Recent Advances In Renewable Energy Sources And Control-2015, VSSUT

Design and analysis of TID controller for Load Frequency

Control of Two-area Interconnected Power System
*Ashutosh Biswal, Rabindra Kumar Sahu, Sidhartha Panda
Department of Electrical Engineering
Veer Surendra Sai University of Technology (VSSUT), Burla-768018, Odisha, India
E-mail: *linku.ashutosh@gmail.com *Corresponding author Phone no.: +91-9556833222
Abstract Frequency deviations and inter-area tie-power
fluctuations from their respective scheduled values following
a local load disturbance which is a source of great concern
in interconnected power system operation and control. This
necessitates an accurate and fast acting controller to maintain
constant nominal frequency. In this article, Tilted integral
derivative controller (TID) has been proposed where the gains of
the controller is optimized by Differential Evolution (DE)
algorithm. Superiority of the proposed DE optimized TID
controller has been shown by comparing the results with some
recently published modern heuristic optimization techniques
such as Bacteria Foraging Optimization Algorithm (BFOA),
Genetic Algorithm (GA) based PI controller, Deferential
Evolution Algorithm (DE) based PI controller, Firefly Algorithm
(FA) based PI and PID controller for the same interconnected
power system. The corresponding performance index is
calculated in terms of Integral Time multiply Absolute Error
(ITAE) and settling time (Ts).

Keywords Automatic load frequency control (ALFC), Tilted

integral derivative controller (TID), Integral Time multiply
Absolute Error (ITAE), Differential Evolution (DE).
I. INTRODUCTION
In case of, large scale power systems consisting of
inter-connected control areas, it is essential to maintain the
frequency and inter area tie power nearer to the scheduled
values. The mechanical power given as input is used not only
to control the frequency of the generators but also to sense the
change in the frequency and tie-line power, which is a
measure of the change in rotor angle. So a well designed
power system is essential which can provide the acceptable
levels of power quality by keeping the frequency and voltage
magnitude within its tolerable limits. Any Change in the
power system load mainly affects the system frequency, while
the reactive power is less sensitive to changes in frequency
and is mainly dependent on the fluctuations of the voltage
magnitude. So the real and reactive power control in the power
system should be dealt separately. The control of the system
frequency and real power is dealt by load frequency control
whereas the regulation in the changes in reactive power and
voltage magnitude is dealt by the automatic Voltage regulator
loop [1-2]. A typical large-scale power system is composed of
several areas of generating units. To reduce the cost of
electricity and to improve reliability of power supply, these
generating units are connected via tie-lines. The usage of tie-

line power imports a new error into the control problem, i.e.,
tie-line power exchange error. When a sudden active power
load change occurs to an area, the area will obtain energy via
tie-lines from other areas. But eventually, the area that is
subject to the load change should balance it without external
support; otherwise there would be economic con icts between
the areas. Hence, each area requires a separate load frequency
controller to regulate the tie-line power exchange error so that
all the areas in an interconnected power system can set their
set-points differently. Load frequency control forms the basis
of many advanced concepts of large scale control of the power
system. As we know any mismatch between generation and
demand deviates the system frequency from its scheduled
value. So a high frequency deviation can lead to a system
collapse.
Several control strategies for LFC of power systems
have been proposed to maintain the system frequency and tieline power ow at their scheduled values during normal and
disturbed conditions. In [3], Ali and Abd-Elazim employed a
BFOA to optimize the PI controller parameters and shown its
superiority over GA in a two-area non-reheat thermal system.
Umesh et al. [4], use the DE algorithm to tune the PI
controller parameter and the superiority of the controller is
demonstrated by comparing the results with GA [3], BFOA
[3] approaches. Saroj et al. [5], use the FA algorithm to tune
the PI and PID controller parameter and the superiority of the
controller is demonstrated by comparing the results with GA
[3], BFOA [3], DE [4] and PSO approaches.
It is clear from the literature survey that different
controller have been proposed by different researcher all over
the world to increase the performance of the system. So
proposing a new controller structure to real-world is always
welcome. In this paper an attempt has taken to improve the
performance of AGC with Tilt integral derivative controller
(TID). In the present study, Differential Evolution (DE)
algorithm is proposed for optimized gains of Tilted integral
derivative controller (TID) and the power system with two
areas having two non reheat steam turbines is considered in
simulation study. The model of the system under study has
been developed in MATLAB/SIMULINK environment. In the
simulation, firstly, a step load increase in the first area of the
power system and then step load increases in both areas of the
same power system are considered.

Page 21

Recent Advances In Renewable Energy Sources And Control-2015, VSSUT

F1

1
R1

B1

ACE1

u1

PD1

1
1 sTG1

1
1 sTT1

K PS1
1 sTPS1

T12
s

PTie

a12

a12
ACE2

B2

u2

1
1 sTG2
1
R2

K PS2
1 sTPS2

1
1 sTT 2

PD 2
F2

Fig.1 MATLAB/SIMULINK model of two-area non reheat thermal interconnected power system

II. MATERIALS AND METHODS

A. Power System Invistigated
This paper consists of two non-reheat thermal power
plant connected by tie-line. Each area of power plant
consists of speed governing system, turbine and generator
having three inputs and two outputs.
Each area supplies according to its respective user
requirement and the tie-lines allow electric power to flow in
between these areas. Therefore, areas affects each other, that
is, any change in load in one of the areas affects the output
frequencies of other areas as well as the tie-line power. Due
to this, the control system of each area needs detailed
information about the transient situation in all the other
areas in order to bring the local frequency to its steady state
value.
The above statement can be verified in Fig. 1 which
shows the complete block diagram of an interconnected
two-area non-reheat power system. In Fig. 1, ACE1 and
ACE2 are area control errors; B1 and B2 are the frequency
bias parameters; u1 and u2 are the control outputs from the
controller; R1 and R2 are the governor speed regulation
parameters in pu Hz; TG1 and TG 2 are the speed governor

Page 22

time constants in sec; TT 1 and TT 2 are the turbine time

constant in sec;
PD1 and PD 2 are the load demand
changes; PTie is the incremental change in tie line power in
pu; K PS1 and K PS 2 are the power system gains; TPS1 and
TPS 2 are the power system time constant in sec; T12 is the
synchronizing coefficient and F1 and F2 are the system
frequency deviations in Hz. The relevant parameters are
given in appendix.
B. Control strucutre and Objective function
To control the frequency, TID controllers are provided
in each area as it offers simpler tuning, better disturbance
rejection ratio, and have less effects of plant parameter
variations on closed loop response. Its designing and tuning
is not only easy than PID but also faster. TID control is
robust, and its transient response to command input ratio
remains good over a wider range of plant parameter
variation [6]. It is similar to that of PID controller, where the
proportional component of the compensator is replaced with
tilted component having transfer function s to the power of 1/n. The structure of TID controller is shown in fig. 2,
where KP, KD, KI, n are proportional, derivative, integral
gains and n is a nonzero real number respectively. The error
inputs the controllers are the respective ACE given by:

Recent Advances In Renewable Energy Sources And Control-2015, VSSUT

TABLE I.

KP
s
Proportional gain

1
n

Fractional integrator

KI

1
s

Integral gain

Integrator

ACEi

Ui

Controller parameters
KP
KI
KD
n
TABLE II.

KD

d
dt

Derivative gain

Derivative

Fig.2 Structure of TID controller

e1(t )

ACE1

B1 F1

PTie

e2 (t )

ACE2

B2 F2

PTie

(1)

(2)
In the design of a modern heuristic optimization technique
based controller, the objective function is first defined based
on the desired specifications and constraints. Performance
criteria usually considered in the control design are the
Integral of Time multiplied Absolute Error (ITAE), Integral
of Squared Error (ISE), Integral of Time multiplied Squared
Error (ITSE) and Integral of Absolute Error (IAE). ITAE
criterion reduces the settling time which cannot be achieved
with IAE or ISE based tuning. ITAE criterion also reduces
the peak overshoot. ITSE based controller provides large
controller output for a sudden change in set point which is
not advantageous from controller design point of view. It
has been reported that ITAE is a better objective function in
LFC studies [5]. Therefore in this paper ITAE is used as
objective function to optimize the scaling factors and
proportional, integral and derivative gains of DE TID
controller. Expression for the ITAE objective function is
depicted in equation (3).
t sim

ITAE

F1

F2

PTie

t dt

OPTIMAL GAIN VALUES

FA:PI
-0.3267
0.4296
---------

FA:PID
1.0556
1.0373
0.9626
-----

DE:TID
1.4073
1.8379
1.3201
7.5208

PERFORMANCE INDEX VALUES

Controller/parameter

ITAE

Conventional PI [3]
GA-tuned PI [3]
BFOA-tuned PI [3]
DE-tuned PI [4]
PS-tuned PI [4]
FA-tuned PI [5]
FA-tuned PID [5]
DE-tuned TID

3.7568
2.7475
1.7975
0.9911
1 2142
0.8695
0.4714
0.2931

Settling time (2% band)

TS (Sec)
F2
PTie
F1
45
45
28
10.59 11.39
9.37
5.52
7.09
6.35
8.96
8.16
5.75
7.37
7.82
5.00
7.11
7.22
5.62
4.52
5.49
4.78
4.20
3.316
3.09

The population is then modified by applying mutation,

crossover and selection operators. DE algorithm uses two
generations; one is old generation and the other one is new
generation of the same population size. Individuals of the
current population become target vectors for the next
generation. The mutation operation produces a mutant
vector for each tar-get vector which is obtained by adding
the weighted difference between two randomly chosen
vectors to a third vector. The crossover operation
generates a trail vector by mixing the parameters of the
mutant vector with those of the target vector. The trial
vector first tries to obtain a better fitness value than the
target vector and then it substitutes the target vector in the
next generation. The evolutionary operators are described
below [7-8]:

(3)

In the above equations, F1 and F2 are the system

frequency deviations; PTie is the incremental change in
tie line power; t sim is the time range of simulation.
III. OVER VIEW OF DE ALGORITHM

A. Initialization of parameter
DE begins with a randomly initiated population of size
NP of D dimensional real-valued parameter vectors. Each
parameter j lies within a range and the initial population
should spread over this range as much as possible by
uniformly randomizing individuals within the search space
constrained by the prescribed lower bound X Lj and upper

Differential Evolution (DE) algorithm is a heuristic

search algorithm introduced by Storn and Price [7]. It is
a simple, efficient, reliable algorithm with easy coding.
The main advantage of DE over Genetic Algorithm
(GA) is that GA uses crossover operator for evolution,
while DE relies on mutation operation based on the
difference of randomly sampled pairs of solutions in the
population. An optimization task consisting of D
variables can be represented by a D-dimensional vector.
At the beginning a population of NP solution vectors is
randomly initialized within the parameter bounds.

bound X Uj .
B. Mutation operation
For the mutation operation, a parent vector from the
current generation is selected (known as target vector), a
mutant vector is obtained by the differential mutation
operation (known as donor vector) and finally an offspring
is produced by combining the donor with the target vector
(known as trial vector). Mathematically it can be
expressed as:

Page 23

0.1

0.1

-0.1

-0.1

-0.2

-0.2

-0.3

GA PI
BFOA PI
DE PI
FA PI
FA PID
DE TID

-0.4
-0.5
-0.6
-0.7

F 1 (Hz )

F 1(Hz )

Recent Advances In Renewable Energy Sources And Control-2015, VSSUT

-0.3

-0.5
-0.6
-0.7

6
Time(sec)

10

GA PI
BFOA PI
DE PI
FA PI
FA PID
DE TID

-0.4

12

6
Time(sec)

10

Fig.4 Change in frequency of area-2 for 0.1 p.u. change in area-1

and 0.2 p.u. change in area-2

Fig.3 Change in frequency of area-1 for 0.1 p.u. change in area-1

and 0.2 p.u. change in area-2

GA PI
BFOA PI
DE PI
FA PI
FA PID
DE TID

0.08

(4)

0.07

vector,

0.06
P Tie (P.u)

Vi, G 1 X r1, G F .( X r 2, G X r 3, G )
Where X i, G
is the given parameter

12

X r1, G X r 2, G X r 3, G are randomly selected vector with

distinct indices i , r1 , r 2 and r 3 , is the donor vector and
and F is a constant from (0, 2).

0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0

C. Crossover operation
After generating the donor vector through mutation
the crossover operation is employed to enhance the
potential diversity of the population. For crossover
operation three parents are selected and the child is
obtained by means of perturbation of one of them. In
crossover operation a trial vector U i,G 1 is obtained

6
Time(sec)

10

12

Fig.5 Change in tie line power for 0.1 p.u. change in area-1
and 0.2 p.u. change in area-2.

X i,G 1

from target vector ( X i, G ) and donor vector ( Vi,G ).

The donor vector enters the trial vector with probability
CR given by:
Uj,i,G 1

U i, G 1 if f (U i, G 1 )
X i, G
otherwise.

f ( X i, G )

(6)

IV. SIMULATION RESULTS

The usefulness of proposed controller was
demonstrated by considering two cases. In the first case
10% step load is applied to area 1 only, finally 10% and
20% step load is applied to area 1 and area 2 respectively
which is depicted in case 2. DE algorithm has been used to
optimize the controller coefficients. The optimization was
repeated 50 times and the best final solution among the 50
runs is chosen as proposed controller parameters. The
optimum values of the different controllers are given in
Table I.

V j , i , G 1 if rand j,i CR or j I rand

(5)
X j , i , G 1 if randj,i CR or j I rand

With rand j , i ~ U (0,1) , I rand is a random integer

from (1,2,.....D) where D is the solutions dimension
i.e. number of control variables. I rand ensures that
Vi , G 1 X i,G .

A. Case 1
A step load of 10% is applied to area 1 at t=0 sec and the
performance of the system DE-optimized TID controller is
shown in Table II. The performance of proposed TID
controller is compared with GA [3], BFOA [3], DE [4]
and FA [5] as shown in Table II. It is clear from the Table
II that smaller ITAE value is obtained with TID controller
(ITAE=0.2931) compared to FA PID (ITAE=0.4714).
Hence it is clear that TID controller outperforms the PID
controller. Hence better system performance in terms of

D.

Selection operation
To keep the population size constant over
subsequent generations, selection operation is
performed. In this operation the target vector X i, G is
compared with the trial vector Vi , G 1 and the one with
the better fitness value is admitted to the next
generation. The selection operation in DE can be
represented by:

Page 24

Recent Advances In Renewable Energy Sources And Control-2015, VSSUT

APPENDIX
Nominal Parameters of the Power System [6]

minimum settling times in frequency and tie-line power

deviations is achieved with proposed TID controller.

B1= B2 = 0.425 pu MW/Hz; R1 = R2 = 2.4 Hz/p.u.; TG1 =TG1 =

0.08sec TT1 =TT2 = 0.3s; TR1 = TR2 =10 s; KPS1 = KPS2 =120Hz/p.u.
MW; TPS1=TPS2 = 20 s; T12 = 0.545, a12 = -1.

B. Case 2
To study the dynamic performance of the system 10% and
20% step disturbance is applied to area 1 and area 2
respectively and the dynamic response is shown in figs 35. From the dynamic response it is revels that the proposed
TID controller gives better response.

[1]
[2]

V. CONCLUSION
In this paper, Differential Evolution (DE) is proposed to tune
the controller parameters for Load Frequency Control (LFC)
problem. The superiority of the proposed design approach
has been shown by comparing the results with some recently
published modern heuristic optimization techniques such as
Bacteria Foraging Optimization Algorithm (BFOA),
Genetic Algorithm (GA) based PI controller, DE optimized
PI controller and Firefly Algorithm (FA) based PI and PID
controller for the same interconnected power system. From
the simulation results, it is observed that significant
improvements of dynamic performance of the system in
terms Integral of Time multiplied by Absolute value of
Error (ITAE), settling time and peak overshoot are obtained
with TID controller.

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]
[7]

[8]

Page 25

REFERENCES
D.P. Kothari and I.J. Nagrath, Modern Power System Analysis,3rd
ed, Singapore, McGraw Hill, 2003.
Elgerd, OI. Electric Energy Systems Theory An Introduction, New
Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill, 2000.
Ali, E. S., and Abd-Elazim, S. M., Bacteria foraging optimization
algorithm based load frequency controller for interconnected power
system, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst., Vol. 33, pp. 633638,
2011.
U.K Rout, R.K. Sahu, and S. Panda, Design and analysis of
differential evolution algorithm based automatic generation control
for interconnected power system, Ain Shams Eng. J., Vol. 4, No. 3,
pp. 409421, 2013.
S. Padhan, R.K. Sahu and S. Panda, Application of Firefly
Algorithm for Load Frequency Control of Multi-area Interconnected
Power System,Electric Power Components and Systems, vol. 42, pp.
1419-1430. 2014.
B. J. Lurie, Three-parameter tunable tilt-integral derivative (TID)
controller,US Patent US5371670, 1994.
R. Stron and K. Price, Differential evolution a simple and efficient
adaptive scheme for global optimization over continuous spaces, J
Glob Optim 1995;11:34159
S. Panda, Robust coordinated design of multiple and multi-type
damping controller using differential evolution algorithm, Electr
Power Energy Syst 2011;33:101830.