Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 29 November 2012
Received in revised form 24 March 2013
Accepted 25 March 2013
Available online 19 April 2013
Keywords:
Multi-band power system stabilizer
CPCE algorithm
Cultural algorithm (CA)
PSO algorithm
Co-evolutionary algorithm (CEA).
a b s t r a c t
Synchronous generators are generally equipped with power system stabilizers (PSS) to damp out low
frequency oscillations. Among different types of PSSs it has been recently shown that the new advanced
stabilizer, called multi-band PSS (MB-PSS), has a better performance to cope with all global, inter area
and local modes. All different types of PSSs are mainly designed based on one operating point of the
system using a linear model. However, power system is inherently nonlinear and its operating conditions
frequently change and the PSS performance may deteriorate. This paper develops a new design for MB-PSS
in which the parameters are tuned by using a new Meta-heuristic optimization algorithm based on the
combination of culture algorithm, particle swarm optimization (PSO) and co-evolutionary algorithms.
In this new culture-PSO-co evolutionary (CPCE) algorithm, the characteristics of all three mentioned
algorithms are combined and a new strong optimization technique is obtained. The proposed MB-PSS is
tested on a multi-machine power system and results are compared with PSO-based MB-PSS (PSO-MBPSS) and conventional MB-PSS (C-MB-PSS). Simulation results conrm the effectiveness of the proposed
optimization tuning method for improving the power system dynamic stability.
2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Nowadays, modern power systems can reach the stressed conditions more easily than the past for the sake of increasing power
demand. Therefore, it is necessary to increase power system stability margin by using supplementary controllers. PSS is a common
cost-effective method to provide the auxiliary control signal for the
AVR system of synchronous generators to enhance electromechanical oscillations damping and to improve dynamic stability [1,2].
The parameters of CPSS are generally tuned by using a linearized
model. However, power system topology and loadings continuously change and in these conditions the CPSS cannot perform
efciently for damping all modes, especially inter-area oscillations
[3]. In order to overcome this drawback and to have a robust PSS,
several researches have been carried out in recent years. These
studies are usually categorized in two groups; (i) presenting a new
method for tuning CPSS parameters and (ii) presenting a new structure for PSS.
The rst group of studies presents a new method for PSS coefcient tuning to guarantee having enough damping for power
BUS 1
T1
BUS 2
Light load
Nominal load
Heavy load
Nominal active
power
Nominal reactive
power
(1)
[, , Eq ]
In Eq. (1) x =
is state variables and u represents the
vector of the PSS output signals. This nonlinear dynamic model can
be rewritten as Eq. (2).
.
(Pm Pe D)
i =
i = 0 ( 1)
(2)
(Eq + Efd )
Eq i =
Tdo
E = Efd + Ka (Vref Vt )
.
fdi
Ta
where shows per unit rotor speed. i and i are rotor angle and
rotor speed of generator ith (pu). Pm and Pe represent mechanical
input power and electrical output power in terms of p.u. Xd is the
per unit transient reactance of d axis. Also Eq and Efd are per unit
values of the internal voltage behind xd and equivalent excitation
, T and K are the time constant of the
voltage respectively. Tdo
a
a
excitation circuit (s), regulator time constant (s) and regulator gain
respectively.
BUS 3
BUS 4
BUS 5
Line 3
Line 1
37
BUS 6
Line 6
T4
Line 5
Line 2
T2
T3
G1
Line 4
G4
G2
New PSS
G3
Load
New PSS
Load
New PSS
New PSS
38
ref
Speed
Sensor
+
actua l
Overall Gain
Wash-out
U PSS
1 + sT3
1 + sT4
1 + sT1
1 + sT2
sTW
1 + sTW
KPSS
Lead-Lag 1 Lead-Lag 2
Limiter
(3)
KL1
KL11 + sTL1
1 + sTL 2
1 + sTL / R
1 + sTL
1 + sTL5
1 + sTL6
LF Band
VL max
VS LL
KL
V1
Speed
transducer
KL2
KL17 + sTL 7
1 + sTL8
1 + sTL
1 + sTL*R
1 + sTL11
1 + sTL12
Kl1
sTW l
1 + sTW l
1 + sTl / R
1 + sTl
1 + sTl5
1 + sTl6
VL min
L l
IF Band
Vl max
Pe
Speed
transducer
Kl2
sTW l
1 + sTW l
1 + sTl
1 + sTl*R
1 + sTl11
1 + sTl12
KH1
sTW H
1 + sTW H
1 + sTH / R
1 + sTH
1 + sTH5
1 + sTH6
+
Vl min
VS LH
KH
sTW H
1 + sTW H
1 + sTH
1 + sTH*R
1 + sTH11
1 + sTH12
VH max
+
-
VH min
VST
HF Band
KH2
VS
Ll
Kl
V2
VST max
+
VS
VST min
VL max
KL
L I
L I
VL min
FL
V Im ax
KI
V Im in
39
+
+ +
+
VST max
VSTab
VST min
Speed
transducer
VH max
KH
VH min
Fig. 4. The idea of capturing different frequency signal in MB-PSS IEEE 4B.
k
k
vk+1
= wvkid + c1 r1 (pkid xid
) + c2 r2 (pkgd xid
)
id
(5)
k+1
k
xid
= xid
+ vk+1
id
(6)
k represent the velocity and the posiIn Eqs. (5) and (6) vkid and xid
tion of ith particle respectively and w is inertia weight, c1 and c2
are acceleration coefcients, r1 and r2 are two random numbers distributed in (0, 1). Also pkid shows the position with the best tness
found so far by the ith particle and called pbest, pkgd is the position
with the best tness found so far by all particles in the population,
usually called gbest.
N11
(4)
BR1 =
N12
N
21
BR2 =
N22
Particles N11 and N21 are used for searching in Belief space 1
(B1 ) and (B2 ) respectively. Also N12 and N22 particles are utilized
for searching in Population spaces 1 (P1 ) and 2 (P2 ). The ratios
between the numbers of particles in sub-spaces of B1 , P1 , B2 and P2
are determined by using BR1 and BR2 coefcients. These coefcients
are generally in the range of 0.40.5. Each space contains a particle
Share
Share
Affect ( )
Evolve ( )
Evaluate ( )
Evolve ( )
BeliefSpace 1
BeliefSpace 2
Evaluate ( )
Affect ( )
Affect ( )
Evaluate ( )
Communication
Protocol
Accept ( )
Affect ( )
Population Space 1
Communication
Protocol
Population Space 2
Evolve ( )
Evolve ( )
Exchange Experiences
Accept ( )
Evaluate ( )
40
Velocities and positions of each particle in SGBS are set arbitrarily. Now SGBS is updated after cultural operations of two
cultural-algorithm-populations in each generation according to
Section 4.2. Two steps for updating SGBS are needed. First a new
SGBS is created including B1 and B2 particles. Then, the excellent
(7)
Start
Rand<Afp
No
Yes
Randomly generate the initial population with
N particles
Rand<Afp
No
Yes
Rand<SAfp
No
Rand<EEp
No
Yes
Update the velocity and position for population
Rand<Acp
No
Yes
The EEn excellent particles in P1 replace the
bad EEn particles in P2
The EEn excellent particles in P2 replace the
bad EEn particles in P1
Yes
The best particle in P1 replaces the worst
particle in B1
Stopping criteria is
met?
Fitness (xi)<TV
No
Yes
Yes
End
No
Rand<Acp
Yes
The best particle in P2 replaces the worst
particle in B2
No
Rand<SAfp
Yes
The SAfn1 excellent particles in SGBS replace
the bad SAfn1 particles in P1
The SAfn2 reinitialized particles in SGBS
replace the other bad SAfn2 particles in P1
No
N0
tness(x )
i
i=1
N0
(8)
41
M=4
i=1
(t ri )dt
(9)
42
Table 2
Parameter settings of CPCE algorithm.
Population size
P1
B1
P2
B2
Afp
Afn
Acp
SAfp
SAfn1
SAfn2
EEp
EEn
60
20
10
20
10
0.4
0.4
0.1
0.1
Table 3
MB-PSS parameters by using CPCE.
T1
T3
T5
T7
K1
K2
G1
0.011
0.005
0.591
0.005
0.01
0.01
0.834
0.657
0.005
0.01
0.01
0.01
1.00
1.50
9.40
1.00
2.32
1.17
1.00
2.72
3.18
G2
0.01
0.005
0.01
0.914
0.01
0.005
0.005
0.01
0.526
0.01
0.079
0.01
1.93
1.00
2.37
1.00
2.82
1.31
1.00
1.31
1.01
G3
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.803
0.005
0.005
4.73
1.55
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.93
1.00
1.67
1.70
G4
0.01
0.847
0.01
0.005
0.01
0.005
0.01
0.647
0.01
0.005
0.01
0.005
1.36
1.07
1.00
1.27
1.00
1.17
1.00
2.78
1.00
Table 4
Parameter settings of PSO algorithm.
Table 6
MB-PSS parameters based on Fig. 3.
Population size
c1
c2
Parameter
Value
60
Table 5
MB-PSS parameters by using PSO.
T1
T3
T5
T7
K1
K2
G1
0.011
0.005
0.6992
0.006
0.01
0.011
0.1751
0.206
0.005
0.011
0.01
0.01
1.47
5.50
13.39
3.93
4.86
1.54
3.40
2.19
2.13
G2
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.01
0.012
0.01
0.01
0.081
0.05
0.005
0.01
0.0098
1.00
3.90
2.34
3.80
1.80
2.24
3.13
1.00
3.76
G3
0.6793
0.294
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.005
0.005
0.1046
0.01
0.01
0.011
0.05
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.66
1.00
1.00
4.25
1.91
1.83
G4
0.01
0.01
0.1479
0.05
0.05
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.005
0.05
0.05
0.01
1.82
1.22
7.52
4.45
1.60
3.77
4.38
1.00
2.99
1.0006
1.0004
1.0002
1.0002
Spped G1(pu)
1.0004
0.9998
0.9996
0.9998
0.9996
0.9994
0.9994
0.9992
0.9992
0.999
7
8
Time(s)
10
11
12
13
14
0.999
15
10
7
8
Time(s)
10
11
12
13
14
14
15
1.0006
1.0004
1.0002
Spped G1(pu)
1
0.9998
0.9996
0.9994
0.9992
0.999
0.9988
7
8
Time(s)
11
12
13
14
15
Fig. 8. G1 speed following disturbance 1 (solid: CPCE-MB-PSS; dashed: PSO-MB-PSS). (A) Light, (B) nominal and (C) heavy.
A 1.0002
1.0002
1.0001
Spped G2(pu)
1.0001
0.9999
0.9998
0.9999
0.9998
0.9997
0.9997
0.9996
0.9996
0.9995
0.9995
0
7
8
Time(s)
C
Spped G2(pu)
Spped G1(pu)
1.0006
Spped G2(pu)
43
10
11
12
13
14
15
7
8
Time(s)
10
11
12
1.0005
0.9995
0.999
7
8
Time(s)
10
11
12
13
14
15
Fig. 9. G2 speed following disturbance 1 (solid: CPCE-MB-PSS; dashed: PSO-MB-PSS). (A) Light, (B) nominal and (C) heavy.
13
15
44
A 1.005
1.005
1.004
1.004
1.003
1.003
Spped G3(pu)
Spped G3(pu)
1.002
1.002
1.001
1
1.001
1
0.999
0.999
0.998
0.998
0.997
0.997
5
Time(s)
0.996
10
5
Time(s)
10
10
1.005
1.004
Spped G3(pu)
1.003
1.002
1.001
1
0.999
0.998
0.997
5
Time(s)
10
Fig. 10. G3 speed following disturbance 2 (solid: CPCE-MB-PSS; dashed: PSO-MB-PSS). (A) Light, (B) nominal and (C) heavy.
1.005
1.004
1.004
1.003
1.003
Spped G4(pu)
1.002
1.001
1
0.999
1.001
0.998
0.999
0.997
0.996
0.998
10
`1
Time(s)
Time(s)
1.003
1.002
Spped G4(pu)
Spped G4(pu)
1.002
1.001
1
0.999
0.998
0.997
5
Time(s)
10
Fig. 11. G4 speed following disturbance 2 (solid: CPCE-MB-PSS; dashed: PSO-MB-PSS). (A) Light, (B) nominal and (C) heavy.
45
Table 7
The values of performance index (ITAE).
Disturbance 1
CPCE-MB-PSS
PSO-MB-PSS
Disturbance 2
Light
Nominal
Heavy
Light
Nominal
Heavy
0.2699
0.4032
0.1582
0.2287
0.3475
0.7105
0.9913
1.3782
0.6870
0.7202
0.7341
1.0971
By changing the operating condition to heavy loading, the CPCEMB-PSS gives a more suitable performance and shows the robust
characteristics.
The simulation results are depicted in Figs. 812. Figs. 8 and 9
show the responses under disturbance 1 and Figs. 10 and 11 show
the responses under disturbance 2. The results for disturbance
1.002
1.001
1.0015
1.0005
1.001
Spped G2(pu)
Spped G2(pu)
1.0005
1
0.9995
0.999
0.9995
0.999
0.9985
0.9985
0.998
0.9975
10
20
30
40
Time(s)
50
60
70
80
10
20
30
0.998
10
20
30
50
60
70
80
40
Time(s)
50
60
70
80
1.002
1.0015
1.001
Spped G2(pu)
1.0005
1
0.9995
0.999
0.9985
0.998
0.9975
40
Time(s)
Fig. 12. G2 speed following disturbance 3 (solid: CPCE-MB-PSS; dashed: PSO-MB-PSS). (A) Light, (B) nominal and (C) heavy.
1.0003
1.0005
1.0002
Spped G1(pu)
Spped G2(pu)
1.0001
0.9999
0.9998
0.9995
0.9997
0.9996
0.9995
15
25
35
Time(s)
45
55
65
75
0.999
15
25
35
Time(s)
45
55
65
75
Fig. 13. Generators speed in the nominal operating condition following disturbance 1 (solid: CPCE-MB-PSS; dashed: C-MB-PSS). (A) G1 (B) G2 .
46
D 1.005
C 1.006
1.004
1.002
Spped G3(pu)
Spped G4(pu)
1
0.998
0.996
0.995
0.994
0.992
0.99
0.988
15
25
35
Time(s)
45
55
65
0.99
75
15
25
35
Time(s)
45
55
65
75
Fig. 14. Generators speed in the nominal operating condition following disturbance 2 (solid: CPCE-MB-PSS; dashed: C-MB-PSS). (C) G3 (D) G4 .
1.005
1.0025
1.002
1.004
1.0015
1.003
Spped G1(pu)
Spped G3(pu)
1.001
1.002
1.001
1
1.0005
1
0.9995
0.999
0.999
0.998
0.997
0.9985
5
Time(s)
10
0.998
5
Time(s)
10
Fig. 15. Generators speed under nominal operating condition following disturbance 4 (solid: CPCE-MB-PSS; dashed: C-MB-PSS). (A) G1 (B) G3 .
High pass
filter
High pass
PSS
Intermediate
pass filter
Intermediate
pass PSS
Low pass
filter
Low pass
PSS
47
dB
40
30
20
10
-2
10
10
-1
10
10
10
Degrees
400
200
0
-200
-2
10
10
-1
10
Frequency (Hz)
10
10
Degrees
20
10
0
-10
-20
-2
10
10
-1
10
10
Frequency (Hz)
PSO-MB-PSS performance goes to uctuations under heavy operating condition, while the CPCE-MB-PSS performance is not affected
by changing the system operating condition.
6.2. Comparing CPCE-MB-PSS and C-MB-PSS
In this section the CPCE-MB-PSS and C-MB-PSS are compared. It
should be mentioned that all three methods (CPCE-MB-PSS, PSOMB-PSS and C-MB-PSS) could be evaluated at the same time and
results could be depicted in one gure. However, since the results
of C-MB-PSS are larger than other methods, gures will not be clear.
In this case, the simulation results are depicted in Figs. 1315.
Fig. 13A and B shows the responses under disturbance 1 and Fig. 14A
and B show the responses under disturbance 2. Also, different loading conditions are considered. Fig. 15 also represents the results for
the case of disturbance 4. It is to be noted that in this case since the
load of bus 3 is supplied through line 2 and the load of bus 4 is
procured through line 5, system will be stable.
The results demonstrate the superior performance of the proposed CPCE-MB-PSS for all cases where the oscillations are damped
out very fast and the magnitude of oscillations is very low in comparison with C-MB-PSS.
6.3. Comparing CPCE-MB-PSS and CPSS
In the previous sections different MB-PSSs were compared. It
is useful to study the internal performance of the MB-PSS and the
results are also compared with the CPSS. The CPSS parameters are
given in [26]. Fig. 16 shows the injected signal by each section of
MB-PSS installed on G1 as an example. It can be seen from Fig. 16
that each section injects its relative stabilizing signal. Thus, this PSS
injects a stronger signal than CPSS and naturally performs better.
Also, the bode diagrams of CPSS and MB-PSS are depicted in Fig. 17.
7. Conclusions
In this paper, a multi-band PSS was successfully tuned by using a
new optimization method and simulated. A multi-machine power
system containing different loading conditions was considered to
evaluate the proposed MB-PSS. This new algorithm was executed
several times to nd out the best solution. To show the ability of
the proposed CPCE-MB-PSS, it was compared with PSO-MB-PSS and
C-MB-PSS. A complete comparison between MB-PSS and CPSS was
also performed and discussed. The simulation results demonstrated
the ability of MB-PSS in damping oscillations under different disturbances and loading conditions.
References
[1] V.S. Vakula, K.R. Sudha, Design of differential evolution algorithm-based robust
fuzzy logic power system stabiliser using minimum rule base, IET Generation,
Transmission & Distribution 6 (2012) 121132.
[2] R.A. Jabr, B.C. Pal, N. Martins, A Sequential conic programming approach for the
coordinated and robust design of power system stabilizers, IEEE Transactions
on Power Systems 25 (2010) 16271637.
[3] K. Sebaa, M. Boudour, Robust power system stabilizers design using multi
objective genetic algorithm, in: IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2007.
[4] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, Mc-Graw Hill, USA, 1994.
[5] R. You, J.E. Hassan, M.H. Nehrir, A nonlinear adaptive neuro-fuzzy power system
stabilizer for multi-machine systems, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 18
(2003) 128135.
48
[16] A.L.B.G. Do Bomm, N. Taranto, D.M. Falcao, Simultaneous tuning of power system damping controllers using genetic algorithms, IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems 15 (2000) 163169.
[17] S.P. Ghoshal, A. Chatterjee, V. Mukherjee, Bio-inspired fuzzy logic based tuning
of power system stabilizer, Expert Systems With Applications 36 (2009)
92819292.
[18] D. Sumina, N. Bulic, I. Erceg, Three-dimensional power system stabilizer, Electric Power Systems Research 80 (2010) 886892.
[19] K.A. El-Metwally, A fuzzy logic-based PID for power system stabilization, Electric Power Components and Systems 29 (2001) 659669.
[20] J.M. Ramirez, V.M. Sanchez, R.E. Correab, Performance of an algebraic-based
PSS, Electric Power Systems Research 81 (2011) 733739.
[21] R. Grondin, I. Kamwa, G. Trudel, L. GBrin-Lajoie, J. Taborda, Modeling and
closed-loop validation of a new PSS concept, the multi-band PSS, IEEE Power
Engineering Society General Meeting 3 (2003) 18041809.
[22] I. Kamwa, R. Grondin, G. Trudel, IEEE PSS2B versus PSS4B: the limits of performance of modern power system stabilizers, IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems 20 (2005) 903915.
[23] T. Hussein, M.S. Saad, A.L. Elshafei, A. Bahgat, Damping inter-area modes of
oscillation using an adaptive fuzzy power system stabilizer, Electric Power
Systems Research 80 (2010) 14281436.
[24] Y. Sun, L. Zhang, X. Gu, A hybrid co-evolutionary cultural algorithm based on
particle swarmoptimization for solving global optimization problems, Neurocomputing 98 (2012) 7689.
[25] J.F. Ardanuy, P. Zuria, Design and comparison of adaptive power system stabilizers based on neural fuzzy networks and genetic algorithms, Neurocomputing
70 (2007) 29022912.
[26] MATLAB software, version R2008a, MB-PSS demo.