH
NH NH NH NH NH NM NM NS
NM NH NM NM NM NS NS ZR
NS NM NM NS NS ZR ZR PS
ZR NM NS NS ZR PS PS PM
PS NS ZR ZR PS PS PM PM
PM ZR PS PS PM PM PM PH
PH PS PM PM PH PH PH PH

Membership functions are used to adapt the fuzzy standards between 0 and 1 for
both input and output values (Figs. 4 and 5).

3.3 PID Controller

The PID control algorithm is a robust and simple algorithm that is widely used in
the industry. The algorithm has sufficient flexibility to yield excellent results in a
wide variety of applications and has been one of the main reasons for the continued
use over the years. As the name suggests, PID algorithm consists of three basic
coefficients; proportional, integral, and derivative which are varied to get optimal
response (Fig. 6).

Fig. 4 Membership functions

for fuzzy controller for input
and output variables
576 S. Paliwal et al.

Derivative Input1 Fuzzy Logic

Input1 Controller
du/dt
Speed Deviation 1
Input2
1
Input2
Power Angle Deviation
1
Wb
M.s+D s
Pm Pe
Transfer Fcn Wb / s
K1
1
K4 Output
K1 Output
K2 K5 1
K2 1 K5
1 K4 1
KA
K3
K3*Tdo'.s+1 Ta.s+1
KA
Delta Eq' K3 Delta Efd
K6
1
K6

Fig. 5 Shows the Heffron–Phillips MATLAB/SIMULINK model of single machine infinite bus
(SMIB) equipped with FLC

3.4 Particle Swarm Optimization

PSO concept is attributed to Kennedy (social-psychologist) and Russell Eberhart

(electrical engineer) in 1995. PSO is an artificial intelligence technique for finding
approximate solutions toward extremely difficult or impossible numeric maximi-
zation and minimization problems. This candidate-based Stochastic optimization
technique is motivated by social behavior of Fish Schooling and swarming theory.
It uses a number of agents (particles) that constitute a swarm moving around in the
search space looking for the best solution. In this paper, PSO technique is applied
so that using different iterations, we analyzed the stability enhancement conditions
at each particular interval with accuracy. The PSO technique gives more accurate
results than a conventional PID controller.
Figure 7 shows the flow chart of PSO technique which shows how the selection
of different parameters is done and generates the best initial fitness parameters
(Fig. 8).
Dynamic Stability Enhancement of Power System … 577

Fig. 6 MATLAB/SIMULINK model plant controlled by small perturbed PID controller

Fig. 7 Flowchart of particle swarm optimization

578 S. Paliwal et al.

Fig. 8 MATLAB/SIMULINK model plant controlled by PSO-based PID controller

4 Simulation Results

Figures 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 show the speed deviation (Δω), power angle deviation
(Δδ) of the SMIB system without controller, controlled by conventional controller,
FLC, PID-based controller, and PSO-based PID, respectively. The system param-
eters (a) Speed deviation (Δω) (b) Power angle deviation (Δδ) of generator obtained
with the proposed controllers are given in Table 2. The outputs of SMIB system
without PSS (a) Speed deviation (Δω) (b) Power angle deviation (Δδ) of generator
are shown in Fig. 9. The responses clearly show that system has large overshoot
(Mp) and large settling time (ts), and error steady state 0 and 2 for speed deviation
and power angle, respectively.

Fig. 9 Output of SMIB system without PSS a speed deviation (Δω) b power angle deviation (Δδ)
of generator
Dynamic Stability Enhancement of Power System … 579

Fig. 10 Output of SMIB system conventional lead-lag PSS a speed deviation (Δω) b power angle
deviation (Δδ) of generator

Fig. 11 Output of SMIB system fuzzy PSS for triangular membership function a speed deviation
(Δω) b power angle deviation (Δδ) of generator

(a) Angular speed deviation

0.04
0.03
Speed deviation

0.02
0.01

0
-0.01

-0.02
-0.03

-0.04
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time in second

(b) 5
Power angle deviation for PID controller
4.5
Power angle deviation

4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time in seccond

Fig. 12 Output of SMIB system with PID controller a speed deviation (Δω) b power angle
deviation (Δδ) of generator
580 S. Paliwal et al.

(a) Angular speed deviation

0.04

0.03

0.02
Speed Deviation

0.01

-0.01

-0.02

-0.03

-0.04
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time in second

Power angle Deviation

(b) 5
4.5
Power Angle Deviation

4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time in second

Fig. 13 Output of SMIB system with PID PSO a speed deviation (Δω) b power angle deviation
(Δδ) of generator

The outputs of SMIB systems with conventional PSS (a) speed deviation (Δω)
(b) power angle deviation (Δδ) of generator are shown in Fig. 10. The responses
show that system has still larger overshoot (Mp) and larger settling time (ts), and
error steady state 0 and 2 for speed deviation and power angle, respectively. This
can be further improved by fine tuning of controller parameters.
The outputs of SMIB system with Fuzzy PSS for a triangular membership
function (a) speed deviation (Δω) (b) power angle deviation (Δδ) of generator are
shown in Fig. 11. The responses show that system has smaller overshoot (Mp) and
smaller settling time (ts), and error steady state 0 and 2 for speed deviation and
power angle, respectively. So performance improved by using Fuzzy PSS. This can
be further improved by fine tuning of controller parameters.
The outputs of SMIB system with PID controller (a) speed deviation (Δω) (b)
power angle deviation (Δδ) of generator are shown in Fig. 12. The responses clearly
show that system has small overshoot (Mp), small settling time (ts), and error
steady state for speed deviation is zero and 2 for Power angle. This can be further
improved by fine tuning of controller parameters.
Table 2 System parameters with different controller
S. System With conventional PSS Fuzzy PSS for triangular PID controller PID PSO controller
no. parameter controller membership function
1 Speed Large overshoot (Mp), peak Smaller overshoot (Mp), peak Smaller overshoot (Mp), peak Smaller Max. overshoot,
deviation value = 0.049 pu, large set- value = 0.037 pu, smaller set- value = 0.0276 pu, smaller Mp = 0.020 pu, smaller
(Dω) tling time (ts), ess = 0 tling time (ts), ess = 0 settling time (ts), ess = 0 settling time (ts), ess = 0
Dynamic Stability Enhancement of Power System …

2 Power Large overshoot (Mp), peak Smaller overshoot (Mp), peak Smaller overshoot (Mp), peak Smaller Max. overshoot.
angle value = 4.5 pu, large settling value = 3.9 pu, smaller settling value = 3.5 pu, smaller settling Mp = 3.37 pu small settling
deviation time (ts), ess= 2 time (ts), ess = 2.01 time (ts), ess = 2.02 time (ts), ess = 2.01
(Dδ)
581
582 S. Paliwal et al.

The outputs of SMIB system with PSO-based PID controller (a) speed deviation
(Δω) (b) Power angle deviation (Δδ) of generator are shown in Fig. 13. The
responses clearly show that system has smaller overshoot (Mp), smaller settling
time (ts) as compare to PID controller, and error steady state for speed deviation is
zero and 2 for Power angle.

5 Conclusion

In this paper, initially the effectiveness of power system stabilizer is reviewed. The
proposed method has been simulated on a SMIB energy system with FLC, PID
controller, and conventional controller using complete state space model. The
MATLAB/SIMULINK simulation results showed that in the presence of small
disturbances in the system, fuzzy controller is more effective as compared to the
conventional controller, and also, PSO-based PID controller is also more effective
than PID controller. The fuzzy logic power system stabilizer (FPSS) gives zero
steady-state error, smaller overshoot, and settling time as compared to conventional
power system stabilizer.

Appendix

Parameter Values
Generator: M = 7.0 s, D = 0, Xd = 1.8, Xq = 1.76, Xd0 ¼ 0:3, Tdo
0
¼ 7:2940,
ωb = 314
Exciter: (IEEE Type ST1): KA = 200, TA = 0.02 s, T1 = 0.154, T2 = 0.033,
KS = 9.5, TW = 1.4, K1 = 0.7636, K2 = 0.8644, K3 = 0.3231, K4 = 1.4189,
K5 = 0.1463, K6 = 0.4167, Kp = 278.65, Ki = 271.41, Kd = 18.14.

References

1. Kundur, P.: Power System Stability and Control. McGraw-Hill, New York (1994)
2. Gupta, N., Jain, S.K.: Comparative analysis of fuzzy power system stabilizer using different
membership functions. Int. J. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2(2) (2010)
3. Zadeh, L.A.: Outline of a new approach to the analysis of complex systems and decision
processes. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 3, 28–44 (1973)
4. Zadeh, L.A.: A theory of approximate reasoning. In: Hayes, J.E., Mikulich, L.I. (eds.)
Machine Intelligence, pp. 149–196, Ellis Horwood/Wiley, New York, (1979)
5. Zadeh, L.A.: A rationale for fuzzy control. Transactions of the ASME, Series G (USA).
J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Contr. 94, 3–4 (1974)
6. Gurrala, G., Sen, I.: A modified Heffron-Phillip’s model for the design of power system
stabilizers. In: Power System Technology and IEEE Power India Conference, 2008. Joint
International Conference on POWERCON 2008, pp. 1–6, Oct 2008
 Dynamic Stability Enhancement of Power System … 583

7. Larsen, E., Swann, D.: Applying power system stabilizers part i, ii, iii: practical
considerations. IEEE Trans. Power Apparatus Syst. PAS-100(6), 3034–3046 (1981)
8. Laskowski, T., DeMello F.P., Nolan, P.J., Undrill, J.: Coordinated application of stabilizers in
multimachine power system. In: Proceedings of the 21st Annual North-American Power
Symposium, vol. 9–10, pp. 175–184 (1989)
9. Vournas, C., Mantzaris, J.: Application of PSS modeling to stabilizer design for inter area
oscillations. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 25(4), 1910–1917 (2010)
10. Watson, W., Manchur, G.: Experience with supplementary damping signals for generator
static excitation systems. IEEE Trans. Power Apparatus and Syst. PAS-92(1), 199–203 (1973)
11. Radman, G., Smaili, Y.: Performance evaluation of pid power system stabilizer for
synchronous generator. In: IEEE Conference Proceedings Southeastcon ‘88, pp. 597–601
(1988)
12. Lin, Y.: Systematic approach for the design of a fuzzy power system stabilizer. In: Power
System Technology, 2004. 2004 International Conference on PowerCon 2004, vol. 1,
pp. 747–752, Nov 2004
13. Roosta, A., Khorsand, H., Nayeripour, M.: Design and analysis of fuzzy power system
stabilizer. In: Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference Europe (ISGT Europe), 2010
IEEE PES, pp. 1–7, Oct 2010
14. Taher, A., Shemshadi S.A.: Design of robust fuzzy logic power system stabilizer. World Acad.
Sci. Eng. Technol. 27 (2007)
15. Kothari, M., Kumar, T.: A new approach for designing fuzzy logic power system stabilizer. In:
International Power Engineering Conference, 2007. IPEC 2007, pp. 419–424, Dec 2007
16. Hussein, T., Saad, M., Elshafei, A., Bahgat, A.: Damping inter-area modes of oscillation using
an adaptive fuzzy power system stabilizer. In: 2008 16th Mediterranean Conference on
Control and Automation, pp. 368–373, June 2008
17. Gupta, R., Bandyopadhyay, B., Kulkarni, A.: Design of power system stabiliser for single-
machine system using robust periodic output feedback controller. IEEE Proc. Gener. Transm.
Distrib. 150(2), 211–216 (2003)
18. Dobrescu, M., Kamwa, I.: A new fuzzy logic power system stabilizer performances. In; Power
Systems Conference and Exposition, 2004. IEEE PES, vol. 2, pp. 1056–1061, Oct 2004
19. Dysko, A., Leithead, W., O’Reilly, J.: Enhanced power system stability by coordinated PSS
design. IEEE Trans Power Syst. 25(1), 413–422 (2010)
20. Gupta, R., Sambariya, D., Gunjan, R.: Fuzzy logic based robust power system stabilizer for
multimachine power system. In: Industrial Technology, 2006. IEEE International Conference
on ICIT 2006, pp. 1037–1042, Dec 2006
21. Tayal, V.K., Lather, J.S.: Digital simulation of reduced rule fuzzy logic power system
stabilizer for analysis of power system stability enhancement. Int. J. Comput. Appl. 47(7),
888–975 (2012)
22. Tayal, V.K., Lather, J.S., Sharma, P., Sinha, S.K.: Power system stability enhancement using
fuzzy logic based power system stabilizer. In: Proceedings of the Third International
Conference on Soft Computing for Problem Solving, Advances in Intelligent Systems and
Computing, vol. 258, pp. 55–68 (2014)
23. Hong, T.P., Lee, C.: Induction of fuzzy rules and membership functions from training
examples. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 84, 33–47 (1996)
24. Rose, T.J.: Fuzzy Logic with Engineering Applications. McGrawHill. Inc, New York (1997)

View publication stats