Newton, Statcom, Project 3

Page|iii
CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE No

Abstract i
Acknowledgements ii
Contents iii
Lists of Figures v
Lists of Tables vii
List of Symbols viii
List of Abbreviations xi

Chapter 1 (Introduction) 1-5
Chapter 2 (Modeling of Power System with PSS and STATCOM) 6-13
2.1. Mathematical Modeling Of Power System with STATCOM 6
2.1.1. Modeling of Generators 6
2.1.2. Modeling of STATCOM 7
2.2. Structure of PSS 11
2.3. Conclusion 12
Chapter 3 (Coordinated Design of PSS and SDC by different
evolutionary techniques) 14-28
3.1. Objective Function 14
3.2. Genetic Algorithm Based Optimization: A Brief Overview 16
3.2.1. Selection of Parents 16
3.1.1 Generating offspring 16
3.1.2 Mutation 17
3.3. Description of Algorithm 17
3.3.1. Parameter Encoding and Decoding 17
3.3.2. Stopping Criteria 18
3.3.3. Algorithm for GA 18
3.4. Biogeography: A Brief Overview 20
3.4.1. Biogeography-Based Optimization (BBO) 22
Page|iv
3.4.2. BBO Algorithm 23

3.5. Binary Coded Bio-Geography Based Optimization 26
3.5.1. Migration 26
3.5.2. Mutation 27
3.6. Conclusion 27
Chapter 4 (Result and Discussion) 29-46
4.1. General 29
4.1.1. Load Flow with STATCOM 29
4.1.2. Operating Conditions for the Test System 29
4.2. GA Based Coordinated Design of PSS and STATCOM 30
4.2.1. Simulation and Result 30
4.2.2. Non-Linear Time-Domain Simulation 30
4.2.3. Disturbances for 10 machine 39 bus system 32
4.3. BCBBO Based Coordinated Design Of PSS and STATCOM 38
4.3.1. Simulation and Result 38
4.3.2. Non-Linear Time-Domain Simulation 38
4.4. Comparisons among BBO ,GA and BCBBO 46
Chapter 5 (Conclusion and Future Scope of the Work) 47-47
References 48-53
Appendix A (10 machine 39 Bus System Data) 54-57

LIST OF FIGURES
Page|v
Figure No. Title Page

2.1 Schematic diagram of STATCOM 8
2.1 Schematic diagram of STATCOM 8
2.2 Equivalent Circuit of STATCOM 8
2.3 STATCOM bus voltage regulator 10
2.4 Structure of Power System Stabilizer 11
2.5 Structure of thyristor-type fast exciter with PSS 13
3.1 Regions of eigen value location for different objective function 15
3.2 Flow chart for Genetic algorithm 19
3.3 Species model of a single habitat 27
3.4 Flow chart for BBO algorithm 28
4.1 Convergence characteristic of GA for 10-machine system 31
4.2 Eigen values associated with electromechanical oscillation modes for Case 1
33
34
34
34
35
4.7 Delta deviation (COI) V/s time (Case 1) 36
Page|vi
4.8 Delta deviation (COI) V/s (Case 2) 37

4.9 Delta deviation (COI) V/s (Case 3) 38
4.10 Convergence characteristic of BCBBO for 10-machine system 39
39
40
40
40
41
4.19 Comparison curve for GA, BBO, BCBBO 46
A.1 IEEE 10-Machine 39-Bus System 54

LIST OF TABLES
Page|vii

Table No. Title Page

4.1 Optimal PSS Parameters (GA) 31
4.2 Optimal STATCOM Damping Controller Parameters (GA) 32
4.3 Eigen Values and Damping Factor
(Without PSS and STATCOM Damping Controller (GA)) 32
(With PSS and STATCOM damping Controller (GA)) 33
4.5 Optimal PSS parameters (BCBBO) 41
4.6 Optimal STATCOM Damping Controller Parameters (BCBBO) 41
(Without PSS and STATCOM damping controller (BCBBO)) 42
(With PSS and STATCOM damping controller (BCBBO)) 42

LIST OF SYMBOLS
Page| viii
6
|
: Rotor angle of i
th
machine
m
|
: Rotor speed of i
th
machine
m
x
: Synchronous speed of the machine
H : Inertia constant.
P
m
: Mechanical power input
P
e
: Electrical power output
F
d
: Direct axis transient emf due to field flux.

F
q
: Quadrature axis transient emf due to field flux.

T
du
: Direct axis open circuit time constant.

T
qu
: Quadrature axis open circuit time constant.

I
d
: Direct axes stator current.
I
q
: Quadrature axes stator current.
X
d
: Direct axis stator reactance.
X
q
: Quadrature axis stator reactance.
X
d
: Direct axis stator transient reactance.

X
q
: Quadrature axis stator transient reactance.

F
d
: Field voltage.
F
Re
: Reference voltage to fast exciter.
F
t|
: Terminal voltage of the machine.
T
a|
: Automatic voltage regulator (AVR) time constant.
K
a
: AVR gain
K
pxx
: Gain of PSS
T
1
, T
2
, T
3
, T
4
: Time constant of lead lag block of PSS
T
w
: Washout Time constant of PSS
K
pxx
m|n
, K
pxx
max
: Minimum and maximum value of K
pxx

T
1
max
, T
1
m|n
: Minimum and maximum value of T
1

T
2
max
, T
2
m|n
2

Page|ix
T
3
max
, T
3
m|n
3

T
4
max
, T
4
m|n
4

T
r
: Transducer time constant.
F
d max
: Maximum value of exciter output
F
d m|n
: Minimum value of exciter output
F
x
: PSS output
F
x max
: Maximum value of PSS output
F
x m|n
: Minimum value of PSS output
I
tg
: Terminal voltage of the generator
F
xt
: STATCOM output voltage phasor.
0
t
: Angle of STATCOM bus with respect to reference bus.

xt
: Angle of STATCOM output voltage with respect to reference bus.
I
st
: Magnitude of STATCOM output voltage in (p.u.).
P
xt
: Real power injection at STATCOM bus in (p.u.).
Q
xt
: Reactive power injection at STATCOM bus in (p.u.).
P
L|
: Real power load at STATCOM bus in (p.u.).
Q
L|
: Reactive power load at STATCOM bus in (p.u.).
I
xt
: STATCOM current phasor.
R
xt
: Resistance of STATCOM step down transformer to represent the ohmic
losses in(p.u.).
X
xt
: Leakage reactance of STATCOM step down transformer in (p.u.)
L
xt
: Leakage inductance of STATCOM step down transformer
Z
xt
: Imedance of STATCOM step down transformer
R
dc
: Resistance of STATCOM representing converter switching losses
C
dc
: STATCOM dc capacitance in p.u
|
xt
: Instantaneous value of STATCOM current
u
xt
: Instantaneous value of STATCOM output voltage
u
t
: Instantaneous value of STATCOM voltage
|
dxt
: Instantaneous value of direct axis STATCOM current phasor
|
qxt
: Instantaneous value of quadrature axis STATCOM current phasor
Page|x
K
xtat
: Gain of STATCOM Damping Controller (SDC)
T
1x
, T
2x
, T
3x
, T
4x
: Time constant of lead lag block of SDC
K
xtat
m|n
, K
xtat
max
: Minimum and maximum value of K
xtat

T
1x
max
, T
1x
m|n
1x

T
2x
max
, T
2x
m|n
2x

T
3x
max
, T
3x
m|n
3x

T
4x
max
, T
4x
m|n
4x

F
re
: Reference voltage to STATCOM voltage regulator
F
xtmax
: Maximum value of SDC output
F
xtm|n
: Minimum value of SDC output
F
aux
: SDC output
T
wx
: Washout Time constant of SDC
K
x
: Gain of STATCOM bus voltage regulator
T
x
: Time constant of STATCOM bus voltage regulator
p
m
: Mutation probability
p
c
: Crossover probability
S
max
: maximum number of species that a habitat can have.
2
x
: Immigration rates when there are S species in the habitat.
x
: Emigration rates when there are S species in the habitat.
P
x
: Species probability when there are S species in the habitat.
6
COI
k
: Rotor angle of k
th
machine in COI reference frame.
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Page|xi
PSS Power System Stabilizer

STATCOM Static Synchronous Compensator
SDC STATCOM Damping Controller
FACTS Flexible AC Transmission Systems
IGBT Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor
MATLAB Matrix laboratory
MVA Mega Volt Ampere
MVAR Mega Volt Ampere Reactive
MW Megawatt
NR Newton Raphson
p.u. Per Unit
PWM Pulse Width modulation
GA Genetic Algorithm
BCGA Binary Coded GA
BBO Biogeography Based Optimization
BCBBO Binary Coded Biogeography Based Optimization
HSI Habitat Suitably Index
SIV Suitable Index Variables
M/c Machine

Page|1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Since 1940s, much stress has been given for the economical design of generators which
causes increasing in the synchronous reactance as a result the system become transiently unstable
due to poor voltage regulation. This problem was largely solved by the use of very fast and high
gain Automatic Voltage Regulators (AVR). But during heavy load condition in weak network
i.e. low frequency oscillations; AVR is not effective to provide sufficient damping to the system
[1]. This problem was solved by the use of Power System Stabilizers (PSS). PSS improves
damping via modulating the reference input signal of AVR by generating an auxiliary signal [2]
during low frequency oscillations.
PSS is effective to damp out local mode of oscillations and to some extent inter area
modes of oscillations. Nowadays, the conventional power system stabilizer (CPSS) is widely
used by power system utilities. However, determining PSS parameters is a crucial step in the
design process. Kundur et al. [3] have presented a comprehensive analysis of the effects of the
different CPSS parameters on the overall system dynamic performance of the power system. It is
shown that the appropriate selection of CPSS parameters result in satisfactory performance
during system upsets. It is generally agreed that the CPSS significantly improves the stability of
power system; however, the optimum tuning of its parameters is still a serious problem; because
the inadequate setting of CPSS parameters may not only fail to stabilize an unstable power
system, but also may reinforce the instability.
Initially Single Machine Infinite Bus (SMIB) model is used for tuning of PSS parameters.
In [4], authors have discussed how the PSS parameters are to be determined by the use of root
locus and bode plot in SMIB system. As power system is a highly interconnected system, for
better damping, coordinated design of PSSs is needed as PSS at one generator causes adverse
effect on modes of other generators. The dynamics of other machines should be considered for
the design of a particular PSS. Basically coordinated designs of PSSs are categorized as damping
torque approach, frequency response approach and state space approach. In [5], it is discussed
how damping torque concept is used for the coordinated design of PSSs in multi machine
environment. In frequency response approach, generally Nyquist criteria, bode plot and root
locus are used. In [6], a Nyquist criterion is used to get the parameters of phase compensation
Page|2
block and root locus plot is used for getting the optimal gain of PSSs. In State Space approach,
different state feedback techniques are used. Pole placement or Eigen value assignment by state
feedback are discussed in [7-9]. In [7], an efficient way of pole placement having straightforward
formulation and less computation requirement is discussed. In [8], four pole placement methods
for the design of power system stabilizer are examined on the basis of frequency response
characteristics of these controllers. In [9], state feedback gain calculation by solving LMIs based
on pole region constraints for placement of poles considering multiple operating points is
discussed. In [10], linear quadratic regulator (LQR) technique is used for finding optimal gain for
state feedback. In this case a generalized Recatti equation is solved for finding optimal gain. In
[11], periodic output feedback technique is used. In this paper, how state feedback gains are
periodically changed to get the robust control is discussed. In this work, LMI is used for adding
multiple operating points during design. In [12], fast output sampling feedback (FOSFT) is used
for design of state feedback based PSS. In this, output is sampled at a faster rate as compared to
input to the system so that state observer can be avoided for full state feedback.
Recently global optimization techniques are used for coordinately design of multi
machine power system stabilizers. Genetic algorithm based design of PSS are discussed in [13]-
[17]. In [13], author has applied certain constraints in design of objective function to restrict the
frequency excursions of electromechanical oscillation modes to a narrow range to ensure the
system to be in transient stability margin. In [14], both optimal placement of a fixed number of
PSS and their tuning simultaneously evaluated using GA. In [15], multi objective type real coded
GA with adaptive mutation is used to simultaneous tuning of PSS in multi machine system. In
[16], Lyapunov method based genetic algorithm is used to tune power system stabilizers. In this
work the Lyapunov criteria is used to check the stability of the system. In [17], genetic algorithm
is proposed to design multi-machine PSS. In this work all damping ratios due to all considered
operating points due to an individual in GA are compared with some fixed values of damping
ratios. According to the result of comparison discrete fitness values are assigned to individuals.
In [18], Rule Based Bacteria Foraging (RBBF) is used to design of multi-machine PSS.
In this method the run length unit used by bacteria for chemo taxis step is not fixed. This is
changed according to a simple heuristic rule. In [19], Evolutionary Programming (EP) approach
is used for robust design of multi machine PSS. In [20], Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) is
used for robust design of multi machine PSS. . In [21], Simulated Annealing (SA) approach is
Page|3
used for design of multi machine power system stabilizer. In this work, author has discussed how
the solution quality is independent of initial guess. In [22], trajectory sensitivity approach is used
for robust design of PSS. In this work, the effect of PSS parameters on system trajectory is used
to minimize a speed based objective function.
The classical power system stabilizers (CPSS) are designed with fixed parameters to stabilize
some nominal operating points. As modern power system is a highly non-linear and probabilistic system,
so CPSS with fixed parameters do not give guarantee of robustness of system. So some non-linear control
techniques like sliding mode control, fuzzy control and neural control are also applied for design of PSS.
In [23], multi rate output feedback based decentralized sliding mode control is used. In this work, FOSFT
along with sliding mode control based on power reaching law are used. In [24], a novel nonlinear
decentralized controller based on the combination of the block control linearization and sliding
mode control techniques is proposed. In [25], a non-linear PSS based on synergetic control
theory is proposed. In [26], a higher order sliding mode is used for robust no-linear PSS design.
Also a differentiator observer is designed for calculating unknown states. In [27] a decentralized
fuzzy logic controller is used for design of PSS. In this case the controller tracks the speed
deviation to zero by controlling output of generator. In [28], artificial neural network is used for
the design of PSS. In [29], PSS design using an adaptive neuro-fuzzy controller is proposed.
On the other hand, in the recent development in power electronic devices have led to the
application of flexible alternating current transmission system (FACTS) in the modern power
system. The primary role of FACTS devices are to regulate real power flow in the network to
damp out low frequency oscillations and hence to improve power system stability. In recent
years shunt FACTS devices such as static VAR compensator (SVC) and gate turn off (GTO)
thyrister based static synchronous compensator (STATCOM) have been implemented to give
reactive power support for compensation of voltage fluctuation in power system. From dynamic
stability point of view, STATCOM provides better damping as compared to SVC as STATCOM
can transiently exchange real power with the system and also give reactive power support during
voltage dip [30].
Different models for the static and dynamic analysis of STATCOM are discussed in [31-
33]. A linear frequency-domain model of a six-pulse STATCOM with PLL (Phase Locked Loop)
and constant reactive power controllers have been presented in [31]. A suitable and accurate
analytical model of an indirectly controlled cascaded multilevel STATCOM with square-wave
control is presented in [32]. The converter voltage components are analyzed in detail for a single-
Page|4
cell and the results are then generalized for a multilevel cascaded converter. In [33], linearized
Philips-Heffron model of power system with STATCOM is established. In [34], the performance
evaluation and tuning of damping controller for SATCOM are discussed. In [35], a robust state
feedback controller for STATCOM based on zero set concepts is discussed. In [36], an optimal
neuro-fuzzy external controller for generating an auxiliary reference signal for a STATCOM to
improve damping in the rotor speed deviations in the neighboring generators is discussed.
PSS is effective for damping local mode of oscillations where as SATCOM is used to
damp out inter area oscillation. The inter-area oscillations, which are typically damped using
PSS controllers on generators, can be adequately handled by properly placing SVC or
STATCOM controllers with additional controls on the transmission side [37]. However,
uncoordinated local control of FACTS devices and PSSs may cause destabilizing interactions.
To improve overall system performance, many researches were made on the coordination
between PSSs and FACTS damping controllers. In [38], a nonlinear optimization algorithm is
minimized by sequential quadratic programming for coordinating PSS and STATCOM damping
controller. Optimal location of STATCOM and coordinated damping controller design of
STATCOM with PSS by using PSO is discussed in [39]. A nonlinear coordinated controller for
PSS and STATCOM based on zero dynamic theory, the exact feedback technique and pole-
assignment technique is designed to improve the transient stability of power system [40].
Coordinated damping controller design for STATCOM and PSS by using genetic algorithm
(GA) is discussed in [41-44]. In [45], simultaneously coordinated parameter design of PSS and
STATCOM by using modified simplex-simulated annealing (MSSA) is presented. MSSA is an
improvement of simulated annealing (SA) with the help of downhill simplex method. In this
work, an Eigen value based objective function is minimized for optimum parameter design.

The organization of the thesis as follows:
Chapter 2: It describes the mathematical modeling of STATCOM with the damping controller,
and generators equipped with fast exciter and power system stabilizer (PSS).
Chapter 3: It describes the different optimization techniques like genetic algorithm (GA),
biogeography based optimization (BBO) and binary coded biogeography based optimization
(BCBBO) for the coordinated design of PSS and STATCOM damping controller. An Eigen
value based objective function used for these optimization techniques is also discussed.
Page|5
Chapter 4: It describes the effectiveness of controller designed by different optimization

techniques via Eigen value analysis and non linear simulation in a 10 machine 39 bus new
England System. A comparison among different optimization techniques used in this work is
also presented.
Chapter 5: It describes major conclusion of this work as well as future scope of this work.

Page|6
CHAPTER 2
MODELING OF POWER SYSTEM WITH PSS AND STATCOM

In modern power system, low frequency oscillations have become the main problem for
power system small signal stability. They restrict the steady-state power transfer limits, which
therefore affects operational system economics and security. Traditionally PSS is used to damp
out these low frequency oscillations. But PSSs are effective to damp out only local mode of
oscillations. The recent advances in power electronics have led to the development of the flexible
alternating current transmission systems (FACTS). STATCOM stands for Static Synchronous
Compensator is one of the FACT devices in addition to main control duties similar to voltage
regulation and reactive power injection should be able to damp inter area oscillations. From the
power system dynamic stability viewpoint, the STATCOM provides better damping
characteristics than the SVC (Static Var Compensator). There are several technical advantages of
a STATCOM over SVC as follows [46]:
- Faster response
- Require less space
- Modular and re-locatable design
- Can be interfaced with real power sources such as battery, fuel cell or SMES
(Superconducting Magnetic Energy Storage)
- Even during low voltage conditions, STATCOM is capable of maintaining constant
reactive current.

2.1 MATHEMATICAL MODELING OF POWER SYSTEM WITH STATCOM [2]
Let us consider a system having m number of generators and n number of buses.
STATCOM is installed at s
th
bus and generators are connected at buses numbered as 1 to n. All
the generators are equipped with thyristerized fast exciters. Now the whole system can be
represented mathematically in p.u as given below:-
2.1.1 Modeling of Generators
Machine Differential Equations [2]
Jo
Jt
=
-
s
(2.1)
Page|7
Jt
=

s
2E
(P
m
-P
c
) (2.2)
JE
q
Jt
=
1
I
do
(-E
q
- I
d
(X
d
-X
d
) +E
]d
) (2.S)
JE
d
Jt
=
1
I
qo
[-E
d
+I
q
(X
q
-X
q
) (2.4)
JE
]d
Jt
=
1
I
u
[-E
]d
+ K
u
(I
Rc]
- I
t
) (2.S)
(i = 1, m)
Stator Algebraic Equations [2]
E
d
- I
sin(o
-0
) - R
s
I
d
+x
q
I
q
= u (2.6)
E
q
-I
cos(o
- 0
) -R
s
I
q
- x
d
I
d
= u (2.7)
(i = 1, m)
Network Equations at Generator Buses [2]
I
d
I
sin(o
-0
) + I
q
I
cos(o
- 0
) +P
LI
- I
I
k
k
cos(0
- 0
k
- o
k
)
m
k=1
= u (2.8)
I
d
I
cos(o
- 0
) - I
q
I
sin(o
- 0
) +Q
LI
- I
I
k
k
sin(0
- 0
k
-o
k
)
m
k=1
= u (2.9)
(i = 1, m)
Network Equations at Load Buses (except the STATCOM bus) [2]
P
LI
- I
I
k
k
cos(0
- 0
k
-o
k
)
m
k=1
= u (2.1u)
Q
LI
- I
I
k
k
sin(0
- 0
k
- o
k
)
m
k=1
= u (2.11)
(i = m +1, n onJ i = s)
2.1.2 Modeling of STATCOM
STATCOM consists of a three phase gate turn off (GTO) based voltage source converter
(VSC) and a DC capacitor. The schematic diagram and the equivalent circuit of the STATCOM
are shown in Fig. 2.1 and Fig. 2.2 respectively.
Page|8

Fig. 2.1: Schematic diagram of STATCOM

Fig. 2.2: Equivalent Circuit of STATCOM
Page|9
STATCOM output voltage magnitude = I

st
= c
0
I
dc
(2.12)
Where c
0
= H
0
r (for PWM inverter), r is the ratio between AC and DC voltage magnitude and
H
0
is the modulation index. In this case an indirect controlled multilevel inverters based
STATCOM is used where the output voltage magnitude of STATCOM is directly proportional to
the voltage across the capacitor. So c
0
= _
S
9
, .
Instantaneous voltage drop across STATCOM step down transformer can be represented as
I
st
Ji
st
Jt
+R
st
i
st
= :
t
- :
st
(2.1S)
Converting Eq.2.13 into D-Q synchronously rotating frame and representing all quantities in p.u.
values, we get
JI
dst
Jt
= -
s
R
st
X
st
I
dst
+
s
I
qst
-
s
sin(o +0
s
)
X
st
I
dc
+

s
X
st
I
s
cos(0
s
) (2.14)
JI
qst
Jt
= -
s
R
st
X
st
I
qst
-
s
I
dst
+
s
cos(o + 0
s
)
X
st
I
dc
+

s
X
st
I
s
sin(0
s
) (2.1S)
Equating the AC and DC side power of the STATCOM,
I
st
I
st
= I
dc
I
dc
+I
dc
2
R
dc
(2.16)
Converting Eq.2.16 into D-Q synchronously rotating frame and separating real and imaginary
parts, we get
I
dc
= -c
0
(sin (o +0
t
))I
std
-cos(o +0
t
)I
stq
) - I
dc
R
dc
(2.17)
As
JI
dc
Jt
, =
I
dc
C
dc
, (2.18)
Putting Eq.2.17 in Eq.2.18, X
dc
=
1
s
C
dc
, and numerical value of c
0
we get
JI
dc
Jt
= -S
s
X
dc
sin(o + 0
s
) I
dst
-S
s
X
dc
cos(o + 0
s
) I
qst
+
s
X
dc
R
dc
I
dc
(2.19)
Network Equations at the STATCOM bus :-
P
S1A1C0M
+P
Ls
- I
s
I
k
sk
cos(0
s
- 0
k
- o
sk
)
n
k=1
= u (2.2u)
Page|10
S1A1C0M
+
Ls
- I
s
I
k
sk
sin(0
s
-0
k
- o
sk
)
n
k=1
= u (2.21)
The STATCOM real power (P
S1A1C0M
) and reactive power (
S1A1C0M
) equations :-
From Fig. 2.2, the expressions for P
S1A1C0M
and
S1A1C0M
can be written as,
P
S1A1C0M
+]
S1A1C0M
=
I
s
I
st
c
-]u
-I
s
2
R
st
- ]X
st
(2.22)
In per unit I
st
= I
dc
so separating the real and imaginary parts of Eq.2.22, the following two
expressions of P
S1A1C0M
and
S1A1C0M
are obtained.
P
S1A1C0M
=
I
s
I
dc
R
st
cos o + I
s
I
dc
X
st
sino -R
st
I
s
2
R
st
2
+ X
st
2
(2.22)
S1A1C0M
=
I
s
I
dc
X
st
cos o -I
s
I
dc
R
st
sino -X
st
I
s
2
R
st
2
+ X
st
2
(2.2S)
As the STATCOM is used to control the bus voltage, it is equipped with a bus voltage
regulator is shown in Fig. 2.3. From this diagram, following dynamic equation can be written for
the regulator.
Jo
Jt
= -
o
I
s
+
K
s
I
s
(I
c]
+ I
uux
- I
t
) (2.24)

Fig. 2.3: STATCOM bus voltage regulator
Page|11
I
uux
is the output of STATCOM damping controller. Its structure is similar to that of PSS
as discussed in Section 2.2.
2.2 STRUCTURE OF PSS [2]
It consists of four parts.
Gain Block.
Signal Washout Block.
Phase compensation Block.
Output Limiter Block
The structure of PSS is shown in Fig. 2.4 [2]

Fig. 2.4: Structure of Power System Stabilizer
Gain Block:

It is simply a gain of K
pss
which determines the damping provided by the PSS. It is set
according to the maximum value of the damping requirement of the system. For higher values
of K
pss
, system behaves as an over damped sluggish system.
Signal Washout Block:

It acts as a high pass filter having high time constant I
w
. It prevents the operation of PSS
during steady change in stabilizing signal as its operation affects the field excitation. PSS is
designed to operate in transient change in stabilizing signal.

I
w
is set in such a way that it allows
all local and inter-area modes of oscillations. Generally I
w
is set in between|1 sec 2scc] for
local mode and|1u sec 2uscc] for inter-area mode. For setting, I
w
= 1uscc, the first swing
stability is improved.
sI
w
1 +sI
w
K
pss
1 +sI
3
1 +sI
4
1 +sI
1
1 +sI
2
I
s mn
Gain Washout Phase compensation

I
s mux
Output limiter
Page|12
Phase Compensation Block:

The phase compensation block provides necessary leading angle compensation to get
pure damping effect by PSS. So it stability is improved. consists of a lead network. As it is
practically difficult to get an absolute lead network, so it consists of lag-lead network. Generally
it consists of one, two or three blocks according to phase compensation required. In this work,
two block type lag-lead network is used.
Output Limiter Block:
During sudden large disturbance, machine swings. AVR tries to limit the electrical power
flow where as PSS tries to increase the power. To restrict PSS during large disturbance, certain
upper limit value is assigned to PSS output. Similarly when machine swing angle reached
maximum value and tends to decrease during large disturbance, machine needs higher
synchronizing torque. But PSS tries decrease excitation. To restrict PSS operation in this case
lower limit to PSS output is assigned.
The speed based lead- lag conventional PSS is considered in this study. The exciter
system with PSS used for this study is given in Fig. 2.5 [14]. The transfer function of the PSS is
as given below.
u
(s) = K
pss
sI
w
1 + sI
w
_
(1 +sI
1
)(1 +sI
3
)
(1 +sI
2
)(1 +sI
4
)
_
(s) (2.2S)
Subscript i correspond the PSS connected to i
th
machine.
u
= small change in PSS output.
= small deviation in rotor speed.

In this work, all the five parameters i.e. K
pss
, I
1
, I
2
, I
3
, I
4
except I
w
each of PSS and
STATCOM damping controller are evaluated and I
w
is kept constant as 5sec for all PSS and
10sec for STATCOM [15].
2.3 CONCLUSION
In this chapter, the mathematical modeling of power system with PSS and STATCOM is
discussed. Now the power system can be represented as a combination of non-linear differential
algebraic equations (DAEs). These DAEs are to be linearized at some nominal operating points
to get the linearized models of power system in state-space form. Finding out the optimum
tuning parameters of PSS and STATCOM damping controller is formulated as an optimization
Page|13
problem. How an eigen value based objective function evaluated on linearized model of power
system and different optimization techniques used for minimization of this objective function are
discussed in the next chapter.
Fig. 2.5: Structure of thyristor-type fast exciter with PSS
Page|14
CHAPTER 3
COORDINATED DESIGN OF PSS AND SDC BY DIFFERENT EVOLUTIONARY
TECHNIQUES

As described in Chapter 2, the structure of the PSS and STATCOM damping controller
(SDC) considered in this work is same. Therefore, each of the PSS as well as the SDC has five
parameters, which need to be determined. Hence, for a multi machine system having p PSS and
one STATCOM, the total number of parameters to be determined is 5(p+1). In this thesis, the
problem of determination of these parameters has been formulated as an optimization problem,
in which an eigen value based objective function has been used. For optimizing these parameters,
two heuristic optimization techniques, namely genetic algorithm (GA) and biogeography based
optimization (BBO) have been used. The detailed description of these two techniques and an
eigen value based objective function are given below.
3.1 OBJECTIVE FUNCTION [15]
Two different eigen value based objective functions are combined to formulate a single objective
function as given below. The parameters of PSS are selected so as to minimize the following objective
function
min [ = [
1
+o. [
2
(S.1)
Where
[
1
= (o
,]
-o
0
)
2
c
i,]c
0
p
]=1
(S.2)
[
2
= (
,]
-
0
)
2
{
i,]
{
0
p
]=1
(S.S)
o
0
and
0
are the threshold value for real part of eigen value and damping factor
respectively. o
,]
and
,]
are the real part and damping ratio of i
th
eigen value of ]
th
operating
point respectively. p is the total number of operating conditions. o is a constant having a
value of 10 [15]. [
1
is used to limit eigen values to the shaded area as shown in Fig. 3.1(a). [
2
is
used to limit eigen values to the shaded area as shown in Fig. 3.1(b). [ is used to limit eigen
values to the D-shaped shaded area as shown in Fig. 3.1(c). In [
1
and [
2
, along with the
Page|15
conditions given in Eq. (3.5) only eigen values whose frequencies lies in between (0.1-2.0Hz)
and magnitude is greater than 1u
-5
or real part greater than zero are considered.

Fig. 3.1: Regions of eigen value location for different objective function [15]
If the i
th
eigen value of ]
th
operating point is represented as o
,]
+]w
,]

damping ratio:
,]
=
-c
i,]
c
i,]
+w
i,]

(S.4)
Objective function given in Eq. (3.1) is to be optimized subjected to:
`
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
K
pss
mn
K
pss
K
pss
mux
I
1
mn
I
1
I
1
mux
I
2
mn
I
2
I
2
mux
I
3
mn
I
3
I
3
mux
I
4
mn
I
4
I
4
mux
K
stut
mn
K
pss
K
stut
mux
I
1s
mn
I
1s
I
1s
mux
I
2s
mn
I
2s
I
2s
mux
I
3s
mn
I
3s
I
3s
mux
I
4s
mn
I
4s
I
4s
mux
(i = 1,2,S. . w) (S.S)
Where w represent the total number of PSS present in the system.
Page|16
3.2 GENETIC ALGORITHM BASED OPTIMIZATION: A BRIEF OVERVIEW [50]

Genetic algorithm (GA) is based on the concept of Charles's Darwin's evolutionary
principle, Survival of fittest which means the species (all living beings), those are more
capable of searching resources survive and other gets vanished during evolution. Biologically,
the genes of fittest individuals (species) are transferred to next generation during evolution.
Biologically survival of fittest species during evolution is equivalent to searching an
optimal result in a numerical optimization problem within constraints on variables. Individuals of
GA are in the form of character string which is analogous to the chromosomes found in DNA.
Each bit of chromosome string represents a gene. Each individual represent a possible solution in
the search space. A group of chromosomes is known as a population. The individuals of
population go through a process of evolution in order to produce a new generation of individuals
those are closer to optimal solution. The evolutionary process consists of three sub-processes,
namely selection of parents, generating offspring, and mutation.
3.2.1 Selection of Parents
Some members of current population are selected for mating process to generate new
offspring for next generation. As the offspring created by mating process carries properties of
parents, so only the individuals having higher fitness value are selected for mating process.
Tournament Selection is one of the methods of selecting parents. In this method,
randomly two small groups of chromosomes are selected from the current population to form the
mating pool (usually two or three per group). The healthier chromosome in each group becomes
a parent. Enough number of these tournaments are made to find the required number of parents.
A few numbers of healthier individual are selected and directly passed to new generation
as only a healthier individual survives in the next generations. These offspring are known as elite
children in the new generation.
3.2.2 Generating offspring
After selection of parents, offspring are created by different crossover techniques. In this
work, binary chromosomes are used. Multi-point crossover is used for mating process.
In this work, two parents are going for crossover and generate two offspring. In multi-
point crossover, a number of crossover points are created and the bits between two consecutive
crossover points of both parents are exchanged to form offspring. If this exchanged process starts
Page|17
from first parent, the offspring 1 is created otherwise offspring 2 is created. Crossover always
occurs at a fixed crossover probability.
3.2.3 Mutation
Mutation operation creates some random chromosomes in the new generation by flipping
some bits in the chromosome. Flipping in binary chromosome changes a zero to one or a one to
zero. Mutation restricts the solution to trap to local optimized points. It creates diversity in the
search space. Mutation always occurs at a fixed mutation probability. Mutation probability is
kept at smaller value to restrict normal search to become a random search.
3.3 DESCRIPTION OF ALGORITHM [14]
3.3.1 Parameter Encoding and Decoding
The parameters to be tuned are initialized randomly keeping all within limit. The
parameters are encoded as fixed length binary string by using concatenated multi-parameter
representation. The number of bits required to represent a single variable (x) is defined by:
bits = rounJ _log2 [1 +
x
h
- x
Iow
Pr
_ (S.6)
Where x
h
onJ x
Iow
represent upper and lower bound of variable x, Pr represent
precision per variable(1u
-4
).
The variable (x) is converted to a new search space where variable (x) has a maximum
value g
mux
= 2
bts
- 1 .The new variable will be
g =
x -x
Iow
x
h
- x
Iow
g
mux
(S.7)
Now the new variables are converted to their respective binary value to represent
chromosomes. This is done to keep all variables within limit during the process of crossover and
mutation.
The converted binary string can be decoded to its original value as given below:-
x = x
Iow
+
1
g
mux
(g (x
h
-x
Iow
)) (S.8)
If
N = total number of individuals.
N
c
= number of elite children.
Page|18
p
m
= mutation probability.
p
c
= crossover probability.
Nbits = total number of bits in a chromosome (individual)
Then
X1 = the number of crossover offspring = rounJ((N - N
c
) p
c
)).
X2 = the number of mutated offspring = N - X1 - N
c

XS = the number of bits to be flipped during mutation = X2 Nbits p
m

In mutation step, leaving elite children randomly X2 numbers of individuals are selected
form the population. Randomly XS bits are selected in X2 chromosomes for flipping.
3.3.2 Stopping Criteria
When the minimum value of the fitness value of all the individuals in a particular
generation goes below a threshold value, or number of generations exceeds a maximum
generation value, GA stops iteration.
3.3.3 Algorithm for GA
Step 1: Initialize the parameters of algorithm: Size of population N, no. of elite children,
crossover probability (p
c
), mutation probability (p
m
), maximum generation, minimum
error.
Step 2: Randomly values of PSS parameters to be tuned are selected within their limit to create
initial population.
Step 3: Parameter encoding
Step 4: Set the iterative generation count Ig = u.
Step 5: Fitness evaluation of each Individual: The binary coded chromosomes are decoded to
their original value by Eq.3.8. The closed loop eigen values of the multi-machine
system with PSS and SDC is evaluated. The fitness value of each individual is
evaluated by the fitness function as given in Eq. (3.1).
Step 6: Judge whether the termination condition is satisfied or not. If satisfied go to Step 12,
otherwise go to Step 7.
Step 7: Set Ig = Ig + 1
Step 8: Elite children selection: According to fitness value better individuals are selected as elite
children.
Page|19
Step 9: Selection: Parent individuals are selected using tournament scheme.

Step 10: Crossover: Multi-point crossover is applied with a crossover probability (p
c
) to get rest
offspring after elite children selection.
Step 11: Mutation: Mutation operation is applied with a fixed mutation rate (p
m
) to all offspring
created by crossover only. Go to Step 5.
Step 12: End the process and output the result.
The flow chart for the above complete algorithm is shown in Fig. 3.2.

.
Fig. 3.2: Flow chart for Genetic algorithm
Randomly
initialize
population
Determine fitness
of population
Select parents
from population
Determine fitness
of population
Apply mutation
operator
Perform
crossover
Converged
END
START
Yes
No
Page|20
3.4 BIOGEOGRAPHY: A BRIEF OVERVIEW [51]:

Biogeography describes the migration of species from one island to another island also
how new species arise in islands and extinction of different species in islands. In the
mathematical modeling of Biogeography, a habitat is any island (area) geographically isolated
from other islands is well suited for residence of living species having a high habitat suitably
index (HSI). Certain factors like rain fall, temperature, and food etc affects habitat suitably index
of a habitat. The factors characterizes HSI are known as suitable index variables (SIVs). The
HSI of a habitat can be evaluated by knowing its SIVs. SIVs acts as independent variable where
as HIS as a dependant variable. The habitats having high HSIs tend to have more number of
species as compared to habitats having smaller HSIs. Migration of species takes place from the
habitats having high HSIs simply because of more number of species they can host. The process
of migration of species from one habitat to other habitat is known as emigration process.
Similarly by immigration process, species enters into a new habitat. The habitat having
high HIVs have low immigration rate because of nearly saturation of species in these habitats. So
the habitats having high HSI are more static in distribution of species. Same way it can be
explained that the high HSI habitats have high emigration rate. The habitats having lower HSIs
have low emigration rate because of very small number of species present in these habitats and
have high immigration rate. Immigration and emigration of species may change the HSIs of
habitats because SIVs of a habitat depends on its biological diversity.
Species model for a single habitat is shown in Fig. 3.3. S
max
is the maximum number of
species that a habitat can have. Let us consider immigration graph. I is the maximum value of
immigration rate occurs at zero species count as more number of species from different habitats
can enter into that habitat. As the number of species increases, the habitat becomes more
crowded and there is a decrease in survival of species after immigration so immigration rate
decreases and becomes zero at maximum value of species count. Now consider emigration
graph. At zero species count emigration rate is zero as no species are present to migrate. As the
number of species increases, the habitat becomes crowded so more number of species are able to
migrate in search of other possible residences so emigration rate increases and attains a
maximum value E, when the habitat is saturated with maximum number of species S
max
. The
equilibrium point contains S
0
number of species where the emigration and immigration rates are
same. For simplicity in explanation of biogeography, the immigration and emigration curves are
Page|21
shown graphically as straight lines but in general they might be more complicated curves. In
BBO algorithm, the calculation of emigration rate and immigration rate is necessary for selecting
habitats whose SIVs will undergo migration operation.
Now consider the probability Ps that the habitat contains exactly S species. Ps changes
from time t to time (t+t) as follows
P
s
(t +t) = P
s
(t)(1 - z
s
t - p
s
t) + P
s-1
z
s-1
t +P
s+1
p
s+1
t (S.9)
where z
s
ans p
s
are the immigration and emigration rates when there are S species in the
habitat. This equation holds because in order to have S species at time(t + t), one of the
following conditions must hold:
1) there were S species at time t, and no immigration or emigration occurred between t
and (t + t);
2) there were (S -1) species at time t, and one species immigrated;
3) there were (S +1) species at time t, and one species emigrated.
Assuming t is very small, the probability of more than one immigration or emigration can be
ignored. Taking the limit t u on both the sides of Eq.3.9 gives Eq.3.10 as shown below.
P
s
= _
-(z
s
+ p
s
)P
s
+ p
s+1
P
s+1
S = u
-(z
s
+ p
s
)P
s
+z
s-1
P
s-1
+ p
s+1
P
s+1
1 S S
mux
- 1
-(z
s
+p
s
)P
s
+ z
s-1
P
s-1
S = S
mux
(S.1u)
We define n = S
mux
and P = |P
0
P
n
]
1
for notation simplicity. Now Eq.3.10 can be
arranged in a single matrix equation as given Eq.3.11.
P
= AP (S.11)
Where
A =
l
l
l
l
l
-(z
0
+ p
0
) p
1
u u
z
0
-(z
0
+ p
0
) p
2

z
n-2
-(z
n-1
+p
n-1
) p
n
u u z
n-1
-(z
n-1
+ p
n-1
)1
1
1
1
1
(S.12)
For straight line curves shown in Fig. 3.3, we have
p
k
=
Ek
n
(S.1S)
Page|22
z
k
= I _1 -
k
n
] (S.14)
Now consider the special caseE = I. Combining Eq.3.13 and Eq.3.14 we have,
z
k
+ p
k
= E (S.1S)
3.4.1 Biogeography-Based Optimization (BBO)
In this section, how theory of biogeography applied to solve practical optimization
problem is discussed. The BBO is mainly consists of two major steps, e.g., migration and
mutation as discussed below.
A. Migration
In BBO, candidate solutions are represented as vectors of real numbers. Each candidate
solution represents as one habitat and each real number in the array is considered as one
SIV for that habitat. The fitness of each candidate solution i.e. HSI value is evaluated by
using its SIVs. On the basis of HSI values of candidate solution set, better quality and
inferior quality solutions are decided.
The emigration and immigration rates of each habitat are used to probabilistically share
information between habitats. A habitat to be modified or not is decided by its habitat
modification probability (P
mod
). If a habitat is selected for modification then its emigration
rate decides the modification of its each SIV. If a SIV is selected for modification then
immigration rate of other habitats probabilistically decide the habitat from which the
corresponding SIV is to be replaced.
B. Mutation
Natural calamities or some other events can drastically change the HSI of a habitat. This
is represented as mutation of SIVs in BBO and species count probability of each habitat is
used to determine the mutation rates. The probability of each number of species can be
calculated by solving the differential equations given in Eq. (3.5). The species count
probability of a habitat tells the likelihood that exits as a solution for a particular problem.
The habitats having very high or very low HSI value are improbable solutions. So they will
mutate to some other solutions. But medium HSI valued habitats are highly probable
solutions so they have little chance to mutate to other solutions. So the mutation rate of
each habitat (m(s)) can be calculated in terms of its species count probability using the Eq.
(3.10).
Page|23
m(s) = m_max(1 - P
s
P
smux
) (S.16)
Where m_mox is an user defined parameter. Mutation operation creates diversity in the
solution space. Without mutation operation, the highly probable solutions tend to be more
dominant in the population. By mutation operation, both high HSI habitats and low HSI
habitats may be modified to new habitats having still better HSI value in comparison to
their earlier value.
Some of the best habitats are selected and kept as it is without migration and mutation
operation from one generation to the next iteration in order to prevent the best solutions from
being corrupted by migration and mutation process. This operation is known as elitism operation.
3.4.2 BBO Algorithm[53]
The algorithm for the BBO can be described as given below.
Step 1: Initialize BBO parameters like habitat modification probability P
mod
, maximum mutation
rate m
max
, max immigration rate I, maximum emigration rate E, step size for numerical
integration dt, number of habitats to be retained in the habitat matrix N, number of SIV m,
elitism parameter p, maximum number of iteration. Randomly initialize all SIVs according to
their feasible range of each habitat of the habitat matrix.
Step 2: In this work, an objective function is to be minimized by BBO for obtaining tuning
parameters of PSS and damping controller for STATCOM. Calculate the fitness value of each
habitat by evaluating the objective function at the given SIVs of each habitat. This fitness value
represents HSI value for the habitat.
Step 3: Based on optimum HSI value, elite habitats are selected.
Step 4: Probabilistically perform migration operation on SIVs of all non-elite habitats. The
selection of those SIVs for migration operation is described below.
1) Assign number of species to each habitat as given below:-
Sort habitats according to their HSI value such that best habitat is the first member
and worst habitat is the last member of sorted habitat matrix.
For i = 1 to N
Species count of habitat = N - i ;
End
Page|24
2) Then calculate value of immigration rate z and emigration rate p for each habitat set:-
For i = 1 to N
z(i) = I (1 - Spccics count o bobitot i Eobitot sizc N );
p(i) = E Spccics count o bobitot i Eobitot sizc N ;
End
Normalize the immigration rate and emigration rate using the following formula:-
z
mn
= minimum value of all z;
z
mux
= maximum value of all z;
p
mn
= minimum value of all p;
p
mux
= maximum value of all p;
For i = 1 to N
z
scuIc
(i) = z
Lowc
+(z
0ppc
-z
Lowc
)
(z(i) - z
mn
) (z
mux
-z
mn
) ;
p
scuIc
(i) = p
Lowc
+ (p
0ppc
- p
Lowc
)
(p(i) - p
mn
) (p
mux
- p
mn
) ;
End
3) Next probabilistically select SIVs of each non-elite habitat for modification and also
the modification source habitat.
For k = p + 1 to N
Randomly generate a number r in [0, 1];
If r <= P
mod

For ] = 1 to m
% Select the habitat from which the corresponding SIV to be replaced:
Randomly generate a number g in [0, 1];
If g < z
scuIc
(k)
R = g sum(p
scuIc
);
Select = p
scuIc
(1);
SelectInuex = 1;
Page|25
While(RanuomNum > Sclcct)

onJ(SelectInuex < N)
SelectInuex =
SelectInuex + 1;
Sclcct = Sclcct +
p
scuIc
(SclcctInJcx);
End While
Ncwly gcncrotcJ bobitot(k, ]) =
0lJ bobitot(SclcctInJcx, ]);
Else
Ncwly gcncrotcJ bobitot(k, ]) =
0lJ bobitot(k, ])
End If
End For
End If
End For
Step 5: Probabilistically apply Mutation operation on all non-elite habitats newly generated by
migration operation as described below:-
1) Update the Species count probability of each habitat by using Eq.3.5;
2) Calculate mutation rate of each habitat by using Eq.3.10;
3) Apply mutation on each non-elite habitat as described below:-
For i = p + 1: N
Randomly generate a number t in [0, 1];
If mutotion rotc(i) > t
X=randomly generated a new habitat in the feasible region;
Ncwly gcncrotcJ bobitot (i, : ) = X;
End If
End For
Page|26
Step 6: Go to Step 2. This loop can be terminated after a predefined number of iterations
(maximum number of iteration) or the fitness value of any habitat evaluated in Step 2 reaches a
predefined range.
3.5 BINARY CODED BIO-GEOGRAPHY BASED OPTIMIZATION
ToincreasemorediversityinBBOsearch,amodifiedBBOalgorithmisproposedwhere
all SIVs are represented as equivalent binary string. So a habitat consists of SIVs of real
numbers,nowbecomesastringofbinarybits.
All the steps are almost same as previous BBO algorithm. The difference in Migration
andMutationoperationarediscussedbelow.
3.5.1 Migration:
ItissimilartomultipointcrossoverinGAasdiscussedinCh.2.Onlydifferenceisthebits
between two consecutive crossover points of a habitat under migration operation are
exchangedwithotherhabitatsselectedprobabilisticallyonthebasisoftheiremigrationrateas
describedbelow.
Forhabitati = 1: N
Byhabitatmodificationprobability,decidewhethermigrationisneededornot.
Ifmigrationisselected
Randomlygeneratec_pnumberofmultiplecrossoverlocations;
Fork = 1: c_p
Randomlygenerateanumberxbetween[01]
Ifx < z
scuIc
(i)
The bits between two consecutive crossover locations are
to be emigrated from a habitat, as described in Step 3 of BBO
algorithm.
Else
Noemigration,itiskeptasitis.
EndIf
Page|27
End
End
3.5.2 Mutation
MutationoperationissimilartomutationoperationinbinarycodedGA.Mutationrate
as calculatedinEq. 3.10actsas mutationprobability.Thehabitatselectedformutation based
onitsmutationprobabilityisreplacedbyarandomlygeneratedbinarystringofsamelength.
Fig. 3.3: Species model of a single habitat

3.6 CONCLUSION
In this chapter, different optimization techniques used in this work has been discussed. In
the next chapter, how these techniques can be applied to power system for optimum parameter
determination of PSS and SDC are discussed. Also both eigen value analysis of linearised power
system and non-linear time domain simulation techniques are discussed to test the effectiveness
of these optimization techniques.

Page|28
START
Randomly initialize
habitats
Determine HSI of
each habitat
Elite habitat
selection
Perform Migration
operation
Apply mutation
operator
Determine HSI of
habitat set
Converged
END
Yes
No
Determine Mutation
rate
Assign species
count, immigration
rate and emigration
rate to each habitat
Fig. 3.4: Flow chart for BBO algorithm
Page|29
CHAPTER 4
RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1 GENERAL
To test the effectiveness of the proposed algorithms, a 10 machine-39-bus, New England
system is considered. The complete description of the system is given in Appendix A. In this
system, PSS is connected to all ten machines. Bus no. 18 is selected for the placement of
STACOM and the active power flow in the line connected between bus no 17 and 18 is
considered as the stabilizing signal for SDC [49].
4.1.1 Load Flow with STATCOM
Treating STATCOM bus as a generator bus, real power injection at STATCOM bus as
zero value and reactive power limit as STATCOM reactive power limit, the N-R load flow is
carried out to find steady state parameters of STATCOM.

4.1.2 Operating Conditions for the Test System
Case 1: base case of the system;
Case 2: outage of line connecting bus no. 33 and 34 with load factor 1.3;
Load factor means the net base case load power is changed by load factor. The
generations of all generating units are changed by same amount as load changed on proportionate
basis to their inertia constant [2]. In designing the cost value for objective function, the values of
o
0
and
0
are taken as -1.0 and 0.20 respectively [15]. The minimum and maximum values of
PSS parameter and STATCOM damping controller parameters to be designed used in this work
are given below: [44].
For PSS:-
K
pss
mux
= Su.u K
pss
mn
= u.uu1
I
1
mux
= 2.u I
1
mn
= u.u1
I
2
mux
= u.2u I
2
mn
= u.uu1
Page|30
I
3
mux
= 2.u I
3
mn
= u.u1
I
4
mux
= u.2u I
4
mn
= u.uu1
For STATCOM damping controller:-
K
st
mux
= S.u K
st
mn
= u.uu1
I
1s
mux
= .2 I
1s
mn
= u.u1
I
2s
mux
= 2.u I
2s
mn
= u.uu1
I
3s
mux
= .2 I
3s
mn
= u.u1
I
4s
mux
= 2.u I
4s
mn
= u.uu1
4.2 GA BASED COORDINATED DESIGN OF PSS AND STATCOM
4.2.1 Simulation and Result
In this case, a binary coded GA (BCGA) as discussed in Section 3.1 is used for
coordinated damping controller design for PSS and STATCOM. By trial and error method, the
final best parameters of GA are found to be, p
c
=0.4 and p
m
=0.004, population size =100,
crossover points =15, maximum number of generation =500. The convergence limit for
objective function considered in this work is taken as1u
-8
.
Convergence pattern of GA for 10-machine system is shown in Fig. 4.1. The optimized
PSS and STATCOM damping controller parameters for 10-machine system are shown in Table
4.1 and Table 4.2 respectively. The eigen values and damping factor (electromechanical modes
(0.1-3.0Hz)) for all the above operating conditions without and with damping controllers (PSS
and STATCOM damping controller) are shown in Table 4.3 and Table 4.4 respectively. The
eigen values (corresponding to unstable modes) are shown in shaded cells in bold letters and
their positions in s-plane for different operating conditions are shown in Fig. 4.2-4.6.
4.2.2 Non-Linear Time-Domain Simulation
The following disturbances has been simulated using 4th order Runge-Kutta method [2]
to validate the effectiveness of the GA based parameter design for PSS and STATCOM damping
controller for 10-machine system. The variation of rotor angles with respect to time for only
most disturbed machines are shown in Fig. 4.7-4.9.
In non-linear simulation both rotor angle measured in center of inertia reference frame
(COI) which can be explained as: [2]
Page|31
o
C0I
k
= o
k
-
E
I
o
I
n
I=1
E
I
n
I=1

(4.1)
Where
n = total number of generators.
o
C0I
k
= rotor angle of k
th
machine in COI reference frame.

Table 4.1: Optimal PSS parameters (GA)
Gen No. K
w
T
1
T
2
T
3
T
4

1 12.0804 0.7612 0.0081 0.0671 0.0993
2 13.7431 0.0095 0.1329 1.8400 0.1010
3 8.2578 0.7076 0.1377 0.0851 0.0785
4 16.8433 0.4428 0.1290 0.3778 0.0750
5 5.1733 0.3845 0.1256 0.2624 0.1338
6 5.4587 0.1563 0.0956 0.3362 0.0781
7 8.4045 0.1510 0.1319 0.2472 0.1383
8 6.2961 0.3912 0.0955 0.4891 0.1130
9 9.4060 0.0126 0.0937 0.2129 0.0736
10 1.8705 0.2367 0.1135 0.1316 0.1242
Fig. 4.1: Convergence characteristic of GA for 10-machine system

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Number of iterations
F
i
t
n
e
s
s

v
a
l
u
e
Page|32
Table 4.2: Optimal STATCOM damping controller parameters (GA)

Gen No. K
xt
T
1x
T
2x
T
3x
T
4x

1
0.1978 0.0076 1.9811 0.0626 0.4742

Table 4.3: Eigen Values and damping factor without PSS and SDC (GA)
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5
3.8552+9.9077i
(0.3626)
3.6541+9.9906i
(0.3435)
3.5562+9.9637i
(0.3361)
3.6683+10.0153i
(0.3439)
2.8859+9.9274i
(0.2791)
0.1062+10.1122i
(0.0105)
0.0396+10.1770i
(0.0039)
0.1327+10.1615i
(0.0131)
0.0485+10.1763i
(0.0048)
0.0278+10.1854i
(0.0027)
0.3314+9.9769i
(0.0332)
0.1674+10.0524i
(0.0167)
0.1734+10.0567i
(0.0172)
0.1598+10.0549i
(0.0159)
0.2074+10.0459i
(0.0206)
0.3639+8.9633i
(0.0406)
0.2495+8.9572i
(0.0278)
0.2518+8.9268i
(0.0282)
0.2244+8.9746i
(0.0250)
0.7341+8.6918i
(0.0842)
0.6345+8.5579i
(0.0739)
0.8136+8.6089i
(0.0941)
0.8040+8.6531i
(0.0925)
0.7911+8.6355i
(0.0912)
0.3196+7.5145i
(0.0425)
0.4636+7.6102i
(0.0608)
0.4061+7.2394i
(0.0560)
0.5115+7.6092i
(0.0671)
0.5507+7.5372i
(0.0729)
0.1229+8.2574i
(0.0149)
0.1231+7.5676i
(0.0163)
0.2743+7.5401i
(0.0364)
0.0339+7.6019i
(0.0045)
0.1986+7.5795i
(0.0262)
0.1769+8.0846i
(0.0219)
0.3072+8.0701i
(0.0380)
0.1555+8.1237i
(0.0191)
0.1285+6.5060i
(0.0197)
0.1495+8.1278i
(0.0184)
0.1071+7.0257i
(0.0152)
0.1931+4.4593i
(0.0433)
0.1780+4.3272i
(0.0411)
0.1177+4.3004i
(0.0274)
0.1740+4.3781i
(0.0397)
0.1370+4.1048i
(0.0334)

4.2.3 Disturbances for 10 machine 39 bus system
Case 1:
A five-cycle three-phase self clearing fault, at 15
th
bus is simulated at base operating
condition. The fault occurred at 1sec and cleared at 1.1sec.
Case 1:
th
bus is simulated at a load factor of 1.2.
The fault occurred at 1sec and cleared at 1.1sec.
Case 3:
th
bus is simulated for load factor of 1.2.
The fault occurred at 1sec and cleared at 1.1sec followed by opening of line between buses no 14
and 15.
Page|33
Table 4.4: Eigen Values and damping factor with PSS and SDC (GA)
7.3991+16.7839i
(0.4034)
7.3640+16.9117i
(0. 3992)
5.6476+16.3995i
(0. 3256)
7.2991+16.7378i
(0. 3997)
6.9517+16.3289i
(0. 3917)
5.4985+16.6178i
(0.3141)
1.4728+3.2296i
(0. 4149)
1.4280+3.2292i
(0. 4044)
1.1382+3.4025i
(0. 3172)
1.0141+3.2435i
(0. 2984)
4.5717+13.4654i
(0.3215)
1.0878+3.4709i
(0. 2991)
1.0960+3.5095i
(0. 2981)
1.0039+2.9851i
(0. 3188)
1.5879+3.4504i
(0. 4181)
3.5962+9.4209i
(0.3566)
1.6300+3.9465i
(0. 3817)
2.0056+3.9887i
(0. 4492)
1.3620+3.4187i
(0. 3701)
7.3118+1.1805i
(0. 9872)
2.7942+8.2096i
(0.3222)
1.8709+4.1929i
(0. 4075)
1.6493+4.3005i
(0. 3581)
6.7414+5.2053i
(0. 7915)
6.7235+15.7108i
(0. 3934)
11.4014+1.2667i
(0.9939)
2.9584+5.5137i
(0. 4728)
1.7375+5.5203i
(0. 3002)
1.7648+3.9559i
(0. 4074)
4.4138+13.4290i
(0. 3122)
7.1039+6.1085i
(0.7582)
6.7532+5.2269i
(0. 7908)
8.4810+3.5106i
(0. 9240)
1.9520+3.9882i
(0. 4396)
1.2963+4.0846i
(0. 3025)
6.7922+5.2539i
(0.7910)
9.5605+1.6534i
(0. 9854)
9.8711+1.3723i
(0. 9905)
2.9644+5.5198i
(0. 4731)
2.2840+4.1755i
(0. 4799)
3.0100+5.4249i
(0.4852)
8.5993+4.0679i
(0. 9040)
7.0915+5.2482i
(0. 8038)
3.9846+9.2475i
(0. 3957)
8.6256+0.7652i
(0. 9961)
1.3009+4.0492i
(0.3059)
7.1002+6.4118i
(0. 7422)
7.3545+6.3903i
(0. 7549)
9.6280+1.6305i
(0. 9860)
2.9575+5.6511i
(0. 4637)
2.6529+8.2708i
(0. 3054)
2.9735+7.0493i
(0. 3887)
8.6246+4.0631i
(0. 9046)
3.1451+8.8209i
(0. 3358)
6.5512+15.6381i
(0. 3864)
3.7269+9.4237i
(0. 3678)
7.0071+6.3970i
(0. 7385)
8.8144+4.5509i
(0. 8886)
4.4110+13.6157i
(0. 3082)
4.4087+13.3772i
(0. 3130)
2.6866+8.3076i
(0. 3077)
7.5150+6.3094i
(0. 7659)
4.0054+9.2201i
(0. 3984)
9.7172+15.7087i
(0. 5261)
5.6845+16.5765i
(0. 3244)
2.5976+7.2909i
(0. 3356)
Fig. 4.2: Eigen values associated with electromechanical oscillation modes for Case 1.
-9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
-50
0
50
Real axis
I
m
a
z
i
n
a
r
y

a
x
i
s
Page|34



-9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
-50
0
50
Real axis
i
m
a
z
i
n
a
r
y

a
x
i
s
-9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
-50
0
50
Real axis
I
m
a
z
i
n
a
r
y

a
x
i
s
-9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
-50
0
50
Real axis
I
m
a
z
i
n
a
r
y

a
x
i
s
Page|35

-9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
-50
0
50
Real axis
I
m
a
z
i
n
a
r
y

a
x
i
s
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
2
(a)

Without SDC and PSS
With SDC and PSS
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
6
(b)

Without SDC and PSS
With SDC and PSS
Page|36
Fig. 4.7: Rotor angle delta in (COI) V/s time (Case 1)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
7
(c)

Without SDC and PSS
With SDC and PSS
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I
(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
4
(a)

With SDC and PSS
Without SDC and PSS
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
6
(b)

With SDC and PSS
Without SDC and PSS
Page|37

Fig. 4.8: Rotor angle delta in COI V/s time (Case 2)

0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
7
(c)

With SDC and PSS
Without SDC and PSS
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
2
(a)

Without SDC and PSS
With SDC and PSS
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0
0.5
1
1.5
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
5
(b)

Without SDC and PSS
With SDC and PSS
Page|38

4.3 BCBBO BASED COORDINATED DESIGN OF PSS AND STATCOM
4.3.1 Simulation and Result
In this case, a binary coded BCBBO as discussed in Section.3.3 is used for coordinated
damping controller design for PSS and STATCOM. BBO parameters considered in this problem
are m_max=.001. E=1, I=1, time step of integration=1, maximum number of species=total
number of habitats, crossover points = 15, maximum number of iterations = 500. The
convergence limit for objective function considered in this work is taken as1u
-8
.
Convergence pattern of BCBBO for 10-machine system is shown in Fig. 4.10. The
optimized PSS and STATCOM damping controller parameters for 10-machine system are shown
in Table 4.7 and Table 4.8 respectively. The eigen values and damping factors
(electromechanical modes (0.1-2.0Hz)) for all the above operating conditions without and with
damping controllers (PSS and STATCOM damping controller) are shown in Table 4.9 and Table
4.10 respectively. The eigen values (corresponding to unstable modes) are shown in shaded cells
in bold letters and their positions in s-plane for different operating conditions are shown in Fig.
4.11-4.15.
4.3.2 Non-Linear Time-Domain Simulation
The same types of disturbances as discussed in Section.4.1.3 has been simulated using
4th order Runge-Kutta method [2] to validate the effectiveness of the BCBBO based parameter
design for PSS and STATCOM damping controller for 10-machine system. The variation of
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
6
(c)

Without SDC and PSS
With SDC and PSS
Page|39
rotor angles with respect to time for only most disturbed machines are shown in Fig. 4.16-4.18
for 10-machine system. In non-linear simulation rotor angle measured in center of inertia
reference frame.

Fig. 4.10: Convergence characteristic of BCBBO for 10-machine system

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
0
2
4
6
8
F
i
t
n
e
s
s

v
a
l
u
e
-9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
-50
0
50
Real axis
I
m
a
z
i
n
a
r
y

a
x
i
s
Page|40

-9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
-50
0
50
Real axis
I
m
a
z
i
n
a
r
y

a
x
i
s
-9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
-50
0
50
Real axis
I
m
a
z
i
n
a
r
y

a
x
i
s
-9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
-50
0
50
Real axis
I
m
a
z
i
n
a
r
y

a
x
i
s
Page|41

Table 4.5: Optimal PSS parameters (BCBBO)
Gen No. K
w
T
1
T
2
T
3
T
4

1 18.6604 0.2087 0.1493 0.5376 0.0794
2 18.8009 0.0371 0.0988 0.0275 0.1338
3 17.5196 0.6030 0.0434 0.1095 0.1489
4 16.8148 0.8943 0.1111 0.0819 0.0807
5 8.3087 0.1022 0.1218 0.1367 0.1250
6 9.4661 1.5129 0.0777 0.0599 0.0739
7 3.8410 0.3387 0.0426 0.0969 0.1267
8 2.6139 0.1311 0.1121 1.1050 0.1274
9 13.3542 0.7185 0.1379 0.0510 0.1207
10 3.1185 0.0858 0.1420 0.2445 0.1270

Table 4.6: Optimal SDC Parameters (BCBBO)
Gen No. K
xt
T
1x
T
2x
T
3x
T
4x

1 0.2361 0.0031 1.7294 0.0288 0.5365

-10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
-50
0
50
Real axis
i
m
a
z
i
n
a
r
y

a
x
i
s
Page|42
Table 4.7: Eigen Values and damping factor without PSS and SDC (BCBBO)
3.8552+9.9077i
(0.3626)
3.6541+9.9906i
(0.3435)
3.5562+9.9637i
(0.3361)
3.6683+10.0153i
(0.3439)
2.8859+9.9274i
(0.2791)
0.1062+10.1122i
(0.0105)
0.0396+10.1770i
(0.0039)
0.1327+10.1615i
(0.0131)
0.0485+10.1763i
(0.0048)
0.0278+10.1854i
(0.0027)
0.3314+9.9769i
(0.0332)
0.1674+10.0524i
(0.0167)
0.1734+10.0567i
(0.0172)
0.1598+10.0549i
(0.0159)
0.2074+10.0459i
(0.0206)
0.3639+8.9633i
(0.0406)
0.2495+8.9572i
(0.0278)
0.2518+8.9268i
(0.0282)
0.2244+8.9746i
(0.0250)
0.7341+8.6918i
(0.0842)
0.6345+8.5579i
(0.0739)
0.8136+8.6089i
(0.0941)
0.8040+8.6531i
(0.0925)
0.7911+8.6355i
(0.0912)
0.3196+7.5145i
(0.0425)
0.4636+7.6102i
(0.0608)
0.4061+7.2394i
(0.0560)
0.5115+7.6092i
(0.0671)
0.5507+7.5372i
(0.0729)
0.1229+8.2574i
(0.0149)
0.1231+7.5676i
(0.0163)
0.2743+7.5401i
(0.0364)
0.0339+7.6019i
(0.0045)
0.1986+7.5795i
(0.0262)
0.1769+8.0846i
(0.0219)
0.3072+8.0701i
(0.0380)
0.1555+8.1237i
(0.0191)
0.1285+6.5060i
(0.0197)
0.1495+8.1278i
(0.0184)
0.1071+7.0257i
(0.0152)
0.1931+4.4593i
(0.0433)
0.1780+4.3272i
(0.0411)
0.1177+4.3004i
(0.0274)
0.1740+4.3781i
(0.0397)
0.1370+4.1048i
(0.0334)

Table 4.8: Eigen Values and damping factor with PSS and SDC (BCBBO)
6.0807+15.4609i
(0. 3660)
18.9467+8.0271i
(0.9208)
4.0919+15.6925i
(0.2523)
19.5112+8.2349i
(0.9213)
17.3437+8.2807i
(0.9024)
3.7668+15.9314i
(0. 2301)
6.1823+15.2046i
(0.3767)
6.3329+14.8633i
(0.3920)
6.1515+15.2921i
(0.3732)
4.6151+15.4271i
(0.2866)
2.4084+10.8883i
(0. 2160)
3.9127+15.7965i
(0.2404)
2.8525+10.0022i
(0.2743)
3.8684+15.8417i
(0.2372)
5.7732+14.6525i
(0.3666)
3.5271+4.4165i
(0. 6240)
2.3842+10.8240i
(0.2151)
2.3236+7.1846i
(0.3077)
2.3625+10.8781i
(0.2122)
2.3819+10.2587i
(0.2262)
1.3213+4.1764i
(0. 3016)
3.1254+8.2283i
(0.3551)
4.0791+4.5233i
(0.6697)
3.1167+8.2417i
(0.3537)
2.4727+6.6927i
(0.3466)
3.1476+8.2664i
(0. 3558)
3.9733+4.3964i
(0.6705)
1.1943+4.1981i
(0.2736)
3.9350+4.4751i
(0.6603)
4.7090+4.5554i
(0.7187)
3.5271+4.4165i
(0. 6240)
1.0391+4.2354i
(0.2383)
2.2973+3.5407i
(0.5443)
1.1745+4.2533i
(0.2662)
1.0336+3.9117i
(0.2555)
7.8903+0.8503i
(0. 9942)
8.0103+0.7443i
(0.9957)
1.3215+2.4173i
(0.4797)
7.9977+0.7639i
(0.9955)
2.3072+3.7460i
(0.5244)
6.7966+0.6471i
(0.9955)
2.2754+3.4637i
(0.5491)
1.6024+3.2286i
(0.4446)
2.2555+3.4784i
(0.5441)
1.6221+3.5435i
(0.4162)
1.6223+3.1117i
(0. 4623)
1.5025+3.2804i
(0.4164)
1.0152+2.7665i
(0.3445)
1.4728+3.2350i
(0.4143)
8.1503+0.7020i
(0.9963)
2.3018+3.4059i
(0. 5599)
1.6360+2.7430i
(0.5122)
1.6465+2.7561i
(0.5129)
1.6707+2.7594i
(0.5179)
6.7108+1.0341i
(0.9883)
Page|43

0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-0.8
-0.7
-0.6
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
2
(a)

With SDC and PSS
Without SDC and PSS
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
6
(b)

With SDC and PSS
Without SDC and PSS
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
7
(c)

With SDC and PSS
Without SDC and PSS
Page|44

0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
4
(a)

With SDC and PSS
Without SDC and PSS
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
6
(b)

With SDC and PSS
Without SDC and PSS
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
7
(c)

With SDC and PSS
Without SDC and PSS
Page|45

0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-0.7
-0.6
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
2
(a)

With SDC and PSS
Without SDC and PSS
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
o
i

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
5
(b)

With SDC and PSS
Without SDC and PSS
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Time (Sec)
D
e
l
t
a

i
n

C
O
I

(
r
a
d
i
a
n
)
-
M
/
c
-
6
(c)

With SDC and PSS
Without SDC and PSS
Page|46
4.4 COMPARISONS AMONG BBO ,BCGA AND BCBBO

Each algorithm had a population size of 100, an elitism parameter of 5, and ran for 100
iterations for the same problem of minimization of objective function discussed in Section 3 with
random initialization. This simulation ran for 100 times for each algorithm. A graph is plotted
between average fitness values with respect to iterations for each algorithm. The graph is shown
in Fig. 4.19. The figure shows that BCBBO takes less number of iterations in comparison with
other algorithms.

Fig. 4.19: Comparison Curve for GA, BBO, BCBBO

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
A
v
e
r
a
g
e

f
i
t
n
e
s
s

v
a
l
u
e

BCBBO
BCGA
BCBBO
Page|47
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE OF THE WORK

CONCLUSION
In this work, a new optimization technique like binary coded biogeography based
optimization (BCBBO) along with binary coded genetic algorithm (BCGA) have been used for
simultaneous tuning of conventional PSS and STATCOM damping controller parameters. The
comparison among different optimization techniques has shown that the new optimization
techniques (BCBBO) gives better result over other optimization techniques. The objective
function used in this work also shifts the lightly damped electromechanical oscillation modes at
different operating conditions to a D-shaped region in the left of s-plane. The method has been
applied to a multi-machine power system at different loading conditions for different system
configurations. Non-linear time domain result shows that the coordinately designed PSS and
STATCOM damping controller work effectively over a wide range of operating conditions and
different system configurations.
FUTURE SCOPE
Coordinated design of PSS and STATCOM damping controller for wide area
application.
Coordinated design of dual input typedelta-P-omega PSS with STATCOM damping
controller.
Coordinated design of PSS with STATCOM damping controller based on PWM
based direct controlled STATCOM.

References
48|P a g e

[1] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, Tata-McGraw-Hill, 2006.
[2] P.W. Sauer and M.A. Pai, "Power System Dynamics and Stability", Englewood Cliffs,
Prentice Hall, NJ , 1998
[3] P. Kundur, M. Klein, G. J . Rogers, and M. S. Zywno, Application of Power System
Stabilizers for Enhancement of Overall System Stability, IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, Vol. 4, No. 2, May 1989, pp. 614626.
[4] J oe H. Chow, George E. Boukarim, and Alexander Murdoch Power System Stabilizers
as Undergraduate Control Design Projects IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol.
19, No. 1, February 2004, pp. 144-151.
[5] M.J . Gibbard, Coordination Design of Multi-Machine Power System Stabilizers Based
Damping Torque Concepts, IEE Proc, Generation, Transmission and Distribution,
Vol.135, No.4,1988, pp. 276-284.
[6] M.J . Gibbard, Coordination of Multi-Machine Stabilizer Gain Settings for a Specified
Level of System Damping Performance, IEE Proc. Generation, Transmission and
Distribution, 1982, Vol. 129, No. 2: pp.45-48.
[7] Yao-nan Yu, Qing-hua Li, Pole-Placement Power System Stabilizers Design of An
Unstable Nine-Machine System IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 5, No. 2,
May 1990, pp-353-358.
[8] J .H. Chow J .J . Sanchez-Gasca, Pole-Placement Designs of Power System Stabilizers
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 4, No. 1, February 1989, pp-271-277.
[9] P. Shrikant Rao and I. Sen, Robust Pole Placement Stabilizer Design Using Linear
Matrix Inequalities IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, VOL.15, No.1, February
2000, pp 313-319.
[10] A. S. Costa, F. D. Freitas, and A. S. Silva , Design of Decentralized Controllers for
Large Power Systems Considering Sparsity IEEE Transactions on Power Systems,
Vol.12, No.1, pp. 144-152.
[11] Rajeev Gupta, B.Bandyopadhyay, A.M.Kulkarni and T.C. Manjunath Design of
Decentralized Power System Stabilizer for Multi-Machine Power System using Periodic
References
49|P a g e
Output Feedback Technique Seventh lnternational Conference on Control,

Automation,Robotics and Vision (ICARCV'OZ), Dec 2002, Slngapore.
[12] Rajeev Gupta, B. Bandyopadhyay and A. M. Kulkarni, Robust Decentralized Fast-
Output Sampling Technique Based Power System Stabilizer for a Multi-Machine Power
System, International J ournal of Systems Science, Vol. 36, No.5, 2005, pp. 297 -314
[13] P. Zhang and A. H. Coonick, Coordinated Synthesis of PSS Parameters in Multi-
Machine Power Systems Using the Method of Inequalities Applied to Genetic
Algorithms, IEEE. Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 15, No. 2, May 2000, pp. 811-
816.
[14] K.Sebaaa and M. Boudourb, Optimal Locations and Tuning of Robust Power System
Stabilizer Using Genetic Algorithms, Electric Power Systems Research, Vol. 79, 2009,
pp. 406416.
[15] Y. L. Abdel Magid and M. A. Abido, Optimal Multi Objective Design of Robust Power
System Stabilizers Using Genetic Algorithms, IEEE. Transactions on Power Systems,
Vol. 18, No. 3, August 2003, pp.1125-1132.
[16] A. Andreoiu and K. Bhattachawa, Robust Tuning of Power System Stabilizers Using a
Lyapunov Method Based Genetic Algorithm, Generation Transmission Distribution,
Vol. 149, No. 5, September 2002, pp. 585-592.
[17] L.B. Do Bomfim, Glauco N. Taranto, Djalma M.Falcao, Simultaneous Tuning of Power
System Damping Controllers Using Genetic Algorithms, IEEE. Transactions on Power
Systems, Vol. 15, No. 1, February 2000, pp. 163-169.
[18] S. Mishra, M. Tripathy, J . Nanda, Multi-Machine Power System Stabilizer Design by
Rule Based Bacteria Foraging, Electric Power Systems Research, Vol. 77, 2007, pp.
15951607.
[19] M. A. Abido and Y. L. Abdel Magid, Optimal Design of Power System Stabilizers
Using Evolutionary Programming, IEEE. Transactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. 17,
No. 4, December 2002, pp. 429-436.
References
50|P a g e
[20] M. A. Abido, Optimal Design of PowerSystem Stabilizers Using Particle Swarm

Optimization IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. 17, No. 3, September
2002, pp. 406-413.
[21] M. A. Abido, Robust Design of Multi Machine Power System Stabilizers Using
Simulated Annealing, IEEE. Transactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. 15, No. 3,
September 2000, pp. 297-304.
[22] S. Q. Yuan and D. Z. Fang, Robust PSS Parameters Design Using Trajectory Sensitivity
Approach, IEEE. Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 24, No. 2, May 2009, pp. 1011-
1018.
[23] V. Bandal and B. Bandyopadhyay, Robust Decentralized Output Feedback Sliding
Mode Control Technique-Based Power System Stabilizer (PSS) for Multi-machine Power
System IET Control Theory Appl. , Vol. 1, No. 5, 2007, pp. 15121522.
[24] H. Huerta , Alexander G. Loukianov, J ose M. Caedo, Decentralized Sliding Mode
Block Control of Multi Machine Power Systems Electrical Power and Energy Systems,
Vol. 32, 2010, pp. 111
[25] Zhenhua J iang Design of a Nonlinear Power System Stabilizer Using Synergetic
Control Theory Electric Power Systems Research, Vol. 79, 2009, pp. 855862.
[26] A. Colbia-Vega, J . de Leo Morales, L. Fridman, O. Salas-Pen, M.T. Mata J imenez,
Robust Excitation Control Design Using Sliding-Mode Technique for Multi Machine
Power Systems Electric Power Systems Research, Vol. 78, 2008, pp. 16271634
[27] Soon Kiat Yee, J ovica V. Milanovic, Fuzzy Logic Controller for Decentralized
Stabilization of Multi machine Power Systems IEEE transactions on fuzzy systems, Vol.
16, No. 4, August 2008, pp-971-980.
[28] D. K. Chaturvedi and O. P. Malik, Generalized Neuron-Based Adaptive PSS for Multi
machine Environment IEEE transactions on power systems, Vol. 20, No. 1, February
2005, pp 358-366
[29] D. K. Chaturvedi and O. P. Malik , Neurofuzzy Power System Stabilizer IEEE
transactions on energy conversion, Vol. 23, No. 3, September 2008, pp-887-894.
References
51|P a g e
[30] N. Mithulananthan, C. A. Canizares, J . Reeve, and G. J . Rogers, Comparison of PSS,

SVC, and STATCOM Controllers for Damping Power System Oscillations, IEEE
transactions on power systems, Vol. 18, No. 2, 1993, pp. 786-792.
[31] Alan R. Wood and Chris M. Osauskas, A Linear Frequency-Domain Model of a
STATCOM IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 19, No. 3, J uly 2004, pp 1410-
1418.
[32] Ronny Sternberger and Dragan J ovcic, Analytical Modeling of a Square-Wave-
Controlled Cascaded Multilevel STATCOM IEEE transactions on power delivery, Vol.
24, No. 4, October 2009, pp. 2261-2268.
[33] H . F. Wang, Phillips-Heffron Model of Power Systems Installed With STATCOM and
Applications IEE Proc. Generation, Transmission, Distribution, Vol. 146, No. 5,
September 1999
[34] K. R. Padiyar and V. S. Parkash, Tuning and Performance Evaluation of Damping
Controller for a STATCOM, International J ournal of Electrical Power and Energy
Systems, Vol. 25, 2003, pp. 155-166.
[35] Vitaly Spitsa, Abraham Alexandrovitz, and Ezra Zeheb, Design of a Robust State
Feedback Controller for a STATCOM Using a Zero Set Concept IEEE transactions on
power delivery, Vol. 25, No. 1, J anuary 2010, pp 456-467.
[36] Salman Mohagheghi, Ganesh Kumar Venayagamoorthy and Ronald G. Harley, Optimal
Neuro-Fuzzy External Controller for a STATCOM in the 12-Bus Benchmark Power
System IEEE transactions on power delivery, Vol. 22, No. 4, October 2007, pp. 2548-
2558.
[37] Nadarajah Mithulananthan, Claudio A. Canizares,J ohn Reeve and Graham J . Rogers,
Comparison of PSS, SVC, and STATCOM Controllers for Damping Power System
Oscillations IEEE transactions on power systems, Vol. 18, No. 2, May 2003, pp 786-
792.
[38] Li-J un Cai and Istvn Erlich, Simultaneous Coordinated Tuning of PSS and FACTS
Damping Controllers in Large Power Systems IEEE transactions on power systems,
Vol. 20, No. 1, February 2005, pp 294-300
References
52|P a g e
[39] Lihong Gu, and J ie Wang, Nonlinear coordinated control design of excitation and
STATCOM of power systems Electric Power Systems Research, Vol.77, 2007, pp. 788
796.
[40] Sidhartha Panda and Narayana Prasad Padhy, Optimal location and controller design of
STATCOM for power system stability improvement using PSO J ournal of the Franklin
Institute , Vol.345, 2008, pp. 166181
[41] L. Cong and Y. Wang, Co-Ordinated Control of Generator Excitation and STATCOM
For Rotor Angle Stability And Voltage Regulation Enhancement Of Power Systems IEE
Proc. Generation, Transmission, Distribution, Vol. 149, No. 6, November 2002.
[42] Masoud Zarringhalami , and M.A.Golkar, Coordinated Design of PSS and STATCOM
Parameters for Power System Stability Improvement Using Genetic Algorithm
DRPT2008, Nanjing China , April 2008,pp. 6-9
[43] M. A. Abido, Design of PSS and STATCOM-Based Damping Stabilizers Using Genetic
Algorithms
[44] Saleh M. Bamasak and M.A.Abido, Robust Coordinated Design of PSS & STATCOM
Controllers for Damping Power System Oscillation 15th PSCC, Liege, 22-26 August
2005
[45] D.Z. Fang, S.Q. Yuan, Y.J . Wang and T.S. Chung, Coordinated Parameter Design of
STATCOM Stabilizer and PSS Using MSSA Algorithm IET Generation, Transmission,
Distribution, Vol.1, No.4, 2007, pp. 670678.
[46] L. Gyugyi and N. G. Hingorani, Understanding FACTS, IEEE Press, New York, 1999.
[47] L.Sunil Kumar and A. Ghosh, Static Synchronous Series Compensator Design, Control,
and Applications, Electric Power System Research, Vol. 49, No 2, May 2004, pp. 1135-
1143.
[48] L.Sunil Kumar and A. Ghosh, Modelling and Control of a Static Synchronous Series
Compensator Design, Control, And Applications, IEEE transaction on Power delivery,
Vol. 14, No. 4, October 1999, pp. 1448-1453.
References
53|P a g e
[49] N. K. Sharma, A Novel Placement Strategy for FACTS Devices in Multi-Machine

Power Systems, Ph.D Thesis, Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology Kanpur, India, J uly 2000.
[50] S.N.Sivanandam and S.N.Deepa, "Introduction to Genetic Algorithm", Springer-Verlag
Berlin Heidelberg, 2008.
[51] D. Simon, Biogeography-Based Optimization, IEEE Transactions On Evolutionary
Computing, Vol. 12, No. 6, , December 2008, pp. 702713
[52] Aniruddha Bhattacharya, and Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, Biogeography-Based
Optimization for Different Economic Load Dispatch Problems, IEEE Transactions On
Power Systems, Vol. 25, No. 2, May 2010, pp 1664-1677
[53] MATLAB Software, Version 7.8.0.347, The Math Works Inc.

54|P a g e

Appendix A
10-machine 39-bus system data

A.1: 10-MACHINE 39-BUS SYSTEM DATA [12]
A.1.1: Single-line diagram [12]

Fig. A.1: 10-Machine 39-BUS system [12]
55|P a g e
A.1.2: Bus data

Bus
No.
Bus
Type
Voltage
(pu)
Angle
(rad)
PL
(MW)
QL
(Mvar)
PG
(MW)
QG
(Mvar)
- Q
Limit
+ Q
Limit
1 1 0.9820 0 9.2 4.6 0 0 0 0
2 2 1.0300 0 1104 250 1000 0 -400 500
3 2 0.9831 0 0 0 650 0 -400 500
4 2 1.0123 0 0 0 508 0 -400 500
5 2 0.9972 0 0 0 632 0 -400 500
6 2 1.0493 0 0 0 650 0 -400 500
7 2 1.0635 0 0 0 540 0 -400 500
8 2 1.0278 0 0 0 540 0 -400 500
9 2 1.0265 0 0 0 830 0 -400 500
10 2 1.0475 0 0 0 250 0 -500 500
11 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 1.0000 0 322 2.4 0 0 0 0
14 0 1.0000 0 500 184 0 0 0 0
15 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
16 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
17 0 1.0000 0 233.8 84 0 0 0 0
18 0 1.0000 0 522 176 0 0 0 0
19 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
21 0 1.0000 0 274 115 0 0 0 0
22 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23 0 1.0000 0 274.5 84.66 0 0 0 0
24 0 1.0000 0 308.6 92.2 0 0 0 0
25 0 1.0000 0 224 47.2 0 0 0 0
26 0 1.0000 0 139 17 0 0 0 0
27 0 1.0000 0 281 75.5 0 0 0 0
28 0 1.0000 0 206 27.6 0 0 0 0
29 0 1.0000 0 283.5 26.9 0 0 0 0
30 0 1.0000 0 628 103 0 0 0 0
31 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
32 0 1.0000 0 75 88 0 0 0 0
33 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
34 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
35 0 1.0000 0 320 153 0 0 0 0
36 0 1.0000 0 329.4 32.3 0 0 0 0
37 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
38 0 1.0000 0 158 30.0 0 0 0 0
39 0 1.0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

56|P a g e
A.1.3: Line data

From
bus
To bus Resistancee
(pu)
Reactance
(pu)
Susceptance B/2
(pu)
Tap
22 6 0 0.0143 0 1
16 1 0 0.0250 0 1
20 3 0 0.0200 0 1
39 30 0.0007 0.0138 0 1
39 5 0.0007 0.0142 0 1
32 33 0.0016 0.0435 0 1
32 31 0.0016 0.0435 0 1
30 4 0.0009 0.0180 0 1
29 9 0.0008 0.0156 0 1
25 8 0.0006 0.0232 0 1
23 7 0.0005 0.0272 0 1
12 10 0 0.0181 0 1
37 27 0.0013 0.0173 0.1608 1
37 38 0.0007 0.0082 0.0659 1
36 24 0.0003 0.0059 0.0340 1
36 21 0.0008 0.0135 0.1274 1
36 39 0.0016 0.0195 0.1520 1
36 37 0.0007 0.0089 0.0671 1
35 36 0.0009 0.0094 0.0855 1
34 35 0.0018 0.0217 0.1830 1
33 34 0.0009 0.0101 0.0862 1
28 29 0.0014 0.0151 0.1245 1
26 29 0.0057 0.0625 0.5145 1
26 28 0.0043 0.0474 0.3901 1
26 27 0.0014 0.0147 0.1198 1
25 26 0.0032 0.0323 0.2565 1
23 24 0.0022 0.0350 0.1805 1
22 23 0.0006 0.0096 0.0923 1
21 22 0.0008 0.0135 0.1274 1
20 33 0.0004 0.0043 0.0365 1
20 31 0.0004 0.0043 0.0365 1
19 2 0.0010 0.0250 0.6000 1
18 19 0.0023 0.0363 0.1902 1
17 18 0.0004 0.0046 0.0390 1
16 31 0.0007 0.0082 0.0694 1
16 17 0.0006 0.0092 0.0565 1
15 18 0.0008 0.0112 0.0738 1
15 16 0.0002 0.0026 0.0217 1
14 34 0.0008 0.0129 0.0691 1
14 15 0.0008 0.0128 0.0671 1
13 38 0.0011 0.0133 0.1069 1
13 14 0.0013 0.0213 0.1107 1
12 25 0.0070 0.0086 0.0730 1
12 13 0.0013 0.0151 0.1286 1
11 12 0.0035 0.0411 0.3493 1
11 2 0.0010 0.0250 0.3750 1

57|P a g e
A.1.4: Machine data

Gen No. H
(sec)
Xd
(pu)
X'd
(pu)
Xq
(pu)
X'q
(pu)
T'do
(sec)
T'qo
(sec)
D
(pu)
1 30.3 0.2950 0.0647 0.2820 0.0647 6.5600 1.5000 0.001
2 500 0.0200 0.0060 0.0190 0.0060 6.0000 0.7000 0.001
3 35.8 0.2495 0.0531 0.2370 0.0531 5.7000 1.5000 0.001
4 26 0.3300 0.0660 0.3100 0.0660 5.4000 0.4400 0.001
5 28.6 0.2620 0.0436 0.2580 0.0436 5.6900 1.0000 0.001
6 34.8 0.2540 0.0500 0.2410 0.0500 7.3000 0.4000 0.001
7 26.4 0.2950 0.0490 0.2920 0.0490 5.6600 1.5000 0.001
8 24.3 0.2900 0.0570 0.2800 0.0570 6.7000 0.4100 0.001
9 34.5 0.2106 0.0570 0.2050 0.0570 4.7900 1.9600 0.001
10 42 0.2000 0.0040 0.1960 0.0040 5.7000 0.5000 0.001

A.1.5: Exciter data
Gen. No. K
A
T
A

(sec)
T
R

(se)
F
d max

(pu)
F
d m|n

(pu)
F
x max

(pu)
F
x m|n

(pu)
1 200 0.015 0.01 5 -5 0.2 -0.2
2 200 0.015 0.01 5 -5 0.2 -0.2
3 200 0.015 0.01 5 -5 0.2 -0.2
4 200 0.015 0.01 5 -5 0.2 -0.2
5 200 0.015 0.01 5 -5 0.2 -0.2
6 200 0.015 0.01 5 -5 0.2 -0.2
7 200 0.015 0.01 5 -5 0.2 -0.2
8 200 0.015 0.01 5 -5 0.2 -0.2
9 200 0.015 0.01 5 -5 0.2 -0.2
10 200 0.015 0.01 5 -5 0.2 -0.2

A.1.6: STATCOM data
K
x
T
x

(sec)
R
xt

(se)
X
xt

(pu)
R
dc

(pu)
F
xtmax

(pu)
F
xtm|n

(pu)
Q
max

(MVAr)
Q
m|n

(MVAr)
-2 0.05 0.01 0.1 110^5 0.5 -0.5 350 -350

Newton, Statcom, Project 3

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Newton, Statcom, Project 3

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Page|iii

3.4.2. BBO Algorithm 23

Figure No. Title Page

4.8 Delta deviation (COI) V/s (Case 2) 37

: Direct axis transient emf due to field flux.

: Quadrature axis transient emf due to field flux.

: Direct axis open circuit time constant.

: Quadrature axis open circuit time constant.

: Direct axis stator transient reactance.

: Quadrature axis stator transient reactance.

PSS Power System Stabilizer

Chapter 4: It describes the effectiveness of controller designed by different optimization

STATCOM output voltage magnitude = I

Gain Washout Phase compensation

Phase Compensation Block:

= small change in PSS output.

= small deviation in rotor speed.

3.2 GENETIC ALGORITHM BASED OPTIMIZATION: A BRIEF OVERVIEW [50]

Step 9: Selection: Parent individuals are selected using tournament scheme.

3.4 BIOGEOGRAPHY: A BRIEF OVERVIEW [51]:

While(RanuomNum > Sclcct)

Fig. 3.3: Species model of a single habitat

Fig. 4.1: Convergence characteristic of GA for 10-machine system

Table 4.2: Optimal STATCOM damping controller parameters (GA)

Fig. 4.7: Rotor angle delta in (COI) V/s time (Case 1)

Fig. 4.10: Convergence characteristic of BCBBO for 10-machine system

4.4 COMPARISONS AMONG BBO ,BCGA AND BCBBO

Output Feedback Technique Seventh lnternational Conference on Control,

[20] M. A. Abido, Optimal Design of PowerSystem Stabilizers Using Particle Swarm

[30] N. Mithulananthan, C. A. Canizares, J . Reeve, and G. J . Rogers, Comparison of PSS,

[49] N. K. Sharma, A Novel Placement Strategy for FACTS Devices in Multi-Machine

A.1.2: Bus data

A.1.3: Line data

A.1.4: Machine data

Potrebbero piacerti anche