Load Frequency Control of Two-Area Electric Power System

Using Gain Schedule PI Fuzzy Logic Controller

T. Hussein
Electrical and Electronic Engineering Department, University of Benghazi
Benghazi, Libya
tawfiq.elmenfy@uob.edu.ly,

Abstract- The use of Proportional Integral (PI) Load Frequency Controller (LFC) to ensure the stable and reliable operation
of electric power system is practical important. Any imbalance between synchronous generators and consumption loads
will cause frequency unstable within the complete power system. The purpose of the Load Frequency Control (LFC) is to
keep the power system frequency and the inter-area tie power as near equilibrium point. This paper introduce gain schedule
PI fuzzy load frequency control (GLFC) applying to two area electric power system. The GLFC consists of two level
control systems, where the PI controller in the conventional form and its parameters are tuned in real time by fuzzy
systems. Fuzzy rule base is constructed in the form set of IF-THEN that describe how to choose the PI parameters under
different operating conditions. The simulation has been conducted in MATLAB Simulink package. The effectiveness of the
GLFC is measured by comparison with conventional PI load frequency controller.
Keywords: Two area power system, Load frequency control, Conventional PI controller and Fuzzy logic controller.
I. INTRODUCTION
Frequency will be fixed in power system if there is
balance between generators and customer demand. The
frequency of the power system is dependent on active
power balance. As frequency is a common factor
throughout the power system, a change in active power
demand at one point is reflected throughout the power
system by a change in frequency. Because there are many
generators supplying power into the grid, these generators
must be provided with LFC to control the generators
output and maintain the frequency at preset value[1].
The gas turbines power plants had been used to improve
the load frequency control in power system. The amount of
these gas turbine plants must be distributed uniformly on
the grid.
In case of frequency drop at power plants the automatic
LOAD-SHEEDING should initiate the first stage to
frequency not lower that 49Hz with minmum 10 to 20%
of the load and the load/frequency controller at power
plants should try to recover the frequency balance between
power generation and power demand by increase the
megawatts of own generator to compensated the load
demand.
However, if the load frequency control is lack to recover
the frequency balancing, and the frequency of generators

drops up to 47.5 Hz, the power stations automatically trip

at this frequency without time delay. Running of power
plants below this frequency are dangerous, and will cause
(danger vibrations and damage of the turbine blades).
In practical systems, the conventional PI controllers are
used to control Load Frequency Control. To avoids the
drawbacks of PI controllers, Numerous techniques have
been introduced in the literatures. A fuzzy type controller
is considered for LFC is introduced in [2], the upper and
lower bounds of membership functions are obtained by
genetic algorithm. A genetic algorithm (GA) based fuzzy
gain scheduling is proposed in [3], a fuzzy system is used
to adaptively decide the PI controller gain, to reduce the
number of fuzzy rule base, the fuzzy system designed by
automatically by genetic algorithm. The interconnected
two area systems are modeled and simulated be PI fuzzy
controller with sliding gain for improved performance
specification like settling time and overshoot is introduced
in [4]. Control methodology developed using conventional
PI controller, Artificial Neural Network (ANN) AND
Fuzzy Logic controller (FLC) for three area interconnected
power system is introduced in [5]. A comparison of
proposed controller shows the superiority of the proposed
controller over conventional PI controller. power system

load frequency control by modified dynamic neural

networks controller proposed by [6]. the controller in [6]
has dynamic neurons in hidden layer and conventional
neurons in other layers. For considering the sensitivity of
power system model, the neural network emulator used to
identify the model simultaneously with control process.
new robust load frequency controller for two area
interconnected power system is presented in [7]. The
Genetic algorithm (GA) controller designed in [7] consists
of two crisp inputs namely deviation of frequency and the
other is derivative of frequency deviation. The output of
the Genetic algorithm controller is the control input to each
area. The paper in [8] studies control of load frequency in
single and two area power systems with fuzzy like PID
controller. In [8] the study, multi-objective genetic
algorithm is used to determine the parameters of the fuzzy
like PID controller according to the system dynamics, the
controller has been compared with the conventional PID
controllers tuned by Ziegler-Nicholasmethod and Particle
Swarm Optimization technique. The overshoots and
settling times with the proposed Genetic-PID controller are
superior to the outputs of the same characteristics of the
conventional PID controllers.

The governors have higher speed ( ) at no load than

speed ( ) at rated 100% load. The governors has percent
regulation as shown in Fig. 1.

System
Frequency

(%)
105

0%
Regulation
100
5%
Regulation

10%
Regulation

95

Droop of a Generator (Speed Droop Governor)

Where
: frequency deviation

100

50

The term droop of generator in the power plant is the

amount of frequency that is necessary to cause the power
plant servomotor to change from fully closed to open
closed[9]. In general the droop of generator ( turbine
mechanical speed) can be expressed with the following
ratio:

Active output power

(%)

Fig. (1): Regulation of the speed Droop Governors

Speed Regulation (

):

The term speed regulation refers to the amount of speed or

frequency change that is necessary to cause the output of
the synchronous generator to change from zero output to
full output. In contrast with droop of a generator, ths speed
regulation focuses on the output of the generator, rather
than the position of power plant servomotors. For
example, if speed regulation ( ) is 10% that means 10%
speed change causes a MW change of 100% [1][8].

: rated frequency
: active output power

II. CONCEPTS OF GAIN SCHEDULING OF PID

CONTROLER UZING FUZZY SYSTEM

: rated active output power

One form of controller widely used in industrial process
control is called a three terms of Proportional-IntegralDerivative (PID) controller [10]. The PID controllers are

the most commonly used in industrial process control. The

PID controller has the following formula:

Consider the two-level control system [11], where the PID

controller is the main controller and its gains are tuned by fuzzy
system on-line.
Let that the ranges
,
and
,
such that proportional gain
and
. For convenience,
are normalized to
the range between zero and one by next formulas:

Where:
Proportional gain.
: Integration time.
: Derivative time
= set point- process measurement.
Let the integral time constant is directly proportional with the
derivative time constant:

By taking the Laplace transformation of eq. (1)

From Eq. (6) we get:

Where:
: Integration gain
Derivative gain
The success of the PID controller depends on an
appropriate choice of the PID controller gains. The PID
gains are usually tuned by experienced of human based on
" rule of thumb".

Hence, the parameters to be tuned by the fuzzy system are

These parameters can be determined by eq.(4),
eq.(5) and eq.(6).
Assume that the inputs to the fuzzy systems are speed
, so every fuzzy system turner
(
consists of two inputs and one output as shown in Fig. (2)

The system can be modeled by the following form:

We will first determine tuning rules base (IF-THEN
Rules) for the PID gains by analyzing a typical response of
the system, and then combine these rules into a fuzzy
system that is used to adjust the PID gains on-line. We will
follow approach proposed in [11].

Fuzzy
Systems

Eq. (4)

Fuzzy
Systems

Eq. (5)

.(8)

Where: A, B & D are the system, the input and the

system disturbance matrixes.
are state, control signal and load
change disturbance.
The system output depends on the objective function
which is Integral Absolute Error (IAE) can be given as:

Fuzzy
Systems

Eq. (7)

Fig. (2): Two-Level fuzzy logic control

.(9)

The control signal for the fuzzy like PI controller can be

given as:

The proposed (GLFC) is shown in APPENDIX A.

-3

III.SIMULATION RESULTS

2
0

speed deviation (pu)

In this section the proposed gain schedule PI load

frequency controller (GLFC) is applied to two area electric
power system. In order to comparison of the proposed
technique and illustrate the effectiveness of the GLFC
controller, another PI load frequency controller which is
tuned by the Ziegler & Nichols is designed and applied to
the system. Fig. 3 shows Simulink model of two-area
electric power system with proposed (GLFC). The
paramters of of two-area electric power system connected
by tie line are shown in APPENDIX B.

x 10

-2
speed deviaiton area 2
speed deviaiton area1

-4
-6
-8
-10

10

15
t(sec)

20

25

30

Fig. (5): Speed deviation step response by GLFC

0.35
power deviation area1
power deviation area2
power deviation tie line

0.3

In1

B1=1/R1+D1
Out1

In2

20

In3
Out2

In4

Sum6

DPL

1/R1

PI FUZZY
1
s
1
s

Product1

Integrator4

.3

Integrator1

ACE1

Manual Switch1

Sum1

KI1

DP

Mux

t, Pm1, Pm2, P12

Mux3

0.2s+1

0.5s+1

Governor 1

Turbine 1

1
10s+0.6
Sum

0
-0.05

Mux2

2
Gain

1
s

0.1
0.05

Clock1

Scope 2

Clock

1
s
Integrator

KI2
Sum4
Manual Switch

0.3s+1

0.6s+1

Governor 2

Turbine 2

Mux Mux

1/R2

Dw
B2=1/R2+D2

t
Dw1
Dw2

Simulation block diagram for Example 12.5

Fig. (3):Simulink model of two-area electric power system with

proposed (GLFC)

The following simulations were performed in order to

investigate the performance of the proposed GLFC over
the conventional integral (PI) controller with 2% change in
load of each area.

power deviation area 1

power deviation area 2
power deviation tie line

0.3
0.25

x 10

-2
-4
speed deviaiton area 2
speed deviaiton area 1

-6
-8
-10
-12
-14

10

15
t(sec)

20

25

30

Fig. (7): Speed deviation step response by PI

Table (1): Comparison results for GLFC & Conventional PI of

power deviation response with 0.2 step input change
Controller
IAE
GLFC
9.04
PI
Conventional
10.14

0.35

power deviation (pu)

30

Scope 1

16.9

Product

25

-3

Dw1
Dw2

speed deviation (pu)

Sum5
1
s

20

Fig. (6): Power deviation step response by PI

16

Integrator3

15
t(sec)

dw

Mux Mux1

Out2

PI FUZZY1

10

Subsystem5

Inertia & load 2

Out1

In3
In4

8s+0.9
Sum3

In1
In2

Sum2

.3

Integrator2

0.2
0.15

Inertia & load 1

Mux

ACE2

0.25

power deviation (pu)

20.6

0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
-0.05

10

15
t(sec)

20

25

Fig. (4): Power deviation step response by GLFC

30

Table (2): Comparison results for GLFC & Conventional PI of

speed deviation response with 0.2 step input change
Controller
IAE
GLFC
0.0009
PI
Conventional
0.002

Form the above tables it is clear that responses obtained

from Gain schedule Fuzzy LFC (GLFC) gives better
response than conventional PI controller .

Conclusion
In this study, a Ziegler & Nichols is used to tuning
conventional PI controller which has been investigated for
automatic Load Frequency Control of a two-area electric
power system.
Secondly, Gain schedule PI fuzzy load frequency control
(GLFC) have been designed and successfully proposed to
Load Frequency Control of a two-area electric power
system. The proposed method was applied to a typical twoarea electric power system.
.

Figs. (4) & (5) respectively shows that the power

deviation response in the tie line between two area and the
speed deviation response for two area when (GLFC) is
applied.
Figs. (6) & (7) respectively shows that the power
deviation response in the tie line between two area and the
speed deviation response for two area when Conventional
PI controller is applied.
.
Simulation results demonstrated that the (GLFC) controller
capable to guarantee the robust stability and robust
performance. The performance of the proposed controller
was investigated and compared with the conventional PI
controller one through dynamic simulations of a two- area
electric power system.
Then A comparison between the proposed (GLFC) and a
well-tuned conventional PI LFC confirms the superiority
of the proposed (GLFC)

References:
[1]. M. Zaki El-Sadek Power System Contrl
Muchtar press, Assiut, Egypt, 2004.
[2]. S. Moitaba, S. Boroujeni, R. Hemmati and H.
Fayazi Load Frequency Control in Multi Area
Electric Power System Using Genetic Algorithm
Scaled Fuzzy Logic International Journal of the
Physics Sciences Vol. 6(3), 377-385, 4 Feb., 2011.
[3]. C. Juang and C. Lu Power System Load
Frequency Control By Genetic Fuzzy Gain
Scheduling Controller Journal of the Chinese

Institute of Engineers, Vol. 28, No., 6, pp. 10131018 2005.

[4]. S. Prakash, Sunil Kumar, A. Shekhar and B.
Singh Impact of Slider Gain on Load Frequency
Control Using Fuzzy Logic Controller ARPN
Journal of Engineering and Applied Science, Vol.
4, No. 7, Sept. 2009.
[5]. S. Parakash and S. Sinha Load Frequency
Control of Three Area Interconnected Hyrothermal Reheat Power System Using Artificial
Intelligent and PI controllers International
Journal of Engineering, Science and Technology,
Vol. 4 No. 1, pp 23-37, 2001.

[6]. K.Sabahi, M. Nekoui, M.Teshnehlab, M.Aliyari

and M.Mansouri Load Frequency Control in
Interconnected Power System Using Modified
Dynamic Neural Networks proceeding of 15th
Mediterranean Conference on Control &
Automation, Athens, Greece July 27-29, 2007.
[7]. B. Venkata, S. V. Jayaram Load Frequency
Control for a Two Arae Interconnected Power
System Using Robust
Genetic Algorithm
Controller Journal of Theoretical and Applied
Information Technology, 2008.

[8]. M. A. Tammam, M. A. Aboelela, M. A.

Mustafa, A. E.; Seif " Fuzzy Like-PID Controller
Tuned By Multi-objective Genetic Algorithm for
Load Frequency Controller in Nonlinear Electric
Power Systems" International Journal of
Advanced in Engineering and Technology, Nov.
2012.
[9]. WECC Tutorial on Speed Governors, WECC
Control Work Group February 1998, WECC
Name Revised June 2002.
[10]. Z. Bubnicki,"Modern Control Theory" Springer
Berlin Heidelberg New York 2005.
[11]. Li-Xin Wang " A Course in Fuzzy Systems and
Control" Printic-Hall 1997.

APPENDIX (A)

pb
pm

Product

ps

Table (3) A two-area electric power system

line has the following parameters

connected by tie

dw

dw

ns

Product1

nm
nb

mf1
Product2

Area
Speed regulation
Frequency sensitive
Inertia constant
Base power
Governor time const.

One

Two
Product3

pb
ps

MATLAB
Function

MATLAB Fcn

pm

dp

Product4

ns

dp

Product7

Out1
Dot Product

nm

1000 MVA

1000 MVA

nb

mf2
Product5

Turbine time const.

Product6
-CConstant

APPENDIX (B)
Fig.(9) :Sub-model of (GLFC)

The Gain Schedule PI Fuzzy Load Frequency Control (.GLFC)

Simulink, Rule base and 7-membership function.
Table (3): Fuzzy-logic PSS rules

LN

MN

SN

SP

MP

LP

f(u)

pb

px1

LN
MN
SN
Z
SP
MP
LP

LN
LN
LN
MN
MN
SN

LN
LN
MN
MN
SN
Z

LN
MN
MN
SN
Z
SP

LN
MN
SN
Z
SP
MP

MN
SN
Z
SP
MP
MP

SN
Z
SP
MP
MP
LP

Z
SP
MP
MP
LP
LP

SP

MP

LP

LP

LP

LP

f(u)

pm

px2

f(u)

ps

px3

4
1

f(u)

dw

zx1

z
5

f(u)

ns

nx1
5

dw

-K-

Upss

kw2

kw
2

Out1
dp

kp

f(u)

dw

nm

nx2

2
dp

7
f(u)

Subsystem2

nb

nx3
delta w

Fig.(8) : Gain Schedule PI Fuzzy load frequency (GLFC)

Fig.(10) : Seven Membership Function (simulink)

LN

MN SN

SP

MP

LP

Fig. (11): Fuzzy variable, Xi, seven membership function