Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology 4(15): 2375-2381, 2012

ISSN: 2040-7467
Maxwell Scientific Organization, 2012
Submitted: February 02, 2012 Accepted: March 06, 2012 Published: August 01, 2012

Steam-Hydraulic Turbines Load Frequency Controller Based on Fuzzy

Logic Control
1,4
Ali M. Yousef, 2Jabril A. Khamaj and 3,4Ahmad Said Oshaba
1
Electrical Engineering Department Faculty of Engineering, Assiut University, Egypt, 71516,
2
Mechanical Engineering Department Faculty of Engineering Jazan University, KSA
3
Power Electronics and Energy Conversion Department, Electronics Research Institute, Egypt
4
Electrical Engineering Department Faculty of Engineering Jazan University, KSA

Abstract: This study investigates an application of the fuzzy logic technique for designing the load-frequency
control system to damp the frequency and tie line power oscillations due to different load disturbances under
the governor deadzones and GRC non-linearity. Integral controller are designed and compared with the
proposed fuzzy logic controller. To validate the effectiveness of the proposed controller, two-area load
frequency power system is simulated over a wide range of operating conditions and system parameter changes.
Further, comparative studies between the conventional PID control and proposed efficient fuzzy logic load
frequency control are included on the simulation results. Programs Matlab software are developed for
simulation. The digital results prove the power of the present fuzzy load-frequency controller over the
conventional. PID controller in terms of fast response with less overshoot and small settling time.

Keywords: Fuzzy logic controller, PID controller, steam-hydraulic turbines

INTRODUCTION power systems are non-linear and complex, where the

Power systems have complex and multi-variable
structures. Also they consist of many different controls
blocks. Most of them are non linear. Power systems are
divided into control areas connected by tie lines. From the
experiments on the power systems, it can be seen that
each area need to its system frequency and tie line power
flow to be controlled. Frequency control is accomplished
by two different control actions in interconnected two area
power system: primary speed control and supplementary
or secondary speed control actions as in Ertugrul and
Ilhan (2005), El-Sherbiny et al. (2001) and El-Sherbiny
et al. (2002). The secondary loop takes over the fine
adjustment of frequecy by resetting the frequency error to
zero through integral action. The relationship between the
speed and load can be adjusted by changing a load
reference set point input.
Load-Frequency Control (LFC) is important in
electric power system design and operation. Moreover, to
ensure the quality of the power supply, it is necessary to
design a LFC system, which deals with the control of
loading of the generator depending on the frequency. The
conventional proportional plus integral controller is
probably the most commonly used. It is well known that
parameters are a function of the operating point and the
loading in a power system is never constant. Further, the
two area power system composed of steam turbines
controlled by integral control only, is sufficient for all
load disturbances and it does not work well. Also, the
non-linear effect due to governor deadzones and
Generation Rate Constraint (GRC) complicates the
control system design. Further, if the two area power
system contains hydro and steam turbines, the design of
LFC systems is important. There are different control
strategies that have been applied, depending on linear or
non-linear control methods as in Saadat (1980), Kothari
et al. (2000) and found in Anju and Sharma (2011). With
the advent of fuzzy logic theory, various applications for
it have been established as in Pan and Liaw (1989),
Saravuth et al. (2006) and as in Yusuf and Ahmed (2004).
It is considered that the fuzzy logic control system works
well with non-linear systems. The present study utilizes
the fuzzy logic control technique control to design the
LFC system for two area power systems. The proposed
technique is added to the integral control LFC system as
a supplementary signal to improve the power system
stability and response characteristics. Also, the non-linear
effect due to governor dead zones or GRC are

Corresponding Author: Ali M. Yousef, Electrical Engineering Department Faculty of Eng., Assiut University, Egypt, 71516,
Electrical Engineering Department Faculty of Engineering Jazan University, KSA
2375
 Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 4(15): 2375-2381, 2012

considered as in Yousef (2011). The types of turbines Pr 2 1 / T1 Pr 2 1 / R2 T1 f 2 1 / T1 E x 2

employed in the two area power system, steam-hydro, are
studied with the proposed fuzzy logic control technique. 1 / T1 U p1

MATERIALS AND METHODS X E 2 1 / T2 X E 2 Pr 2 [1 / T2

The system investigated comprises an TR / T1T2 ] TR / T1T2 R2 f 2
interconnection of two areas load frequency control. The
model is steam-hydraulic turbines. The linearized E x 2 K E 2 [ B2 f 2 a12 * Ptie ]
mathematical models of the first order system are
represented by state variables equations as follows: The tie line power as:
For steam area as: Ptie 2T12 [ f 1 f 2 ]
f = !1/Tp1)f1+kp1/Tp1)Pg1!kp1/Tp1)Ptie The overall system can be modeled as a multi-
!kp1/Tp1)Pd1 variable system in the form of:

P g1 = !1/Tr1)Pg1+)Pr1[1/Tr1!Kr1/Tt1] x Ax (t ) Bu(t ) Ld (t ) (1)

+Kr1/Tt1)XE1
where A is system matrix, B and L are the input and
disturbance distribution matrices.
P r1 = 1/Tt1)XE1!1/Tt1)Pr1 x(t),u(t) and d(t) are system state, control signal and
load changes disturbance vectors, respectively:
) X E1 = ! 1/R1Tg1)f1 ! 1/Tg1)XE1 + 1/Tg1)Ex1
+1/Tg1)Up1 x(t) = [)f1 )Pg1 )Prl )XE1 )EX1 )f2 )Pg2 )Pr2 )XE2 )EX2
)Ptie]T (2)

E x1 K E 1 B1 f 1 Ptie u(t) = [u1 u2]T (3)
For hydraulic area as:
d(t) = [)Pdl )Pd2]T (4)
f2 1 / Tp2 f 2 k p2 / Tp 2 Pg 2 k p2 / Tp2
ACEi = )ptie, i + bi )fi (5)
* a12 * Ptie k p 2 / Tp 2 Pd 2

y(t) = Cx(t) (6)

Pg 2 Pg 2 [1/.5Tw (1/.5T2 TR /.5T1T2 )]
X E 2 [1/.5Tw 1/.5T2 ] TR /.5T1T2 R2 f 2 )ptie(t) = )ptie, 1 (t) = ! )ptie, 2(t) (7)

1 K p1 K p1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T p1 T p1 T p1
1 1 K K r1
0 ( r1 ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T r1 Tr1 Tt1 Tt 1

1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tt1 Tt 1
1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
R1T g 1 T g1 Tg1
K E 1 B1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K E1
A 1 K p2 K p2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 12
T p2 Tp2 Tp2
TR 1 1 TR 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 ( ) 0 ( ) 0 0
. 5T1T 2 R 2 . 5T w .5T 2 .5T1T 2 . 5T w .5T 2
1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
R 2 T1 T1 T1
TR 1 T 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 ( R ) 0 0
T1T 2 R 2 T 2 T1T 2 T2
0 0 0 0 0 K E 2 B2 0 0 0 0 K E 2 a 12

2 T12 0 0 0 0 2 T12 0 0 0 0 0

2376
 Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 4(15): 2375-2381, 2012

TT1,TT2 = Turbine time constant (s) of area No. 1 and

T
1 area No. 2
0 0 0
Tg1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tp = Plant model time constant (s)
B Kp = Plant gain
0 0 0 0 0 0
1
0 0 0 0
T1 R = Speed regulation due to governor action
(HZ/p.u. MW)
KE = The integral control gain

K p1
T
Effect of governor dead zones non-linearity: Figure 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 shows the power system block diagram with governor
T
L p1
dead zones. The described of governor dead zones D(v)
K p2
0 0 0 0 0
Tp2
0 0 0 0 0
by the following function:

m(v-d), if v $d
where, D[v] = 0, {if-d # v # d
{m(v+d) if v #d
)f1, )f2 = The frequency deviation (HZ) of area No.
1 and area No. 2 Effect of GRC non-linearity: The block diagram of the
)Pg1, )Pg2 = The change in generator output (p.u. MW) plant model with Generation Rate Constraint (GRC) given
of area No. 1 and area No. 2 by Pg 0.0017 p.u. MW/s is shown in Fig. 1
)XE1,)XE2 = The change in governor value position
(p.u. MW) of area No. 1 and area No. 2 Fuzzy logic control: Fuzzy logic has an advantage over
)Pd1,)Pd2 = The change in turbine values (p.u. MW) of other control methods due to the fact that it does not
area No. 1 and area No. 2 sensitive to plant parameter variations. The fuzzy logic
)EX1,)EX2 = The change in integral control of area No. control approach consists of three stages, namely
1 and area No. 2 fuzzification, fuzzy control rules engine and
)Pd1,)Pd2 = Load disturbance (p.u. MW) of area No. 1 defuzzification. To design the fuzzy logic load frequency
and area No. 2 control, the input signals is the frequency deviation at
Tg1,Tg2 = Governor time constant (s) of area No. 1 sampling time and its change. While, its output signal is
and area No. 2 the change of control signal )U(k). When the value of

Fig. 1: Two-Area (Steam-Hydraulic Turbines) load frequency control with governor deadzone and GRC nonlinearity

2377
 Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 4(15): 2375-2381, 2012

LN : Large negative membership function

MN : Medium negative
SN : Small negative
Z : Zero
SP : Small positive
MP : Medium positive
LP : Large positive

PID power system stabilizer: PID controllers are

Fig. 2: Three-stage of fuzzy logic controller: u, membership dominant and popular and, have been widely used
degree because one can obtain the desired system responses and
it can control a wide class of systems. This may lead to
the thought that the PID controllers give solutions to all
requirements, but unfortunately, this is not always true as
in Datta et al. (2000). In this work, the PID optimal tuning
method used is found in Kristiansson and Lennartson
(2002). In this method, the parameters of PID controller
satisfying the constraints correspond to a given domain in
a plane. The optimal controller lies on the curve. The
design plot enables identification of the PID controller for
desired robust conditions and in particular, gives the PID
Fig. 3: Fuzzy logic power system stabilizer controller for lowest sensitivity. By applying this method,
Table 1: Fuzzy logic control rules
trade-off among high frequency sensor noise, low
d )f frequency sensitivity, gain and phase margin constraints
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- are also directly available.
)f LN MN SN Z SP MP LP
LN LP LP LP MP MP SP Z The transfer function of a PID controller is given by:
MN LP MP MP MP SP Z SN
SN LP MP SP SP Z SN MN
Z MP MP SP Z SN MN MN K(s) = Kp(1+1/Tls+TDs) (8)
SP MP SP Z SN SN MN LN
MP SP Z SN MN MN MN LN where Kp,Kp/Tl and KpTD represent the proportional,
LP Z SN MN MN LN LN LN
integral and derivative gains of the controller respectively.
1 1 TI
Define n
TI TD
and as the controller's
2 TD
natural frequency and the damping coefficient,
respectively. Then the PID transfer function can be
written as:

n2 2 n s s2
K ( s) K P (9)
2 n s

The optimal PID controller parameters values were:

Fig. 4: Membership functions of the fuzzy regulator Kp = 2, TI = 0.6 and KD =1

the control signal at sampling time [k-1] (U(k-1)) is added
to the output signal of fuzzy logic controller, the required
control signal U(k) is obtained. Figure 2 shows the three-
stage of fuzzy logic controller. While the fuzzy logic
control system is described in Fig. 3. The fuzzy control
rules are illustrated in Table 1. The membership function
shapes of error and derivative error and the gains are
chosen to be identical with triangular function for fuzzy
logic control. However, this horizontal axis range is taken
different values because of optimizing controller. The
membership function sets of FLC for two areas are shown
in Fig. 4
where,
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
To validate the effectiveness of the proposed fuzzy
controllers, the power system under study is simulated
and subjected to different parameters changes. The power
system frequency deviations are obtained. Further a
various types of turbines (steam and hydro) are simulated.
Also a comparison between the power system responses
using the conventional integral and PID control system
and the proposed fuzzy logic controller is studied as
follows and the system parameters are:
Nominal parameters of the hydro-thermal system
investigated:

2378
 Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 4(15): 2375-2381, 2012

f = 60 HZR1 = R2 = 2.4 HZ/per unit MW

Tg1 = 0.08 s Tr = 10.0 s Tt = 0.3s 0.005 Deviation P tie
TR = 5 s D1 = D2 = 0.00833 Mw/HZ
0
T1 = 48.7 s T2 = 0.513 s, Tg2 = 0.08s
Tt1 = Tt2 = 0.3 s Kr1 = Kr2 = 1/3 -0.005
Pd1 = 0.05 p.u. MW

P tie
B1 = B2 = 0.425 -0.010
Pd2 = 0.0 -0.015
Tr1 = Tr2 = 20 s, T12 = 0.0707 s Without
The integral control gain Ki = 1 pu -0.020 Integral
Fuzzy
0.010 -0.025
Without 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
0.005 Integral Time
Fuzzy
0 Fig. 7: Tie-line power deviation response due to 0.5 p.u. load
disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power system with
-0.005 and without integral and proposed fuzzy logic control
f1

-0.010 Deviation P tie

0.005
-0.015 Tg1 = Tg2 = 0.1
0
-0.020
-0.005
-0.025 P tie
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 -0.010
Time
-0.015
Fig. 5: Frequency deviation response of area-1 due to 0.5 p.u. Without
-0.020 Integral
load disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power system
Fuzzy
with and without integral and proposed fuzzy logic -0.025
control 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Time
0.015
Without Fig. 8: Tie-line power deviation response due to 0.5 p.u. load
0.010 Integral disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power system with
Fuzzy
0.005 and without integral and proposed fuzzy logic control at
increased 20% in Tg
0
F2

-0.005 Deviation of F1
0.010
-0.010 0.005 Tg1 = Tg2 = 0.1
-0.015
0
-0.020 -0.005
f1

-0.025
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 -0.010

Time -0.015
Without
-0.020 Integral
Fig. 6: Frequency deviation response of area-2 due to 0.5 p.u. Fuzzy
load disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power system -0.025
with and without integral and proposed fuzzy logic 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
control Time

Fig. 9: Frequency deviation response of area-1 due to 0.5 p.u.

Figure 5 shows the frequency deviation response of
area-1 due to 0. 5 p.u. load disturbance in area-1 of the
two-area power system with and without integral and
proposed fuzzy logic control. Figure 6 shows the
frequency deviation response of area-2 due to 0.5 p.u.
load disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power system
with and without integral and proposed fuzzy logic power
deviation response due to 0.5 p.u. load disturbance in
area-1 of the two-area power system with and without
load disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power system
with and without integral and proposed fuzzy logic
control of model-2 at increased 20% in Tg
control. Figure 7 shows the tie-line power deviation
response due to 0.5 p.u. load disturbance in area-1 of the
two-area power system with and without integral and
proposed fuzzy logic control. Figure 8 depicts the tie-line
integral and proposed fuzzy logic control at increased

2379
 Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 4(15): 2375-2381, 2012

0.005 Deviation P tie

0.015 Deviation of F2
Tt = 0.5, Tr = 20
0.010 0
0.005 Tg1 = Tg2 = 0.1
-0.005
0

P tie
-0.005 -0.010
f2

-0.010
-0.015
-0.015 Without Without
-0.020 Integral -0.020 Integral
Fuzzy
-0.025
Fuzzy
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 -0.025
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Time
Time
Fig. 10: Frequency deviation response of area-2 due to 0.5 p.u.
load disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power Fig. 13: Tie-line power deviation response due to 0.5 p.u. load
system with and without integral and proposed fuzzy disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power system
logic control at increased 20% in Tg with and without integral and proposed fuzzy logic
control at change in Tt , Tr
Deviation of F1 -3
0.015 P tie dev. Response in pu.
4 10
0.010
Tg1 = 0.5, Tr = 20 2
0.005 Kp = 0, ki = 0, kd = 0
0 0
-0.005
f1

P tie

-2
-0.010
-0.015 -4
Without
Integral W/o-control
-0.020 Fuzzy -6 PID-control
Fuzzy-control
-0.025
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 -8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Time
Time (sec)
Fig. 11: Frequency deviation response of area-1 due to 0.5 p.u.
load disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power Fig. 14: Tie-line power deviation response due to 0.5 p.u. load
system with and without integral and proposed fuzzy disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power system
logic control at change in Tt , Tr with and without PID and proposed fuzzy logic control
F2 dev. response in pu.
Deviation of F2 0.010
0.015
0.005 Kp = 0.02, ki = 0.2, kd = 0
0.010 0
Tg1 = 0.5, Tr = 20
0.005 -0.005
0 -0.010
F2
f2

-0.005 -0.015
-0.010 -0.020
-0.025 W/o-control
-0.015 Without PID-control
Integral -0.030 Fuzzy-control
-0.020 Fuzzy -0.035
-0.025 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Time (sec)
Time

Fig. 12: Frequency deviation response of area-2 due to 0.5 p.u. Fig. 15: Frequency deviation response of area-2 due to 0.5 p.u.
load disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power load disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power
system with and without integral and proposed fuzzy system with and without PID and proposed fuzzy logic
logic control at change in Tt, Tr control

20% in Tg. Figure 9 depicts the frequency deviation
response of area-1 due to 0.05 p.u. load disturbance in
area-1 of the two-area power system with and without
integral and proposed fuzzy logic control at increased
20% in Tg. Moreover, Fig. 10 depicts the frequency
deviation response of area-2 due to 0.5 p.u. load
disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power system with
and without integral and proposed fuzzy logic control at
increased 20% in Tg. Figure 11 displays the frequency
deviation response of area-1 due to 0.5 p.u. load

2380
 Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 4(15): 2375-2381, 2012

proposed controller a comparison among the conventional

0.015
F1 dev. Response in pu. integral and PID controller and the proposed controller is
0.010 obtained. The effect of governor non-linear and GRC is
0.005 Kp = 0.02, ki = 0.2, kd = 0 included in the simulation. The proposed controller proves
0
that it is robust to variations in dead zones non-linearity.
The digital simulation results
-0.005
Proved and show the effectiveness of the power of
F1

-0.010
-0.015
-0.020 W/o-control
PID-control
-0.025 Fuzzy-control
-0.030
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time (sec)
Fig. 16: Frequency deviation response of area-1 due to 0.5 p.u.
load disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power
system with and without PID and proposed fuzzy logic
control
Table 2: Time settling calculated in each control
Integral-control PID-control
(Sec) (Sec)
F1 50 40
F2 40 35
Tie-line power 30 28
disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power system with
and without integral and proposed fuzzy logic control at
change in turbine time constant (Tt) and Tr. Figure 12
displays the frequency deviation response of area-2 due to
0.5 p.u. load disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power
system with and without integral and proposed fuzzy
logic control at change in turbine time constant Tt and Tr.
Figure 13 shows the tie-line power deviation response of
area-1 due to 0.5 p.u. load disturbance in area-1 of the
two-area power system with and without integral and
proposed fuzzy logic control at change in turbine time
constant Tt and Tr. Figure 14 shows the tie-line power
deviation response due to 0.5 p.u. load disturbance in
area-1 of the two-area power system with and without
PID and proposed fuzzy logic control. Figure 15 depicts
the frequency deviation response of area-2 due to 0.5 p.u.
load disturbance in area-1 of the two-area power system
with and without PID and proposed fuzzy logic control.
Figure 16 shows the frequency deviation response of area-
1 due to 0.5 p.u. load disturbance in area-1 of the two-area
power system with and without PID and proposed fuzzy
logic control. Also, Table 2 displays the settling time
calculation at different controllers.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The presents study design a load-frequency control
system using fuzzy logic controller for enhancing power
system dynamic performances after applying several
disturbances upon it. The proposed controller is robust
and gives good transient as well as steady-state
performance. To validate the effectiveness of the
the proposed FLC over the conventional integral and PID
controller through a wide range of load disturbances. The
superiority of the proposed fuzzy controller is embedded
in the sense of fast response with less overshoot and/or
undershoot and less settling time.
70 80
REFERENCES
Anju, G. and P.R. Sharma, 2011. Design and simulation
of fuzzy logic controller for dstatcom in power
system. Int. J. Eng. Sci. Technol., 3(10): 7815-7822.
Datta, A., H. Ming-Tzu and S.P. Bhttacharyy, 2000.
Structure and Synthesis of PID Controllers.
Fuzzy control
(Sec) Advanced in Industrial Control, Springer-Verlag
30 London Limited.
29 El-Sherbiny M.K., G. El-Saady and A.M. Yousef,
25 2001.A-two-layered fuzzy logic controller for power
system automatic generation control. Proceeding of
4th Jordan International Electrical Conference (4th
JIEEEC-2001), 16-18 April, pp: 197-202.
El-Sherbiny M.K., A.M. Yousef and G. El-Saady, 2002.
Efficient fuzzy logic load-frequency control. Energ.
Conver. Manage. J., 43(14): 1853-1863.
Ertugrul, C. and I. Kocaarslan, 2005. A fuzzy gain
scheduling PI controller application for an
interconnected electrical power system. EPSR J., 73:
267-274.
Kothari M.L., J. Nanda and B.L. kaul, 2000. Automatic
generation control of Hydro-thermal system. J. EL,
61.
Kristiansson, B. and B. Lennartson, 2002. Robust and
optimal tuning of PID controllers. IEE Proc. Contr.
Theory Appl., 149: 17-25.
Pan, C.T. and C.M. Liaw, 1989. An adaptive controller
for power system load-frequency control. IEEE
T. Power Syst., 4(1).
Saadat, H., 1980. Power System Analysis. Tata Mc-Graw
Hill Publishing Company Limited. New Delhi, India.
Saravuth, P., I. Ngamroo and W. Kong prawechnon,
2006. Design of optimal fuzzy logic based PI
controller using multiple search algorithm for load
frequency control. Int. J. Contr. Automation Syst.,
4(2): 155-164.
Yousef, A.M., 2011. Model prdictive control approach
based load frequency controller. WSEAS Trans. Syst.
Contr., 7(6).
Yusuf, O. and S. Ahmed, 2004. Dynamic fuzzy network
based load frequency controller design in electrical
power system. G.U. J. Sci., ISSN: 1303-9709.

2381