Decentralized fractional order PID controller for Automatic Generation

control of multi-source power systems with Deregulated Power System

Abstract
In this paper, a Differential Evolution (DE) optimized Fractional Order Proportional Integral
Derivative (FOPID)/PID/Optimal controllers are proposed for Automatic Generation Control (AGC) of two
area multi source power system with/without HVDC link. The multi sources in each area include thermal,
hydro and gas power plant. To make the power system more realistic, a time delay parameter has been
included in the system model. The optimum gains of the FOPID/PID/Optimal controller with/without
HVDC links are optimized employing DE technique. The FOPID controller has five parameters to be tuned;
consequently it gives two more degrees of freedom in comparison with the conventional PID and Optimal
controller. The superiority of proposed FOPID controller is demonstrated by comparing the results with PID
and optimal controllers for the same interconnected power system. Additionally, sensitivity analysis is
carried out by varying the operating load condition and system parameters in the range of +25% to -25%
from their nominal values as well as the size and position of step load perturbation to demonstrate the
robustness of the proposed DE optimized FOPID controller. Finally the proposed approach is investigated
under randomly varying load disturbances.
Keywords: Load Frequency Control (LFC); MATLAB simulink; Differential Evolution (DE); Fractional Order
PID controller; DC tie line; Time delay.

1.1.

Literature Survey
1.1.1. Overview of LFC schemes and Review of Literature
The first attempt in case of LFC has to control the power system frequency by the help of
the governor. This technique of governor control was not sufficient for the stabilization of the system. So,
an extra supplementary control technique was introduced to the governor by the help of a variable
proportional directly

to the deviation of frequency plus its integral. This scheme contains classical
1

approach of Load Frequency Control (LFC) of power system. Cohn has done earlier works in the important
area of LFC. Concordia et al [1] and Cohn [2] have described the basic importance of frequency and
tie line power and tie line bias control in case of interconnected power system.
The revolutionary concept of optimal control (optimal regulator) for LFC of an interconnected power
system was first started by Elgerd[3]. There was a recommendation from the North American Power
Systems Interconnection Committee (NAPSIC) that, each and every control area should have to set its
frequency bias coefficient is equal to the Area Frequency Response Characteristics (AFRC). But Elgerd and
Fosha [3-4] argued seriously on the basis of frequency bias and by the help of optimal control methods thy
presented that for lower bias settings, there is wider stability margin and better response. They have also
proved that a state variable model on the basis of optimal control method can highly improvise the stability
margins and dynamic response of the load frequency control problem.
The standard definitions of the different terms for LFC of power system are heaving
the approval by the IEEE STANDARDS Committee in 1968 [5]. The dynamic model
Suggestions were described thoroughly by IEEE PES working groups [5-6]. On the basis of
experiences with real implementation of LFC schemes, various modifications to the ACE definition
were suggested time to time to cope with the changing environment of power system [7, 8, 9, and
10].
R. K. Green [9] discussed a new formulation of LFC principles. He has given a Concept of transformed
LFC, which is heaving the capability to eliminate the requirement of bias setting, by controlling directly the
set point frequency of each unit.
1.1.2. Literature on LFC Related Power System Model
For more than last three decades researches are going on load frequency control of power
system. Linearized models of multi area (including two areas) power systems are considered so far for
best performance.
2

K. C. Divya et al [11] has presented the hydro- hydro Power system simulation model. They have
taken an assumption of same frequencies of all areas, to overcome the difficulties of extending the
traditional approach. The model was obtained by ignoring the difference in frequencies between the control
areas.
E. C. Tacker et al [12] has discussed the LFC of interconnected power system and investigated the
formulation of LFC via linear control theory. A comparison between three relatives was made to the
ability for motivation of the transient response of system variables. Later, the effect of Generation Rate
Constraint (GRC) was introduced in these studies, considering both discrete and continuous power
system.
B. oni et al [13] described the effect of implementation of nonlinear tie line bias characteristic.
Using UMC hybrid simulator this type of study is performed to simulate a typical type of power
system voltage and frequency sensitivity, governor dead band of loads.
1.1.3. Literature Review on LFC Related to Control Techniques
The continuing work by numerous numbers of engineers of control engineering has generated links between
the closed loop transient response (in time domain) and frequency response. The research is carried over
using different classical control techniques.
A large number of studies have been carried out for an effective AGC regulator design [1, 2], including the
pioneering works by Elgerd and Fosha [3,4].Literature study reveals that several control strategies have been
proposed by many researchers over the past decades for AGC of power system in order to maintain the
system frequency and tie line power flow at their scheduled values during normal and disturbed conditions
under deregulated environments. The control techniques such as conventional [5] and optimal control [6]
have been proposed for AGC. R. K. Cavin et al [7] has considered the problem of LFC for an
interconnected system from the theory of optimal stochastic system point of view. Literature survey
shows that most of the researchers applied optimal control theory on thermal power systems with AC
3

tie lines only [3,8,9]. However in [10] optimal control theory has been applied to realistic power system
model with both parallel AC/DC tie lines. The use of high voltage direct current (HVDC) to transmit bulk
power over long distance has received increasing attention in recent years. HVDC possess attractive features
such as fast controllability of power in HVDC lines through convertor control, ability to reduce transient
stability problems associated with AC tie lines and other economic advantages. Due to the slow response of
the governor and IPPs, the classical controllers are incapable to attenuate the large changes in frequency
oscillations. Thus stabilization of frequency oscillations becomes challenging and greatly expected in the
prospect competitive market. As a result sophisticated control design is necessary in AGC in order to
stabilizing frequency oscillation.
Now days the proportional integral derivative controller (PID) is the most popular feedback controller used
in the process industries. It is a robust, easily understood controller that can provide excellent control
performance despite the varied dynamic characteristics of process plant. As the name suggests, the PID
algorithm consists of three basic modes, the proportional mode, the integral and the derivative modes. A
proportional controller has the effect of reducing the rise time, but never eliminates the steady-state error. An
integral control has the effect of eliminating the steady-state error, but it may make the transient response
worse. A derivative control has the effect of increasing the stability of the system, reducing the overshoot,
and improving the transient response. Proportional integral (PI) controllers are the most often type used
today in industry. A control without derivative (D) mode is used when: fast response of the system is not
required, large disturbances and noises are present during operation of the process and there are large
transport delays in the system. PID controllers are used when stability and fast response are required.
Derivative mode improves stability of the system and enables increase in proportional gain and decrease in
integral gain which in turn increases speed of the controller response. However, when the input signal has
sharp corners, the derivative term will produce unreasonable size control inputs to the plant. Also, any noise
in the control input signal will result in large plant input signals. These reasons often lead to complications in
practical applications.

With introduction of fractional calculus Podlubny given a more flexible structure PID by extended in
traditional notion of PID controllers [11]with the controller gains define the fractional differ-integrals as
design variables. To design PID controllers dominant pole placement based optimization problems have
been attempted using Differential Evolution in Maiti et al. [12], Biswas et al. [13] and Invasive Weed
Optimization with Stochastic Selection (IWOSS) in Kundu et al. [14]. Maiti et al. [15] also tuned a FOPID
controller for stable minimum phase systems by minimizing an integral performance index i.e. ITAE criteria
with Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO). A similar approach has been adopted for optimization of a
weighted sum of Integral of Absolute Error (IAE) and ISCO to find out the controller parameters with
GA by Cao, Liang & Cao [16] and with PSO by Cao & Cao [21]. Luo & Li [17] tuned a similar ITAE
based PID controller with Bacterial Foraging oriented by Particle Swarm Optimization (BF-PSO).
Ou, Song & Chang [18] designed a FOPID controller for First Order Plus Time Delay (FOPTD) systems
using Radial Basis Function (RBF) neural network where the controller gains and differential-integral orders
can be determined from the time constant and delay of the process after the neural network is trained with a
large set of FOPID parameters and system parameters. The approach in [19] also proposes an

H -optimal

FOPID controller by putting the infinity norm of the weighted sensitivity and complementary sensitivity
functions as an inequality constraint to the objective function that in [16]. Lee & Chang [20, 21] used
Improved Electromagnetism with Genetic Algorithm (IEMGA) to minimize the Integral of Squared Error
(ISE) while searching for optimal PID parameters. Pan et al. [22] used evolutionary algorithms for time
domain tuning of PID controllers to cope with the network induced packet drops and stochastic
delays in NCS applications.

2.

Introduction.
For satisfactory operation of a power system, the frequency should remain nearly constant.
Frequency control ensures constancy of speed of induction motors and synchronous motors. A
considerable drop in frequency could result in high magnetizing currents in induction motors and
5

transformers. The wide-spread use of electric clocks and the use of frequency for other timing purposes
require accurate maintenance of synchronous time which is proportional to frequency as well as its integral
[1]. Under steady-state conditions the total power generated by power stations is equal to the system load
and losses. However, the users of the electric power change the loads randomly and momentarily. This
results in sudden appearance of generation-load mismatches. The mismatch power enters into/drawn for
the rotor thus causing a change generator speed and hence the system frequency (as frequency is closely
related to the generator speed). In an interconnected power system, as a power load demand varies
randomly, both area frequency and tie-line power interchange also vary. It is impossible to maintain the
balances between generation and load without control. So, a control system is essential to cancel the
effects of the random load changes and to keep the frequency at the standard value. The Load Frequency
Control (LFC) loop continuously regulates the active power output of the generator to match with the
randomly varying load. The objectives of LFC are to minimize the transient deviations in area frequency
and tie-line power interchange and to ensure their steady state errors to be zeros [2-4]. LFC is one of the
major issues in electrical power system design/operation and is becoming much more critical recently with
growing size, varying structure and complexity in interconnected power system [5].
In a practically interconnected power system, the generation normally comprises of a mix of thermal,
hydro, nuclear and gas power generation. On the other hand, owing to their high efficiency, nuclear plants
are generally kept at base load close to their maximum output with no participation in the system LFC. Gas
power generation is ideal for meeting the varying load demand. Gas plants are used to meet peak demands
only. Keeping in view the present power scenario, combination of multi-source generators in a control area
with their corresponding participation factors and considerations of Time Delay (TD) associated with both
communication channels and signal processing simultaneously is more realistic for the study of LFC [6].
According to practical point of view, the load frequency control problem of interconnected power
system is much more important than the isolated (single area) power systems.
The researchers in the world over are trying to propose several control strategies for LFC of power
systems in order to maintain the system frequency and tie line power flow at their scheduled values during
6

normal operation and also during random load perturbations. Literature study reveals that several control
strategies have been proposed by many researchers over the past decades for LFC of power system [7-17]. In
1970 the concept of modern optimal control for AGC in an interconnected power system was introduced by
Elgerd [3]. Gozde and Taplamacioglu [8] proposed a gain scheduling PI controller for an AGC system
consisting of two area thermal power system with governor dead-band nonlinearity. The authors have
employed a Craziness based Particle Swarm Optimization (CRAZYPSO) with different objective functions
to minimize the settling times and standard error criteria. In [9], AGC using DE optimized ideal 2-DOF PID
controller has been presented. In [10], several classical controllers structures such as Integral (I),
Proportional Integral (PI), Integral Derivative (ID), PID and Integral Double Derivative (IDD) have been
applied and their performance has been compared for an AGC system. Elyas [11] proposed an intelligent
linear-quadratic optimal output feedback regulator for AGC in a deregulated environment where PSO and
Imperialist Competitive Algorithm (ICA) based linear-quadratic output feedback regulator are employed to
calculate the global optimal gain matrix of controller. A sub-optimal AGC regulator is proposed by Ibraheem
et al. [12] for a two identical thermal area system with reheat thermal turbines and is interconnected via
parallel AC/DC links using output feedback control strategy. A coordinator design scheme is proposed in
[13] so as to enhance joint operation of the pitch angle regulation and the dump load for AGC of isolated
power system with wind generators and flywheel energy storage system. Frequency regulation in a hybrid
power system by H and iterative proportional-integral-derivative H based approach using linear matrix
inequalities is presented in [14]. Parmar et al. have reported in [15] a multi-sources generation including
thermal-hydro-gas systems, considering HVDC link connected in parallel with existing AC link for
stabilizing frequency oscillation and used an optimal output feedback controller for frequency stabilization.
Mohanty et al. [16] have studied the controller parameters tuning of DE algorithm and its application to
optimize the parameters of I, PI and PID controllers of multi-sources power system. The authors have
demonstrated the superiority of DE approach over optimal output feedback controller for the same power
systems. Recently, Ibraheem et al.[17] have studied the optimal control theory to realistic power system
model with/without HVDC link connected in parallel with existing AC link. The authors have not considered
7

the important physical constraints such as Time Delay (TD) in the system model which affect the power
system performance. Thus to get an accurate insight of the LFC problem, it is essential to include the
important physical constraints in the system model. This needs further comprehensive study with the
consideration of TD and random load disturbances.
In recent times, the fractional order controller finds potential applications in the field of engineering
and science [18-22]. The FOPID controller is the expansion of the conventional PID controller based on
fractional calculus. In fractional order PID controller, proportional (K P), integral (KI), derivative (KD)
gains, integral order () and derivative order () as design specifications which provide superior flexibility
in controller design. A number of methods have been used in the literature for tuning FOPID [23-28].
It is observed from literature survey, that there is still scope of work on investing new controller
structures and evolutionary optimization techniques for better performance. Hence, proposing and
implementing new control structures and high performance heuristic optimization algorithms to real world
problems are always welcome. For any meta-heuristic algorithm, a good balance between exploitation and
exploration during search process should be maintained to achieve good performance. DE being a global
optimizing method is designed to explore the search space and most likely gives an optimal/near-optimal
solution if used alone.
In view of the above, a maiden attempt has been made in this paper to apply a DE optimization
technique to tune the FOPID/PID/Optimal output feedback controller for the LFC of multi area multi
source power systems with/without HVDC link. In order to have a more realistic power system the time
delay parameter is included in the system model. The superiority of the proposed FOPID controller is
shown by comparing the results with conventional PID controller and optimal controller for the same
interconnected power system. The effectiveness of the proposed controllers with the change in system
parameters or loading conditions is assessed for the system under study. It is observed that the proposed
controllers are robust with wide variation in system parameter and loading condition. Finally the LFC
performance under random load perturbation has been investigated with the proposed approach.

3.

Material and method

3.1 System under study

The system under investigation consists of two area power system interconnected by a transmission
line. Each area comprises reheat thermal, hydro and gas generating units. Each control area has its
regulation parameter and participation factor which decide the contribution to the nominal loading.
Summation of participation factor of each control should be equal to 1. The transfer function model of
system under study is shown in Fig. 1 [17]. The nominal parameters of the system are taken from reference
[17] and given in Appendix. In Fig. 1, RT, RH and RG are the regulation parameters of thermal, hydro and
gas units respectively. TG is speed governor time constant of thermal unit in sec, TT is steam turbine time
constant in sec, TW is nominal starting time of water in penstock in sec, TR is the hydro turbine speed
governor reset time in sec, TRH is hydro turbine speed governor transient droop time constant in sec, TGH is
hydro turbine speed governor main servo time constant in sec, X is the lead time constant of gas turbine
speed governor in sec, Y is the lag time constant of gas turbine speed governor in sec, c is the gas turbine
valve positioner, b is the gas turbine constant of valve positioner, TF is the gas turbine fuel time constant in
sec, TCR is the gas turbine combustion reaction time delay in sec, TCD is the gas turbine compressor
discharge volume-time constant in sec, KP power system gain in Hz/pu MW, TP is the power system time
constant in sec, F is the incremental change in frequency and PD incremental load change. PD1 and
PD 2 are the load demand changes of area 1 and 2 respectively; PTie is the incremental change in tie

line power (p.u); T12 is the synchronizing coefficient and F1 and F2 are the system frequency
deviations in Hz. Two control areas are having equal power capacity of 2000 MW and 1000 MW as
nominal loading. The load contribution of thermal, hydro and gas generating units are 600MW, 250MW
and 150MW respectively. To get an accurate insight of the LFC problem, it is essential to include the
important inherent requirement and the basic parameter and include them model. The important constraints
which affect the power system performance is Time Delay (TD). In view of the above, the effect of TD is
incorporated to a power system model. Owing to the growing complexity of power systems in deregulated
environment, communication delays become a significant challenge in the LFC analysis. Time delays can
9

degrade a systems performance and even cause system instability. In the present paper, a time delay of 50
ms is considered [29].
3.2 Modeling of LFC with HVDC link
In order to improve the dynamic performance of the system, HVDC link (parallel AC-DC) is
connected directly in parallel with AC tie line interconnected power system. The single line diagram of two
area power system with parallel AC-DC links is shown in the Fig. 2 [15-17]. When some sudden load
disturbances occur in an area, the HVDC link quickly starts the control system to suppress the peak value
of transient frequency deviation. Subsequently, governors eliminate the steady state error of the frequency
deviation. Further advantage in considering the different speed performance is that the dynamics of
governors in both areas can be neglected in the control design of HVDC link for simplicity. For sudden
step load perturbation the change of output in area1 of a HVDC link is given as [16]

PDC

K DC
(F1 F2 )
1 sTDC

(1)
where K DC is gain of a HVDC link and TDC is time constant of HVDC link in Sec.
4.

Controller structure
4.1 Optimal controller design
The first step in the development of the design procedure of the controller is the linearized model

of the power system. The linear model of the system is described in the state space form, as follows:

(2)
x Ax Bu PD
Where, A (n*n) is state matrix, B (n*m) is control matrix for n number of state variables and m number of
inputs and is disturbance matrix. Different variables have been defined as:
State variables:
x1=F1 x2=PTie x3=F2 x4=PGT1 x5=PRT1 x6=XT1 x7=PGH1 x8=XH1 x9=XRH1 x10 =PGH1 x11=PFC1
x12=PVP1 x13=XG1 x14=PGT2 x15=PRT2 x16=XT2 x17=PGH2 x18=XH2 x19=XRH2 x20 =PGH2 x21=PFC1 x22
=PVP1 x23=XG1 x24 =ACE1 x25 =ACE2 x26 =PTieDC
Control inputs:
u1= PC1; u2= PC2 ; u= [u1 u2]T
10

Disturbance inputs:
PD1; PD2; PD = [PD1 PD2] T
The system state space equations with reference to transfer function block in Fig.1 are given below.

x1

1
K
K
K
K
K
x1 P1 x2 P1 x4 P1 x7 P1 x10 P1 PD1
TP1
TP1
TP1
TP1
TP1
TP1

(3)

(4)

x2 2T 12x2 2T 12x3

12 K P 2
K
K
K
K
K
1
x2
x 3 P 2 x14 P 2 x17 P 2 x 20 P1 x 26 P1 PD 2
TP1
TP 2
TP 2
TP 2
TP 2
TP1
T P1

(5)

K
K K
K K
1
x 4 t1 r1 t1 x5 r1 t1 x 6
Tr 1
Tt1
Tt1
Tr1

(6)

x3

x4

1
1
x5
x6
Tt1
Tt1

1
1
1
x6
x1
x6
u1
R1Tg1
Tg 1
Tg 1

x5

(7)
(8)

2 K h1 2 K h1
2 K h1TR1 2 K h1
2 K h1TR1
2 K h1TR1
2
x1
x8
x9
x7
x 7

u1
TW 1
TGt1
TGH 1TRH 1
TGH 1 R1TRH 1
Tw1
TGH 1TRH 1 TGH 1

(9)

x8

1
TR1
TR1
TR1
1
x9
x1
x8

u1
TGH 1 R1TRH 1
TGH 1
TRH 1TGH 1
TGH 1 TRH !TGH 1

(10) x9 R T
1

x1

RH 1

TRH 1

x9

TRH 1

u1

(11)

x10

1
TCD1

x10

K g1
TCD1

K g1TCR1
x12
TF 1TCD1

x11

(12)

x11

1
T 1
1
x12
x11
CR
2
TF 1
TF 1 T F 1

x12

(13)

X1
c
x
1
x1 1 x12 x13 1 u1
b1 R1Y1
b1
b1
b1Y1

(14)

X1
1
X1
1
1

u
x13

1
13
2
2 1

Y
R
Y
Y
Y
1
R
Y
1 1
1
1 1
1

(15)

x14

K
K K
1
x14 t 2 x2 r 2 t 2
Tr 2
Tt 2
TR 2

x15

Kr2 Kt2
x16
Tt 2

(16)
11

1
1
x15
x16
Tt 2
Tt 2

x15

(17)
1
1
1
x3
x16
u2
R2Tg 2
Tg 2
Tg 2

x16

2 K h 2 TR 2
x17
TGH 2 R2TRH 2
(19)

x18

TW 2

x3

(18)

2K h2 2K h2
x17

TGH 2
Tw 2

2 K h 2 TR 2 2 K h 2
x18

TGH 2TRH 2 TGH 2

1
TR 2
TR 2
1
x3
x18

TGH 2 R2TRH 2
TGH 2
TGH 2 TRH 2TGH 2

x19

x19

2 K h 2 TR 2
u2
TGH 2TRH 2

TR 2
u2
TRH 2TGH 2

(20)
1
1
1
x3
x19
u2
R2TRH 2
TRH 2
TRH 2

x19

x20

x21

1
TCD 2

x 20

K g2
TCD 2

K g 2TCR 2
TF 2TCD 2

x21

(21)

x22

(22)

1
1 TCR 2
x21
2 x22
TF 2
TF 2 T F 2

(23)

x22

X2
c
x
1
x3 2 x 22 x23 2 u 2
b2 R2Y2
b2
b2
b2Y2

(24)

X2
1
X2
1
1

u2
x23

3
23
2
2

Y
R
Y
Y
Y
2
R
Y
2 2
2
2 2
2

(25)

x 24 1 x1 x 2 x 26

(26)

x25 12 x2 x3 12 x26

(27)

x26

K DC
K
1
x1 DC x3
x26
TDC
TDC
TDC

(28)

Using the Eqs.(3)(28), the input matrices A is of the order 2626, the control matrix B is of order of 262
and the disturbance matrix is of order of 262. The equation of output is given by (29)
Y Cx Du

(29)

But, the matrix D is always assumed to zero for a control system with feedback.
Therefore, the output equation is:

12

Y Cx

(30)
where C matrix is the order of (226) called output matrix.
The values of matrices can be calculated with the help of [17].In case of optimal control
technique the inputs (control inputs) are taken as linear combination of all 26 states being feedback.
The 26 states being feedback are x1, x2... x26and the control inputs can be written as like below:
u1=k1,1x1+ k1,2x2+ k1,3x3+ k1,4x4+ k1,5x5+ k1,6x6+ k1,7x7+ k1,8x8+ k1,9x9+ k1,10x10+ k1,11x11+ k1,12x12+ k1,13x13+
k1,14x14+ k1,15x15+

k1,16x16+ k1,17x17+ k1,18x18+ k1,19x19+ k1,20x20+ k1,21x21+ k1,22x22+ k1,23x23+ k1,24x24+ k1,25x25+

k1,26x26
(31)
u2=k2,1x1+ k2,2x2+ k2,3x3+ k2,4x4+ k2,5x5+ k2,6x6+ k2,7x7+ k2,8x8+ k2,9x9+ k2,10x10+ k2,11x11+ k2,12x12+ k2,13x13+
k2,14x14+ k2,15x15+

k2,16x16+ k2,17x17+ k2,18x18+ k2,19x19+ k2,20x20+ k2,21x21+ k2,22x22+ k2,23x23+ k2,24x24+ k2,25x25+

k2,26x26
(32)
Hence, finally the equation for control input can be written as:
U= - (K x)
Where K is a (226) matrix called feedback gain matrix and is given by:
k1,1 k1, 2 k1,3 k1, 4 k1,5 k1,6 k1,7 k1,8 k1,9 k1,10 k1,11 k1,12
K
k 2,1 k 2, 2 k 2,3 k 2, 4 k 2,5 k 2,6 k 2,7 k 2,8 k 2,9 k 2,10 k 2,11 k 2,12

(33)
k1,13
k 2,13

k1,14
k 2,14

k1,15
k 2,15

k1,16
k 2,16

k1,17
k 2,17

From the definition of optimal control problem designing the control law is that to find out the feedback
gain matrix K such that the given performance index (PI) will be minimised while the system
transfers from initial state x(0)0 to origin with in infinite time , x()=0.
Generally the quadratic form of PI is taken as:
PI

1
2

Qx u T Ru dt

(34)

Where, Q is the State Weighing Matrix which is real, symmetric and positive semi definite in
nature and R is the Control Weighing Matrix heaving real, symmetric and positive definite
character, selected as identity matrices of appropriate dimension for power system model under
investigation.
The deviations of Area Control Errors about the steady state values are minimized. In this case these
deviations are:

e1 (t ) ACE1 B1F1 PTie12 1 x1 x3

(35)

e2 (t ) ACE2 B2 F2 PTie 21 2 x2 x3

(36)
13

The deviations of ACE ( dt ) about the steady state values are minimized. For this case these deviations
are x24 and x25. The deviations of control inputs (u1and u2) about the steady state values are minimized. As,
the matrices A, B, R and Q are found out.
So, the optimal control law is given by U=-(K x)
The feedback gain matrix K is given by (37)
K=R-1 BT S
(37)
Where, S is a real, symmetric and positive definite matrix which is obtained by solving the matrix Riccatti
equation given by (38)
ATS+SA-SBR-1BTS+Q=0
As a result, the overall closed loop equation with state feedback control is

(38)

x Ax B ( Kx ) ( A BK ) x Ac x

(39)
Where Ac ( A BK ) is called closed loop system matrix.

3.1

Proportional Integral Derivative (PID) controller

The proportional integral derivative controller (PID) is the most popular feedback controller used

in the process industries. It is a robust, easily understood controller that can provide excellent control
performance despite the varied dynamic characteristics of process plant. As the name suggests, the PID
algorithm consists of three basic modes, the proportional mode, the integral and the derivative modes. A
proportional controller has the effect of reducing the rise time, but never eliminates the steady-state error.
An integral control has the effect of eliminating the steady-state error, but it may make the transient
response worse. A derivative control has the effect of increasing the stability of the system, reducing the
overshoot, and improving the transient response. Proportional integral (PI) controllers are the most often
type used today in industry. A control without derivative (D) mode is used when: fast response of the
system is not required, large disturbances and noises are present during operation of the process and there
are large transport delays in the system. Derivative mode improves stability of the system and enables
increase in proportional gain and decrease in integral gain which in turn increases speed of the controller
response. PID controller is often used when stability and fast response are required. In view of the above,
PID structured controllers are considered in the present paper.
3.2

Fractional Order Proportional Integrative Derivative (FOPID) controller

14

The classical PID controllers are usually not effective due to their linear structure, especially, if the
processes involved are higher order, time delay systems and systems with uncertainties. On the other hand,
FOPID controller is used for industrial application to improve the system control performances. The most
common form of a fractional order PID controller is the PI D controller because of involving an
integrator order of

and differentiator order of .FOPID controller provides extra degree of freedom for

not only the need of design controller gains (K P, KI, and KD) but also design orders of integral and
derivative [23-24, 27]. It has been shown by many contemporary researchers that application of FOPID
controller enhances the closed loop performance of a conventional PID controller in terms of handling
change in an operating point by online updating the controller parameters [27]. The main advantages of
FOPID controller is that if the parameter of a power system changes, a fractional order PID controller is
less sensitive than a classical PID controller. Additionally the fractional order controller has two extra
variables to tune. This provides extra degrees of freedom to the dynamic properties of fractional order
system. In view of the above FOPID controllers are selected in this paper to solve the LFC problem. The
structure of FOPID controller is shown in Fig. 3.
Fractional order calculus is an area where the mathematicians deal with derivatives and integrals
from non- integer orders. There are many definitions used in the literature to describe the fractional order
function [23-28]. The fractional-order differentiator can be denoted by a general fundamental operator as a
generalization of the differential and integral operators, which is defined as follows [26]:

dq
dt q

q0

q0

aD

q
t

q
( d )

q0

(40)
where, q is the fractional order and the constant a is related to the initial conditions
15

In the present study, Caputo definition, which is referred to as smooth fractional derivative in the
literature [26-27], is chosen for the FOPID controller. The Caputo definition is as mentioned below:
t

1
f ( m) ( )

d
m 1 q m
(m q ) (t ) q 1 m

q
0

f (t )
a Dt

qm
dm

f
(
t
)

dt m
(41)
where m is the smallest integer which is larger than q and is the Gamma function given by the
following expression:

( z )

z 1

e t dt

(42)
The Laplace transformation of equation (41) as given below

a Dt

n 1

f (t ) S q F ( s )
S q k 1 f ( k ) (0)

k 0

n 1 q n , n N

(43)
For fractional order controllers to be used for simulation and hardware applications with transfer
functions that involve fractional orders of S, the transfer function should be approximated as an integerorder transfer function with similar behavior, which includes an infinite number of poles and zeros.
Nevertheless, reasonable approximations can be obtained with finite numbers of poles and zeros. In this
case, Crone is one of the approximations [26], which can be used. Based on the recursive distribution of
poles and zeros is employed here:
s
zn
S
,
s
n 1 1
pn
N

(44)

The zeroes and poles are to be assigned inside the frequency range , ; Frequencies of poles and
zeros are given by Eqs.(45)(49)
z ,1 l

(45)

p , n z , ( n 1) , n 1 N

(46)

z , n p , ( n 1) , n 2 N

(47)
16

h
l

h
l

(48)
1 N

(49)
The transfer function of FOPID controller as given by (50)
K
G ( s) K P I K D S
S
(50)
In the present paper, FOPID controllers are considered for each generating units. So for the two
area three unit system, three FOPID controllers are considered. As identical areas are assumed the test
system, identical FOPID controllers are assumed for each unit.

3.3

Objective function
In the design of a modern heuristic optimization technique based controller, the objective function

is first defined based on the desired specifications and constraints. Four kinds of performance criteria
usually considered in the control design are the Integral of Time multiplied Absolute Error (ITAE), Integral
of Squared Error (ISE), Integral of Time multiplied Squared Error (ITSE) and Integral of Absolute Error
(IAE). Performance of any optimization technique depends on selection of proper objective function.
Objective functions or cost functions generally used in time domain ITAE, IAE, ITSE and ISE. ITAE
criterion reduces the settling time which cannot be achieved with IAE or ISE based tuning. ITAE criterion
also reduces the peak overshoot. ITSE based controller provides large controller output for a sudden
change in set point which is not advantageous from controller design point of view. It has been reported
that ITAE is a better objective function in LFC studies [30].Therefore in this paper ITAE is used as
objective function or cost function to properly design the proposed PID/FOPID controller. Expression for
the ITAE cost function is depicted in equation (51).
t sim

J ITAE

F1 F2 PTie t.dt

(51)

17

Where, F1 and F2 are the system frequency deviations; PTie is the incremental change in tie line
power; t sim is the time range of simulation. The problem constraints are the controller parameter bounds.
Therefore, the design problem can be formulated as the following optimization problem.
Minimize J
(52)
Subject to
K P min K P K P max , K I min K I K I max , K D min K D K D max , min max and min max

(53)
Where J is the objective function and K P min , K I min , K D min ; K P max , K I max , K D max

are the

minimum and maximum value of the control parameters. As reported in the literature, the minimum and
maximum values of controller parameters are chosen as -2 and 2 respectively. The minimum and
maximum value of integrator order ( ) and differentiator order ( ) are chosen as 0 and 1 respectively.
5.

Overview of Differential Evolution algorithm

Differential Evolution (DE) algorithm is a population-based stochastic optimization algorithm

recently introduced [31]. Advantages of DE are: simplicity, efficiency & real coding, easy use and
speediness. DE works with two populations; old generation and new generation of the same population.
The size of the population is adjusted by the parameter NP. The population consists of real valued vectors
with dimension D that equals the number of design parameters/control variables. The population is
randomly initialized within the initial parameter bounds. The optimization process is conducted by means
of three main operations: mutation, crossover and selection. In each generation, individuals of the current
population become target vectors. For each target vector, the mutation operation produces a mutant
vector, by adding the weighted difference between two randomly chosen vectors to a third vector. The
crossover operation generates a new vector, called trial vector, by mixing the parameters of the mutant
vector with those of the target vector. If the trial vector obtains a better fitness value than the target
vector, then the trial vector replaces the target vector in the next generation. The DE algorithm is
explained in more detail in [7]. The flow chart of DE approach is shown in Fig. 4.
18

6.

Results and discussions

5.1 Analysis of results

The model of the system under study shown in Fig. 1 is developed in MATLAB/SIMULINK
environment and DE program is written (in .mfile). The developed model is simulated in a separate
program (by .m file using initial population/controller parameters) considering a 1% step load increase
(1% of nominal load i.e. 10 MW) in area 1. The objective function is calculated in the .m file and used in
the optimization algorithm. The process is repeated for each individual in the population. Using the
objective function values, the population is modified by DE for the next generation. Simulations were
conducted on an Intel, core i-3 CPU, of 2.4 GHz and 4 GB RAM computer in the MATLAB 7.10.0.499
(R2010a) environment. The optimization was repeated 50 times and the best final solution among the 50
runs is chosen as controller parameters. The best final solutions obtained in the 50 runs are shown in
Tables I and II for the optimal gains and PID/FOPID controller considering (i) AC link and (ii) parallel
AC/DC links respectively. The corresponding performance index in terms of ITAE value, settling times
(2% band), peak overshoot and peak undershoot in frequency and tie line power deviations are shown in
Table III.
For proper comparison, it is evident from Table III and Fig. 5 that with same power system,
minimum ITAE value is obtained with proposed FOPID controller (ITAE= 0.8723) compared to PID
(ITAE= 2.7718) and optimal (ITAE=9.3341) controller. Hence, it can be concluded that proposed FOPID
controller outperform the optimal and PID controller as minimum objective function value is obtained
with proposed FOPID controller. Consequently, better system performance in terms minimum settling
times in frequency and tie-line power deviations is achieved with proposed FOPID controller compared
to PID and optimal controllers as shown in Table III and Fig. 6.
To study the dynamic performance of the proposed controllers, a step load increase in demand of
1% is applied at t = 0 s in area-1 and the system dynamic responses are shown in Figs. 7(a-c). For
comparison, the simulation results with FOPID, PID and Optimal controllers for the same power system
are also shown in Figs. 7(a)-(c). Critical analysis of the dynamic responses clearly reveals that with the
19

same power system significant improvement is observed with proposed FOPID controller compared to
others controllers.
To study the effect of location of disturbance on the system performance, a simultaneous step
increase in load of 1% in area 1 and 2% in area 2 is considered simultaneously at t = 0 s and the system
dynamic response is shown in Figs. 7 (d)-(f). It is clear from Figs. 7 (d)-(f) that, proposed FOPID
controller are robust and perform satisfactorily when the location and size of the disturbance change. In
this case also improved results are obtained with proposed FOPID controller compared to others.
5.2 Extension to multi-source power system with parallel AC/DC links
The study is further extended to a multi-source power system interconnected by ACDC tie lines
as shown in Fig. 2[15-17]. The transfer function model of system under study is shown in Fig. 1. A 1%
step load perturbation (SLP) in area 1 is considered at t = 0 s. The ITAE error, settling times, peak
overshoot and peak undershoot of frequency and tie line power deviations with the Optimal/PIDFOPID
controllers are given in Table III. It can be seen also from Table III and Fig. 5 that, with HVDC (AC-DC
parallel lines) system, the ITAE value is further reduced (ITAE=0.3738) compare to without HVDC (with
only AC line) system (ITAE=0.8723) for the same controller (FOPID). It is clear from Table III and Fig.
6 that the settling times of F1, F2 and PTie are improved with HVDC link compared to with AC line
only. Hence it can be concluded that system performance improves with HVDC link.Figs. 8 (a)-(c) show
the dynamic responses of the power system with HVDC link (ACDC parallel line) for a 1% step load
perturbation (SLP) in area 1 is considered at t = 0 s. It is noticed from Figs. 8 (a)-(c) that better
performance is obtained with proposed FOPID controller compared to Optimal/PID controller. To show
the robustness of proposed controllers, simultaneous step increase in load of 1% in area 1 and 2% in area
2 is considered at t = 0 s. The dynamic responses are shown in Figs. 8 (d)-(f) from which it is clear that
the designed controllers are robust and perform satisfactorily for different location and size of the
disturbance change.
5.3 Sensitivity analysis

20

The Sensitivity analysis is carried out to study the robustness the system to wide changes in the
operating conditions and system parameters [6,7,9,16]. In this section robustness of the power system is
checked by varying the loading conditions and system parameters from their nominal values (given in
appendix) in the range of +25% to -25%. In all the cases, with HVDC links is used due to their superior
performance. The tuned parameters under varied conditions with HVDC links are shown in Tables IV
and V. The various performance indexes (Settling time, Peak overshoot, Peak undershoot and ITAE)
under normal and parameter variation cases for the system with HVDC link are given in Table VI. It can
be observed from Table VI that ITAE values and settling times, peak overshoot and peak undershoot of
F1 , F2 and PTie vary within acceptable ranges and are nearby equal to the respective values

obtained with nominal system parameter. Hence, it can be concluded that the proposed controllers are
robust and perform satisfactorily when system parameters changes in the range 25%. To complete the
analysis, the dynamic performance of the system with the varied conditions of loading, TG, TT, TRH, TCD
and T12 are shown in Figs. 9-11. It can be observed from Fig. 9 (a-c) that the effect of the variation of
loading condition on the system performance is negligible. Also from Figs. 9 (d-f), 10 (a-f) and 11 (a-f)
clearly reveals that the effect of system parameters (TG, TT, TRH, TCD and T12) on the system performance
is negligible.
To investigate the superiority of the proposed method, a random step load changes is applied in
area-1. Fig. 12(a) shows the random load pattern of power system [32]. The step loads are random both in
magnitude and duration. The dynamic response for random load disturbances with HVDC link is shown
in Fig. 12 (b-d). It can be seen from Fig. 12 (b-d) that proposed controller (FOPID) shows better transient
responses than others. Also it is clearly observed from Fig. 12 (b-d) that the proposed FOPID controller
provides superior damping even in presence of a random load variation compare to others.
7.

Conclusion
In this paper, the load frequency control of two area with diverse sources power system such as

thermal, hydro and gas in each area and interconnected via parallel AC/DC transmission links has been
performed using optimal, PID and FOPID control techniques. The simulation study has been carried out on
21

a two area interconnected power system with identical plants having 25% generation from hydro, 60%
from thermal with reheat turbines and 15% from gas turbine systems. In order to make the power system
more realistic, the non linearity parameter such as time delay has been included in the system model. The
gains of optimal/PID/FOPID controller are optimized employing a Differential Evolution (DE) technique.
To show the superiority of proposed FOPID controller, results are compared with optimal and PID
controller for the same interconnected power system. The performance of FOPID controller exhibits
improved dynamic performance over conventional PID and optimal controller. Simulation results show
that with DC link in parallel with AC link as an area interconnection is able to outperform compare to
others. In addition, the system performance in terms of ITAE value, settling times (2% band), peak
overshoot and peak undershoot in frequency and tie line power deviations value is reduced when parallel
AC/DC links are used as area interconnection. Further, sensitivity analysis is performed by varying the
system parameters and operating load conditions from their nominal values to illustrate the robustness of
the proposed approach. It is observed that the proposed controllers are robust and ensures satisfactory
system performance in presence variation in system parameters and operating load conditions. Finally, the
effectiveness and robustness of the proposed controller against random load variations were investigated.

22

Figures

Fig.1
Block diagram of two-area multi-source interconnected power system

Fig.2 Two-area interconnected power system with HVDC link in parallel with an AC link

23

Fig. 3 Structure of FOPID controller

S ta rt

S p e c ify th e D E p a ra m e te rs
In itia liz e th e p o p u la tio n
G e n .= 1
E v a lu te th e p o p u la tio n

C r e a te o f f s p r in g s a n d e v a lu te th e ir f itn e s s

Is f itn e s s o f o f f s p r in g b e tte r th a n
f itn e s s o f p a r e n ts ?
Yes
R e p la c e th e p a r e n ts b y o f f s p r in g s
in th e n e w p o p u la tio n

No

D is c a r d th e
o f f s p r in g in
n e w p o p u la tio n

Yes
S iz e o f n e w p o p u la tio n <
O ld p o p u la tio n ?
G en. = G en+1

No
No
G en. > M ax. G en ?
Yes
S to p

Fig. 4 Flow chart of DE optimization approach

24

References
[1]

Debbarma, S., Saikia, LC., and Sinha, N. Automatic generation control using two degree of
freedom fractional order PID controller. Int. J. Elect. Power & Energy Syst. Vol. 58, pp. 120
129, 2014.

[2]

D.P. Kothari and I.J. Nagrath. Modern Power System Analysis, 4th ed. New Delhi: Tata McGraw
Hill; 2011.

[3]

P. Kundur, Power System Stability and control, Tata McGraw-Hill, 8th reprint 2009.

[4]

O.I. Elgerd, Electric energy systems theory. An introduction, New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill; 1983

[5]

H. Bevrani, Robust Power System Frequency Control, Springer, 2009

[6]

Ibraheem, P. K., and Kothari, D.P. Recent philosophies of automatic generation control strategies in
power systems, IEEE Trans Power Syst, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 346-357, 2005.

[7]

Parmar, K.P.S., Majhi, S., and Kothari, D.P. Load frequency control of a realistic power system with
multi-source power generation, International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, Vol.
42, No. 1, pp. 426433, 2012.

[8]

Rout, U.K., Sahu, R.K., and Panda, S. Design and analysis of differential evolution algorithm based
automatic generation control for interconnected power system, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, Vol.
4, No. 3, pp. 409421, 2013.

[9]

Gozde, H., and Taplamacioglu, M.C. Automatic generation control application with craziness based
particle swarm optimization in a thermal power system, International Journal of Electrical Power
& Energy Systems, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 816, 2011.

[10] Sahu,

R.K., Panda, S., and Rout, U.K. DE optimized parallel 2-DOF PID controller for load

frequency control of power system with governor dead-band nonlinearity, Int J Electr Power
Energy Syst, Vol. 49, No. 1, pp. 1933, 2013.
[11]

Saikia, L.C., Nanda. J., and Mishra, S. Performance comparison of several classical controllers in
AGC for multi-area interconnected thermal system, Int J Electr Power Energy Syst, Vol. 33, pp.
394401, 2011.
25

[12] Elyas,

R. Intelligent linear-quadratic optimal output feedback regulator for a deregulated automatic

generation control system, Elect. Power Comp. and Syst., Vol. 40, No. 5, pp. 513533, 2013.
[13] Ibraheem,

Prabhat, K., Hasan, N., and Nizamuddin. Sub-optimal automatic generation control of

interconnected power system using output vector feedback control strategy, Elect. Power Comp.
and Syst., Vol. 40, No. 9, pp. 977994, 2012.
[14] Huang,

C., Xianzhong, K.D., and Zang, Q. Robust load frequency controller design based on a new

strict model, Elect. Power Comp. and Syst., Vol. 41, No. 11, pp. 10751099, 2013.
[15] Pandey,

S.K., Nand Kishor, and Mohanty, S.R. Frequency Regulation in Hybrid Power System

Using Iterative Proportional-Integral-Derivative H Controller, Elect. Power Comp. and Syst., Vol.
42, No. 2, pp. 132148, 2014
[16] Parmar,

K.P.S., Majhi, S., and Kothari, D.P. Improvement of dynamic performance of LFC of the

two area power system: an analysis using MATLAB, International Journal of Computer
Application, Vol. 40, No. 10, pp. 2832, 2012.
[17] Mohanty,

B., Panda, S., and Hota, P.K. Controller parameters tuning of differential evolution

algorithm and its application to load frequency control of multi-source power system, International
Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, Vol. 54, pp. 7785, 2013.
[18] Ibraheem,

Nizamuddin, and Bhatti, T.S. AGC of two area power system interconnected by AC/DC

links with diverse sources in each area, International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy
Systems, Vol. 55, pp. 297304, 2014.
[19]

Aboelela, MAS, Ahmed, MF, and Dorrah, HT. Design of aerospace control systems using fractional
PID controller. Adv Res, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 22532, 2012.

[20] Igor,

P. Fractional-order systems and PI D controller. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,

Vol. 44, pp. 208214, 1996.

[21] K.S.

Miller and B. Ross. An introduction to the fractional calculus and fractional differential

equations, New York: Wiley; 1993.

26

[22] Hamamci,

SE. An algorithm for stabilization of fractional-order time delay systems using

fractional-order PID controllers. IEEE Trans Automatic Control, Vol. 52, No. 10, pp. 1964-9, 2007.
[23]

Alomoush, MI. Load frequency control and automatic generation control using fractional order
controllers. Electrical Engineering, Vol. 91, pp. 35768, 2010.

[24]

Biswas, A., Das, S., Abraham, A., and Dasgupta, S. Design of fractional order PID controllers
with an improved differential evolution. Eng Appl Artif Intell, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 34350, 2009.

[25] Pan,

I., and Das, S. Chaotic multi-objective optimization based design of fractional order PID

controller in AVR system. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst, Vol. 43, No. 1, pp. 393407, 2012.
[26] Tang,

Y., Cui, M., Hua, Ch., Li. L., and Yang, Y. Optimum design of fractional order PID

controller for AVR system using chaotic ant swarm. Expert Syst Appl, Vol. 39, No. 8, pp. 688796,
2012.
[27] Taher, S.A.,

Fini, M.H., and Aliabadi, S.F. Fractional order PID controller design for LFC in electric

power systems using imperialist competitive Algorithm, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, Vol. 5,
No. 1, pp. 121135, 2014.
[28]

HongSheng, Li., Ying, Luo., and YangQuan, Chen. A Fractional Order Proportional and
Derivative (FOPD) Motion Controller: Tuning Rule and Experiments, IEEE Transactions on
control systems technology. Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 516520, 2010.

[29] Tahmine,

V., Moghaddam, N., Bigdeli, and Afshar, K. Tuning a Fractional Order PID Controller

with Lead Compensator in Frequency Domain, International Journal of Electrical and

Electronics Engineering, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 139144, 2011.
[30] Panda,

S. Differential evolution algorithm for SSSC-based damping controller design considering

time delay. J. Franklin Institute, Vol. 348, No. 8, pp. 19031926, 2011.
[31] Shabani,

H., Vahidi, B., and Ebrahimpour, M. A robust PID controller based on imperialist

competitive algorithm for load-frequency control of power systems, ISA Transaction, Vol. 52, No. 1,
pp. 8895, 2013.

27

[32] Stron,

R., and Price, K. Differential evolution A simple and efficient adaptive scheme for global

optimization over continuous spaces, Journal Global Optimization, Vol. 11, pp. 341359, 1995.

28