J.

Raja
C.Christober Asir Rajan

J. Electrical Systems 7-2 (2011): 193-205

Regular paper
Improved Power System Dynamic
Performance Using SMES For
Frequency Excursion
This paper analyses a comparative transient performance of six types of single machine power
system. The six types of system configurations are viz. (i) AVR loop with Proportional
Integral controller (PI) combined with AGC loop. (ii) AVR loop with single input CPSS
combined with AGC loop. (iii) AVR with PI combined with SMES unit based AGC loop. For
AGC loop both thermal unit and hydro unit are individually consider. (iv) AVR with CPSS
combined with SMES unit based AGC loop. For AGC loop both thermal unit and hydro unit
are individually considered. (v) AVR with FLC combined with FLC based AGC loop. For
AGC loop both thermal unit and hydro unit are individually considered. (vi) AVR with FLC
combined with SMES unit based AGC with FLC loop. For FLC based AGC loop both thermal
unit and hydro unit are individually considered. The Thermal unit is either single or double
reheat turbine. Hydro unit is considered with mechanical or electrical governor. Proportional
Integral, Conventional power system stabilizer and fuzzy controller is provided in AGC loop.
It is shown that the SMES based fuzzy controlled AGC loop along with fuzzy controlled AVR
assist better transient performance of the power system in all cases under different operating
conditions.

Keywords: Automatic Generation Control (AGC), Automatic Voltage Regulator (AVR),

Conventional Power System Stabilizer (CPSS), Fuzzy Logic Controller (FLC), Superconducting
Magnetic Energy Storage (SMES).

1. Nomenclature

Incremental change in Rotor angle.

Incremental change in electrical angular frequency.

M
Inertia co-efficient.
D
Damping co-efficient.
Voltage proportional to direct axis flux linkages
E1q
K1
K2
K3
K4
K5
K6
1
Tdo

Ka
Ta
Ke
Te
KP
KI

Kcf

Change in electrical power for a change in rotor angle with constant flux linkage
Change in electrical power for change in flux linkage with constant rotor angle.
Impedance factor
Demagnetizing effect of change in rotor angle
Change in terminal voltage with change in rotor constant angle Eq1.
Change in terminal voltage with change in Eq1 for constant
Direct axis open circuit time constant of the machine
Amplifier gain
Time constant of amplifier
Exciter gain
Time constant of exciter
Proportional Gain Constant
Integral Gain Constant
Gain constant of frequency

Corresponding author :
J.Raja, Assistant Director, National Power Training Institute, Ministry of Power India, Faridabad 121 003,
Haryana, India. Email: rajaj1980@rediff.com, Cell No.: 8800124789.
Dr.C.Christober Asir Rajan, Associate Professor, Pondicherry Engineering College, Puducherry, India. Email:
asir_70@hotmail.com
Copyright JES 2011 on-line : journal.esrgroups.org/jes

J. Electrical Systems 7-2 (2011): 193-205

Kpss
Td1,Td2
Td3,Td4
Tdc
Tg
Trr
Tt
Tw
Tr

Power System Stabilizer Gain

Time constant of the power system stabilizer
Time constant of the power system stabilizer
Converter time constant
Governor time constant
Terminal voltage transducer time constant
Non- reheat turbine time constant is S domain
Washout time constant of PSS block on S domain
Reheat turbine time constant

2.0 Introduction
Load Frequency control is an important issue in power system operation and control.
The loading in power system is never constant. To ensure the quality of the power supply,
we need to design a load frequency control system which deals with control of generator
with changing load. There has been continuing interest in designing strategy for load
frequency controls has been proposed since 1980 [1-3].
In [4], Nanda and Mangla discussed the AGC performance of interconnected system in
the continuous mode using conventional integral and fuzzy controllers, Nanda et al [5] also
considered an interconnected Hydro-Thermal system in the continuous discrete mode using
conventional integral controller or PI controller. It has been established that maximum
deviation and settling time are same for the controllers and the paper has established the
fuzzy controller without considering SMES.
In the context of AGC coordinated CPSS equipped with AVR model, it is quite
relevant to investigate the further improvement in the transient performance by the
application of SMES with fuzzy controller. In [5-6], transfer function model for single
stage, double stage reheat turbine, the transfer function of model mechanical and electrical
governor are given. A literature survey reveals that mechanical governor has an integral
part of existing hydro units.
On the other hand, owing to their low power consumption while in operation, modern
hydro units are being equipped with electric governors. Nanda et al [5] are the first to
compare the performance of electric and mechanical governors in the context of
interconnected hydrothermal AGC system. The uses of SMES and battery energy storage
for load leveling application and for improvement of the dynamic performance of power
system have been described [7-11]. The importance of control system using SMES has
been presented as one of the powerful stabilizers for undamped oscillations which tend to
occur in a long distance bulk power transmission system has been viewed and analyzed in
the literature [12]. In [13] the improvement in AGC with the addition of a small capacity
SMES unit is studied, and time domain simulations are used to study the performance of
the power system dynamics are analyzed.
Fuzzy PI controller has some advantages: (i) it provides an efficient way of copying
with imperfect information, secondarily, (ii) it offers flexibility in decision making process,
thirdly, (iii) it provides an interesting man / machine interface by simplifying rule
extraction from human experts and fallowing a simpler a posterior interpretation of the
system reasoning. Fuzzy logic controllers are knowledge base controllers usually derived
from a knowledge acquisition process or automatically synthesized from self organizing
control architecture. Fuzzy Logic Controllers have been used in both AGC and AVR.
Attempt has been made to examine suitable number of triangular membership functions
(MFs) that can provide better dynamic response. The dynamic responses are obtained and
compared to those obtained with conventional integral controllers, conventional power
194

J.Raja et al: A Improved Power System Dynamic Performance Using SMES

system stabilizer and Fuzzy controller. Fuzzy Logic controllers are quite robust and the
Fuzzy rules for nominal condition need not be changed for 25% variations in system
parameters and 20% variations in operating load condition from their nominal values.
The rest of the paper is documented in the following headings. Section 3 provides test
power system investigation. Section 4 deals with Mathematical model SMES. Section 5 and
6 incorporates fuzzy logic in AGC and AVR. Section 7 includes Simulation Results, .
Section 8 Result and followed by References in section 9.

3.0 System Investigation

A single machine connected to infinite bus system (SMIB) is considered [18]. The
MATLAB-SIMULINK representation of SMIB system with AVR, exciter, Synchronous
generator, CPSS loop, AGC loop and subsystem loop is shown in fig 1, subsystem SMES is
shown in fig 3.The synchronous generator with AVR, IEEE STIA thyristor excitation
system along with generator and equivalent transmission line reactance are represented by a
two axis fourth order model.
3.1Automatic Generation Control
The main aim of AGC is making ACE zero for an interconnected hydro thermal system so
that the scheduled value of the system frequency and tie line power is maintained, In
general two control variables associated with AGC schemes and these two variable gives an
idea about ACE [20] and they are related with the equation (1).

ACE= (P + B f)
tie

(1)

In the present work ACE is only, B*f bias setting of B=i is considered for both hydro and
thermal areas. The system model is considered for continuous mode operation. The nominal
system parameters are given in the Appendix 1.
3.2Automatic Voltage Regulator
AVR is about controlling the reactive power in a stable power system. The proposed AVR
system block diagram for system simulating a fourth order model of synchronous generator
shown in figure 1. The AVR system response is studied and simulated with PI controller,
Conventional power system stabilizer (CPSS) and Fuzzy logic controller (FLC). First a
simple system with first order generator and without PI controller is simulated. Second a
more realistic system has been simulated with PI and a fourth order generator. Third
conventional power system stabilizer is designed for a fourth order generator to suppresses
the voltage fluctuations, Fourth the same system is simulated with FUZZY controller
instead of conventional and PI controllers. Dynamic response shows that performance of
fixed gain CPSS is better for particular operating conditions. It may not yield satisfactory
results when there is a change in the operating point.
3.3. Combining LFC and AVR
Due to weak coupling relationship between the AVR and AGC, the voltage and frequency
are regulated separately. The study of coupling effects of the AVR and AGC can be found
in Kundur [2], where it is mentioned that a small change in the electrical power Pe is the
product of the synchronizing power coefficient PS and the change in the power angle .
195

J. Electrical Systems 7-2 (2011): 193-205

Taking in to account that the voltage is proportional to the main field winding flux Ed, the
following linearised equation is obtained (2).
P = K + K E '
(2)
e
2
1
Where K1 is the change in the electrical power for a change in the direct axis flux linkage
with constant rotor angle and K2=PS. By modifying the generator field transfer function
and taking in to account the effect of rotor angle. The equation for the stator EMF can
expressed as (3).

Fig.1: MATLAB SIMULINK Representation of SMIB with AVR, Synchronous

Generator, PSS Loop, AGC Loop, SMES Loop
.

Fig 2: AGC Loop Sub System

E' =

KG
(V K )
3
(1+STG ) f

(3)

Where K3is the demagnetizing effect of a change in the rotor angle (at steady state). The
small effect of this rotor angle upon the generator terminal voltage can be expressed as
equation (4)
196

J.Raja et al: A Improved Power System Dynamic Performance Using SMES

V = K + K E'
t
4
5

(4)

Where K4 is the change in terminal voltage with the change in rotor angle for Ed, K5 is the
change in terminal voltage with the change in Ed for a constant rotor angle. Therefore the
simulation model for a fourth order machine time constant is generated figure 1.The actual
model may vary slightly in presentations due to some limitations in the MATLAB graphics
interface nonetheless. Note that VL and PL are included to simulate the load change in
voltage and power respectively, which are effectively the change in real and reactive power.
4.0 Superconducting Magnetic Energy Storage
The operation of SMES units, that is, charging, discharging, the steady state mode and the
power modulation during dynamic oscillatory periods are controlled by the application of
the proper positive and negative voltage to the inductor. This can be achieved by
controlling the firing angle of the converter bridges. Neglecting the transformer and the
converter losses in [22] and DC voltage is given by in equation (5).
E = 2 V COS - 2 I R
(5)
d
do
d c
Where, Ed = DC voltage applied to the inductor (KV), = firing angle (degree), Id = current
through the inductor (KA), Rc = equivalent commutating resistance (ohm), Vdo = maximum
open circuit bridge voltage of each 6-pulse converter at = 0 deg (KV). The inductor is
initially charged to its rated current, Ido by applying a small positive voltage. Once the
current has attained the rated value, it is held constant by reducing voltage ideally to zero
since the coil is superconducting. A very small voltage may require to over coming the
commutating resistance. The energy stored at any instant [8],
LI 2
W = d MJ ; Where, L=Inductance of SMES, H.
L
2
a) Frequency deviation as a control signal:
The frequency deviation f of the power system is sensed and used to control the SMES
voltage, Ed. When power is to be pumped back in to the grid in the case of fall in the
frequency due to sudden loading in the armature, the control voltage Ed is to be negative
since the current through the inductor and thyristor cannot change its direction. The
incremental change in the voltage applied to the inductor is expressed as:
Kf
E =
f
d (1+STdc )

(6)

Where : Ed is the incremental change in converter voltage; Tdc is the converter time delay;
Kf is the gain of the control loop and S is the Laplace operator d/dt. If ACE is used as
control signal then
Kf

1
E =
K (f + P )- K IAi I
d (1+ STdc ) Ai i Bi ij
di

(7)

Where, i,j=1,2
b) Area control error (ACE) as control signal:
In case where tie line power deviation signals are available, it may be desirable to use area
control error as input to SMES control logic. This has certain disadvantages, which are
desirable later, compared to frequency deviation derived controls. The area control error of
two areas is defined in equation (1) and then.
197

J. Electrical Systems 7-2 (2011): 193-205

E di =

K Ai
1
( f i +
Pij )
(1 + S T d ci )
Bi

(8)

i,j = 1,2.
5.0 The Fuzzy Logic Based PI Controller for AGC
Fuzzy set theory and fuzzy logic establish the rules of a non-linear mapping. The use of
fuzzy sets provides a basis for a systematic way for the application of uncertain and
indefinite models. Fuzzy set is based on a logical system called fuzzy logic controller.
Because of the complexity and multi-variable conditions of the power system, conventional
control methods may not give satisfactory solutions. On the other hand, robustness and
reliability make the fuzzy logic controller useful in solving a wide range of control
problems. The fuzzy logic controller has two input signals, namely, ACE and ACE*, the
output signal (y) of the fuzzy logic controller is the input signal of the conventional PI
controller. Finally, the output signal from the conventional PI controller called the control
signal (u) is used for controlling the LFC in the interconnected power system.

The fuzzy logic controller is comprised of four main components: the fuzzifier, the
inference engine, the rule base, and the defuzzifier. By taking the system output, the control
signal for the FLPI controller is given by in designing the FLPI controller, important
procedures are how to obtain the PI gains, membership functions and control rules. The PI
gains have been determined easily, but the membership functions and the control rules are
difficult. Thus, to simplify solving this problem, this paper presents a new approach to
determine the PI gains, membership functions and control rules based on the TS algorithm
The membership functions of the fuzzy logic controller presented in Table.1 consist of
three memberships functions (two-inputs and one-output). Each membership function has
five memberships, comprising five triangular memberships. All memberships are selected
to describe all linguistic variables. For the determination of the control rules, it can be more
complicated than membership functions, which depend on the designer experiences and
actual physical system referred [. The FLPI controller uses the membership functions and
the control rules as shown in Figure3 and table 1 [17-20].Conventional controllers are
derived from control theory technique based on mathematical models of the open loop
process to be controlled. For instance, a conventional Proportional Integral controller can
be described by the function.
TABLE - 1 KNOWLEDGE BASE
ACE
NL
NS
ZE
PS
NL
NL
NS
NS
NL
NB
NL
NS
ZE
NS

Change
in ACE*

198

PL
ZE
ZE

ZE

NS

NS

ZE

PS

PS

PS

ZE

PS

PS

PL

PL

PL

ZE

ZE

PS

PL

PL

J.Raja et al: A Improved Power System Dynamic Performance Using SMES

U = K p + K i e dt

(9)
According to the conventional automatic theory. The performance of the PI controller is
determined by its proportional parameter KP and integral parameter KI. The proportional
controller provides control action equal to some of multiple of error, while the integral
controller term forces the steady state error to zero.
6.0 FUZZY-Logic Based Power System Stabilizer
Power system stabilizers (PSSs) are added to excitation system to enhance the damping
during low frequency oscillations. This paper presents a study of fuzzy logic based PI
controller with power system stabilizer (PSS) for stability enhancement of a single machine
power system. In order to accomplish the stability enhancement, speed deviation () and
acceleration () of the rotor of synchronous generator were taken as the input to the fuzzy
logic controller. This variable gives significant effects on damping of the generator shaft
mechanical oscillations. The stabilizing signals were computed using the fuzzy membership
functions depending on these variables.
TABLE-2 KNOWLEDGE BASE
LN
MN
Z
MP
Z
Z
MP
MP
LP
MN
Z
Z
MP
MP
MN
Z
Z
Z
Z
MN
MN
Z
Z
MN
LN

LN

MN

MN

LN

LP
MP
MP
MP
Z

The nonlinear model of single machine infinite bus system (SMIB) developed using
Simulink. After choosing proper variables as input and output of fuzzy controller, it is
required to decide on the linguistic variables. These variables transform the numerical
values of the input of the fuzzy controller to fuzzy quantities. The number of these
linguistic variables specifies the quality of the control which can be achieved using the
fuzzy controller. As the number of the linguistic variables increases, the Computational
time and required memory increase. Therefore, a compromise between the qualities of
control and computational time is needed to choose the number of linguistic variables. For
the power system under study, five linguistic variables for each of the input and output
variables are used to describe them in Large Negative (LN), Medium Negative (MN),
Zero(Z), Medium positive (MP), Large positive (LP).The two inputs; speed deviation and
acceleration, result in 25 rules for each machine. Decision in table 2 shows the result of 25
rules, where a positive control signal is for the deceleration control and a negative signal is
for acceleration control.
7.0 Simulation Results
Simulation study has been carried out by varying active and reactive power. The present
system model is new one and totally different form reference [5-8]. Fuzzy based SMES
system results are newly computed and compared with CPSS, PI controllers. The major
observations of the present works are as documented:
(i) Sensitivity Analysis
In this paper, the investigations are carried out to study the effect of power system by
varying system parameters like H, Tg, Tt, Kr, Tr, real and reactive power. the parameters are
199

J. Electrical Systems 7-2 (2011): 193-205

varied by 25% from the nominal values. From reference [5-8] results, the dynamic
response hardly changes by 25% variations in system parameters, for corresponding
optimum PI gains. But the Fuzzy controllers are quite robust for system parameter
variations. The table 3 clearly shows parameter variation should not affect the dynamic
response of the system.
Table -3 Sensitivity Analysis
Parameter variation
All nominal
Load Parameter
H parameter
Tg Parameter
Tt Parameter
Kr parameter
Tr parameter
P & Q Variations

Load

KP

KI

100%
30%
70%
75%
125%
75%
125%
75%
125%
75%
125%
75%
125%
30%
70%

5.326
6.431
6.213
6.332
7.236
7.523
7.653
4.882
7.123
4.775
7.865
3.851
7.995
3.261
4.163

0.050
0.085
0.073
0.045
0.086
0.048
0.087
0.046
0.066
0.043
0.088
0.049
0.091
0.025
0.043

(ii) Comparison of single stage and double stage reheat turbine for thermal unit

From figure 4(a) & (b), the optimal transient performance of the power system for thermal
unit with single stage reheat and double stage reheat turbine in the AGC loop coupled with
CPSS & PI plus AVR loop is portrayed both for 0.01 p.u. step perturbation in load torque,
operating condition being P=0.9, Q=0.1, Xe=0.4752, Et=1.0. From this figure, it is again
observed that while comparing the transient response profile of the power system for single
stage and double stage reheat turbine, it is clear that, both the turbine models yield the same
performance .Thus, it may be inferred that a double stage turbine can be modeled as a
single stage one

(iii) Comparison of electric and mechanical governor for hydro unit:

From figure 5 (a) and (b), a close look at the comparative performance characteristics of
electric governor and mechanical governor for hydro unit unveil that electric governor is
better than mechanical governor when system transient performance is of interest. In the
recent work carried out by Nanda et al.[2],a very fast oscillation in the performance of
mechanical governor while settling down the frequency deviation in the AGC loop is
noticed. However, in the present work, due to the assistance of PSS loop that very fast
oscillatory response is not present in mechanical governor .However, a very fast initial
oscillation for a short duration in electric governor is noticed due to system transient.
200

J.Raja et al: A Improved Power System Dynamic Performance Using SMES

(iv) Performance evaluation and comparative analysis of AGC (PI) with different AVR systems
(PI, CPSS, FUZZY).

Figure 6 (a), (b), (c) and (d) shows the optimal transient performance of power system with
various combination of AVR, corresponding to an operating condition of P=0.9,Q=0.1,
Xa=0.4752, Et=1.0 for thermal with single stage reheat turbine. Simulated results are
displayed in figure (a) to (d). From these results , it is noted that the importance of CPSS
action for either 0.01P.U step perturbation in reference voltage, the system transient
performance is better than PI controller, CPSS improves the dynamic performance and it
reduces settling time, peak over shoot. But compared to AVR with CPSS, fuzzy controller
reduces settling time faster manner, the Fuzzy with power system transient performance is
better than PI and CPSS.

(v) Performance evaluation and comparative analysis of Power System with Conventional
Controller and FUZZY controller.

Figures 7(a), (b) shows the optimal transient performance of power system with various
combination of AVR AGC with PI and Fuzzy controllers, corresponding to an operating
condition of P=0.9,Q=0.1, Xa=0.4752, Et=1.0 for thermal with single stage reheat turbine.
Simulated results are displayed, it is noted that the importance of Fuzzy action for either
0.01P.U step perturbation in reference voltage, the system transient performance is better

201

J. Electrical Systems 7-2 (2011): 193-205

than PI controller, CPSS improves the dynamic performance and it reduces settling time,
peak over shoot. But compared to AVR with CPSS, fuzzy controller reduces settling time
faster manner, the Fuzzy with power system transient performance is better than PI and
CPSS.

(vi)

Performance evaluation of SMES with single reheat thermal unit:

Figure 8 shows the simulation results, where the SMES is located at the generator terminal,
the optimal transient performance of the power system corresponding to an operating
condition of P=0.9, Q=0.1, Xe =0.4752, Et =1.0. For thermal unit with single stage reheat
turbine in the AGC loop. From this figure it is noticed that the fluctuation of voltage
suppressed although the damping of power oscillations are hardly improved. The damping
is improved when the active power control is used. In contrast with these, the fluctuation of
voltage is suppressed and damping is improved as well when the simultaneous control of
active and reactive power is applied. Due to the application of SMES action for either 0.01
p.u. step perturbation in reference voltage or that in load torque the system transient
performance is considerably improved and settling time Ts, Mp, Peak Time Tp are listed in
table 4 and corresponding controller gains are listed in table 5. The values of settling time
Ts, Mp, Peak Time Tp are reduced with the application of SMES.
In figure 8 the dynamic performance has been compared with and without SMES under
different types of controllers. The main task of SMES may be attributed from the action of
a sudden rise in the demand of load. Under this contingency condition, the stored energy in
SMES is almost immediately released through the PCS to the grid as line quality AC. As
the governor and other control mechanisms start working to set the power system to the

202

J.Raja et al: A Improved Power System Dynamic Performance Using SMES

new equilibrium condition. Thus, improved transient performance is gained with the
application of SMES in the interactive with AVR and AGC with different controllers.
Table -4 coordinated performance of AGC, AVR & SMES with Different Controllers.
AGC(PI)+AVR(PI)
AGC(PI)+AVR(PI)+SMES
AGC(PI)+AVR(CPSS)
AGC(PI)+AVR(CPSS)+SMES
AGC(FUZZY)+AVR(PI)
AGC(FUZZY)+AVR(PI)+SMES
AGC(FUZZY)+AVR(CPSS)
AGC(FUZZY)+AVR(CPSS)+SMES
AGC(FUZZY)+AVR(FUZZY)
AGC(FUZZY)+AVR(FUZZY)+SMES

Settling time
10.0
5.0
8.0
4.5
6.0
4.8
5.4
4.6
3.0
2.5

Peak over shoot

0.0066
0.0085
0.0025
0.0095
0.0015
0.0018
0.0016
0.0020
0.0026
0.0035

Rise time
1.00
0.05
0.05
0.06
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.04
0.05
1.00

Table 5: Coordinated Performance of CPSS, AGC, CPSS, AGC & SMES System
Performance Under 0.01P.U Step perturbation in Reference Voltage with different
operating condition
P.U

Type Of AGC

Thermal unit with single stage

reheat turbine
P=0.2
Q=-0.2
V=1.0

Thermal unit with double stage

reheat turbine
Hydro unit with electric governor
Hydro unit with mechanical
governor
Thermal unit with single stage
reheat turbine

P=0.6
Q=0.4
V=1.0

Thermal unit with double stage

reheat turbine
Hydro unit with electric governor
Hydro unit with mechanical
governor

System Model

CPSS & AGC

CPSS , AGC & SMES
CPSS & AGC
CPSS , AGC & SMES
CPSS&AGC
CPSS, AGC & SMES
CPSS&AGC
CPSS, AGC & SMES
CPSS & AGC
CPSS , AGC & SMES
CPSS & AGC
CPSS , AGC & SMES

0.01 P.U Step

KI
KP
5.3261
0.052
0.7995
0.193
6.3216
0.045
0.6569
0.168
6.3261
0.0453
0.5992
0.219
5.9261
0.085
0.6595
0.168
7.3261
0.052
0.9995
0.198

6.3261
0.8895

0.066
0.067

CPSS&AGC

6.3261

0.234

CPSS, AGC & SMES

CPSS&AGC
CPSS, AGC & SMES

0.8895
6.3261
0.5992

0.234
0.198
0.056

.
8.0 Conclusion
(a) Performance of thermal single stage and double stage reheat turbines are close to each
other in the context of transient analysis. Thus a single stage reheat may replace in a double
stage reheat for all the practical purposes. Similarly Electrical governor is superior to
mechanical governor and it yields better dynamic response with SMES.
(b) Superconducting magnetic energy storage units are successfully implemented for
improving small signal dynamic performance of the power system. Inclusion of SMES unit
in coordinated with AVR, CPSS and AGC loop with either single stage or double stage
reheat turbine improves the transient performance considerably. Due to inclusion of SMES
unit in the coordinated system configuration, same enhancement in the transient response
203

J. Electrical Systems 7-2 (2011): 193-205

occurs for the electric or mechanical governor installed in the hydro automatic generation
loop.
(c) Investigation reveal that the proposed Fuzzy controllers gains are quite robust , i.e
25% variation in system parameters, operating condition, etc from their nominal values
do not affect the system responses appreciably. Also this study reveals that the improved
dynamic stabilization action of SMES is always consistent under increase or decrease in
either reference voltage and /or load torque irrespective of the AGC configuration.
(d) In this study the fuzzy logic power system stabilizer is designed for Single Machine
Power System along with AGC. The performance of the power system with fuzzy logic
power system stabilizer, AGC loop is better one since it is effective for all test conditions. It
is shown that an excellent performance of the fuzzy control over the conventional one for
the excitation control of synchronous machines could be achieved.

9.0 References
[1] ANSI/IEEE std 122-1985, IEEE recommended practice for functional and performance
characteristics of control system for steam turbine generator units, The institute of EEE
USA,1985.
[2] P.Kundur,Power System Stability and Control, McGraw-Hill Inc, 1994.
[3] P.M.Anderson and A.A.Faurd, Power System Control & Stability, IEEE, Pres,
Revised printing, 1994.
[4] J.Nanda,A.Mangala,Automatic generation control of an interconnected hydro thermal
system using conventional integral and fuzzy logic controller, in: proceeding of the IEEE
international conference on electric utility deregulation, Restructuring and power
technologies, Hong Kong, 2004.
[5] J.Nanda,A.Mangala,S.Suri, Some New findings on Automatic generation control of an
interconnected hydro thermal system with conventional controllers, IEEE trans. Energy
Convers. 21 (March(1)) (2006) 187 -194.
[6] P.Ajay.D.Vimal Raj,J.Raj, S.Senthil Kumar, R.C.Bansal, Automatic Generation
Control of a Hydro-Thermal and Thermal-Thermal system in a Deregulated
Environment,Journal of electrical systems Volume 5,2009.
[7] H.J.Kunish, K.G.Krammer and H.Domonic Battery Energy Storage-Another Option
for Load Frequency Control & Instantaneous reserve, IEEE Trans on Energy conversion
Vol E-1, No.3.pp41-46,Sep 1986.
[8] H.J.Boeniig & J.F.Haur, Commissioning tests of the Bonneville power Administration
30 MJ super conducting Magnetic storage unit, IEEE Trans on power apparatus &
systems. Vol.PAS-104,No.2.PP 302-312. Feb 1982.
[9] Banarjee.J.K, Chatterjee and S.C.Tripathy, Application of Magnetic energy storage
units as Load Frequency Control Stabilizers, IEEE Trans, on energy
conversion,Vol.5.No.1,pp481-501,March 1990.
[10] Kwa-Sur Tam and Prem kumar,Application of super magnetic energy storage in an
asynchronous link between power system,IEEE Trans on Energy conversion,vol.5,
No.3.Sep1971.
[11] H.A. Peterterson, N.Mohan and R.W.Boom, Super Conductive energy storage
Inductor-Converter Units for power system, IEE Trans. On Power apparatus and systems,
Vol. PAS-94,No.4,PP 1337-1348, July/August 1975.
[12] R.J. Loyd, J.D.Rogers et al., A feasibility utility scale superconducting Magnetic
Storage Plant, IEEE Trans. On Energy conversion, Vol. EC-1, No.4, PP 63-64, Dec 1986.
[13] O.I Elgerd, Electric Energy System Theory: An Introduction, McGraw Hill, 1982.

204

J.Raja et al: A Improved Power System Dynamic Performance Using SMES

[14] Y.Mitani, K.Tsuji, Y.Murakami, Application of Superconducting Magnetic Energy

storage to improve power system dynamic performanceIEEE trans. On power system, Vol
3,No.4-1988.
[15] S.C. Tripathy, R.Balasubramaniam, P.S. Chandramohan Nair, Effect of
Superconducting Magnetic Energy Storage on Automatic Generation Control Considering
Governer Dead band and Boiler dynamics.IEEE tran. On power system Vol 7,Aug 1992.
[16] S.C. Tripathy, R.Balasubramanian,P.S. Chandramohan Nair , Small rating capacitive
energy storage for dynamic performance improvement of automatic generation control,
IEE proceedings, Vol 138,Jan 1991.
[17] J.Nanda and Mangala,AGC of an Interconnected Hydro- Thermal using conventional
and Fuzzy logic controller, 2004 IEEE international conference on Electric utility
deregulation April 2004,Hong Kong.
[18] D. K. Sambariya, R. Gupta, A. K. Sharma fuzzy applications to single machine power
system stabilizers Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 2005
2009 JATIT.
[19] G.A.Chown, R.C.Hartman, Design and expcrience with a Fuzzy Logic Controllcr for
Automatic Generation Control (AGC), IEEE Transaction on Power System, Vol.-13, No.
3, Aug. 1998, pp 965-970.
[20] C.S.Indulkar, Baldev Raj, Application of Fuzzy Controllcr to Automatic Generation
Control, Electric Machine and Power System, 23:209-220, 1995.
[21] V.Mukherjee,S.P.Ghoshal, Applications of Capactive energy storage for transient
performance improvement of power system,Electric power systems research 2008.
[22] E.W.Kimbark Direct current transmission,Vol. I,(book), john wiley,1971.
[23] Manoranjan Parida, J.Nanda, Automattic Generation control of a Hydro Thermal
system in Deregulated environment.
10.0 Appendix
SMIB data: Xd=0.973, Xd=0.19, Ka=50, Ta=0.05s.
AGC loop time constant: R= 2.4 Hz/per unit MW, B = 0.275, D=0.0, Xq=0.55,Tdo=7.765s, H=4.63,
Re=0, Xe=0.997.
Single Stage Reheat turbine data: Tg=0.08s, Tt=0.3s, e=0.35.
Double Stage Reheat turbine data: Tr1=10s, Tr2=10s, Tt=0.3s, Kr1=0.2, Kr2=0.2.
Stabilizer datas at Different Operating Conditions (P, Q & V Variations)
CASE-I: P=0.9 P.U, Q=0.1 P.U, V=1.0 P.U.
K1=0.6067, K2=1.0065, K3=0.6025, K4=0.3625, K5=-0.1076 , K6=0.7604.
CASE-II: P=1.0 P.U, Q=0.8 P.U, V=1.0 P.U.
K1=-0.3140, K2=-0.8455, K3=0.6025, K4=-0.3045, K5=0.1712, K6=0.7846.
CASE-III: P=0.25 P.U, Q=0.8 P.U, V=1.0 P.U.
K1=0.1803, K2=0.2252 , K3=0.6025, K4=0.0811, K5=-0.0366, K6=0.8361.
Conventional Power System Stabilizer fixed data : Tww=10s, Td2=0.05s, Td4=0.05s. The Optimized
Gain parameter for a step load of 0.01P.U in area1.Refered in [2], [16].
SMES Data: When the Frequency deviation is used as the SMES contol signal- Ki1=0.875, KF1=35
Kw/Hz, Kid=0.20 Kw/KA
When ACE is Used as the SMES Control Signal: KI1=0.70, Kb1=50Kv/Unit ACE, Kid=0.20Kv/KA.

205