Advertisement

Adaptive Fuzzy Sliding Mode Power System Stabilizer Using Nussbaum Gain

  • Emira NechadiEmail author
  • Mohamed Naguib Harmas
  • Najib Essounbouli
  • Abdelaziz Hamzaoui
Article

Abstract

Power system stability is enhanced through a novel stabilizer developed around an adaptive fuzzy sliding mode approach which applies the Nussbaum gain to a nonlinear model of a single-machine infinite-bus (SMIB) and multi-machine power system stabilizer subjected to a three phase fault. The Nussbaum gain is used to avoid the positive sign constraint and the problem of controllability of the system. A comparative simulation study is presented to evaluate the achieved performance.

Keywords

Multi-machine power system stabilizer adaptive fuzzy sliding mode Nussbaum gain Lyapounov stability 

1 Introduction

Power systems are complex nonlinear systems that often exhibit low frequency oscillations due to insufficient damping caused by adverse operating conditions which can lead to a devastating loss of synchronism[1]. Power system stabilizers are used to suppress these oscillations and improve the overall stability[1, 2, 3, 4]. The computation of the fixed parameters of these stabilizers is usually based on the linearized model of the power system around a nominal operating point[5, 6, 7]. Operating conditions often change as a result of load variations and/or major disturbances. These changes affect power system dynamic behavior which requires adjustment of stabilizer parameters. Keeping the latter at fixed values will greatly degrade power system performance[7]. Conventional stabilizers, using lead–lag compensators have been based on linearized power system model to damp oscillations. Disturbances, varying loading conditions and therefore frequently changing operating point were not taken into consideration[8-11]. However, a lot of researches about the design of power system stabilizers have been conducted, using a wide range of strategies, such as sliding controller[12], adaptive controller[13, 14, 15], and adaptive fuzzy controllers[16,17]. A comparison of some approaches to designing power system stabilizers was presented in [18]. One of these possible methods is the application of adaptive fuzzy sliding controller. Remarkable research effort has been done in the last decade to put forward intelligent fuzzy logic based power system stabilizer (PSS) as well as optimality in adapting to changing operating conditions as in [19-21]. However, these linear model based control strategies often fail to provide satisfactory results over a wide range of operating conditions. Moreover, during severe disturbances, PSS action may actually cause the generator under its control to lose synchronism in an attempt to control its excitation field.

For the last few years, optimization techniques for a conventional[22, 23] and dual PSS[24, 25, 26] have also been applied using different algorithms such as particle swarm optimization (PSO), genetic algorithms (GA), chaotic optimization algorithm (COA) and neuro-fuzzy system (NFS).

Contribution made in this paper consists in a new adaptive fuzzy sliding mode power system stabilizer using a Nussbaum gain. Stability of the overall system is guaranteed via Lyapunov synthesis.

In the following sections of this paper, a nonlinear power system model is presented first, followed by the development of an adaptive fuzzy sliding mode controller using Nussbaum gain and the addressed stability issue. In Section 3, the study of simulation results for different operating conditions on single-machine and multi-machine power system is described.

2 Power system model

The power system model considered in this paper is a nonlinear model representing a synchronous machine connected to an infinite bus via a double circuit transmission line. Fig. 1 shows the power system schematic diagram including turbine, transformer, automatic voltage regulator andPSS[4].
Fig. 1

Single-machine infinite-bus (SMIB) power system

A nonlinear representation of the power system during a transient period after a major disturbance has occurred in the system[17, 27, 28]:
$$\left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}{l}} {{{\dot x}_1} = {x_2}} \\ {{{\dot x}_2} = f(x) + g(x)u} \end{array}} \right.$$
(1)
Wher x = \({\left[ {{x_1}\quad {x_2}} \right]^{\text{T}}} = {\left[ {\Delta \omega \quad \tfrac{{\Delta P}}{M}} \right]^{\text{T}}} \in {{\mathbf{R}}^2}\) is the state vector, Δω is the speed deviation, ΔP = P m - P e is the accelerating power, M is inertia moment coefficient of the synchronous machine, uR is the input, f (x) and g (x) are nonlinear functions, and g (x) ≠ 0 in the controllability region (see the appendix).
The block diagram of a conventional lead-lag power system stabilizer is shown in Fig. 2, in which a conventional single-input is presented. Parameters and details can be found in [22].
Fig 2

Conventional power system stabilizer

The two inputs of an IEEE power system stabilizer, unlike the conventional single-input PSS, is shown in Fig. 3, in which a dual-input PSS3B is presented. Parameters and details can be found in [24].
Fig 3

Dual-input power system stabilizer

3 Adaptive fuzzy sliding mode power system stabilizer

Consider a single-input-single-output (SISO) nonlinear system described by (1), with the sliding surface as
$$s = {x_2} + \beta {x_1}$$
(2)
where β is a positive constant.
The time derivative of the sliding surface (2) is given by
$$\dot S = f(x) + \beta {x_2} + g(x)u.$$
(3)
Assuring the existing condition (4)
$$S\dot S < 0.$$
(4)
Hence, the control law is
$$u = {g^{ - 1}}(x)( - f(x) - \beta {x_2} - k\operatorname{sgn} (S)).$$
(5)

Control law (5) allows ensuring the system stabilization and robustness, but it has the drawback in the computation of k, which is not a straightforward task. In a more realistic case where f (x) and g (x) are unknown, they are replaced by their fuzzy estimations.

In previous researches on the indirect adaptive fuzzy method, the controller with g - 1 (x) can be singular because it cannot be guaranteed that g(x) is not equal to zero at any moment, where g(x) denotes the approximation of g(x). In this paper, a Nussbaum gain will be incorporated into the control law in order to estimate function g - 1 (x)[29].

Definition 1[30]. A function is called a Nussbaum-type function if it has the following properties:
$$\mathop {\lim }\limits_{y \to \infty } \sup \frac{1}{y}\int_0^y {N(\varsigma )d\varsigma } = + \infty $$
(6)
$$\mathop {\lim }\limits_{y \to \infty } \inf \frac{1}{y}\int_0^y {N(\varsigma )d\varsigma } = - \infty .$$
(7)
Throughout this paper, the even Nussbaum function:
$$N(\varsigma ) = \cos \left( {\frac{\pi }{2}} \right)\varsigma {\operatorname{e} ^{{\varsigma ^2}}}$$
(8)
is employed, and ς is a variable to be determined later.
Lemma 1[30]. Let V (·) and ς (·) be smooth functions de-fined on [0,t f ), with \(V(t)\; \geqslant \;0,\;\forall t \in [0,{t_f})\), and N (·) be an even Nussbaum-type function. If the following inequality holds: where c 0 represents some suitable constant, c 1 is a positive constant, and g' (x (t)) is a time-varying parameter which takes values in the unknown closed interval I = [l -, l +], with 0 ∉ I,then V (t), ς (t) and Open image in new window must be bounded on [0,t f ).

The proof of this lemma can be found in [30].

Based on the universal approximation theorem, the unknown function f (x) and constant k can be approximated by (10) and (11), respectively: where θ = [θ 1,θ 2, … ,θ m ]T is the parameter vector and ξ = [ξ 1, ξ 2, & , ξ m ]T is the vector of fuzzy basis functions.
The approximation error is given by in which \(\theta _f^ * \) and \(\theta _k^ * \) are the optimal parameter values. We define
$${\tilde \theta _f} = {\theta _f} - \theta _f^*$$
(14)
$${\tilde \theta _k} = {\theta _k} - \theta _k^*.$$
(15)
Theorem 1. For the nonlinear system (1), if we choose the following control law
$$u = N(\varsigma )\left( { - \hat f(x) - \beta {x_2} - \hat k\operatorname{sgn} (S)} \right)$$
(16)
with and the following adaptation laws:
$${\dot \theta _f} = {\gamma _1}S\xi (x) - {\gamma _1}{\theta _f}$$
(18)
$${\dot \theta _k} = {\gamma _2}g(x)N(\varsigma )|S|\xi (x) - {\gamma _2}{\theta _k}$$
(19)
such that |d f S| \( \leqslant \;\varepsilon ,\;\;{\gamma _1},\;\;{\gamma _2}\) are positive constants and g' (x) = -g(x), then the stability of the closed loop system can be guaranteed.
Proof. Choose the Lyapunov function candidate to be
Therefore, Using (18) and (19), we can obtain
The following inequalities are valid
And we can rewrite V as Let Open image in new window and Open image in new window . Then, (25) becomes
$$\dot V \leqslant - \alpha V + \beta + (g'(x)N(\varsigma ) + 1)\dot \varsigma .$$
(26)
Multiplying both sides of (26) by eat , we can obtain
$$\frac{\operatorname{d} }{{\operatorname{d} t}}(V(t){\operatorname{e} ^{\alpha t}}) \leqslant \beta {\operatorname{e} ^{\alpha t}} + {\operatorname{e} ^{\alpha t}}[g'(x)N(\varsigma ) + 1]\dot \varsigma .$$
(27)
After integrating (27) over [0,t f ] , it follows that
$$0 \leqslant V(t) \leqslant \frac{\beta }{\alpha } + \left[ {V(0) - \frac{\beta }{\alpha }} \right]{\operatorname{e} ^{ - \alpha t}} + {\operatorname{e} ^{ - \alpha t}}\int_0^t {[g'(x)N(\varsigma ) + 1]{\operatorname{e} ^{\alpha \tau}}\dot \varsigma \operatorname{d} \tau .} $$
(28)
Noting that \(0 < {{\text{e}}^{ - \alpha t}} < 1{\text{ and }}\tfrac{\beta }{\alpha }{{\text{e}}^{ - \alpha t}} > 0\), we have \([V(0) - \tfrac{\beta }{\alpha }]{{\text{e}}^{ - \alpha t}} \leqslant V(0)\). Then the above equality becomes
$$0 \leqslant V(t) \leqslant \eta + {\operatorname{e} ^{ - \alpha t}}\int_0^t {[g'(x)N(\varsigma ) + 1]{\operatorname{e} ^{\alpha \tau }}\dot \varsigma \operatorname{d} \tau .} $$
(29)
where \(\eta = \tfrac{\beta }{\alpha } + V(0)\).

According to Lemma 1, it can be concluded from (32) that V(t) and Open image in new window are bounded, i.e., Open image in new window and Open image in new window are also bounded.

4 Simulation

The soundness of the proposed PSS was tested, and the performance as well as robustness tests were conducted and compared with a conventional stabilizer and a dual-input power system stabilizer through simulations. Good transient behavior with the proposed control under severe operating conditions were illustrated by the following case studies. The speed variation and accelerating power are chosen as the power system control variables. Five fuzzy sets for each input are sufficient for the PSS to be designed.

4.1 Simulation cases for an SMIB

To assess the performance of the proposed controller, simulations were carried out for different operating conditions.

A three-phase fault test is applied to an infinite bus as in Fig. 1, lasting 60 ms before being cleared. When the power system is strongly perturbed, the proposed stabilizer reacts rapidly and prevents an eventual loss of synchronism. Therefore, it enables the system to reach a stable operating point very quickly.

The simulation results for nominal load, heavy load and light load are shown in Fig. 4. It is clear that the proposed PSS (PPSS) exhibits superior performance to the conventional PSS (CPSS) and dual-input PSS (DPSS) power system stabilizers. The simulation results shown in Fig. 4 indicates a good transient behavior of the proposed PSS.
Fig 4

Speed deviations in nominal, heavy loading and light loading cases

4.2 Simulation of multi-machine power system

To evaluate the performance of the proposed control, we performed simulation for multi-machine power system as in Fig. 5 with the aim to compare the performance of the proposed PSS with the conventional PSS and dual-input PSSs.
Fig 5

Multi-machine power system

In order to validate stability enhancement due to the proposed stabilizer, a three-phase fault test is applied to bus 7 (Fig. 5) with a duration of 60 ms before it is cleared. Three operating conditions were investigated: Cases of nominal load, light load and heavy load. The fault is cleared and the controller helps the system to reach a stable operating point very quickly. As shown in Fig.6, the proposed approach shows better control performance than the conventional PSS and dual PSSs in terms of settling time and damping effect.
Fig 6

Speed deviations in nominal case

To further evaluate the robustness of the proposed stabilizer, the power system is subjected to heavy load operation (Fig. 7) and light load operation (Fig. 8). The results show again the clear oscillations damping of the proposed controller in multi-machine power system, as compared with its conventional counterpart, but we have a small deterioration in performance.
Fig 7

Speed deviations in heavy loading of the system

Fig 8

Speed deviations in light loading of the system

In this study, we used different operating points to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed control in oscillations damping after the occurrence of large disturbance on a power system by providing better transient response and stronger robustness than other stabilizers. The adaptive fuzzy sliding mode using Nussbaum gain scheme permits to take account of severe load variation and varying operating conditions.

5 Conclusions

Based on the adaptive fuzzy sliding mode controller and the Nussbaum gain, we introduced a new power system stabilizer that enhances damping and improves transient dynamics of a single-machine infinite-bus and multi-machine power system stabilizers. Different load conditions as well as severe perturbations were used to evaluate the proposed power system stabilizer effectiveness in rapidly reducing oscillations that could lead to loss of synchronism if not treated. Simulation results exhibited its superior performance over classical PSSs. Real power system remains to be thoroughly investigated under the proposed stabilizer.

Appendix

Parameters of single (SMIB) operating conditions:

Nominal load: P = 0.9/unit,Q = 0.3/unit

Heavy load: P = 1.60/unit,Q = 0.6/unit

Light load: P = 0.45/unit, Q = 0.35/unit

Multi-machine power system parameters:

G1:Nominal load: P = 0.72/unit,Q = 0.27/unit.

Heavy load: P = 2.21/unit,Q = 1.09/unit.

Light load: P = 0.36/unit, Q = 0.16/unit.

G2:Nominal load: P = 1.63/unit,Q = 0.07/unit.

Heavy load: P = 1.92/unit,Q = 0.56/unit.

Light load: P = 0.80/unit, Q = -0.11/unit.

G3:Nominal load: P = 0.85/unit,Q = -0.11/unit.

Heavy load: P = 1.28/unit,Q = 0.36/unit.

Lightload: P = 0.45/unit, Q = -0.20/unit.

Nonlinear functions:
$$\begin{array}{*{20}{l}} {f(x) = \frac{{{x_e} + {x_d}}}{{{{T'}_{d0}}({x_e} + {{x'}_d})}}(\Delta P - {P_m}) + \frac{{{V^2}}}{{2{{T'}_{d0}}{{({x_e} + {{x'}_d})}^2}}}} \\ {\quad \left( {\frac{{({x_e} + {x_d})({{x'}_d} + {x_q})}}{{({x_e} + {x_q})}} + ({x_d} + {{x'}_d})} \right)\sin (2\delta ) + } \\ {\quad \left( {Q + {V^2}\left( {\frac{{{{\sin }^2}(\delta )}}{{{x_e} + {x_q}}} + \frac{{{{\cos }^2}(\delta )}}{{({x_e} + {{x'}_d})}} + \frac{{({{x'}_d} + {x_q})cos(2\delta )}}{{({x_e} + {x_q})({x_e} + {{x'}_d})}}} \right)} \right) \times } \\ {\quad {\omega _{sm}}{\Delta _\omega } + \frac{{{K_A}V\sin (\delta )}}{{{{T'}_{d0}}({x_e} + {{x'}_d})}}({V_{ref}} - {V_t})} \\ {\quad g(x) = \frac{{{K_A}V\sin (\delta )}}{{{{T'}_{d0}}({x_e} + {{x'}_d})}}.} \end{array}$$

References

  1. [1]
    P. Kundur. Power System Stability and Control, New York, USA: McGraw-Hill Inc, 1994.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    F. P. DeMello, C. A. Concordia. Concepts of synchronous machine stability as affected by excitation control. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-88, no. 4, pp. 316–329, 1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    P. M. Anderson, A. A. Fouad. Power System Control and Stability, Lowa State, USA: IEEE Press, 1977.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    E. V. Larsen, D. A. Swann. Applying power system stabilizers, Part I, II, III. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-100, no.6, pp. 3017–3046, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    M. L. Kothari, J. Nanda, K. Bhattacharya. Design of variable structure power system stabilisers with desired eigenvalues in the sliding mode. IEE Proceedings C of Generation, Transmission and Distribution, vol. 140, no. 4, pp. 263–268, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    K. Bhattacharya, M. L. Kothari, J. Nanda. Design of discrete-mode variable structure power system stabilizers. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 399–406, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Y. M. Park, W. Kim. Discrete-time adaptive sliding mode power system stabilizer with only input/output measurements. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol. 18, no.8, pp. 509–517, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Z. H. Jiang. Design of power system stabilizers using synergetic control theory. In Proceedings of Power Engineering Society General Meeting, IEEE, Tampa, FL, pp. 1–8, 2007.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    A. L. Elshafei, K. A. El-Metwally, A. A. Shaltout. A variable structure adaptive fuzzy logic stabilizer for single and multi-machine power systems. Control Engineering Practice, vol. 13, no.4, pp. 413–423, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    P. Hoang, K. Tomsovic. Design and analysis of an adaptive fuzzy power system stabilizer. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 455–461, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    G. J. Li, T. T. Lie, C. B. Soh, G. H. Yang. Design of state-feedback decentralized nonlinear H∞ controllers in power systems. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 601–610, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    A. Y. Sivaramakrishnan, M. V. Hariharan, M. C. Srisailam. Design of variable-structure load-frequency controller using pole assignment technique. International Journal of Control, vol. 40, no.3, pp. 487–498, 1984.CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    A. Ghosh, G. Ledwich, O. P. Malik, G. S. Hope. Power system stabilizer based on adaptive control techniques. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol.PAS-103, no. 8, pp. 1983–1989, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    S. J. Cheng, Y. S. Chow, O. P. Malik, G. S. Hope. An adaptive synchronous machine stabilizer. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 101–107, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    D. A. Pierre. A perspective on adaptive control of power systems. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol.2, no. 2, pp. 387–395, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    N. Hossein-Zadeh, A. Kalam. A direct adaptive fuzzy power system stabilizer. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 1564–1571, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    N. Hossein-Zadeh, A. Kalam. An indirect adaptive fuzzy-logic power system stabiliser. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 837–842, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    A. L. Elshafei, K. El-Metwally. Power system stabilization via adaptive fuzzy-logic control. In Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Symposium on Intelligent Control, IEEE, Istanbul, Turkey, pp. 89–94, 1997.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    S. S. Lee, J. K. Park. Design of power system stabilizer using observer/sliding mode, observer/sliding mode-model following and H∞/sliding mode controllers for small-signal stability study. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol. 20, no.8, pp. 543–553, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    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, vol. 80, no. 12, pp. 1428–1436, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    G. H. Hwang, D. W. Kim, J. H. Lee, Y. J. An. Design of fuzzy power system stabilizer using adaptive evolutionary algorithm. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intel­ligence, vol. 21, no.1, pp. 86–96, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    M. Soliman, A. L. Elshafei, F. Bendary, W. Mansour. LMI static output-feedback design of fuzzy power system stabilizers. Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 6817–6825, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    H. Shayeghi, H. A. Shayanfar, A. Safari, R. Aghmasheh. A robust PSSs design using PSO in a multi-machine environment. Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 696–702, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    H. Shayeghi, H. A. Shayanfar, S. Jalilzadeh, A. Safari. Multi-machine power system stabilizers design us­ing chaotic optimization algorithm. Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 51, no. 7, pp. 1572–1580, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    A. Chatterjee, S. P. Ghoshal, V. Mukherjee. Chaotic ant swarm optimization for fuzzy-based tuning of power system stabilizer. International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol 33, no. 3, pp. 657–672, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    A. Sharma, M. L. Kothari. Intelligent dual input power system stabilizer. Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 64, no.3, pp. 257–267, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    S. P. Ghoshal, A. Chatterjee, V. Mukherjee. Bio-inspired fuzzy logic based tuning of power system stabilizer. Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 9281–9292, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    M. A. M. Hassan, O. P. Malik, G. S. Hope. A fuzzy logic based stabilizer for a synchronous machine. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 6, no.3, pp. 407–413, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    A. Boulkroune, M. Tadjine, M. MSaad, M. Farza. Fuzzy adaptive controller for MIMO nonlinear systems with known and unknown control direction. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, vol. 161, no.6, pp. 797–820, 2010.CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    S. S. Ge, H. Fan, T. H. Lee. Adaptive neural control of nonlinear time-delay systems with unknown virtual control coefficients. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part B: Cybernetics, vol. 34, no.1, pp. 499–516, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science in China Press 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emira Nechadi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mohamed Naguib Harmas
    • 1
  • Najib Essounbouli
    • 2
  • Abdelaziz Hamzaoui
    • 2
  1. 1.Electrical Engineering DepartmentFerhat Abbas University of Setif 1Algeria
  2. 2.Centre of Research for Science and Information Technology and Communication LaboratoryChampagne Ardennes UniversityFrance

Personalised recommendations