IEEE

Power & Energy Society

IEEE Tutorial Course

Power System Stabilization
Via Excitation Control

09TP250

Copyright IEEE 2009

978-1-4244-5069-5
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

IEEE TUTORIAL COURSE

POWER SYSTEM STABILIZATION
VIA EXCITATION CONTROL

Sponsored by

IEEE Power Engineering Society Life Long Learning Committee

and the

Excitation Systems Subcommittee

of the

Energy Development and Power Generation Committee

Presented at

the IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting

Tampa

Florida

28th June 2007

-1-
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 REVIEW OF FEEDBACK CONTROL CONCEPTS ........................................................................................ 7
I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................................... 7
II. LAPLACE TRANSFORMS .................................................................................................................................................... 7
III. TRANSFER FUNCTIONS AND BLOCK DIAGRAMS.................................................................................................................. 9
A. Transfer Function Example.......................................................................................................................................... 9
B. Block Diagrams............................................................................................................................................................ 9
C. Interconnection Of Systems........................................................................................................................................ 10
D. B.D. Manipulation Example....................................................................................................................................... 10
E. Transfer Function Example........................................................................................................................................ 10
IV. FREQUENCY RESPONSE MODELS .................................................................................................................................... 11
V. STABILITY CRITERIA FOR FEEDBACK CONTROL SYSTEMS .............................................................................................. 11
A. General Comments..................................................................................................................................................... 11
B. Nyquist Criterion (Gain And Phase Margins) ........................................................................................................... 12
C. Example...................................................................................................................................................................... 14
D. Root Locus Example................................................................................................................................................... 15
VI. STATE-SPACE TECHNIQUES............................................................................................................................................. 16
A. General Comments..................................................................................................................................................... 16
B. State-Space Models .................................................................................................................................................... 17
C. State Space model Example ....................................................................................................................................... 17
VII. SYSTEM SIMULATION ...................................................................................................................................................... 18
CHAPTER 2 OVERVIEW OF POWER SYSTEM STABILITY CONCEPTS ................................................................... 19
I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 19
II. POWER SYSTEM STABILITY CLASSIFICATION .................................................................................................................. 19
A. Definition.................................................................................................................................................................... 19
B. Categories Of Stability ............................................................................................................................................... 19
1) Voltage Stability..................................................................................................................................................... 19
2) Frequency Stability ................................................................................................................................................ 19
3) Rotor Angle Stability ............................................................................................................................................. 19
III. BACKGROUND - GENERATOR CONNECTED TO INFINITE BUS ........................................................................................... 20
IV. TRANSIENT STABILITY .................................................................................................................................................... 20
V. TRANSIENT VS. OSCILLATORY STABILITY ...................................................................................................................... 21
VI. OSCILLATORY STABILITY ............................................................................................................................................... 21
A. Characteristic Dynamic Equation.............................................................................................................................. 21
B. Local Vs. Inter Area Oscillations............................................................................................................................... 22
C. Negative Damping Due To Voltage Regulator .......................................................................................................... 22
D. PSS For Improved Oscillatory Stability..................................................................................................................... 24
VII. GENERATOR MODELS ..................................................................................................................................................... 25
VIII. CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................................................. 25
CHAPTER 3 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA AND TUNING TECHNIQUES..................................................................... 26
I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 26
II. PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................................ 26
A. Oscillatory Stability Limits......................................................................................................................................... 26
B. System Modes Of Oscillation ..................................................................................................................................... 26
C. Tuning Concepts......................................................................................................................................................... 27
D. Speed Input Stabilizers............................................................................................................................................... 28
E. Frequency Input Stabilizers ....................................................................................................................................... 28
F. Power Input Stabilizers .............................................................................................................................................. 29
III. TUNING EXAMPLE ........................................................................................................................................................... 29
A. Phase Compensation.................................................................................................................................................. 30
B. Root Locus.................................................................................................................................................................. 30
C. Step Test and Fault Simulations................................................................................................................................. 31
D. PSS Torsional Interaction ....................................................................................................................................... 32
E. Use of Modified Lead-lag Compensation................................................................................................................... 33

-2-
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

F. Inter-area Mode Damping ......................................................................................................................................... 33

IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................................ 34
CHAPTER 4 INTEGRAL OF ACCELERATING POWER TYPE STABILIZERS............................................................ 35
I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 35
II. OVERVIEW OF PSS STRUCTURES .................................................................................................................................... 35
A. Speed-Based (Dw) Stabilizer...................................................................................................................................... 35
B. Frequency-Based (f) Stabilizer................................................................................................................................. 35
C. Power-Based (P) Stabilizer...................................................................................................................................... 36
D. Integral-of-Accelerating Power (P) Stabilizer ...................................................................................................... 36
III. PRACTICAL APPLICATION ISSUES .................................................................................................................................... 37
A. Signal Mixing ............................................................................................................................................................. 37
B. Mechanical Power Variations.................................................................................................................................... 38
C. Input Signals .............................................................................................................................................................. 39
D. Compensated Frequency ............................................................................................................................................ 40
IV. HARDWARE CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................................................................ 41
V. PSS COMMISSIONING & FIELD VERIFICATION ................................................................................................................ 41
VI. APPENDIX - DERIVATION OF FILTER RESPONSES ............................................................................................................ 42
A. Background ................................................................................................................................................................ 42
B. Conventional Low Pass Filter.................................................................................................................................... 42
C. Ramp-Tracking Filter................................................................................................................................................. 42
CHAPTER 5 FIELD TESTING TECHNIQUES...................................................................................................................... 44
I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 44
II. MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES AND INSTRUMENTATION .................................................................................................. 44
A. Signal Transducers and Conditioning ....................................................................................................................... 44
B. Terminal Voltage........................................................................................................................................................ 44
C. Electrical Power......................................................................................................................................................... 44
D. Field Voltage.............................................................................................................................................................. 45
E. Generator Speed......................................................................................................................................................... 45
F. Terminal or Internal Frequency................................................................................................................................. 46
G. Power System Stabilizer Output................................................................................................................................. 46
H. Generator Torque Angle ............................................................................................................................................ 46
I. Signal Recording............................................................................................................................................................ 46
III. TESTING TECHNIQUES ..................................................................................................................................................... 46
A. Step and Impulse Response Testing ........................................................................................................................... 46
B. Frequency Response Testing...................................................................................................................................... 47
C. Equipment and Techniques for Frequency Domain Analysis .................................................................................... 48
D. General Comments..................................................................................................................................................... 48
IV. ON SITE TUNING AND STABILITY ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................. 48
A. The Excitation System ................................................................................................................................................ 48
B. Tuning Criteria........................................................................................................................................................... 49
C. PSS Testing ................................................................................................................................................................ 49
V. SHAFT TORSIONAL OSCILLATION.................................................................................................................................... 49
CHAPTER 6 APPLICATION CONSIDERATIONS.............................................................................................................. 51
I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 51
II. UNIDIRECTIONAL EXCITERS ............................................................................................................................................ 51
III. DIGITAL EXCITERS .......................................................................................................................................................... 51
A. Processor Cycle Time................................................................................................................................................. 51
B. Integer Or Floating Point Arithmetic......................................................................................................................... 51
C. Passwords And Security ............................................................................................................................................. 51
IV. MINIMUM EXCITATION LIMITERS ................................................................................................................................... 52
CHAPTER 7 FUTURE DIRECTIONS IN PSS DESIGN....................................................................................................... 53
I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 53
II. ANALYTICAL ADAPTIVE CONTROL BASED APSS ........................................................................................................... 53
A. Direct Adaptive Control ............................................................................................................................................. 53
B. Indirect Adaptive Control........................................................................................................................................... 54

-3-
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

C. System Model ............................................................................................................................................................. 55

D. System Parameter Estimation .................................................................................................................................... 55
III. INDIRECT ADAPTIVE CONTROL STRATEGIES ................................................................................................................... 55
A. Linear Quadratic Control .......................................................................................................................................... 55
B. Minimum Variance (MV) Control .............................................................................................................................. 56
C. Pole-Zero And Pole Assigned Control ....................................................................................................................... 56
D. Pole Shift Control....................................................................................................................................................... 56
IV. PS CONTROL BASED ADAPTIVE PSS............................................................................................................................... 56
A. Self-Adjusting Pole-Shift Control Strategy................................................................................................................. 56
V. PERFORMANCE STUDIES WITH POLE-SHIFTING CONTROL PSS........................................................................................ 58
VI. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE BASED PSS........................................................................................................................... 59
A. Adaptive PSS With NN Predictor And NN Controller................................................................................................ 59
B. Adaptive Network Based Fuzzy Logic Controller ...................................................................................................... 59
C. Architecture................................................................................................................................................................ 59
D. Training And Performance ........................................................................................................................................ 60
E. Self-Learning ANF PSS.............................................................................................................................................. 60
F. Neuro-Fuzzy Controller Architecture Optimization................................................................................................... 60
VII. AMALGAMATED ANALYTICAL AND AI BASED PSS ........................................................................................................ 61
A. Adaptive PSS With NN Identifier And Pole-Shift Control.......................................................................................... 61
B. Adaptive PSS with Fuzzy Logic Identifier and Pole-Shift controller ......................................................................... 62
C. Adaptive PSS With RLS Identifier And Fuzzy Logic Control ..................................................................................... 62
VIII. MULTI BAND PSS ....................................................................................................................................................... 63
A. Tuning Methodology .................................................................................................................................................. 64
B. Application Experience .............................................................................................................................................. 64
C. Multiband PSS Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................... 65
IX. CONCLUDING REMARKS.................................................................................................................................................. 66
CHAPTER 8 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................................... 67

CHAPTER 9 BIOGRAPHIES .................................................................................................................................................... 70

PSS Tutorial - March 2007 B.doc

-4-
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

FOREWORD

In 1981 the first IEEE tutorial course on power system stabilization via excitation control was presented by
Ken Bollinger, Joe Hurley, Frederick Keay, Einar Larsen and David Lee and the notes from that tutorial became a
widely used reference for generation engineers working to improve power system stability.

Ideas for power system stabilization using excitation control originated as a result of electric power oscillations
occurring on interties between large power pools and stability problems associated with single generators, or
banks of generators connected to large power systems. Before the 1981 tutorial increasing use of high gain
excitation systems and increased use of transmission systems had been leading to decreased stability margins and
power system stability problems. A considerable amount of effort had been spent on research projects, sitework
and the development of control electronics to stabilize multi-machine systems.

Since the 1981 tutorial, research work and product development has continued. Electronic control units now
utilize digital technology to provide repeatability, more features and easier use, and control algorithms have been
improved to eliminate some earlier shortcomings.

The development of the integral of accelerating power type stabilizer (PSS2B type as described in IEEE
Standard 421.5 2005) allowed stabilizers to operate successfully with minimal terminal voltage fluctuation even
during very rapid loading and unloading of generators. This type has now become the de-facto standard and this
type of stabilizer is now a requirement in many parts of North America.

Increasing numbers of power system stabilizers have been installed as grid codes around the world and North
American requirements such as the WECC guidelines have demanded that generators be equipped with
stabilizers. In addition the power system disturbances in Western North America during July and August 1996
caused increased effort to be focused on testing and validating of generating units including their excitation
control systems and associated stabilizers. These factors have resulted in many more engineers being introduced
to power system stabilizers for the first time.

Whilst excellent papers are available on many aspects of power system stabilizer design, implementation and
testing, this tutorial is intended to provide engineers and technicians with a set of key insights into problems
related to power system oscillations and the currently available solutions.

It is expected that the course participants will have a basic understanding of power system analysis and control
concepts. The tutorial includes introductory material to provide a basis for understanding of the terminology used
in the latter part of the course.

This tutorial includes contributions from present day experts in the field of power system stability in addition to
material from the authors of the original tutorial. The first two chapters review feedback control and power
system stability concepts. Following chapters describe more detail on performance criteria, tuning techniques,
accelerating power type stabilizers, field testing techniques and application considerations. The last chapter
describes some future directions in stabilizer design.

The authors and presenters of this tutorial are grateful to the authors of original tutorial and to the experts in
this industry who have written many excellent papers referenced here.

Robert Thornton-Jones
March 2007

-5-
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

IEEE Tutorial Course

Power System Stabilization
Via Excitation Control
J.C.Agee and Shawn Patterson Bureau of Reclamation, Denver
Roger Beaulieu and Murray Coultes Goldfinch Power Engineering, Toronto
Robert Grondin, Innocent Kamwa, Gilles Trudel Hydro-Qubec
Arjun Godhwani Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville
Roger Brub and Les Hajagos Kestrel Power Engineering, Toronto
Om Malik University of Calgary
Alexander Murdoch and George Boukarim GE, Schenectady
Jos Taborda ABB, Switzerland
Robert Thornton-Jones Brush, United Kingdom

AbstractThe document comprises chapters supporting a tutorial course on

power system stabilization via excitation control to be presented at the IEEE PES
general meeting in June 2007. Feedback control and power system stability
theory is presented to explain the foundation concepts of power system
stabilization by excitation control. Tuning and testing techniques and application
considerations are described. Both present day stabilizer types and future
directions in stabilizer design are explained.

Index Terms - Control, Excitation, Generator, Regulator, Stabilizer.

-6-
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
CHAPTER 1
REVIEW OF FEEDBACK CONTROL CONCEPTS
Arjun Godhwani
I. INTRODUCTION
Study of feedback control requires knowledge of various
mathematical tools that consist of Laplace transforms, Bode
plots, Nyquist plots, and Root locus. These tools apply to
single-input-single-output systems (SISO) that are linear and
time invariant - LTI. The state space approach is used to
analyze not only (SISO) systems but also multiple-input-
multiple-output (MIMO) systems. Some of the systems tend
to be nonlinear and are linearized around an operating point
for small excursions of the signals before applying these
tools. Knowledge of these tools is critical to understanding
power system control and stability. Therefore a review of
these tools is presented in the following.
It will be impossible to cover all relevant mathematics in
the brief period available yet the Tutorial Course organizers
felt that some review was needed. This section of the course
will survey those areas of mathematics that are part of the
repertoire of analysts who are working in the power system
control area.
There are two approaches to handling power system
control problems and, in particular, power system
stabilization problems.
a) The analyst can use a combination of intuition and
common sense to deduce proper control strategy and
settings.
b) The problem may be approached from the theoretical
viewpoint and computer techniques employed to
synthesize the controller.
Most engineers involved in tuning controllers will tend to
agree that the best approach lies somewhere between 'a' and
'b'. If one relies too heavily on intuition, situations will arise
when the process, or system, does not respond according to
plan and there is nothing to fall back on as an alternate
control strategy. On the other hand, theoretical studies often
lead to elegant solutions with no practical way of
implementing the solution. This latter approach does not yield
a feel for the physical system and sometimes masks an
obvious solution.
A compromise between intuition, or common sense, and
theory is usually the best approach. In many situations
Engineering judgment must be used to cull out second-order
effects and reduce the problem to the point where
mathematical concepts will yield practical solutions. A simple
power system model will be used to illustrate this
compromise and to highlight certain analytical techniques.
Analyzing plant (or process) stability can be done simply by
observing the mechanical linkage, or gauges, in a control
loop or doing an in depth study on a mathematical model of
the system. Synthesizing, or tuning controllers can involve
everything from "tweaking" the knobs with an "experienced"
hand to applying computerized algorithms to calculate
-7-
controller parameters in offline studies on a mathematical
model of the system.
The subsequent sections of this chapter will attempt to
concentrate on those aspects of feedback control theory that
are pertinent to power system stabilizer (PSS) tuning.
Emphasis will be placed on concepts that have been used in
offline studies and subsequently used for tuning hardware
that is now in place at power plants. This should not imply
that other methods are not equally applicable but it was felt
that a comprehensive survey of all controller synthesis
techniques would be outside the scope of this tutorial. In
many situations advanced controller synthesis concepts must
be applied when design constraints on the controller are quite
stringent.
The next section describes basic concepts relating time,
frequency, and Complex-S-Plane Parameters. This is
followed by a brief review of basic control concepts with
emphasis on stability of feedback control systems. State
space techniques are discussed next followed by introductory
concepts related to simulation techniques.
II. LAPLACE TRANSFORMS
Fourier analysis is extremely useful in analyzing many
practical problems involving signals and LTI systems.
Fourier series can represent periodic signals, while aperiodic
signals can be represented by Fourier transforms. In each
case the signals are represented by an infinite set of complex
exponentials est with s = j. In addition when a complex
exponential passes through an LTI system the output is also a
complex exponential of same frequency with a change in
amplitude and change in phase. This concept is one of the
reasons for usefulness of frequency response techniques such
as Bode plots and Nyquist plots. The above-mentioned
property of complex exponentials not only applies to pure
imaginary values of s but also arbitrary values of s. This
leads to generalization of Fourier transform to Laplace
transform. Laplace transforms have many of the same
properties that make Fourier transforms useful. But
usefulness of Laplace transforms goes beyond that of Fourier
transforms. For example Laplace transforms can be used to
investigate stability. Using Laplace transforms we will
develop the concepts of transfer function, natural and forced
modes of response, poles and zeros etc. In addition block-
diagram reduction will allow us to manipulate systems that
possess one or more feedback loops.
The starting point for studying a control system is to
represent it by its differential and algebraic equations. The
study is usually done to answer one or both of the following
questions:
a) How stable is the system?
b) What has to be added, or changed, to achieve a desired
level of stability?
One approach to answering these questions is to derive a
compact model of the process (system) relating the input of
the process to the output. This is shown in "block diagram"
form in Fig.1.1. The output y(t) is a function of the input x(t)
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

and the system model.

Input x(t) System Output y(t)
Model

Figure 1.1 Block Diagram Of Input Output Model

A convenient way to represent the system model is to use

Laplace Transforms [1]. The Laplace transform model is Figure 1.2 Pole-Zero Plot
usually derived as a special case of general transform theory,
but an intuitive approach will be used for expediency. Differential equations (D.E.) can be transformed into
A periodic signal can be represented by a series of algebraic equations using Laplace transforms. The resulting
sinusoidal signals. The analysis for calculating the Laplace expression can then be manipulated algebraically to
amplitudes of the sine and cosine terms of the series is obtain stability information and other relevant information
referred to as Fourier series [2]. The Fourier series for about the physical system described by the D.E. In some
periodic functions, and Fourier transform for aperiodic cases the Laplace transform is used to obtain the time domain
functions, transform a time domain signal into its frequency solution of the D.E. but in most cases it is used to obtain
components. stability information about a process.
An extension of this transform concept to the more general Table I contains the Laplace transform of relevant time
case allows the analyst to transform functions of time into the domain expressions including differential and integration
"Complex Frequency" domain. operations. The entries in Table I are determined using (1).
Laplace transform of a time function f(t) is denoted as F(s) Table I also includes initial value and final value properties.
and is defined as follows: TABLE I
LAPLACE TRANSFORM PAIRS AND PROPERTIES
f (t ) F(s )

F(s) = f ( t )e st dt
0
(1.1) (t ) 1
1
u (t )
The set of commonly used Laplace transform pairs and s
properties are listed in Table I. Laplace transforms for 1
t
commonly used time functions are rational functions i.e. s2
ratio of two polynomials. 1
e at
One of the important applications of the Laplace transform s+a
is in the analysis of systems. The system transfer function is s
cos(t )
defined as the ratio of the output transform and the input 2 + s 2
transform, assuming all initial conditions as 0.
sin (t )
2 + s 2
Y(s)
H(s) = (1.2) s+a
X(s) e at cos(t )
+ (s + a ) 2
2

The roots of the numerator of the transfer function are e at sin (t )
called the zeros of the system and the roots of the + (s + a ) 2
2

denominator of the transfer function are called the poles of df ( t )

sF(s ) f (0 )
the system. An example of a transfer function and how we dt
display poles and zeros on the s-plane is shown in Fig.1.2. In
d 2f ( t ) df (0 )
this example K is the gain, and the system has a zero at s = - s 2 F(s ) sf (0 )
2, and poles at s = 0 and s = -10. dt 2 dt
t
F(s)
H(s) =
K (s + 2)
(1.3)
f (t)dt
0
s
s(s + 10)
lim f (t ) lim sF(s )
t s 0
lim f (t ) lim sF(s )
t 0 s

-8-
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

III. TRANSFER FUNCTIONS AND BLOCK DIAGRAMS

A D.E. can be solved using Laplace transforms as shown
below. A general D.E. is shown in (1.4).
d 2 y (t ) dy(t ) df (t )
2
+3 + 2 y (t ) = + 3 f (t ) (1.4)
dt dt dt

The Laplace Transform of (1.4) yields

(s 2 + 3 s + 2) Y(s) = (s + 3) F(s) + I(s) (1.5)

where, F(s) = Laplace Transform of f(t), and I(s) = Laplace

term associated with initial conditions.

Equation (1.5) can be written as

Figure 1.3 Mechanical System

N(s) I(s) The Differential Equation that describes this system is

Y(s) = F(s) + (1.6)
D(s) D(s)
d 2 y( t ) dy( t )
Where M 2
+D + Ky( t ) = f ( t ) (1.10)
dt dt
N(s) = (s + 3) (1.7)
Using entries of Laplace Transform Table I, with initial
conditions set to zero,
and
M s 2 Y(s) + D s Y(s) + K Y(s) = F(s) (1.11)
D(s) = (s + 3 s + 2)
2
(1.8)
or
It is readily seen that the polynomial D(s) appears both in
the denominator of the "forcing function" term and also the Y(s) 1
"initial condition" term. It is further seen that if f(t) is = 2
(1.12)
F(s) Ms + Ds + K
specified, the time domain solution for y(t) can be obtained
by factoring (finding the roots of) D(s) and using partial
The main advantage of deriving a transfer function relating
fractions.
system output to system input is that it enables the analyst to
Then each of the roots of D(s) contributes a term to the
assess system stability from the roots of the characteristic
time domain response with the roots having a direct
equation of the system.
relationship with the time constants and frequency of
One of the main problems with using Laplace transforms
oscillation of the time domain terms. The polynomial D(s) is
to assess system stability is that it usually requires a
called the characteristic polynomial of the system.
considerable amount of algebra to obtain the transfer function
Since the forcing function term contains the characteristic
(T.F.) and the corresponding characteristic equation. This is
polynomial (and thus all information pertaining to stability
partly expedited by using block diagrams to represent the
and the form of the time domain transients), the initial
system and then manipulating the block diagram to obtain the
condition term is dropped and (1.6) reduces to
characteristic equation. This concept is discussed in the next
section.
N(s)
Y(s) = F(s) (1.9)
D(s) B. Block Diagrams
Block diagram representation of a physical system enables
The term N(s)/D(s) as discussed before is referred to as the the analyst to obtain overall input/output relationships by
"Transfer Function" of the system. using "block-diagram" manipulation rather than apply matrix
methods or other reduction techniques [3] on the set of
A. Transfer Function Example
Laplace equations describing the physical system. Of greater
Determine the transfer function, Y(s)/F(s) of the following significance is the fact that block diagram representation of
mechanical system. the physical system indicates a cause and effect, or signal
flow pattern, of the physical system. When set up properly,
the block diagram (B.D.) is a one-to-one representation of the

-9-
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

elements of the physical system and the blocks of the Laplace D. B.D. Manipulation Example
B.D. Derive the T.F., C(s)/R(s), for the feedback system shown
The basic element of B.D. representation is the transfer below in Fig.1.5.
function. The input/output relation,

Y(s) = G1 (s) F(s) (1.13)

is represented by the block diagram shown in Fig.1.4 with

Model represented by the transfer function G1(s).
C. Interconnection Of Systems
Many real systems are built as interconnection of
Figure 1.5 Feedback Control System
subsystems. Fig.1.4 below shows a series (also called
cascade) and a parallel interconnection. In addition to the From the B.D.
transfer function blocks, parallel connection uses the
summing block.
The series connection is represented by the following
E(s) = R(s) - Z(s) (1.17)
equations,
C(s) = G(s) E(s) (1.18)
Y(s) = G 2 (s) X(s) (1.14)
Z(s) = H(s) C(s) (1.19)
And
Substituting for E from (1.17) and Z from (1.19) in (1.18),
X(s) = G1 (s) F(s) (1.15) and simplifying gives

(1.14) and (1.15) can be combined as C(s) G (s)

= (1.20)
R (s) 1 + G (s)H(s)
Y(s) = G1 (s) G 2 (s) F(s) (1.16)
Where 1 + GH = 0 is the Characteristic Equation of this
system.
Thus the series connection can be equivalently represented
by a single block with transfer function G1(s) G2(s). E. Transfer Function Example
Similarly the parallel connection can be represented by a Derive the T.F. E(s)/R(s) for the system shown in the
single block with transfer function G1(s) + G2(s). previous example.

E(s) = R(s) - G(s)H(s) E(s) (1.21)

Therefore

E (s) 1
= (1.22)
R (s) 1 + G (s)H(s)

It can be readily seen from the previous two examples that

Figure 1.4 Series And Parallel Connections
It is possible to manipulate block diagram models using the
elementary operations described previously. An example of
the application of B.D. manipulation to obtain a system
transfer function is shown below.
both transfer functions have identical characteristic equations
but that they have different numerator terms in the transfer
functions. The roots of characteristic equation dictate the
types of modes of response, and the numerator terms affect
the magnitudes of the response terms. This basic concept is
worth noting as it explains why system transients have
different characteristics when viewed from different points on
a system even though the T.F.s have identical characteristic
equations and the same input signal is applied in both
instances.

- 10 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

IV. FREQUENCY RESPONSE MODELS of the transfer function can be obtained by summing up the
By definition, the frequency response of a system is the contribution to the Bode plot of each term as seen in Fig.1.6.
ratio of the output over the input when the input to a system It can further be noted from Fig.1.6 that the complex pair can
is a sinusoidal forcing function of radian frequency and give very sharp attenuation or magnification in the magnitude
steady state conditions have been reached. plot at frequencies in the vicinity of the "resonant humps" of
We are already familiar with sinusoidal steady-state these terms. This feature is important in the design of "pass"
methods of analysis from circuit analysis. and "stop" band filters; a concept that is used in the design of
Theoretically, the frequency response of a system can be filters to block generator shaft "torsional" frequencies from
obtained from the transfer function by setting s = j in the feeding back into the AVR through the PSS.
transfer function. The result is, Bode diagrams are also used to plot experimental
frequency response data when measurements have been made
Y( j) using a sinusoidal generator and recording equipment. In
= G (j) (1.23) these cases a transfer function can be obtained from the
X( j)
frequency response data by doing a "manual" or
"computerized" analysis to best fit the data. In some
Let us consider a general frequency response function that situations frequency response data is used directly to obtain
includes all types of terms as follows: data for assessing stability of existing systems or for
designing controllers to enhance the stability of the control
2
j loop. These concepts will be discussed later.
K(1+ TZ j) (1+ 2( )+j )
nz nz (1.24) It will be seen in the next section that transfer functions
G( j) =
j
2 and frequency response concepts form a vital basis for
( j) n (1+ Tp j)(1+ 2( )+ j ) assessing stability of certain types of control systems.
np np

V. STABILITY CRITERIA FOR FEEDBACK CONTROL SYSTEMS

The term G(j) can be completely represented graphically
by plotting the magnitude |G| and the angle G against on A. General Comments
two separate graphs. It is customary to plot gain in dB given Classical control theory is based on single-input-single-
by 20 Log |G| versus Log(). Hence the general frequency output (SISO) control systems [4] [5]. Stability of these
expression in decibels can be obtained from (1.24). systems is assessed by investigating the effect of adjustable
parameters on the roots of the characteristic equations. The
20Log | G | = characteristic equation is obtained by manipulating the set of
20LogK n 20Log 20Log |1 + TP j | equations describing the dynamic system, or the system block
(1.25)
diagram.
+20Log |1 + TZ j |
Once an expression for the characteristic equation is
2
j obtained, several techniques can be applied to this equation to
+20Log | (1 + 2 ( ) + j ) | assess stability. These so-called classical tools for stability
nz nz
2
assessment include [6] - [8]:
j Routh-Hurwitz Criterion
20Log | (1 + 2 ( ) + j

)|
np Nyquist Criterion
np
Bode Plots
Root Locus Technique
The expression for the angle of the frequency response is The latter two will be described here as they relate directly
given by to techniques that are used for PSS tuning.
Many feedback control systems have adjustable gain K
G = Angles of numerator terms either in the forward or feedback path. The locations of
Angles of denominator terms (1.26) closed-loop poles change as the gain K is varied. The closed
loop pole locations decide key control system performance
Where angles of numerator and denominator terms are characteristics such as stability, transient response, and
determined by specifying a particular value of and closed-loop bandwidth.
algebraically summing the angles of the terms in the
numerator and denominator of (1.24).
Each of the terms in (1.25) contribute to the magnitude plot
(Bode Plot) of the total magnitude plot of 20 log |G| (this is
written in shorthand as | G | dB). Fig.1.6 illustrates the
contribution of each term to the Bode Plot.
When the transfer function is given, a complete Bode plot

- 11 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
Figure 1.6 Graph Showing Contribution Of Each Term Of (1.24) To Bode Plot |G|
The root-locus method is a graphical technique for plotting
closed-loop poles as a function of some system parameter
commonly the gain K.
In contrast to the root-locus method, the Nyquist criterion
gives information on the stability of a feedback system. The
Nyquist method can be applied not only to systems for which
mathematical description is available but also to systems for
which experimental frequency response information is
available. The Nyquist criterion gives relative stability
information in the form of gain and phase margins. The
Nyquist criterion uses a polar plot of the open-loop transfer
function.
Another frequency response method that is widely used is
the Bode diagram. In the Bode gain plot, gain in decibels -
dB is plotted against on logarithmic scale. In the Bode
phase plot the phase in degrees is plotted against on
logarithmic scale. The stability information of Nyquist
criterion is easily transferred to the Bode plots. In addition
magnitude Bode curve can be easily plotted using asymptotic
approximation. Since Bode plots are much more widely used
than the Nyquist plots, we will discuss Bode plots in more
detail.
Reader should note that Root-locus and Bode plots
complement each other. While root-locus gives the exact
closed loop pole locations, the Bode plots give relative
stability information in the form of gain and phase margins.
The root-locus approach gives information about the stability
and the transient characteristics of the system. The frequency
response approach can be used to design systems to minimize
- 12 -
the effects of noise. The correlation between the transient and
frequency responses is indirect, except for the case of second-
order systems.
There are many other sophisticated computerized tuning
techniques described in the literature that have been applied
to simulated power system models or Scaled-down laboratory
systems. These include optimal control, optimal output
feedback control [9] - [11], pole placement techniques [12],
minimum variance methods [13], [14] and frequency domain
techniques [15]. The need for imposing additional design
constraints (such as minimizing complex performance indices
related to system transient swings) on the controller does not
appear to be of prime concern to Utilities. Presently most
common method for tuning PSS consists of improving
damping (i.e. moving characteristic roots).
B. Nyquist Criterion (Gain And Phase Margins)
The Nyquist criterion utilizes either the transfer function or
experimentally obtained frequency response data and gives a
measure of the relative stability of the roots of the
characteristic equation.
Consider the closed-loop system shown in Fig.1.7. If a
sinusoidal signal, R(s), is applied it will be modified and
phase-shifted by G(j) and H( j) so that the feedback signal
Z(j) will subtract vectorially from the input R(j).
E(j) = R(j) Z(j) (1.27)
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

directly from (1.28) and (1.29). Phase margin, PM, is defined

as the phase angle of GH relative to 180 when |GH| = 1 or,

PM = GH 180o (1.30)

when |GH| = 1 and Gain Margin, G.M., is the relative

Figure 1.7 Feedback Block Diagram magnitude of GH when the angle of GH is 180, or,

If GH phase shifts the input sinusoid by 180 and amplifies 1

it by an amount greater than unity, the feedback signal will GM = (1.31)
| GH |
enhance the original input sinusoid and instability will result.
This same intuitive argument can be applied to a wide range
of sinusoidal signals applied to the input. It is apparent that if when GH = 180 o .
GH has frequency response characteristics such that,
The gain and phase margin stability parameters are shown
o in the Bode plot of Fig.1.8.
| GH | < 1 when GH = - 180 (1.28)
Gain and phase margins are used to assess the stability of
power systems control loops. This can be illustrated by
And considering the following power system application. The
Bode plot contains the same information as the polar plot and
| GH | < 180o when | GH | = 1 (1.29) the former is normally used as gain and phase margin for the
AVR system can be more readily extracted from the Bode
Over a range of frequencies then the system should be plot.
stable. There are exceptions to this rule for some systems and
in those cases the generalized "Nyquist criterion" must be
applied.The relative stability of a feedback system follows

Figure 1.8 Bode Plots Illustrating Gain And Phase Margins

- 13 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

margin information is readily available from the Bode plots.

C. Example
A block diagram is shown below for a hypothetical
terminal voltage control loop for a synchronous generator
operating at rated speed on open circuit.
Figure 1.9 Voltage Control Loop
A typical problem would be to assess the stability of this
control loop for varying AVR gains.
For this case GH = AVR x Gen x Transducer
Kg
Ka Kv
GH =
1 + Ta s 1 + Ta s 1 + Tv s
Root-Locus Theory
The root-locus method involves a graphical approach to
evaluating the excursion of system roots (loci) as a function
of the change in magnitude of one or more of the coefficients
of the characteristic equation. This graphical technique
yields the approximate root locations of the characteristic
equation and hence gives information about the "form" of
time domain transients of the system for a particular
combination of controller and plant parameters.
Most single-input-single-output (SISO) control systems
can be manipulated into the standard form shown in Fig.1.7.
For our application the transfer function G(s) can be related
to the power system transfer function and the feedback
transfer function H(s) to the power system stabilizer.
The closed loop transfer function for the system is given
by,
C (s) G(s)
= (1.33)
R( s ) 1 + H ( s)G ( s )
(1.32)
1 + G(s) H(s) (1.34)

The corresponding Bode plot of GH is shown below in

Fig.1.10 for three different values of AVR gain. It is
assumed that all other gains and time constants are known.
Bode Plot of GH(j) shows the magnitude and phase of
GH(j) for 3 values of AVR gain. The gain and phase

Figure 1.10. Bode Plot For 3 Different Values Of AVR Gain

- 14 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

The characteristic equation is, Where Zi and Pj are referred to as the zeros and poles
of GH. It follows that the roots of the characteristic
1 + G(s) H(s) = 0 (1.35) equation must satisfy,

Recall that the roots of the characteristic equation give a K | (s + Z i ) |

=1 (1.43)
direct indication of the frequency modes and time constants | (s + Pj ) |
of the time domain transients. This can be deduced by first
finding the roots of (1.35). After finding the roots, (1.35) and
can be written as

n (s + p n ) m (s + Pm jQ m ) = 0 (1.36)
( )
(s + Z i ) s + Pj = 180 q360 (1.44)

For K= 0 to
where -pn are the real roots of (1.35) and -Pm jQm are
the complex conjugate roots of (1.35).
By initially locating the zeros and poles on a graph with
an imaginary vertical axis and a real horizontal axis
Numerator(s)
C(s) = (1.37) (referred to as the complex s-plane), it is possible to
n (s + p n ) m (s + Pm jQ m ) establish some rules using (1.43), and (1.44) to sketch the
characteristic root excursions (referred to as root loci)
The natural modes of response of the closed loop system while varying K from zero to infinity.
are shown below,
For the Characteristic Equation,
pn t pmt
kne + k me sin(Q m t m ) (1.38)
n m
1 + KGH(s) = 0 (1.45)

Where it is apparent that the time constant in the

TABLE 2
exponential terms of (1.38) are identical to the real parts of RULES FOR ROOT-LOCUS CONSTRUCTION FOR K > 0
the roots shown in (1.36). It should also be noted that the 1. Loci originate on poles of GH(s) and terminate on the
imaginary part of the roots shown in (1.36) give a direct zeros of GH(s)
indication of the damped radian frequency of the decaying 2. The root locus on the real axis always lies in a section
sinusoids as represented in the second set of terms in of the real axis to the left of an odd number of poles
(1.38). and zeros.
3. The root locus is symmetrical with respect to the real
axis.
The root-locus method provides a graphical approach to 4. The number of asymptotes na is equal to the number of
finding the roots of a characteristic equation. Consider a poles of GH(s), np, minus the number of zeros of
slightly modified form of (1.35) given by, GH(s), nz, with angles given by [(2m+1)180] / (np-
nz), where m is an integer between 0 and (na-1).
H(s)G(s) = - 1 (1.39)
5. The asymptotes intersect the real axis at where
= ( poles of GH zeros of GH) / (np-nz)
It follows that any value of s, say si, which satisfies 6. The breakaway points are given by the roots of
dK
G (s i )H(s i ) = 1 (1.40) =0
ds
KaKgKv
and Where K ' = (1.46)
Tg Ta Tv

G (s i )H(s i ) = 180 q360 (1.41) If all parameters are specified except the AVR gain Ka,
then a root locus plot for varying Ka would be
constructed as shown in Fig.1.11.
is a root of the characteristic equation. The transfer
function G(s) H(s) (commonly referred to as the "open D. Root Locus Example
loop" transfer function) can be written as, Consider the voltage regulator loop of the previous
example shown in Fig.1.9. A typical application for
K (s + Z i ) applying root locus techniques would be to study the
= 1 (1.42)
(s + P j ) effects of Ka on the roots of the characteristic equation.

For this case the characteristic equation is given by

- 15 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

a complex system may be improved by inserting a simple

Ka Kg Kv lead or lag compensator. The techniques of conventional
1+ =0 (1.47) control theory are conceptually simple and require only a
1 + Ta s 1 + Ta s 1 + Tv s
reasonable amount of computation.
In conventional control theory, only the input, output,
This can be written as
and error signals are considered important; the analysis and
design of control systems are carried out using transfer
K' functions, together with a variety of graphical techniques
= 1 (1.48)
1 1 1 such as root-locus plots and Bode plots. The unique
(s + )(s + )(s + )
Ta Tg Tv characteristic of conventional control theory is that it is
based on the input-output (transfer function) relationship of
the system.
The main disadvantage of conventional control theory is
that, generally speaking, it is applicable only to low order
linear time-invariant systems having a single input and a
single output. It is cumbersome for time-varying, nonlinear
larger systems with multiple-inputs multiple-outputs
(MIMO).

Figure1.11 Root Locus Plot Of The System

The open-loop poles and zeros of the system are shown

on the s-plane. As the AVR gain increases two of the roots
of the characteristic equation move towards the right half-
plane (unstable side of the s-plane). Typical time domain
characteristics for three values of gain Ka are shown in
Fig.1.12. For instance the roots of the characteristic
equation for gain Ka1 where the AVR is at a low gain, give
rise to reasonably damped oscillations.
This is compared with the root locations for a gain Ka2
where the system is oscillatory and those for gain Ka3
where the system is unstable.
The next section describes the State-Space approach to Figure 1.12 Time Domain Sketches For 3 Values Of Ka
modeling and assessing stability of linearized systems.
This technique allows the analyst to formulate the system Because of the necessity of meeting increasingly
model using first order differential equations and then use stringent requirements on the performance of complex
computer programs to assess stability and synthesize control systems, modern control theory is gaining in
controllers. popularity. Modern control theory is based on the concept
of state [7], [9]. The concept of state by itself is not new
VI. STATE-SPACE TECHNIQUES since it has been in existence for a long time in the field of
classical dynamics and other fields.
A. General Comments System design using modern control theory enables the
Root-locus and frequency-response methods are quite engineer to design optimal control systems with respect to
useful for dealing with single-input single- output-systems. given performance indices.
For example, by means of open-loop frequency-response The state-space approach can be used to study various
tests, we can predict the dynamic behavior of the aspects of control systems. These include:
closed-loop system. If necessary, the dynamic behavior of

- 16 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

obtaining root contours, or root loci, or eigenvalue

plots using digital computer programming
techniques,
optimal controller design for large systems,
system reduction and equivalent models of large
systems,
sensitivity studies to ascertain the influence of
system parameters on roots and time domain
transients.
We will be mostly dealing with the eigenvalue plots. Figure1.13 Inertia Model
A physical system described by a set of differential
equations of any order can be transformed into a set of first The steps used in finding the state space model are
order D.E.'s using simple substitutions. The variables of described below.
the new set of D.E.'s define the "state" of the system at any i) Assign a state variable xi to the output of each
instant of time "t". integrator block (l/s).
The transformed set in matrix form is given by, .
ii) Since the input to each integrator block must be x i ,
.
X (t ) = AX (t ) + BF (t ) (1.49) the state space equations can be written directly.

For this example,

Y(t) = C X(t) (1.50)
. 1 1
Where, x1 = ( Dx1 K1 x2 ) + Pdist
X is an n x 1 vector containing the state variables 2H 2H
. (1.51)
X is an n x 1 vector containing the first derivative of .
X x 2 = x1
F is an m x 1 vector containing the independent (1.52)
forcing functions to the system
A is an n x n characteristic matrix The matrix form of these two equations is,
B is an n x m coupling matrix
Y is an r x 1 output vector . D K1 1
C is an r x n coupling matrix x1 = x1 (1.53)
. 2H 2H + 2H Pdist
x
B. State-Space Models x 2 1 0 2 0
It is possible to derive the standard state-space form,
. which is of the form,
X = A X + BF(t) of a physical system from any of the
different mathematical models of the system. .
State space equations can be written from a block X = AX + BF( t ) (1.54)
diagram of a system as illustrated by considering the
power system "inertia" model shown below. In this model, The output equation is
the turbo-generator inertia is denoted "H; sources of
damping are represented by the term "D; and the y = x1 (1.55)
synchronizing coefficient is denoted "K1. States and
are the generator speed and rotor angle, respectively. The matrix form of this equation is,
C. State Space model Example
Determine the state-space model and the eigenvalues for x1
Y = [1 0] (1.56)
the system shown in Fig.1.13. x2

We next show the connection between roots of

characteristic equation and of the characteristic matrix [A].
In this example the transfer function linking shaft speed,
s, to power disturbance, Pdist, is derived as follows,

- 17 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

1 Expanding the determinant expression of (1.65) yields,

s = E (1.57)
2 Hs
D K
2 + + 1 =0 (1.66)
K1 2H 2H
E = Pdist D s s (1.58)
s It can be noted that (1.66) is identical to the
Characteristic Equation shown in (1.59).
Substituting (1.58) into (1.57) and simplifying yields Several powerful digital computer subroutines are
available for calculating eigenvalues (characteristic roots)
1 directly from the matrix [A]. This allows the analyst to
s
s 2H obtain roots of very large systems by generating the [A]
= (1.59)
matrix and inserting the elements of [A] directly into a
Pdist s 2 + D s + K1
computer program.
2H 2H It is useful to compare classical methods for assessing
system stability with the state-space eigenvalue approach.
Where the roots of the characteristic equation are given
For classical methods a considerable amount of algebra is
by
required in order to get the equations in a form that will
allow approximate graphical methods or root-finding
1/ 2
D D K
2 algorithms to be applied. In other words, the dynamic
s1 , s 2 = 1 (1.60) equations have to be compressed down to an input-output
4 H 4 H 2 H expression. With the state-space approach, the state-space
model is formulated directly from the separate blocks or
The eigenvalues, , of matrix [A] of the corresponding equations describing the physical system. Computer
state space model are given by the solution to, techniques are applied directly to the [A] matrix and thus
manual algebra is virtually eliminated.
Det [I A] = 0 (1.61)
VII. SYSTEM SIMULATION
An important part of investigating system stability and
Where, Det is the determinant of the matrix, and
designing controllers is to simulate the complete system
with nonlinearities. State-space and classical methods for
1 0 assessing stability are applicable to linearized
I= (1.62)
0 1 representation of the physical plant and to low order
nonlinear models.
It follows that If one is concerned about the operation of the system
under large signal operation, then the nonlinear equations
could be simulated on the digital computer and plots of
0 time domain transients obtained for pre-selected parameters
I = (1.63)
0
and disturbances to the system. Transient stability
programs are used extensively for this purpose in the
electric power industry. Although these nonlinear
For this example, simulation programs are needed for large-signal
investigations they are very inefficient when used for trial-
D K1 and-error investigations in the design of controllers for
A = 2H 2H (1.64) linear systems. The Matlab/Simulink [16] package is very
widely used for this purpose. The next chapter outlines
1 0 basic power system dynamics and identifies factors
contributing to negative damping of synchronous generator
Equation (1.61) applied to this example yields the rotor oscillations.
following,

D K1
+ 2 H 2H (1.65)

1

- 18 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

that contribute to instability and devising methods of

CHAPTER 2 improving stable operation, is greatly facilitated by
OVERVIEW OF POWER SYSTEM classification of stability into appropriate categories. There
STABILITY CONCEPTS are mainly three categories of stability: voltage [19],
Arjun Godhwani, Jose Taborda, Les Hajagos frequency [20], and rotor angle stability. The following are
descriptions of the corresponding forms of stability
I. INTRODUCTION phenomena.
Power system stability is considered by first presenting
1) Voltage Stability
the definition followed by the classification of stability in
Voltage stability is concerned with the ability of a power
to Voltage, Frequency and Rotor angle stability. It is then
system to maintain steady voltages at all buses in the
argued that the subject of this tutorial is Power System
system after being subjected to a disturbance from a given
Stabilization via Excitation Control and the rotor angle
initial operating condition. Instability that may result
stability is the one that plays the critical role. We consider
occurs in the form of a progressive fall or rise of voltages
a synchronous machine connected to infinite bus and
of some buses. A possible outcome of voltage instability is
develop an expression for electric power as it is related to
loss of load in an area, or tripping of transmission lines and
rotor angle. We go on to discuss the transient (large signal)
other elements by their protection equipment leading to
and oscillatory rotor angle (small signal) stability and their
cascading outages.
dependence on synchronizing and damping torques. It is
established that the synchronizing torque governs the
2) Frequency Stability
transient stability whereas the oscillatory stability is
Frequency stability is concerned with the ability of a
affected by the damping torque. We next show that a fast
power system to maintain steady frequency within a
acting, high gain AVR improves the synchronizing
nominal range following a severe system upset resulting in
coefficient but may reduce the damping coefficient. The
a significant imbalance between generation and load. It
reduction in damping can be compensated by power system
depends on the ability to restore balance between system
stabilizer (PSS), acting through the voltage regulator, to
generation and load, with minimum loss of load.
provide a supplementary signal to increase the damping
Instability that may result occurs in the form of sustained
and thus stabilize the system against oscillatory instability.
frequency swings leading to tripping of generating units
We conclude the paper by briefly discussing different kinds
and/or loads.
of PSS in use and their basic structure.
The overview of power system stability concepts was
3) Rotor Angle Stability
part of the IEEE tutorial of 1981 [17]. An IEEE committee
Rotor angle stability is concerned with the ability of
report [18] just preceded the tutorial. Although the basic
interconnected synchronous machines of a power system to
concepts of the power system stability have not changed
remain in synchronism after being subjected to a
that much, the technology of power system stabilizers has
disturbance from a given initial operating condition. It
gone through significant evolution. In this paper we
depends on the ability to maintain/restore equilibrium
present the status of power system stability concepts at
between electromagnetic torque and mechanical torque of
present and discuss the status of some issues such as
each synchronous machine in the system. Instability that
stability classification, new types of power system
may result occurs in the form of increasing angular swings
stabilizers etc. We start with stability classification.
of some generators leading to their loss of synchronism
with other generators.
II. POWER SYSTEM STABILITY CLASSIFICATION

A. Definition Note: The subject of this tutorial is Power System

Stabilization via Excitation Control. While Frequency
Power System Stability is the ability of an electric power
stability and Voltage stability are important in the overall
system, for a given initial operating condition, to regain a
power system stability problem, it is the rotor angle
state of operating equilibrium after being subjected to a
stability that has a critical role to play in Power System
physical disturbance, with system variables bounded so that
Stabilization via Excitation Control. Therefore we have
system integrity is preserved. Integrity of the system is
limited ourselves to a short description of the Frequency
preserved when practically the entire power system
and Voltage stabilities.
remains intact with no tripping of generators or loads,
except for those disconnected by the isolation of the faulted
We next discuss basic issues involved in the power
elements or intentionally tripped to preserve the continuity
system stability. We begin with the consideration of a
of operation of the rest of the system.
generator connected to infinite bus configuration and
B. Categories Of Stability develop the concepts of transient and oscillatory stability.
Analysis of stability, including identifying key factors

- 19 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

III. BACKGROUND - GENERATOR CONNECTED TO INFINITE '

BUS E q Eo
PE = '
sin (2.1)
Since power systems rely on synchronous machines for X d+ X e
the generation of electrical power, a necessary condition
for the transmission and exchange of power is that all This power-angle characteristic is shown as the sine
generators rotate in synchronism. Consider a remote function plotted in Fig. 2.3.
generator connected radially to a major substation of a very
large system, as shown in Fig. 2.1. The transmission
system feeds into the large system or infinite bus, which
assumes that its voltage is so strongly influenced by large
nearby generation that it is independent of events at the
remote generator.

EO
ET EHV
XT XS
Gen. Infinite
Bus

XE=XT+XS
Figure 2.1 Single-Machine Power System Configuration

A phasor diagram of the voltages on such a system is Figure 2.3 Power-Angle Curve
shown in Fig.2.2. These voltages are:
IV. TRANSIENT STABILITY
Eo infinite bus voltage Transient stability analysis is primarily concerned with
ET generator terminal voltage the immediate effects of transmission line disturbances on
Eq generator internal voltage behind transient reactance generator synchronism. Fig.2.4 illustrates the typical
Eq generator internal voltage behind synchronous behavior of a generator in response to a fault condition.
reactance
Starting from the initial operating condition (point 1), a
close-in transmission line fault causes the generator
Eq electrical output power PE to be drastically reduced. The
resultant difference between electrical power and
mechanical turbine power causes the generator rotor to
Eq' accelerate with respect to the system, increasing the power
I.Xd
angle (point 2). When the fault is cleared, the electrical
SS ET I.Xd' power is restored to a level corresponding to the
appropriate point on the power-angle curve (point 3).
I.XE Clearing the fault necessarily removes one or more
EO
transmission elements from service and at least temporarily
I weakens the transmission system. For simplicity, this
Figure 2.2 Generator/ Infinite Bus Phasor Diagram
effect is not shown in Fig.2.4.
After clearing the fault, the electrical power out of the
The angle difference in the phasors indicates a real generator becomes greater than the turbine power. This
power flow from the generator into the infinite bus. causes the unit to decelerate (point 4), reducing the
In the analysis of classical steady-state stability, the momentum the rotor gained during the fault. If there is
voltage Eq and the power angle ss are used in the enough retarding torque after fault clearing to make up for
characteristic electrical power flow equation. However, for the acceleration during the fault, the generator will be
simple transient and dynamic stability analyses, it is more transiently stable on the first swing and will move back
appropriate to use the voltage E behind transient reactance toward its operating point in approximately 0.5 second
and the angle between this voltage and the infinite bus from the inception of the fault. If the retarding, torque is
voltage. In this way, the generator electrical power can be insufficient, the power angle will continue to increase until
expressed as: synchronism with the power system is lost.

- 20 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
Power
PMAX 3 a solution may be quite costly as well as unfeasible to
4
PDCEL
Stable
1 Turbine
PM
Power
PACCEL
2 A. Characteristic Dynamic Equation
0o o
90o
Power Angle -
Figure 2.4 Power-Angle Curve Illustrating Transient Stability.
Excitation system forcing during and following the fault
attempts to increase the electrical power output by raising
the generator internal voltage Eq, thus increasing PMax. Fast
and powerful excitation systems can improve transient
stability, although the effect is limited due mainly to the
large field inductance of the generator which prevents a
sudden change in Eq for a sudden increase in exciter
output voltage.
The steady-state stability refers to the ability of a power
system to maintain synchronism at all points for
incremental slow-moving changes in power output of units
or power transmission facilities. Steady-state stability a
small signal phenomenon is governed by the synchronizing
coefficient. Transient stability a large signal phenomenon
is also governed by the synchronizing coefficient. A fast
acting, high gain AVR in general increases the
synchronizing coefficient but may decrease the damping
coefficient. Thus a high gain AVR helps the steady state
and transient stabilities but may reduce the oscillatory
stability.
V. TRANSIENT VS. OSCILLATORY STABILITY
In present-day systems, a machine being transiently
stable on the first swing does not guarantee that it will
return to its steady-state operating point in a well-damped
manner and thus be stable in an oscillatory mode.
Significant improvement in transient stability has been
achieved through very rapid fault detection and circuit
breaker operation. System effects such as sudden changes
in load, short circuits, and transmission line switching not
only introduce transient disturbances on machines, but also
may give rise to less stable operating conditions. For
example, if a transmission line must be tripped due to a
fault, the resulting system may be much weaker than that
existing prior to the fault and oscillatory instability may
result.
One solution to improve the dynamic performance of
this system and large scale systems in general could be to
add more parallel transmission lines in order to lower the
reactance between the generator and the load center. Such
implement. In the presence of a weak transmission system,
control means, such as a power system stabilizer (PSS),
acting through the voltage regulator, can provide
significant stabilization of such oscillations if properly
implemented.
Unstable
VI. OSCILLATORY STABILITY
Following a system disturbance, whether it is a large
180o disturbance or just a minimal load change on the system, a
generating unit will characteristically tend to oscillate
around its operating point until it again reaches steady
state. The characteristics of these oscillations are
analogous to the motion of the spring mass systems.
For a synchronous machine under constant field
excitation, an approximation of its dynamic motion is
obtained by relating the angular acceleration of the
generator rotor to the torques imposed on the rotor, in the
same manner that linear acceleration relates to force in a
spring mass system. This relationship for a synchronous
machine is:
(Inertia) (Angular Acceleration) + (Damping Torque)
+ (Electrical Torque - Turbine Torque) = 0.
For small changes, the behavior is described by a
characteristic equation having the same structure as that of
the mechanical spring mass system. This is the "swing"
equation:
2H d 2 D d
+ + K1 = 0 (2.2)
s dt 2 s dt
Where the parameters are defined as:
(radians) rotor angle deviation from the
steady state operating point
H (kW sec/kVA) inertia constant of the rotor of the
generating unit (or group of units)
D (p.u. power/p.u. freq. change) damping
coefficient representing friction
and windage, prime mover and
load damping, etc.
s (radians/sec) synchronous frequency = 377 r/s
on 60 Hz systems
K1 (p.u. P/radian) synchronizing coefficient.
Acting like the restoring force of the spring in the
mechanical spring mass system, the term K1 called the
synchronizing power, acts to accelerate or decelerate the
rotating inertia back toward the synchronous operating
point. For small deviations from the operating point, the
synchronizing coefficient K1 is the slope of the transient
- 21 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
power angle curve at the particular steady state operating
point, as shown in Fig. 2.5.
If o is the steady state angle between Eo and E q , then
&
the slope is simply the derivative of the power angle
function, or:
' PE
dP E q Eo
K1 E o = cos o
d '
X d+ X e
Where:
' 0
E q is the internal voltage behind transient reactance in
p.u.,
Eo is the infinite bus voltage in p.u.,
'
X d is the generator transient reactance in p.u.,
Xe is the external reactance in p.u., and
is the angle between E and Eo.
Stronger transmission systems, with lower values of Xe,
have a larger value of K1 and thus provide more
synchronizing power to the generator.
The characteristic "swing" equation in (2.2) governs the
power system dynamic response with a damped oscillatory
behavior, having an oscillation frequency of approximately
K1s
n radians / sec .
2H
The inherent modal frequency that is exhibited is
dependent mainly on such factors as unit inertia(s),
machine and transmission system reactances, and load
level.
There are two distinct types of dynamic oscillations that
have been known to present problems on power systems.
One type occurs when a generating unit (or group of units)
at a station is swinging with respect to the rest of the
system. Such oscillations are called "local mode"
oscillations. The oscillations are termed "local" because the
behavior is mainly localized at one plant, with the rest of
the system experiencing much less of the effects.
Spontaneous local oscillations tend to occur when a very
weak transmission link exists between a machine and its
load center, such as for an isolated power station sending
power across a single long transmission line. Such systems
can usually be accurately modeled by a machine, single
transmission line, and infinite bus.
B. Local Vs. Inter Area Oscillations
Power
Operating
Point E'q EO
PE = sin
X
PM
(2.3)
0o 90o 180o
Power angle
Figure 2.5 Power Angle Curve Showing Derivation of Synchronizing
Coefficient K1.
The frequency of the characteristic local mode is
generally in the 1 2 Hz range, depending mainly on the
impedance of the transmission system. Stronger
transmission systems generally have the higher local mode
frequencies along with less of a tendency toward
spontaneous or undamped oscillations.
A second type of oscillations, known as "interarea"
modes, is more complex because they usually involve
combinations of many machines on one part of a system
swinging against machines on another part of the system.
(2.4)
C. Negative Damping Due To Voltage Regulator
Just as in a mechanical spring mass system, a power
system contains inherent damping effects that tend to damp
out dynamic oscillations. Even when the proper conditions
exist for dynamic instability (i.e., high network reactances,
line outages, high load levels, etc.), the natural damping of
the system, represented by the positive D term in equation
(2.2), will prevent any sustained oscillations unless a
source of negative damping is introduced.
It is generally recognized that the normal feedback
control actions of voltage regulators and speed governors
on generating units have the potential of contributing
negative damping which can cause undamped modes of
dynamic oscillations. Direct evidence of this has been seen
by the fact that sustained oscillations on power systems
have been stopped simply by switching voltage regulators
from automatic to manual control. However, removing
voltage regulators from service is not a realistic solution to
the problem, because the beneficial features of the voltage
regulator would be lost. The fortunate aspect of the
problem is that the same voltage regulator control that
causes negative damping can be supplied with
supplementary controls to contribute positive damping for
oscillatory stabilization.
The major function of the voltage regulator is to
continually adjust the generator excitation level in response
to changes in generator terminal voltage. The voltage
- 22 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
regulator acts to accurately maintain a desired generator
voltage and change the excitation level in response to
disturbances on the system.
Fig. 2.6 shows a block diagram of the major elements
associated with a generating unit under voltage regulator
control. Any change in the terminal voltage magnitude ET
from the reference set point provides an error signal (e) to
the voltage regulator, which calls for a change in excitation
level. The major delay in this voltage feedback loop is due
to the response in machine flux (Eq) for a change in
generator field voltage (EFD). This delay is due to the large
inductance of the generator field winding. For a generator
on line, this delay can be represented by a time constant Tq
which is usually about 2 seconds.
As an illustration of how the action of voltage regulator
control affects dynamic oscillations, the "swing" equation
is rewritten to show the effect of changes in machine flux,
Eq
2 H d 2 D d '
(2.5)
+ + K 1 + K 2 E q = 0
s dt 2 s dt
The term K2Eq is determined mainly by changes in
excitation level, as determined by the control action of the
voltage regulator with phase lags due to the exciter and
generator field circuit.
Figure 2.6 Block Diagram Of Generator Under Voltage Regulator Control
The undamping effect of the regulator can be illustrated
by the phase relationship of the various rotor torque
components of dynamic oscillations. The phasor diagram
in Fig. 2.7 shows the relative phase of various generator
signals for small deviations around the operating point.
For local machine oscillations the angle deviation () lags
the speed deviation () by 90 degrees and the terminal
voltage deviation (ET) by 180 degrees. Note that the
phasor plots of Fig. 2.7, Fig. 2.8, and Fig. 2.10 are used to
illustrate the concepts of oscillatory stability and are not
considered a useful analytical tool for assessing stability.
The vertical axis of Fig. 2.7 is the synchronizing axis,
and components of restoring power along this axis in the
positive direction tend to increase the frequency of
dynamic oscillations. The horizontal axis is the damping
axis. Components of restoring power, which are in phase
with the oscillations of machine speed or frequency,
provide damping to these oscillations.
- 23 -
Figure 2.7 Phasor Relationship Of Signals And Torque Components; Unit
With Fixed Excitation
However, components that are out of phase with
machine speed and point toward the right tend to cancel the
natural damping provided by the unit. The components of
restoring power shown in Fig. 2.7 correspond to that of a
machine under manual voltage control (i.e., constant
excitation). The resultant forcing action for oscillations
points to the left of the vertical axis, indicating that
dynamic oscillations will be damped.
The effect of voltage regulator control on oscillations
can be seen by analyzing the phase components of the
restoring power caused by changes in excitation.
Generator terminal voltage deviation (ET) is sensed by the
error detector of the voltage regulator with reversed
polarity due to negative feedback voltage control. It is this
signal which initiates control action of the generator
excitation system.
Fig. 2.8 shows the effect of the voltage feedback signal
on the resultant restoring power for the case of a plant with
a very weak transmission system. The phase lags 1 and
2 between the error signal (e or -ET) and the generator
flux (Eq) correspond to the time delays associated with
the regulator/exciter action and the time constant of the
generator field, respectively. The major delay occurs in the
generator, with the delay of the regulator/exciter of
secondary effect. The restoring power due to Eq has a
component, which acts to reduce the damping of dynamic
oscillations. The resultant dynamic forcing action may
point into the unstable region and result in undamped
oscillations that grow in magnitude.
An excitation system with a very fast response and a
high effective gain will act to magnify the negative
damping contribution. With a slightly lower phase lag in
the excitation system, the contribution due to regulator
action is more directly in line with the negative damping
axis, and has a larger magnitude because of the higher
effective gain. The result is more of a tendency toward
oscillatory instability with high response and high initial
response excitation systems, and generally a greater need
for, supplementary stabilizing devices.
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

Positive Damping Negative Damping excitation system. The resulting signal is amplified to a
(Stable Region) (Unstable Region)
desired level and sent through a signal wash out module.
Resulting This module functions to continuously balance the
Synchronizing Axis Response
t
stabilizer output and thus prevent it from biasing the
generator voltage for prolonged frequency or power
excursions. The output limiter serves to prevent the
Et stabilizer output signal from causing excessive voltage
1
2
changes upon load rejection and to retain the beneficial
action of regulator forcing during severe system
D s E'q disturbances [22].
Damping Regulator
Axis Et Forcing Action
Term. Freq.
Signal
Shaft Speed Transducer
Washout
or Power
Figure 2.8 Phasor Relationship Of Signals And Torque Components; Unit
Under Voltage Regulator Control, Large Xe.
Output
Lead/Lag
Amplifier
Signal to Regulator
It should be made clear that the undamping component Network Limiter Sensing
Circuit
K2Eq is generally only large enough to cause growing
oscillations when the unit is under conditions that cause Figure 2.9 Major Elements Of Power System Stabilizer
large power angles, such as a weak transmission system,
large load, or low terminal voltage. Test experience has For proper damping action, PSS control settings
shown that a unit with a steady state power angle above 70 consisting of the lead, the lag, and the gain adjustments of
degrees (between the generator internal voltage and the the stabilizer have to be judiciously determined. Since the
infinite bus voltage) tends to have potential local mode dynamic response of a unit involves the machine and the
stability problems under voltage regulator control. external system, such settings may vary from unit to unit.
D. PSS For Improved Oscillatory Stability Also, particular PSS settings designed to suppress intertie
oscillations may not be effective in damping local
Since voltage regulator control can act to reduce the
machine/system oscillations. Therefore, setting procedures
damping of unit oscillations by sensing terminal voltage, it
for PSS's generally involve either a field test, a study of the
seems reasonable that a supplementary signal to the voltage
machine and system, or both.
regulator can increase damping by sensing some additional
A PSS setting procedure involving frequency response
measurable quantity. In doing so, not only can the
tests in the field has been widely accepted by utilities in the
undamping effect of voltage regulator control be cancelled,
Upper Midwest and Western United States for damping
but damping can be increased so as to allow operation even
inter area oscillations. From the measurement of terminal
beyond the steady state stability limit. This is the basic
voltage deviation in response to sinusoidal inputs to the
idea behind the power system stabilizer (PSS). The
voltage regulator reference, phase information is obtained
supplementary signal of a PSS may be derived from such
upon which PSS lead lag settings are determined. The PSS
quantities as changes in shaft speed (), generator
amplifier gain is empirically found. This is achieved by
electrical frequency (f)), or electrical power (PE).
monitoring the dynamic response of the unit with the PSS
There are a number of considerations in selecting the
in service and slowly increasing the PSS gain until small
right input quantity. The factors that play a role are
rapid oscillations appear, usually in the frequency range of
requisite gain and phase compensation, the susceptibility to
1 to 4 Hz. The PSS gain is then set to approximately one
other interactions such as torsional oscillations, and the
third this value.
noise level in transducers. The speed and frequency inputs
Since local mode stability problems often involve a
have been widely used. The trend is more towards PSS
single machine and the system, modeling procedures can
design based on integral of accelerating power. This type
be used as an aid in determining PSS settings. Such
of PSS provides satisfactory damping and reduced torsional
modeling techniques include representation of the PSS,
interactions. The basic theory of a PSS control based on
excitation system, generator, and external system. Both
integral of accelerating power input signal, its advantages
time response and frequency domain analysis can be used
and the methods of tuning the stabilizers are discussed by
in evaluating PSS settings.
Murdoch et al [21].
A block diagram showing the major elements of a
typical PSS is shown in Fig. 2.9. A special speed,
frequency, or power transducer converts the stabilizing
signal to a control voltage. The transducer output is then
phase shifted by an adjustable lead lag network, which acts
to compensate for time delays in the generator and

- 24 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

Positive Damping Negative Damping generator as it behaves when connected through an external
(Stable Region) (Unstable Region)
reactance to an infinite bus. This model is used to illustrate
Resulting generator dynamic behavior as well as to analyze actual
Response t Synchronizing Axis
local mode dynamic stability problems. The model applies
to a D-Q axis generator representation with a field circuit
PSS Forcing in the direct axis, but without sub-transient amortisseur or
action
solid iron eddy current effects in either axis.
The effects of the voltage regulator can be included in
the model by adding a feedback branch between the output
4
3
ET and the input EFD. Similarly, a power system
Damping
Axis stabilizer branch can be included in Fig. 2.11 between the
PSS output signal and the summing junction of the voltage
regulator. A speed-governor can also be represented as a
Figure 2.10 Phasor Relationship Of Signals; Unit Under Voltage
Regulator Control With PSS In Service. path between and the mechanical turbine torque Tm.
Kundur [22] shows the effect of a high gain voltage
A typical phase relationship of the signals associated regulator and the role played by a PSS.
with the PSS control sensing frequency or speed is shown Specifically the value of K5 has a significant bearing on
in Fig. 2.10. The quantity sensed by the PSS is phase the influence of the AVR on the damping of system
shifted by an amount 3 in the lead lag network. This PSS oscillations. Kundur [22] shows analytically as well as via
output signal is sent into the voltage regulator. The time examples that for high value of external system reactance
delays in the excitation system and generator result in an and high generator outputs, K5 is negative. In practice, the
actual forcing action that has a large damping component. situation where K5 is negative is commonly encountered.
By increasing the PSS amplifier gain, this damping action For such cases, a high response exciter is beneficial in
can be increased. However, higher order effects limit this increasing sysnchronizing torque. However, in so doing it
gain. The resultant dynamic forcing action due to the PSS introduces negative damping. In order to meet these
cancels the undamping effect of voltage feedback control conflicting requirements one then uses the high response
and extends the stability limit. exciter and a PSS.

VII. GENERATOR MODELS VIII. CONCLUSIONS

Linearized generator models are obtained by considering Power system stability concepts are presented. It is
small variations about an operating point. These linearized shown that a PSS can be used to compensate for the
models are then used for analyzing simple oscillatory detrimental effects of a high response exciter. Basic
stability problems. DeMello and Concordia [23] have structure of a PSS is shown.
described such a model with the aid of the block diagram
of Fig. 2.11, relating the pertinent variables of electrical
torque (Te), speed (), angle (), terminal voltage
(ET), and field voltage (EFD). This model represents a

Figure 2.11 Small Signal Model Of Generator, Transmission Line And Infinite Busbar

- 25 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
CHAPTER 3
PERFORMANCE CRITERIA AND
TUNING TECHNIQUES
Alexander Murdoch and George Boukarim
I. INTRODUCTION
This chapter addresses the application of power system
stabilizers, beginning with a discussion of the required
contribution to improve system small signal (dynamic)
stability, and ending with criteria for tuning a stabilizer to
meet these objectives.
Tuning of supplementary excitation controls for
stabilizing system modes of oscillation has been the subject
of much and continuing work during the past 30 years, and
a number of different tuning approaches have been
proposed and used during this period, each with its own set
of benefits and limitations. These approaches include phase
compensation, root locus, optimal and robust control, as
well as others. The approach that will be discussed in this
tutorial utilizes a combination of phase compensation, root
locus, and time domain analyses to tune and evaluate the
performance of the PSS. Phase compensation is the process
of selecting PSS lead/lag settings to compensate for phase
lags introduced by the generator, excitation system, and
power system. The PSS lead/lag settings introduce the
necessary phase shift to the PSS control signal to ensure
that generator electrical torque modulations resulting from
the PSS action are in phase with generator speed
oscillations [23]to[33]. Root locus analysis is used to select
the PSS gain, and to determine the PSS instability gain and
ensure adequate gain margin in the PSS control loop.
Finally, time domain analysis showing the PSS response to
small and large system disturbances is used to validate the
performance of the PSS in the non-linear power system
under different system and operating conditions.
Independent of the techniques utilized in tuning
stabilizer equipment, it is necessary to recognize the non-
linear nature of power systems and that the objective of
adding power system stabilizers is to extend power transfer
limits by stabilizing system oscillations. Adding damping is
not an end in itself, but as a means to extending power
transfer limits. This chapter addresses the performance
characteristics of power system stabilizers with respect to
extending power transfer stability limits for both remote
generation and situations where inter-tie mode oscillations
may be critical to system stability. Both small and large
disturbance aspects of performance are included, resulting
in a definition of desired stabilizer performance to ensure a
robust design meeting the system requirements. In addition,
a relationship is established between desired performance
and the phase compensation characteristics that are useful
for stabilizer tuning.
- 26 -
II. PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES
A. Oscillatory Stability Limits
Applying power system stabilizers can extend power
transfer stability limits by improving small signal stability
which is characterized by lightly damped or spontaneously
growing oscillations in the 0.1 to 4 Hz frequency range.
This is accomplished via excitation control to contribute
damping to the system modes of oscillation. Consequently,
it is the stabilizer's ability to enhance damping under the
least stable conditions, i.e., the "critical conditions", which
is important. Additional damping is primarily required
under conditions of weak transmission and heavy load as
occurs, for example, when attempting to transmit power
over long transmission lines from remote generating plants
or over relatively weak ties between systems.
Contingencies, such as line or unit outages, often
precipitate such conditions. Hence, systems that normally
have adequate damping can often benefit from stabilizers
during such abnormal conditions. In most cases the PSS is
not required for normal operation but may be critical
during contingencies or islanding operation.
It is important to realize that the stabilizer is intended to
provide damping for small excursions about a steady-state
operating point, and not to enhance transient stability, i.e.,
the ability to recover from a severe disturbance. In fact, the
stabilizer will often have a deleterious effect on transient
stability by attempting to pull the generator field voltage
out of ceiling too early in response to a fault. The stabilizer
output is generally limited to prevent serious impact on
transient stability, but stabilizer tuning also has a
significant impact upon system performance following a
large disturbance, as will be discussed.
B. System Modes Of Oscillation
As described in previous chapters, the power system
oscillations of concern to stability occur generally in the
0.2 to 2.5 Hz frequency range. There are occasionally inter-
tie modes in the region of 0.1 Hz and slightly below, and
some aero-derivative turbines have local mode frequencies
near 4Hz operating into strong systems. The rotors of
machines, behaving as rigid bodies, oscillate with respect
to one another using the electrical transmission path
between them to exchange energy. There are many
different modes in which such oscillations may occur, often
simultaneously.
Experience suggests that it is not unusual for a
generating unit to participate in both local and inter-area or
inter-tie modes of oscillation, the damping and frequency
of which vary with system operating conditions. The Power
system stabilizers must therefore be able to accommodate
both of these modes, and be robust to changes in the
system operating conditions. Since a single unit or power
plant is dominant in local modes, its stabilizer can have a
very large impact on damping those oscillations. By
contrast, a single unit participates in only a portion of the
total magnitude of power oscillation in the inter-tie mode.
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
Therefore, a power system stabilizer applied to a single unit
can only contribute to the damping of an inter-tie mode in
proportion to the power generation capacity of the unit
relative to the total capacity of the area of which it is a part.
As a consequence, a stabilizer should be designed to
provide adequate local mode damping under all operating
conditions, with particular attention to conditions of heavy
load and weak transmission, and simultaneously to provide
a high contribution to damping of inter-tie modes. These
criteria ensure good performance for a wide range of power
system contingencies.
C. Tuning Concepts
Stabilizers must be tuned to provide the desired system
performance under the condition which requires
stabilization, typically weak systems with heavy power
transfer, while at the same time being robust in that
undesirable interactions are avoided for all system
conditions.
To provide damping, the stabilizer must produce a
component of electrical torque on the rotor that is in phase
with speed variations. The implementation details differ,
depending upon the stabilizer input signal employed.
However, for any input signal the transfer function of the
stabilizer must compensate for the gain and phase
characteristics of the excitation system, the generator, and
the power system [31] to [33]. These elements collectively
determine the transfer function from the stabilizer output
(Epss) to the component of electrical torque, which can be
modulated via excitation control (Tep). It must be noted that
Tep is only a portion of the total torque acting on the rotor,
and that it cannot be measured directly. Since it is related to
flux changes in the machine, it can be measured indirectly
via terminal voltage, as will be discussed in later sections.
The transfer function relating Tep to Epss, denoted here
as GEP(s), is strongly influenced by voltage regulator gain,
generator power level, and ac system strength.
Figure 3.1 Stabilizer With Speed Input System Block Diagram
The block diagram in Fig. 3.1 illustrates, in terms of a
few basic small-signal transfer functions, the relationship
between the applied torques on the turbine-generator shaft
and the resulting generator rotor speed, G and rotor
angular displacement, . The electrical torque may be
- 27 -
considered to have two components, viz. (3.2) that which is
produced by the power system stabilizer solely by
modulation of generator flux, Tep, and (3.2) that which
results from all other sources, including shaft motion, Teo
The functional relationship between speed and torque is
shown for a stabilizer employing generator speed as an
input signal. The contribution of torque due to the stabilizer
path is given by:
Tep
= PSS (s)GEP(s) = P(s) (3.1)
G
where GEP(s) = the plant through which the stabilizer
must operate. (Generator, Exciter, and
Power System)
= Tep / E pss (3.2)
PSS(s) = speed-input stabilizer
= pss / G (3.3)
Tep = component of electrical torque due
solely to stabilizer path
Epss = stabilizer output signal
The plant GEP(s) has the highest gain and greatest phase
lag under conditions of full load on the unit, hence a target
value of base load for the tuning process. The tuning will
also be affected by the transmission system. Expected
values from short circuit studies give starting point and
various contingency cases will define likely weaker
transmission cases. A wide range should be covered to
insure robustness in the tuning. The PSS may not be critical
for normal operation but critical if the system become
weaker. Choosing high AVR gains may limit operation
without PSS for maintaining small signal stability margins.
The de Mello Concordia model [23] in Fig 3.2 is similar
to the basic block diagram in Fig 3.1 and allows us to
illustrate the process in conceptual terms. The top part of
this figure shows the relationship between the accelerating
torque and the rotor speed and angle. These are the basic
electromechanical equations for the generator. The terms
"D" and "K1" represent the equivalent damping and
synchronizing torque coefficients. The lower part of this
figure shows the effects of the AVR and the flux dynamics
in the generator. The effect of the AVR is to increase the
effective "K1" term, but unfortunately at the same time this
reduces the damping term. To maintain or increase the
dynamic stability margin it is necessary to increase the
effective "D" term in the model. If we consider the addition
of the PSS loop which acts through the AVR and generator
field circuit, what we would like the PSS control loop to do
is to provide changes in torque which are exactly in phase
with changes in rotor speed.
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
D measurement provided a reliable measure of local mode
- and inter-tie oscillation induced from electromechanical tie
Tm 0
1 +
y 2Hs s
+
- +
T e Input
+ with low frequency torsional modes (and light damping
K1
+ were applied to mitigate any PSS-torsional interaction.
K2
K4
K5
- -
Eq K3 + +
-
AVR
1 + sK3Tdo
+ effects on system performance. Also, speed input PSS
K6
Input(s) PSS Input PSS Gain
Section and Phase
Fig. 3.2. deMello-Concordia Block Diagram
The stabilizer design may have one or more inputs, and
from a control point of view any measurable signal in
which the modes that are to be controlled are observable
would be a candidate for application. The signals of
common use are speed, frequency, or electrical power.
They may appear singly or in combination to form a PSS
input signal as indicated in the first lower block of Figure
3.2. After appropriate phase and gain compensation there is
one output signal most commonly applied to the reference
summing point in the excitation system, but may be added
later with the output of the AVR in some systems.
A great deal of material was presented in the 1981
tutorial [17] to outline the characteristics of the various
input signal choices. At that time, there were many
commercial offerings that used single input speed,
frequency or power. Early designs of PTI for accelerating
power and later work by Ontario Hydro for an integral of
accelerating power design have led to todays commercial
offerings that are the subject of the next section of this
document.
It is more relevant here to focus on the PSS tuning
process or methodology, and only briefly focus on the
design choices of input signals. Most of the tuning process
is independent of the choice of input signal in the sense that
it will of course influence the tuning of parameters but not
the methods used in analysis. The material in the 1981
tutorial on the characteristics of the various PSS designs is
still useful for understanding various designs and rather
than repeat it here we will summarize briefly the commonly
applied designs.
D. Speed Input Stabilizers
A commonly applied design has a speed input based on
measurement directly at the turbine front standard toothed
wheel with magnetic proximity probe. The speed
to the power system. Unfortunately, the speed
measurement also provided a rich spectrum of oscillations
from the turbine-generator torsional dynamics and on units
i.e. large steam turbines), multi-stage band reject filters
Speed input stabilizers require 60-70 degrees of phase lead
at local mode and the corresponding control mode gain
margins result in limited damping, particularly with the
Eref torsional filter phase lags. Note that a torsional filter
equivalent was placed in the PSS1A model to include these
designs are especially susceptible to intra-plant oscillations
in multi-unit plants that limit the allowable gain margins
and available performance [34].
A new variation on the speed input PSS is what is called
the multi-band PSS [35]. Measured speed is discriminated
into three frequency bands, then compensated by three
lead-lag stages in each band and algebraically combined
with weighting factors into a PSS output. This model and
design concept are presented in 421.5-2005 [36] and [35].
E. Frequency Input Stabilizers
The ac bus frequency input stabilizer is another
commonly used design. This design has two major
differences with speed input with respect to tuning. First,
the frequency signal is less sensitive to intra-plant
oscillations than either speed or power. These modes have
higher frequencies than the local mode of the power plant
to the power system, and the phase lag of the stabilizer
loop is therefore greater. Hence, with speed or power input
these modes will become unstable and impose a limitation
upon stabilizer performance. Secondly, the sensitivity of
the frequency signal to speed variations increases as the
connected transmission system becomes weaker [33]. This
offsets the reduction in gain from voltage reference to
electrical torque, GEP(s), due to a weaker transmission
system. As a consequence, the frequency input stabilizer
can be tuned for the best performance under weak
transmission conditions where the stabilizer contribution is
most required.
Although these differences in tuning criteria will
generally result in less high frequency gain for frequency
input stabilizers than for speed input stabilizers, significant
attenuation is still required at the torsional frequencies to
prevent excessive torsional interaction. Frequency input
PSS was often used in place of speed for four pole turbine-
generators where the band-reject torsional filters for speed
input PSS would result in more significant phase lags due
to the lower frequency torsional modes. The phase
compensation for frequency input PSS is similar to speed
input designs
- 28 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
F. Power Input Stabilizers
Other designs are based on electrical power by itself, or
accelerating power based on measurements of electrical
power and speed or frequency. The next chapter has detail
of the current accelerating power PSS design. The interest
in using accelerating power as a stabilizer input signal
results from the inherently low level of torsional interaction
[33]. It must be noted that a practical power-based
stabilizer must utilize some form of compensation for
mechanical power changes, as well as the washout stage to
remove steady-state value of input signal.
As a point of reference, it is instructive to compare the
power-based stabilizer design to a speed-input stabilizer.
This can be accomplished by recognizing that speed is
related to accelerating power by the inertia, and hence
power has an inherent 90 degree phase lead relative to
speed with, correspondingly reduced phase-lead
requirements in the PSS.
The integral of accelerating power design results in
canceling the phase lead from power and the phase
compensation is similar to those required for speed input
designs. The reduced filtering requirements of the power-
based system allow much greater small-signal damping to
be obtained with the power-based system [21], [38].
A final preface to the tuning example is a note on a key
aspect of a rigorous application of the tuning process is the
ability to function in both frequency domain and time
domain studies [40]. While there are many software tools
able to function with explicit forms of transfer functions
and systems, it has been long recognized that it is not only
possible but straightforward to mechanize the output of
state matrices from the dynamic equations linearized
around an operating point. Unfortunately, it has not been
common practice in the past 30 years to include this into
commercially available stability software. While it is
possible to write the closed-form equations for a small
system, the mechanization of the work to include quickly
developing the state matrices for any system size and
configuration of dynamic models that is a cornerstone of
the process.
III. TUNING EXAMPLE
An example will be used to illustrate the combined use
of phase compensation and root locus techniques to meet
the tuning objectives. The tuning process is done using a
single machine infinite bus (SMIB) system. Although the
SMIB system only has local mode response, we will see
later that the frequency response characteristics can be used
to design for inter-area mode damping. The example
machine is a 600MW two pole steam turbine with integral
of accelerating power input stabilizer [36] (IEEE Type
PSS2A). Before beginning PSS tuning, the AVR tuning,
needs to be determined [37]. In this case grid requirements
for this bus fed static exciter led to a transient gain of 40
per unit, to meet a specific response time and overshoot
criteria. A range of reactance values was considered
- 29 -
looking out from the unit into the system. These are given
as a total of the generator step up transformer and the
Thevenin equivalent looking out from the HV switchyard.
To consider the robustness of the parameter choices, a
range of impedances is usually chosen to cover normal and
contingency cases. In this example 15, 30 and 45% on the
unit base were used.
PSS Tuning Studies for IEEE Tutorial
P = 0.9 pu Q = 0 pu Xtot = 15/30/45%
40
Uncompensated (Te/Etref)+(EXCSIG/Speed)
Xtot=15%
Xtot=30%
20 Xtot=45%
0
Gain(dB)
20
40
60
200
Xtot=15%
Xtot=30%
100 Xtot=45%
Phase(Degree)
0
100
200
300
10
2 1
10 10
0
Frequency(Hz)
1
10
2
10
Fig. 3.3. Uncompensated Transfer Function T/
The transfer function from speed to torque through the PSS
control path is calculated and plotted in Fig 3.3. This
transfer function reflects the phase and gain relationship
between the component of torque produced by the action of
the PSS and the generator speed oscillations, with no PSS
phase compensation. We can see from this transfer function
that the phase lag in the range of local mode is about 100
degrees, primarily due to the large inductance of the field
circuit (Tdo). Without compensation, the component of
torque produced by the PSS action at the local mode
frequency lags the generator rotor speed oscillations by
about 100 degrees. This means that this torque component
has little, if any, impact on the damping of local mode
oscillation, and its influence will be mainly in improving
the generator synchronizing torque and increasing local
mode frequency. The objective of selecting the PSS phase
compensation is to introduce the necessary phase shift in
the PSS control path to cause this transfer function to have
a phase of nearly zero degrees throughout the range of
frequencies of interest, 0.1 to 3-4 Hz where inter-tie and
local mode frequencies exist. With a compensated phase of
near zero degrees, the component of electrical torque due
to PSS action is nearly in phase with speed oscillations, and
is almost completely directed to improving the damping of
generator oscillations. Also in this and subsequent transfer
functions we note the affect of two torsional band-reject
filters that were applied at 13.56 and 23.49Hz. The process
of PSS tuning actually would begin without application of
filters, then determine if filters are required, and then repeat
the tuning process for parameter settings with filters, if
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

required. The torsional filters, if required, for the integral in the input signals on PSS output. The discussion on the
of accelerating power PSS are relatively modest so usually deMello Concordia block diagram illustrated how we can
only one iteration in the tuning process is required. view these components are resolved into damping and
A point to be made here is the slight difference in the synchronizing torques. The choice of leads of 0.2 and 0.18
transfer function of uncompensated transfer function, and seconds, and lags of 0.035 and 0.04 seconds are shown in
the AVR closed loop, which can be readily measured. This Fig 3.5 where the plot also reflects the choice of washout
point was mentioned in [31] to [33] and the previous time constant of 5 seconds. Compensated phase is within
tutorial material. Note the plot on Fig 3.4 compares the two 30 degrees of target (zero degrees) for most of the range of
transfer functions and we can see that they agree closely interest, and no more than 45 degrees of lag at 3 Hz, which
near local mode but differ by as much as 30 degrees in the is above the local mode frequency (about 1.6 Hz).
inter-tie region. In that case if one would assume the AVR
PSS Tuning Studies for IEEE Tutorial
closed loop was the target value, the performance goal in P = 0.9 pu Q = 0 pu Average Transfer Function for Xtot = 15/30/45%
Compensated (T /E )+(EXCSIG/Speed) PSS Lead/Lag : 0.18,0.2,0/0.035,0.04,0
the inter-tie region would lead towards overcompensation
e tref
150

relative to phase lead. During testing, the measured AVR

100
closed loop transfer function should be compared with the
computed AVR closed loop and recognize that is not the 50

one used for tuning. That validates the tuning process and 0
allows confidence in the transfer function that was used in

Phase (degrees)
tuning, but which cannot be easily measured. 50

PSS Tuning Studies for IEEE Tutorial 100

P = 0.9 pu Q = 0 pu Xtot = 15%
Voltage Control Loop Transfer Function (Vt/Vtref) and Uncompensted OpenLoop Transfer Function
40
Vt / Vtref 150
Uncompensated Te / Speed
20
200
0

250 Compensated Phase

Gain(dB)

20 Uncompensated Phase
PSS Lead/Lag
300
40 2 1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10 10
Frequency (Hz)
60
200
Vt / Vtref Fig. 3.5. Uncompensated, Compensated and PSS Phase Plot
Uncompensated Te / Speed
100

0
Choice in the phase compensation for adding more lead-
lag stages or changing washout time constant can be made
Phase(Degree)

100
at this point and the effects on phase can be considered. At
200
this point the high frequency gain of the PSS can also be
300
10
2
10
1
10
0
10
1 2
10
considered. If we are concerned about the application of
Frequency(Hz) torsional filters, the characteristics of the lead-lag stages in
Fig. 3.4. Comparison of Uncompensated and AVR Closed Loop this frequency range are considered. Generally speaking
the torsional frequencies are high enough compared to the
In this example, two PSS lead-lag stages are used to local mode that the asymptote in gain which is the product
compensate the uncompensated transfer function. Most of all the lead time constants divided by the product of all
stabilizers offer three lead-lag stages for phase the lag time constants can be used. In this case the high
compensation (reference the new PSS2B model in 421.5- frequency gain is (0.2*0.18)/(0.035*0.04) = 26.5. If two
2005), and some manufacturers offer even more than three designs are otherwise roughly the same it may be wise to
stages in their designs. The use of additional lead-lag choose the one with lower high frequency gain. A further
stages gives the ability to better shape the gain and phase discussion of the PSS-torsional interaction is in a later part
characteristics over a wider range of frequencies to meet of this section.
performance targets. Older equipment may be limited to
B. Root Locus
two stages for choosing compensation.
The next step in the process is to consider the root locus
A. Phase Compensation as PSS gain is varied. As shown in Appendix A of [33], the
The phase compensation is chosen to be close to zero initial direction of local mode eigenvalue migration as the
phase for the range of 0.1 to 3.0Hz. If we leave the phase stabilizer gain is increased from zero is determined by the
slightly under-compensated we have both significant compensated transfer function phase at the local mode
positive damping torque contribution, and also positive frequency. For perfect compensation, i.e., L , = 0 pure
synchronizing torque contribution. The phase at low positive damping will be obtained and the eigenvalue will
frequency is affected by choice of the washout (high pass move directly into the left half plane with no change in
filter) that is applied to eliminate the steady-state changes frequency. If phase lag exists, the frequency will increase

- 30 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

in proportion to the amount of damping increase, factor between setting and instability point). Here we see
specifically the gain of 80 on the PSS will result in instability at about
5.5Hz, well above (18dB) the recommended PSS gain of
L = tan L L (3.4) 10.
If frequency domain tools are not available, the process
where L = local mode frequency (rad/sec) of PSS tuning is somewhat less rigorous but the damping
and oscillation frequency of local mode can be determined
L = local mode decay rate (sec-1)
from time simulations to get equivalent information as
= implies change due to stabilizer contained in Figs 3.6 and 3.7. Also, that same information
For L = -45 frequency will increase at the same rate as can be validated during testing in similar fashion. It is also
damping. For L = -90 a restructuring of (3.4) will show possible in any system to measure the PSS open loop
that no change in damping will take place, but frequency transfer function (from AVR input to PSS output with PSS
will increase. This basic concept is very useful in not connected) and we have found that the measured gain
understanding the root locus. at the crossover point correlates well with the inverse of the
Root locus plots are shown in Fig. 3.6 for the three instability gain. The crossover point also provides the
different impedances. These plots represent the migration instability frequency.
of the local mode eigenvalues as stabilizer gain is increased PSS Tuning Studies for IEEE Tutorial
from zero towards infinity. P = 0.9 pu Q = 0 pu Xtot = 15/30/45%
Control Mode Locus as a Function of PSS Gain PSS Lead/Lag : 0.18,0.2,0/0.035,0.04,0

8
PSS Tuning Studies for IEEE Tutorial
P = 0.9 pu Q = 0 pu Xtot = 15/30/45%
Local Mode Locus as a Function of PSS Gain PSS Lead/Lag : 0.18,0.2,0/0.035,0.04,0 7

2
7
6
6
1.8 * Kpss 7
567
5 4 3 1 0
6 2 5
5 6

Frequency (Hz)
1 Xtot = 15% 1.6 e
2 10 od 4
lM 5
ro
* Kpss 3 20 nt 4
6 5 4 3 1.4 Co 4
1 0 2 1 Xtot = 30% 4 40 4
7
2 2 3
Frequency (Hz)

6 5 4 3 1.2 5 60
8 7 2 1 Xtot = 45%
3 4 3 3
8 6 80 3
4 6 1 7 100 2
5 8 2 2 Local Mode 2
6 10 0.8 2 1
2 1
7 15 3 3 3 2 1
0.6 1
4 44
8 20 5655
6
54
7
6657
7 3433222
45
6 7776
2334456 5767
12314
0.4 7
1 13
4
51 6
6
2 4
5
3
7
21 11 232
45
6
7
3
245
6
7456
3 7 1
61
3
4
5
7
2 3
4
5
6
71
2 3
4
5
6
7
2 72
63
5
71
54
6
2
3
5
7
6
4
7
6
7
5
6
4
4
325
6
73
3
4
1
5
6
7
21
4
5
6
7
2 0
25 20 15 10 5 0 5
0.2 Sigma (1/Seconds)
123456781234567
8 12345678
1
3
4
2
5
7
8
6 1
2
3
4
5
7
8
6 1
2
3
4
5
7
8
6 878
54
7
65
3
44
5
2
28
67
3
13
62
4
5
7
8 7
6 8
4
5
3
1
2
6 0
5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 Fig. 3.7. Control Mode Root Locus as PSS Gain is Increased
Sigma (1/Seconds)

Fig. 3.6. Root Locus of Local Mode for Different System Strengths Some newer digital based controls have built in test
functions that allow for these frequency responses as well
Although many eigenvalues exist for the total system as step tests to be performed and have tools that plot
only the dominant ones associated with the local mode are frequency responses directly.
shown in this figure. We can see that local mode frequency C. Step Test and Fault Simulations
is increased as the system tie becomes stronger, and
After choosing phase compensation and gain, time
significant damping is introduced by the PSS without much
simulations are run to verify performance with voltage
frequency change. In this case the frequency increases
steps and fault disturbances. Voltage step tests will be used
slightly as PSS gain is increased, illustrating the comments
later for performance verification. Cases are normally run
made previously about positive synchronizing torque
for all of the system reactances to check the robustness of
contribution. Weaker systems have inherently lower
the design.
damping without PSS, but in all cases the PSS provides
For this example we show the 2% voltage step response
significant improvement in damping.
in Fig 3.8 for the strong system connection of X=15%. As
The other aspect of the PSS design comes into the PSS
this is a single machine system the response is local mode
control mode that is becoming dynamically less stable as
and the oscillation without PSS can be seen to be at about
the local mode dynamic stability is increasing. The plot in
1.6Hz which correlates with the root locus plot in Fig 3.6.
Fig 3.7 shows the control mode and also the local mode
The step is applied for 5 seconds and then removed. The
root locus on the same plot. Here we focus on ensuring the
oscillation in MW and speed clearly show the response and
chosen gain allows for adequate gain margin. From a point
the damping as provided by the stabilizer.
of view of control system design we need to ensure a
minimum of 6dB and typically better 10dB margin (a 3:1

- 31 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

PSS Tuning Studies for IEEE Tutorial PSS Tuning Studies for IEEE Tutorial
P = 0.9 pu Q = 0 pu Xtot = 15% PSS Lead/Lag : 0.18,0.2,0/0.035,0.04,0 P = 0.9 pu Q = 0 pu Xtot(prefault) = 15% Xtot(postfault) = 20% PSS Lead/Lag : 0.18,0.2,0/0.035,0.04,0
Response to a 2% Step in Terminal Voltage Reference Blue : PSS ON Red : PSS OFF Response to a 0.1 Second Fault MidWay to Infinite Bus Followed by the Loss of Lines Blue : PSS ON Red : PSS OFF
1.04 0.2 1.5 2

1.03 0.15 1
1
0

Qe(pu)
1.02 0.1

Qe(pu)

Vt(pu)
Vt(pu)

1.01 0.05 1
0.5
1 0 2

0.99 0.05 0 3

3.5 50.04 15 51

3 50.5
50.02
10

Speed(Hz)
Speed(Hz)

Efd(pu)
2.5
Efd(pu)

50 50
2
5
49.98 49.5
1.5

1 49.96 0 49

0.93 0.01 3 0.06

0.04
0.92 2

PSS Output(pu)
0.005
PSS Output(pu)

0.02

Pe(pu)
0.91
Pe(pu)

0 1 0
0.9 0.02
0
0.005
0.89 0.04

1 0.06
0.88 0.01 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
Time (Seconds) Time (Seconds)
Time (Seconds) Time (Seconds)

Fig. 3.8 2% Voltage Step Simulation with X=15% - with & without PSS Fig. 3.9 Three Phase Fault Simulation with X=15% - with & without PSS

The fault response in Fig 3.9 shows the same local mode For each mode 40 cases are studied, for a range of
response following the fault and subsequent line clearing. system impedances and MW and MVAR loading as shown
This case illustrates the principle that the PSS cannot in the bottom of the figure as bar graphs.
provide effective damping while the PSS output is in limit. 0.35
|TIV|/Sigma for Torsional Mode #1 Less Than 0.1 > No Interaction Larger Than 0.1 > Interaction
0

During the first two cycles of the local mode swing the PSS Threshold
Without Filters

is alternating between positive and negative limits, and 0.3 With Filter

when the PSS comes out of limit the damping reduces the 0.25

local mode swing to insignificant levels within 1 swing

|TIV|/Sigma0

cycle, similar to what was observed for the step test.

0.2

0.15
D. PSS Torsional Interaction
For steam turbines with lightly damped low frequency 0.1

torsional modes it is possible for the PSS to interact with 0.05

torsional oscillations [41]. In those cases the calculation of 0

Torsional Interaction Vectors (TIV) are included in the
Xe

PSS tuning process. There is a criterion for allowable

P

interaction of no more than 10% change in the torsional

Q

mode location (vector including damping and frequency) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

relative to the initial damping of the torsional mode without Case #

the PSS. In Fig 3.10 is a plot of the TIVs for PSS applied Fig. 3.10. TIV with and without Filters for Mode 1 Response
to a nuclear plant for mode 1 (near 10Hz), where torsional
filters were applied. As part of the dynamic setup, more Note that the interaction increases for stronger systems
detailed models of the generator and excitation system are and for operation under excited with leading power factor.
used to accurately represent their behavior at higher The TIV calculations are done for all sub-synchronous
frequencies. The torsional dynamics are included in the modes and typically only the lower frequency modes show
models using modal form equations for all the sub- interaction with the PSS. For any modes showing
synchronous torsional modes. Test results have validated interaction above the 10% level in TIV/Sigma, filters are
models at dozens of machines studied specified. Any band reject filter design can be used, and a
common form is the biquadratic form, as follows:

n 2 + 2 N n s + s 2 (3.5)
n 2 + 2 D n s + s 2
In some cases more than two filters are applied to a
torsional mode and stagger tuned to give a wider
bandwidth. This is common with mode 1 as the modal
frequency varies slightly as the unit operating point
changes.

- 32 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

E. Use of Modified Lead-lag Compensation

Aero Turbine Three Lead Lag Example PSS Tuning Study
For some applications where the performance at both P = 0.85 pu Q = 0 pu Xtot = 15/30/45%
Local Mode Locus as a Function of PSS Gain PSS Lead/Lag : 0.6,0.6,0.05/5,0.015,0.01
local mode and inter-area modes are critical, adding phase 4

compensation should be considered. In the following 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Xtot = 15%

example, an aero-derivative combustion turbine which has
3.5

very light inertia, H=1.17, and base rating of 60MW is * Kpss 8 7

3
6 5 4 3 2 1 Xtot = 30%
considered. The resultant local mode frequency is about 1 0
2 2 8 7 2.5
6 5 4 3 2 1 Xtot = 45%
3.6Hz for the stiff system, and performance at inter-area

Frequency (Hz)
3 4

mode is also important. In this case, it is desired to keep 4 6 2

5 8
phase compensation in a good region for a 50:1 span in 6 10 1.5
frequency. By using three lead lags, which were available 7 15
8 20
in the equipment, we could set the third lead-lag stage for a 1

net low frequency lag. The lead time constants were

8
788
5667
3445 0.5
223
adjusted to 0.6, 0.6 and 0.05 seconds, and the lag time 2
3
4
7
8 2
1
5
6 1
3
4
5
7
8 1
6 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1 2 8
7
constants set to 5.0, 0.015, and 0.01 seconds. In this case
22233434
54655676 7
8788 1
2
3
4
7
5
8
6 1 7
8
2
3
4
7
5
6 8
4
3
5
1
6 5
6
4
3
2 2
7
1 4
1
3
5
86
6 7
2
1
4
3
5
8 0
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

we could also retain the washout time constant at 2.0 Sigma (1/Seconds)

seconds, to effectively decouple the low frequency power Fig. 3.12. Local Mode Root Locus for Aero Turbine Example
oscillations from affecting the PSS. Figs 3.11 and 3.12
show the plots of phase compensation and local mode root X=0.5 X=0.6
locus. 1 3
F. Inter-area Mode Damping Pg=0.9 X=1.2 Pg=0.4

So far, we have considered the tuning based on single P=0.006

X=0.07 X=0.025
machine system and have not validated performance for
2 4
inter-area modes [42] to [43]. To explicitly evaluate the
Pg=4.5 Pg=9.2
effect of stabilizers on damping of inter-area modes of
oscillation, a four-machine system was simulated having All data on 1000 MVA Base PL=5.3 PL=9.5
both local and inter-area modes of oscillation.
Fig. 3.13. Four Machine Example System

Aero Turbine Three Lead Lag Example PSS Tuning Study

P = 0.85 pu Q = 0 pu Average Transfer Function for Xtot = 15/30/45%
The four-machine example system in Fig 3.13 has
detailed generator models, excitation systems, and integral
Compensated (T /E )+(EXCSIG/Speed) PSS Lead/Lag : 0.6,0.6,0.05/5,0.015,0.01
e tref
200

of accelerating power type PSS which are tuned using three

150
lead-lag stages to maximize damping for both local mode
100
and inter-area modes. For a single machine situation, where
local mode is the only consideration, only recovery from
50
the first swing need be considered since the stabilizer will
Phase (degrees)

0
always be acting correctly within its limits to aid damping
of the resulting oscillations. In a multi-machine
50 environment, however, more than the first swing may be
100
critical, and the non-linear performance of the stabilizer
becomes important. This will be apparent from the large
150 Compensated Phase signal performance analysis that follows:
Uncompensated Phase
PSS Lead/Lag The response of the four-machine system to a three-
200
10
2
10
1
10
0

Frequency (Hz)
10
1 2
10 phase fault on the right side bus (see Fig 3.13) is plotted in
Fig. 3.14 for the case of no stabilizer on any machines as
Fig. 3.11. Phase Compensation for Aero Turbine Example compared to all machines having stabilizers. The plot of the
speed signals from the simulation clearly shows the
improvement that can be obtained in both local mode and
inter-area mode damping. The plot in Fig 3.15 shows the
root locus that has the local modes and inter-area mode
shown graphically in frequency domain.

- 33 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

PSS Tuning Studies for IEEE Tutorial areas. Stabilizer performance must therefore be measured
Machine Speed Response to a 4Cycle Fault on Bus 4 4Machine System
Red: All Machines Without PSS Blue: All Machines With PSS in terms of enhancing damping under these weak system
conditions. This measure must include not only the small-
61 61

60.5 60.5 signal damping contributions to all modes of system

oscillation, but the impact upon system performance
1 (Hz)

3 (Hz)
60 60
following large disturbances, when all modes of the system
59.5 59.5 are excited simultaneously. Based upon this measure, it is
shown that the most appropriate stabilizer tuning criteria is
59 59
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
to provide good damping to local modes of oscillation and
61 61
also the inter-area modes of oscillation.
60.5 60.5 The first step before beginning the PSS tuning process is
to determine the settings for the AVR control based on the
2 (Hz)

4 (Hz)

60 60
equipment and the grid interconnection requirement that
59.5 59.5 might exist. Once the AVR tuning is determined, we use
phase compensation, root locus, and time domain analyses
to tune and evaluate the performance of the PSS. Phase
59 59
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
Time (Seconds) Time (Seconds)

Fig. 3.14. Plot of Speed Signals from 4 Machine System
The above observations are intended to illustrate a
general relationship between small-signal damping and
large-disturbance performance, rather than a comparison of
performance between particular input signals. Most new
designs use the integral of accelerating power type PSS but
many existing plants have speed, frequency and power
input PSS designs. Stabilizer output limits and dynamic
limiting circuits (third stage switchable washout) [39] also
can be part of the tuning process. In the interest of space
these concepts will remain documented in the literature.
PSS Tuning Studies for IEEE Tutorial
4Machine Study System
Root Locus as a Function of PSS Gain PSS Gain on All Machine Varied Simultaneously
6 5 4 3
* Kpss
1 0
compensation lets us select the PSS lead/lag settings to
compensate for phase lags introduced by the generator,
excitation system, and power system. Root locus analysis is
used to select the PSS gain, and to determine the PSS
instability gain and ensure adequate gain margin in the PSS
control loop. Finally, time domain analysis demonstrates
the performance of the PSS in the power system
environment. The choice of washout time constants and
the use of additional lead-lag stages were illustrated by
example. The need to insure adequate margins for low
frequency torsional oscillations that might interact with the
PSS was also mentioned as impacts the tuning process.
The tuning concepts and performance criteria developed
in this chapter, including the relationship of performance to
phase compensation characteristics, provides the basis for
2.5
field tuning procedures. The references [44], [45], [46],
[47], [48], [49], [50] and [51] are to be recommended for
2 1
2 study and review. Further background and practical
application information is in Sections 4, 5, and 6 of this
tutorial which are replete with practical experience.
Frequency (Hz)

1.5
2 10 6 5 4 3 2 1

3 20
4 30
5 40 1

6 50
6
5
4
6 5 3
4 2 1
3 0.5
2
1
1 2 3 4
5 1
654
3 26
123456 12
3
4
56
54
63
2
1
4
5
3
6
2
5
4
3
6 23456 0
5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5
Sigma (1/Seconds)

Fig. 3.15. Plot of Root Locus from 4 Machine System

IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The objective of applying power system stabilizers is to
extend stability limits on power transfer by enhancing
damping of system oscillations via generator excitation
control. Lightly damped oscillations can limit power
transfer under weak system conditions, associated with
either remote generation transmitting power over long
distances or relatively weak inter-ties connecting large

- 34 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
CHAPTER 4
INTEGRAL OF ACCELERATING
POWER TYPE STABILIZERS
Roger Brub and Les Hajagos
I. INTRODUCTION
Despite their relative simplicity, power system stabilizers
may be one of the most misunderstood and misused pieces
of generator control equipment. The ability to control
synchronous machine angular stability through the
excitation system was identified with the advent of high-
speed exciters and continuously acting voltage regulators.
By the mid-1960s several authors had reported successful
experience with the addition of supplementary feedback to
enhance damping of rotor oscillations [52].
The function of a PSS is to add damping to the units
characteristic electromechanical oscillations. This is
achieved by modulating the generator excitation so as to
develop components of electrical torque in phase with rotor
speed deviations. The PSS thus contributes to the
enhancement of small-signal stability of power systems.
Many excellent references are available with guidance on
the selection of PSS settings once the required speed signal
is provided as an input to the PSS [30], [31], [32], [33],
[50], [53].
Early PSS installations were based on a variety of
methods to derive an input signal that was proportional to
the small speed deviations characteristic of
electromechanical oscillations [52], [54], [55]. After years
of experimentation the first practical integral-of-
accelerating-power based PSS units were placed in service
[56], [57], [58]. This design provided numerous advantages
over earlier speed-based units and forms the basis for the
PSS implementation that is used in most units installed in
North America. This design is now a requirement in many
Reliability Regions within North America and has been
modelled in the IEEE standards as the PSS2A and PSS2B
structures [36]. For simplicity, the term PSS2A stabilizer
will be used to refer to the integral-of-accelerating power
based design in general throughout this paper.
This paper briefly describes some of the earlier
structures in order to explain the advantages of the
accelerating-power design. This design is then described
along with a detailed review of the role of the "ramp-
tracking mechanical filter and the basis for the present
structure that is in wide use by many manufacturers.
II. OVERVIEW OF PSS STRUCTURES
Shaft speed, electrical power and terminal frequency are
among the commonly used input signals to the PSS.
Alternative forms of PSS have been developed using these
signals. This section describes the practical considerations
that have influenced the development of each type of PSS
as well as its advantages and limitations.
- 35 -
A. Speed-Based (Dw) Stabilizer
Stabilizers employing a direct measurement of shaft
speed have been used successfully on hydraulic units since
the mid-1960s. Reference [52] describes the techniques
developed to derive a stabilizing signal from measurement
of shaft speed of a hydraulic unit.
In early designs on vertical units, the stabilizers input
signal was obtained using a transducer consisting of a
toothed-wheel and magnetic speed probe supplying a
frequency-to-voltage converter. Among the important
considerations in the design of equipment for the
measurement of speed deviation is the minimization of
noise caused by shaft run-out (lateral movement) and other
causes [52], [54]. Conventional filters could not remove
such low-frequency noise without affecting the
electromechanical components that were being measured.
Run-out compensation must be inherent to the method of
measuring the speed signal. In some early applications,
this was achieved by summing the outputs from several
pick-ups around the shaft, a technique that was expensive
and lacking in long-term reliability.
The original application of speed-based stabilizers to
horizontal shaft units (e.g. multi-stage 1800 RPM and
3600 RPM turbo-generators) required a careful
consideration of the impact on torsional oscillations. The
stabilizer, while damping the rotor oscillations, could
reduce the damping of the lower-frequency torsional modes
if adequate filtering measures were not taken. In addition
to careful pickup placement at a location along the shaft
where low-frequency shaft torsionals were at a minimum,
electronic filters were also required in the early
applications [55].
While stabilizers based on direct measurement of shaft
speed have been used on many thermal units, this type of
stabilizer has several limitations. The primary
disadvantage is the need to use a torsional filter. In
attenuating the torsional components of the stabilizing
signal, the filter also introduces a phase lag at lower
frequencies. This has a destabilizing effect on the "exciter
mode," thus imposing a maximum limit on the allowable
stabilizer gain [30]. In many cases, this is too restrictive
and limits the overall effectiveness of the stabilizer in
damping system oscillations. In addition, the stabilizer has
to be custom-designed for each type of generating unit
depending on its torsional characteristics. The integral-of-
accelerating power-based stabilizer, referred to as the
Delta-P-Omega (P) stabilizer throughout this section,
was developed to overcome these limitations.
B. Frequency-Based (f) Stabilizer
Historically terminal frequency was used as the input
signal for PSS applications at many locations in North
America. Normally, the terminal frequency signal was
used directly. In some cases, terminal voltage and current
inputs were combined to generate a signal that
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

approximates the machines rotor speed, often referred to where

as "compensated frequency.
One of the advantages of the frequency signal is that it is
more sensitive to modes of oscillation between large areas
than to modes involving only individual units, including
those between units within a power plant. Thus it seems
possible to obtain greater damping contributions to these
"interarea modes of oscillation than would be obtainable
with the speed input signal [31], [32], [33].
Frequency signals measured at the terminals of thermal
units contain torsional components. Hence, it is necessary
to filter torsional modes when used with steam turbine
units. In this respect frequency-based stabilizers have the
same limitations as the speed-based units. Phase shifts in
the ac voltage, resulting from changes in power system
configuration, produce large frequency transients that are
then transferred to the generators field voltage and output
quantities. In addition, the frequency signal often contains
power system noise caused by large industrial loads such as
arc furnaces [59].
C. Power-Based (P) Stabilizer
Due to the simplicity of measuring electrical power and
its relationship to shaft speed, it was considered to be a
natural candidate as an input signal to early stabilizers.
The equation of motion for the rotor can be written as
follows:
H = inertia constant
Pm = change in mechanical power input
Pe = change in electric power output
= speed deviation
If mechanical power variations are ignored, this equation
implies that a signal proportional to shaft acceleration (i.e.
one that leads speed changes by 90) is available from a
scaled measurement of electrical power. This principle
was used as the basis for may early stabilizer designs. In
combination with both high-pass and low-pass filtering, the
stabilizing signal derived in this manner could provide pure
damping torque at exactly one electromechanical
frequency.
This design suffers from two major disadvantages. First,
it cannot be set to provide a pure damping contribution at
more than one frequency and therefore for units affected by
both local and inter-area modes a compromise is required.
The second limitation is that an un-wanted stabilizer output
is produced whenever mechanical power changes occur.
This severely limits the gain and output limits that can be
used with these units. Even modest loading and unloading
rates produce large terminal voltage and reactive power
variations unless stabilizer gain is severely limited.
Many power-based stabilizers are still in operation
although they are rapidly being replaced by units based on
the integral-of-accelerating power design.

1 D. Integral-of-Accelerating Power (P) Stabilizer

= ( Pm Pe ) (4.1) The limitations inherent in the other stabilizer designs
t 2H
led to the development of stabilizers that measure the
accelerating power of the generator [56], [57], [36].

Ramp-Tracking Stabilizer Gain & Phase Lead Limits

High-Pass Filters Filter
Vstmax
C D E G H
s Tw1 s Tw2 1 + (1+s T8)
N
+ 1 + s T1 1 + s T3
I
Speed Ks1
M

Output
M

1 + s Tw1 1 + s Tw2 1 + s T6 M 1 + s T2 1 + s T4
A +
(1+s T9)
-

Vstmin

Ks3

High-Pass Filters

s Tw3 s Tw4 Ks2

Power 1 + s Tw4
1 + s Tw3 1 + s T7
F
B
Figure 4.1 Accelerating Power PSS Model (PSS2A)

- 36 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
The earliest systems combined an electrical power
measurement with a derived mechanical power
measurement to produce the required quantity. On
hydroelectric units this involved processing a gate position
measurement through a simulator that represented turbine
and water column dynamics [54]. For thermal units a
complex system that measured the contribution of the
various turbine sections was necessary [58].
Due to the complexity of the design, and the need for
customization at each location, a new method of indirectly
deriving the accelerating power was developed. The
operation of this design of stabilizer is described in
references [56], [57]. The IEEE standard PSS2A model
used to represent this design is shown as Fig. 4.1 [36].
The principle of this stabilizer is illustrated by re-writing
equation (4.1) in terms of the integral of power.
1 from reliability problems due to failures of components
= ( Pm Pe ) t (4.2)
2H
The integral of mechanical power is related to shaft
speed and electrical power as follows:
Pmt = 2H + Pet (4.3)
The P stabilizer makes use of the above relationship
to simulate a signal proportional to the integral of
mechanical power change by adding signals proportional to
shaft-speed change and integral of electrical power change.
On horizontal-shaft units, this signal will contain torsional
oscillations unless a filter is used. Because mechanical
power changes are relatively slow, the derived integral of
mechanical power signal can be conditioned with a low-
pass filter to attenuate torsional frequencies.
The overall transfer function for deriving the integral-of-
accelerating power signal from shaft speed and electrical
power measurements is given by:
P Pe (s) Pe (s)
a t + G(s) + (s) (4.4)
2H 2Hs
2Hs
where G(s) is the transfer function of the low-pass filter.
The major advantage of a P stabilizer is that there is a
greatly reduced requirement for a torsional filters with this
design. This alleviates the exciter mode stability problem,
thereby permitting a higher stabilizer gain that results in
better damping of system oscillations. A conventional end-
of-shaft speed measurement or compensated frequency
signal can be used with this design.
III. PRACTICAL APPLICATION ISSUES
Many excellent papers have been written dealing with
the tuning of PSS [31], [32], [33], [50]. These authors dealt
- 37 -
with the selection of phase compensation, gain and output
limit settings and their effect on the overall performance of
the PSS. This will not be repeated here. Instead, this
section will focus on the derivation of the accelerating-
power signal and its use in deriving an equivalent speed
signal. Specifically, this section will describe the impact of
speed measurement issues and mechanical power variations
on the operation of units equipped with this style of PSS
and how this has influenced the design of PSS2A
stabilizers.
With a large base of installed units, and long history of
usage, experience has been acquired with many different
vintages of hardware. Early designs suffered from failures
due to mechanical components such as speed pickups.
Replacement of the measured speed signal with a derived
frequency signal has greatly improved reliability at many
facilities. The early analog-electronic designs also suffered
used to implement the adjustable settings (e.g. switches,
potentiometers). Digital designs have eliminated these
components and improved reliability and ease of use.
Further gains in reliability are achieved when the PSS is
implemented as additional software code in a complete
digital excitation system, since this eliminates any
additional hardware.
A. Signal Mixing
Referring to the block diagram of Fig.4.1, the two input
signals to the P stabilizer are speed (A) and active
power (B). Although the P design has many advantages
over stabilizers that employ only one of these inputs it is
sensitive to the relationship between these two inputs. For
optimum performance it is critical that the two signal paths
(A-C and B-F) are matched in terms of gain and filter time
constants.
The power path employs two high-pass filter stages and
an integration to derive the integral-of-electrical power
change signal, Pe:
2
P sT 1
2He 1 + sTW W s2H Pe
(4.5)
sTW3 K S2
Pe
1 + sTW3 1 + sT7
The second part of Equation 5 is based on the notation of
Fig.4.1 and the following settings:
TW3 = T7 = TW
TW4 = 0 (i.e. this block is bypassed)
KS2 = TW / (2H)
KS3 = 1
In order for the speed signal path to match the power
path it must employ two stages of high-pass filtering as
well, and its equivalent filter time constant must be kept as
small as possible:
TW1 = TW2 = TW
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

T6 0 not the case and a large error signal can propagate to the
PSS output, thereby changing terminal voltage and reactive
With these settings the signal appearing at point D is power on the unit. This problem forced the selection of
proportional to changes in the integral-of-mechanical low PSS gains or output limits, severely limiting the
power, Pm. When re-combined with the Pe signal at effectiveness of the PSS.
point G, the integral-of-accelerating power, Pa, is formed. The transfer function between the power input, PE, and
This signal is then treated as equivalent speed and the the integral-of-accelerating power signal, PA, (points B and
phase lead blocks that follow are set to compensate in order G in Fig.4.1) may be written as follows:
to maximize the contribution of the stabilizer to damping
torque. PA (s) sTW3 K S2
= ( G(s) 1) (4.6)
B. Mechanical Power Variations PE (s) 1 + sTW3 1 + sT7
Although the original requirement for the PSS units was
based on a need to provide damping for the local plant The original design of mechanical power low-pass filter
modes of oscillation, many new installations and retrofits consisted of a simple multi-pole filter of the form:
have been applied to improve damping of inter-area modes
of oscillation [50] as is common in western U.S. utilities. 1
In order to be effective at damping these modes of G(s) = (4.7)
oscillation, the high-pass filters, parameters Tw1 to Tw4 in
(1 + sT9 ) M
Fig.4.1, must be set to admit frequencies as low as 0.1 Hz
without significant attenuation or the addition of excessive which is achieved in the model by setting the following
phase lead. values:
Early attempts at re-tuning PSS for these frequencies
identified some side effects related to mechanical power T8 = 0
variations on the units. Tests on the original P design N=1
on thermal units included fast intercept valve closures that
produced a step change in power of approximately 5%, The filter order, M, and time constant, T9, can be
followed by a ramp of 0.55%/s [55]. The maximum selected to provide adequate attenuation of the lowest
generator terminal voltage change produced by a PSS torsional frequency for horizontal-shaft applications.
configured with short washout time constants was below Researchers [60] discovered that they could reduce the
2%, for the normal in-service gain. On the first tests of this sensitivity to mechanical power variations by re-designing
design on hydraulic units, mechanical power ramp-rates in the mechanical power low-pass filter to utilize a transfer
excess of 10%/s were achieved under gate limit control. function of the form:
The introduction of long high-pass filter time constants
M
produced excessive terminal voltage and reactive power 2
deviations. In response to this problem, researchers 1+ s
o
identified the root cause of the variations and modified the G(s) = 2 (4.8)
designs accordingly. s 2
When mechanical power is changed rapidly, electrical 2 + s+1
o o
power follows quickly but there is a limited change in the
rotor speed. Although this depends on the strength of the Further analysis and tests on actual hardware
system interconnection, the speed changes will always be implementations confirmed that the complex-pole
relatively small and are considered to be negligible in the implementation was not optimal and that the following
following analysis. transfer function could be used to reduce mechanical power
Referring to Fig.4.1, when electrical power (B) is effects on the PSS output.
ramped, the integral-of-electrical power signal (F) will
change with a rate and magnitude determined by the N
selected washout time constants and unit inertia. From this (1 + sT8 )
point forward, the signal follows two paths to the output.
G(s) = M
(4.9)
The lower path is a direct connection to the derivation of
(1 + sT9 )
the equivalent speed signal at point G. The signal
produced at point F also travels through the mechanical The filter of equation (4.9) is frequently identified as a
power low-pass filter (E) before appearing at the output. "ramp-tracking filter based on its properties when the
Ideally these signals would exactly cancel each other, since coefficients, T8, T9, M and N are selected correctly.
the PSS was not intended to produce an output for this The criteria used to analyze the merits of different
condition. With long washouts and high ramp rates, this is mechanical power filter designs are the following:
Attenuate high-frequency components in the input

- 38 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

signal. denominator terms. To obtain 40 dB of attenuation at 7

Allow low-frequency mechanical power changes to
pass through with negligible attenuation.
Minimize the PSS output deviation that occurs when
the mechanical power is changing rapidly.
Based on torsional frequencies as low as 7 Hz, the first
two criteria dictated the selection of filters with four poles
(M=4) and time constants (T9) of 0.08 seconds. These
filters were used on numerous large horizontal units but did
not meet the third criteria, especially when applied to
hydroelectric units with their rapid ramp rates.
To understand the advantages of the "ramp-tracking
filter and the required selection of coefficients it is
instructive to compute the accelerating power signal that is
generated when mechanical power changes rapidly. For
Hz, the denominator time constants are set to 0.1 s,
resulting a numerator time constant of 0.5 s.
With this design, the filtered integral-of-mechanical
power signal can track rapid rates-of-change in the
measured electrical power signal, greatly reducing the
terminal voltage modulation produced by the PSS. Fig.4.2
displays the simulated output of stabilizers equipped with a
conventional and ramp-tracking low-pass filter to a power
ramp on a hydraulic turbine. Clearly the ramp-tracking
filter greatly reduces the PSS output deviation for this
condition.
1.2
1.0

Active Power
this purpose, the integral-of mechanical power changes are 0.8

(pu)
characterized as combinations of the following time- 0.6
domain inputs: 0.4
step, A*u(t) 0.2
ramp, B*t
0
parabola, C*t2 0 5 10 15 20
ramp-tracking
where t is time in units of seconds and A, B and C are 0.20 low-pass
the magnitudes of the associated components in per unit. PSS Output 0.15
The steady-state PA signal for each of these inputs can be
calculated using the final value theorem by evaluating the 0.10
(pu)

following: 0.05
0
lim t p A (t) = lims0 (s * Input *(G(s) 1)) (4.10)
-0.05
0 5 10 15 20
Appendix A provides details of the evaluation of
Time (seconds
equation (4.10) for a conventional low-pass filter (equation
Figure 4.2 Simulated Ramp Response
4.7) and the ramp-tracking filter (equation 4.9). The result
for each type of input is summarized in Table 4.1.
Different coefficients and time constants can be used to
TABLE 4.1: improve the tracking of power ramps or to provide greater
STEADY STATE RESPONSE TO POWER VARIATIONS attenuation of low-frequency torsional components.
Input Steady-State Output Increasing the denominator order or the denominator time
Low-Pass Ramp-Tracking constant is a viable alternative to introducing notch filters
step input 0 0 at torsional frequencies since it does not interfere with the
ramp input -B*M*T9 0 selected phase compensation of the resulting accelerating
parabolic input infinite -C*F(M,T9) power signal. This will increase the sensitivity of the
stabilizer to power changes however this is normally
The key result in this table is that the ramp-tracking filter acceptable on large horizontal shaft units with their slow
produces a zero steady-state output for a ramp input and a loading rates.
bounded output for a parabolic input. This is only true if The performance of this filter may also be critical to the
the coefficients are selected to satisfy behaviour of the unit, in the event of inadvertent islanded
operation resulting in large frequency and mechanical
T8 = M *T9 (4.11) power variations.
C. Input Signals
The derivation of the results provided in Table 1, Electrical power is readily available as an input. In
including the relationship of equation (4.11) is included as analog implementations it can be measured using a three-
Appendix A. phase Hall-effect watt transducer or equivalent device that
The most commonly used ramp-tracking filter produces an instantaneous output proportional to the
coefficients are N=1 and M=5 since this provides four net generator active power. Selective filtering is required to
poles with the minimum number of numerator and remove the characteristic harmonics present in the output

- 39 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
measurement. In digital implementations a variety of
techniques are available to calculate power from the
sampled ac voltage and current measurements. In either
case the key is to not add unnecessary filtering and phase
lag that will affect the phase compensation in this signal
path. This has been achieved with good success in various
manufacturers implementations for many years.
The original P stabilizers employed a physical
measurement of shaft speed using magnetic speed pickups
as the source. A frequency-to-voltage converter was then
used to generate the required direct measurement of speed.
This necessitated the use of filtering and as a result, the
input speed probe signals had to be relatively high
frequency, necessitating multiple probes and toothed wheel
or milled slot. Once again careful selection of the filtering
was necessary to avoid the introduction of phase lag in this
path. In applications where excessive filtering is used, the
time constant, T6, can be used in the model of Fig.4.1 to
simulate the effect on overall stabilizer performance.
Although there is a long history of speed measurement in
excitation control, it introduces several complications to the
application of the stabilizer. Since it requires the only
moving parts in the entire device, it is the least reliable
element of the design. Numerous stabilizers have been
temporarily disabled or have failed during operation due to
improper gapping of speed measurement probes or failure
of physical or electrical connections. On vertical shaft
hydraulic units, there was the significant additional
complication of dealing with shaft runout. On these units
there can be a significant lateral movement of the shaft that
varies with load level. Regardless of the location of the
pickups, once-per-revolution noise appears at some level.
On units with speed in the range of 100 rpm this is very
significant since the noise component may coincide with
the local mode electromechanical frequency of the unit.
Early speed based stabilizers coped with this problem
through an ingenious mechanical arrangement that made
use of up to 5 speed probes mounted equidistant around the
circumference of the shaft to eliminate the runout
component [50]. Although this worked and formed the
basis for many successful stabilizer installations it was
costly due to the need for customization at each location. It
was also relatively unreliable due to the requirement to
have all probes in operation for the cancellation effect to
function properly.
For these reasons, direct speed measurement was
gradually phased out in favour of compensated frequency,
which can be measured using the same PT and CT inputs
that are already available for measurement of electrical
power.
D. Compensated Frequency
Direct terminal frequency, measured from the generator
PTs, has been used as an input signal in many stabilizers in
the past. Its advantages and disadvantages were discussed
earlier. It cannot be used directly in a P stabilizer
- 40 -
configuration. Referring to the signal nomenclature of
Fig.4. 1, it is a requirement that the "speed signal at point
A match the power signal at point B so that the derived
integral-of-mechanical power signal at point D represents
equation 3 accurately. Any error in the derivation of the
signal at point D due to signal mismatch will pass through
the filter to point E and will result in an error in the
stabilizer output.
The extent to which the electromechanical components
appear in terminal frequency is dependent on the
component and the system strength. For example inter-
machine modes between two units connected together at
their low-voltage bus will be completely absent in a
frequency signal measured from the generator PTs. Inter-
area modes involving large groups of units will be visible
in the terminal frequency but local machine modes will be
greatly attenuated in for strong system connections.
Based on the above, frequency measurement can only be
used if the ac source can simulate a voltage that is coupled
directly to shaft position changes. Both the generator
terminal voltage and a voltage proportional to the
generator's terminal current are used in deriving the
"internal voltage. A voltage behind quadrature axis
reactance is used for this purpose:
E i = E t + jX q I t (4.12)
where Xq has been used to denote an impedance
proportional to the generators quadrature axis impedance.
For steady-state conditions the phasor derived from the
synchronous q-axis reactance will be aligned with the
quadrature axis is depicted in Fig.4.3.
Ei Q-AXIS
It jXqIt
Et
D-AXIS
Fig. 4.3 Compensated Phasor
As the rotor moves, the phasor derived in this manner
will maintain its position where the frequency derived from
the compensated phasor will contain the desired
electromechanical components. Since the rotor is in
motion, the compensating reactance should represent the
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

quadrature reactance that applies to the frequency range of operating conditions (Fig 4.6)
interest. For round-rotor machines this normally requires
an impedance value close to the transient quadrature 120
reactance. stabilizer phase compensation
Each generator will be somewhat different, and the closed-loop exciter phase lag
100
compensating reactance should be selected based on

Phase (degrees)
knowledge of the machine reactances and time constants.
80
IV. HARDWARE CONSIDERATIONS washout&
lag-lead selection
The hardware should be designed so as to allow setting 60
of the PSS parameters over a sufficiently wide range. The
design should also ensure a high degree of functional 40
reliability and allow sufficient flexibility for maintenance. lead-lag
selection
These requirements are often overlooked, resulting in 20
unreliable and unsatisfactory performance of the PSS,
much to the frustration of operators. There have been
many instances of operators turning off the PSS because of 0
0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5
poor performance resulting from inadequate hardware
design and improper selection of control parameters. Frequency (Hz)
The requirement for high reliability and maintainability
Figure 4.4 Closed-Loop Exciter Phase Compensation
of PSS and other elements of the excitation system may be
in part satisfied by component redundancy. Duplicate
voltage regulators and PSS [30], [57] have been used on
Active Power
1.00
critical generating units. One voltage regulator with its
(pu)
0.95
PSS would be in service at any one time with the other
tracking it. In the event of a PSS malfunction, various 0.90
protective features would initiate transfer to the alternate 1.04
regulator and PSS. In addition to improving the detection
Terminal V

of PSS failures, this feature limits the adverse

(pu)

1.03
PSS ON
consequences of such failures. The improved reliability PSS OFF
and reduced parts count of newer digital exciters, with 1.02
built-in PSS, have mitigated the need for such complex 0.0010
delta speed

systems. 0.0005
(pu)

Another feature worth incorporating in a PSS is built-in 0

-0.0005
facility for dynamic tests. This allows routine testing of
-0.0010
PSS periodically by station personnel in order to detect
0.005
latent failures [57]. A convenient way to test the
PSS Output

performance of a PSS is to inject a small (1 to 2%) change 0

(pu)

in the PSS output (AVR terminal voltage reference) signal -0.005

and monitor the responses of key variables such as -0.010
generator terminal voltage, field voltage, power output, 0 1 2 3 4 5
frequency, and PSS output. Such a test facility is also very Time (seconds)
useful during PSS commissioning.
Figure 4.5 Stabilizer On-Line Step Response

V. PSS COMMISSIONING & FIELD VERIFICATION
During field commissioning, the actual response of the
generating unit with the PSS is measured and used to verify
some of the analytical results. Typical tests performed
during commissioning include:
measurement of the on-line closed-loop excitation
system phase compensation requirements (Fig. 4.4)
step response tests to measure damping
improvement at local mode frequencies (Fig. 4.5)
load-ramping tests to ensure that the PSS does not
produce undesirable modulation of the units
terminal voltage under normal or emergency
As noted in the previous section, the tests usually consist
of injecting small step changes to the voltage regulator
terminal voltage reference and monitoring a number of
generator variables. If there are discrepancies between
computed and measured responses, the models are
appropriately modified; if necessary, revised PSS settings
are determined and implemented. This "closed loop" design
and commissioning process is very effective [61].
Initially, the PSS gain should be increased slowly, with
transient testing at each setting. To insure sufficient
stability margin, a good practice is to check the
performance of the PSS with the gain increased up to twice

- 41 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

the normal in-service setting. The objective is to ensure that

the PSS gain is set at a value well below the limit at which M

either the exciter mode is unstable or there is excessive (1 + sT9 ) = a i (sT9 )i

M
(A4.3)
amplification of input signal noise. i=0

Tests and simulations performed on all types of utility-

scale generators, including large and small hydro, large Some of the coefficients may be written by inspection as
fossil-fired and nuclear units and combustion turbines, follows:
have consistently demonstrated that a conventional PSS a0 = aM = 1
tuned and tested in this manner, will improve stability for a1 = aM-1 = M
any reasonable operating scenario. The other coefficients are not critical to the analysis of
0.20 the steady-state response. Substituting A.3 into A.1 yields:
Reactive Power

0.15
0.10
(pu)

0.05
1
0
-0.05
G(s) 1 = M
1
0.03
a (sT )i 9
i
PSS Output

0.02
i=0
(pu)

0.01
M (A5.4)
sT9 a i (sT9 )i 1
0
-0.01

1.0 = i =1
Active Power

M
1 + a i (sT9 )i
0.8
(pu)

0.6
0.4 i =1
0.2
where the fact that a0=1 has been used to reduce the
0.0006
numerator and expand the denominator.
delta speed

0.0002
(pu)

-0.0002
-0.0006 Step input: U(s) = A/s
-0.0010

450
M
i 1
A 9 a i (sT9 )
300
150 sT
(Vdc)
Field

0
-150
lim y(t) = lim s i =1
M

s 1 + a (sT )i (A4.5)
-300
t s0

filter mech power

0.15 i 9
0
-0.15
i =1
(pu)

-0.30
-0.45 =0
-0.60
0 5 10 15 20
Time (seconds) Ramp input: U(s)=B/s2
Figure 4.6 Fast Load Ramp
M
i 1
VI. APPENDIX - DERIVATION OF FILTER RESPONSES B 9 a i (sT9 )
sT
lim y(t) = lim s 2 i =1
M

A. Background t s 0
s 1 + a (sT )i
The conventional low-pass filter and ramp-tracking filter

i =1
i 9

are both based on the general form of a filter:
M
i 1
(1 + sT8 ) BT9 a1 + a i (sT9 )
G(s) = (A4.1) = lim i=2 (A4.6)
(1 + sT9 ) M s 0 M

1 + a i (sT9 )i
i =1
The steady-state response of the output, y, to various
inputs, u, is calculated from the final value theorem. = B*T9 * M

lim y(t) = lim(s * U(s) *(G(s) 1)) (A4.2) Parabolic input: C/s3
t s 0
lim y(t) =
t
B. Conventional Low Pass Filter
The conventional low-pass filter is obtained from A.1 by
setting T8 = 0. The denominator of A.1 can be expanded as C. Ramp-Tracking Filter
follows:

- 42 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

1 + sT8
G(s) 1 = M
1
a (sT )
i=0
i 9
i

M (A4.7)
s(T8 MT9 ) a i (sT9 )i
= M
i=2

a (sT )
i =0
i 9
i

Step input: U(s) = A/s (A4.8)

M

A s(T8 MT 9 ) a i (sT9 )i
lim y(t) = lim s M
i=2

t s0
s



i=0
a i (sT9 ) i


=0

Ramp input: U(s) = B/s2 (A4.9)

M

B s(T8 MT 9 ) a i (sT9 )i
lim y(t) = lim s 2 M
i=2

t s0
s



i =0
a i (sT9 )i

= T8 MT9

A4.9 equates to zero as long as T8=M*T9

Ramp input: U(s) = C/s3 (A4.10)

M
i
C a i (sT9 )
lim y(t) = lim s 3 iM= 2
t s0
s i



i =0
a i (sT9 )

M
i
a 2 T 9 + a isi 2 T9
= lim C M
i =3
(A4.11)
s0
1 + a i (sT9 ) i

i =1
M 1
= CT9 i
i =0

The reduction is based on the assumption that the

coefficient relationship, T8=M*T9, has been used. In this
case the response to a parabolic input will be bounded and
will increase with the number of poles and time constant as
expected.

- 43 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
CHAPTER 5
FIELD TESTING TECHNIQUES
J. C. Agee and Shawn Patterson
I. INTRODUCTION
In this chapter the implementation of techniques for the
adjustment of power system stabilizers at generating
stations will be considered. The presentation begins with a
review of measurement techniques and instrumentation,
continues with a discussion of field testing techniques with
examples, and concludes with a brief look at the
phenomenon of shaft torsional oscillation.
II. MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES AND INSTRUMENTATION
To assess the performance of the excitation control
system and PSS (power system stabilizer), it is necessary to
be able to observe or record several system quantities.
These include: terminal voltage deviation, electrical power
output deviation, generator field voltage, shaft speed
deviation or frequency deviation, and PSS output. While
the measurements of generator field voltage and electrical
power are not essential for stabilizer setup, they do add
insight into the performance of this control system. In
addition, the static measurement of torque angle at various
loads may be necessary to properly tune certain types of
PSS.
There are three types of testing commonly used for
dynamic stability assessment: step or impulse response
tests, frequency response tests, and system line or load
switching tests. For the first two of these, the test or
disturbance signal is normally added to the terminal voltage
reference. Step or impulse response testing is easy to
perform and suitable for model checking, stabilizer
commissioning, and routine maintenance performance
evaluation.
Frequency response testing provides a much deeper
insight into the control system than step response testing
and is the best tool for stabilizer tuning. It is, however,
more difficult to perform than step response testing,
requiring experienced personnel and more expensive test
equipment. Switching tests are sometimes used as a final
stabilizer check, particularly where inter-area modes of
stability are of concern. They are much more difficult to
co-ordinate, but allow an excellent final check on the
dynamic stability of an area.
A. Signal Transducers and Conditioning
Many digital excitation systems have built-in transducers
and data acquisition features that can be used for PSS
tuning, but in general, the parameters to be monitored
during field testing are not available in a form suitable for
direct recording or input to control instrumentation.
Frequently the quantities must be transduced, filtered and
amplified to obtain a useable signal level proportional to
the primary quantity with the appropriate bandwidth and
- 44 -
amplification. Generally, for PSS tuning, all transducers
must have at least a 10 Hz bandwidth, be low noise (noise
should be less than 5% of the deviations to be recorded),
and must faithfully represent small deviations about the
steady-state point; however, they do not need to have
absolute accuracy over the full range of each quantity.
The required degree of transducer signal to noise
depends upon the signal to noise ratio and the sensitivity
with which the signal must be observed (i.e. signal
deviation to noise). The power station electrical noise
environment is a relatively harsh one and hence special
care in the shielding and grounding of signal leads is
especially important. Depending upon the type, the
excitation system itself may provide substantial noise to
nearby instrumentation.
B. Terminal Voltage
This is an important quantity for the assessment of
performance of both the excitation control system and the
PSS. Terminal voltage is readily measurable by means of a
simple three phase rectifier bridge transducer. This
transducer is quite linear provided diode voltage drop is
low and the phases are relatively well balanced. For such a
transducer, the main ripple component is at 360 Hz which
can readily be filtered to provide a noise free signal with
the required bandwidth.
The transducer output without filtering would contain
about 6% of 6th harmonic (360 Hz) as well as lower
amplitudes of higher frequency components. Small
amounts of 2nd harmonic may also be present if the phase
voltages are not perfectly balanced. Assume that it is
desired to record terminal voltage variations of about 2% of
rated and follow accurately frequencies up to 10 Hz with
less than 7% amplitude error and 30 phase error at 10 Hz.
Assume also that the recorder will reproduce all signals
provided to its inputs. It can readily be shown that the
desired characteristics can be achieved with a simple
second order filter (with breakpoints at 38 Hz). There are
several refinements in voltage transducers which provide
greater linearity, greater accuracy or reduce filtering
requirements. Such refinements, however, are not
generally required for the measurement of voltage for the
purposes of stabilizer tuning.
C. Electrical Power
Generator electrical power is readily measured with the
aid of Hall Watt Transducers (or the equivalent). Such
devices when obtained without internal signal conditioning,
produce an isolated millivolt output level proportional to
the instantaneous power out of the generator with response
times of less than 1 ms. Watt transducers permanently
installed for metering purposes will normally not fulfill this
requirement. The transducer output, for balanced 3 phase
generator output contains no inherent noise components.
Transducer deficiencies and signal lead pickup can
contribute some noise at 60 Hz and even harmonics which
are readily filtered by techniques similar to those described
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
for terminal voltage transducers. Notch rejection filters or
a double order low pass filter with break points at 60 Hz or
lower will normally be sufficient if good signal shielding
practices are followed.
D. Field Voltage
Field voltage is already a direct quantity although it may
contain noise components (360 Hz and higher) several
times larger than its direct voltage (particularly in thyristor
controlled systems). In addition, it is necessary to provide
a transducer which will isolate the instrumentation from the
high power floating field circuit, while maintaining the
desired 10 Hz or higher signal bandwidth. Transducers
which will provide an output voltage proportional to the
generator field voltage for frequencies up to about 1 kHz
while maintaining the required (2000 V) level of isolation
are commercially available. As field voltage varies widely
with input to the voltage regulator, suppression of the
steady-state value may not be necessary.
For the measurement of excitation response times on
high initial response systems, maximum bandwidth
(minimum filtering) should be used, but for stabilizer
tuning, a reduced bandwidth will suffice. [62] Techniques
similar to those used for terminal voltage will allow the
specification of adequate filtering for stabilizer setup. A
simple second order low pass filter with break points at
about 50 Hz will normally be adequate for the
measurement of field voltage of most excitation systems.
E. Generator Speed
The measurement of shaft speed is extremely useful for
assessing power system damping (although electrical
power can also be used for this purpose). In addition, the
PSS transfer function has historically been defined with
shaft speed as its input. Thus, measurement of shaft speed
has been critical to the development of PSS. However,
implementation of dual-input stabilizers using electrical
power and internal frequency has lessened the
importance of shaft speed measurement.
Shaft speed measurement is still important in turbo-
generators because the PSS, if improperly designed or
adjusted, has the capability of exciting shaft torsional
oscillations through excitation control as discussed in
Section V. Therefore, in these types of machines it is
important to monitor these mechanical modes and ensure
that they are not affected by the stabilizer. The first
torsional mode is the one most likely to be excited through
the stabilizer and is also the one most readily monitored at
the ends of the generator shaft. Typical torsional mode
profiles are shown in Figure 5.7. The extent to which
various torsional modes are observable at any shaft location
can be assessed from such profiles.
Speed is the most difficult signal of those described to
monitor successfully. This is particularly due to the fact
that the speed changes to be observed are of the order of
0.05% of rated and to "see" the torsional components, wide
bandwidth is required, (50 Hz for a 3600 RPM machine).
- 45 -
Speed should be monitored directly from the turbine-
generator shaft. A gear wheel mounted directly on the
turbine-generator shaft with stationary electro-magnetic
pickups (or the equivalent realized through electro-optics)
is normally employed. This produces a signal whose
frequency or pulse repetition rate is proportional to the
speed of the shaft. (Speed transducers driven by couplings
are normally unsatisfactory for observation of the
torsionals as they tend to produce additional modes
representative of the coupling in addition to, or instead of,
those of the shaft system.) The speed measurement
technique is usually based upon a conventional tachometric
circuit, although other methods have also been used
successfully.
In all machines, the generator shaft moves around
somewhat in the bearings. This can lead to "noise"
components at 60 Hz for a 3600 rpm machine and 30 Hz
for an 1800 rpm machine. Such components can be
partially removed by the use of either multiple pickups to
cancel this motion (diametrically opposed speed sensors
have been shown to be quite effective) or sharply tuned
notch filters to attenuate them. Slowly rotating hydro
generators have noise components below 10 Hz (e.g. 3 Hz
for a 180 rpm machine), so this signal is seldom used in
stabilizers for hydro applications.
The first (lowest frequency) torsional mode is lightly
damped and normally subjected to random excitation by
the steam supply system. Hence it can frequently be seen to
come and go in a more or less random fashion in a
sufficiently sensitive recording. The amplitude of such
torsional oscillations under normal operation might
typically be of the order of 0.005% of rated speed when
monitored at the end of the shaft. They might be higher or
much lower depending upon the loading condition and the
nature of the system load.
Normally, the filtering used for speed measurement is
more complex than that used with other quantities, as
dictated by the requirements for high gain, wide bandwidth
and high noise attenuation. Because one is interested only
in very small changes about the steady-state value, the
steady state component can be subtracted, easing the
instrumentation requirements. Such direct signal
suppression must be extremely stable. Alternatively, high
pass filtering can be used in which case the signal is "rolled
off" below some low (e.g. 0.01 Hz) cutoff frequency.
The combination of transducing and filtering should then
allow the desired signal amplification with a minimum of
phase shift and attenuation in a band from about 0.1 Hz or
lower to about 50 Hz. For four-pole steam turbine
generators, the high frequency end of the band can be
further restricted to about 25 Hz as torsional components
are proportionately lower in frequency. This allows the
possibility of filtering of components at 30 Hz.
To monitor this signal adequately, notch rejection filters
at 30 Hz (for 4 pole machines only), 60 Hz and higher
harmonics, combined with low pass filters would normally
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

be required. For example, consider a tachometric circuit
which produces 2000 pulses per second at rated speed.
Assume 100% of 2 kHz ripple and that to observe the
torsionals adequately this must be attenuated to 0.001% of
rated. In other words 2 kHz must be attenuated by a factor
of 100,000 or 100 db. If a 4th order filter is chosen so that
100 db attenuation occurs at 2 kHz, then a 4th order break
point at 110 Hz would be possible. A torsional component
at 40 Hz would then experience an attenuation of only 28%
or 2.2 db, but would be phase shifted by 80 in the filter.
The effects of any notch filters used would have to be
added to this.
F. Terminal or Internal Frequency
In lieu of shaft speed, terminal or internal frequency is
often used. Internal frequency is defined as the frequency
of the internal voltage phasor obtained by adding the
voltage drop across the quadrature axis impedance to the
generator terminal voltage. The voltage drop across the
quadrature axis impedance is determined by multiplying
the generator terminal current phasor by the quadrature axis
impedance, Xq. This measurement has proven to be easier
to obtain and more accurate for salient pole hydro
generators than for round rotor machines that are subject to
quadrature axis saturation; however, it has been used
successfully with all types of machines.
To transduce frequency from either the terminal voltage
or internal voltage phasor a method much like the one
associated with shaft speed is used. In this case the pulses
are generated by zero crossings or other points on the
waveform. Care must be taken to filter out the effects of
harmonics on the input waveforms. A signal with 10 Hz
bandwidth much like the terminal voltage signal is desired.
G. Power System Stabilizer Output
This quantity is normally available in a form suitable for
direct observation or recording. It may be necessary to
provide appropriate isolation, particularly if the voltage
regulator is not grounded. Instrumentation must present a
high input impedance so that it does not overload the
stabilizer output.
revolution to produce adequate dynamic torque angle
results.
I. Signal Recording
Many varieties of signal conditioning, recording, and
data acquisition equipment are suitable for PSS and
excitation system testing. Basically, a multichannel
recording system with built in signal amplification and a
bandwidth of about 100 Hz is required. Increased
flexibility is provided by a recording system with high
impedance differential inputs, high common mode
capability or isolation, internal signal bias, built in
amplification and signal conditioning and a wide range of
recording speeds. There are a multitude of recorders and
data acquisition systems that will meet these requirements.
Some excitation systems may have built-in data recording
capabilities that can be used for this purpose as well.
III. TESTING TECHNIQUES
Once the desired signals are in a form suitable for
observation or measurement with the desired accuracy,
gain and bandwidth, the following test procedures can be
performed.
A. Step and Impulse Response Testing
While various types of perturbations can be considered
for the time domain evaluation of a system, the ones used
most often in PSS testing are step and impulse disturbances
added to the terminal voltage reference signal. If the
desired worst case power system conditions can be set up,
they permit quick and simple checks on the stability of the
overall system. Without extensive testing or comparative
model test results, they do not allow much insight into the
way parameters should be modified for improved tuning;
however, a series of time domain tests with various PSS
adjustments can be useful in verifying model accuracy.
15.35 655
15.30 650
15.25 645
15.20 640
Terminal Voltage, Vt (kV)

Output Power (MW)

15.15 635
H. Generator Torque Angle 15.10 630

Measurement of generator torque angle may be 15.05 625

necessary to properly tune stabilizers that use internal 15.00 620
frequency as an input. Typically, only steady-state
14.95 615
measurements of angle are required. For these
14.90 610
measurements, an index pulse related to a position on the
generator shaft, such as a key phasor from a vibration 14.85
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
605

monitoring system, can be compared to the 60Hz terminal Time (s)

voltage waveform to determine the change in relative shaft
position as the generator is loaded. This change in position
can then be used to calculate the generator torque angle and
the effective quadrature-axis impedance. Dynamic
measurement of torque angle requires automation of this
process using a phase angle transducer. Generators with
multiple pole pairs may require more than one pulse per
Vt MW
Figure 5.1a Typical system step response with PSS off
Possibly the greatest value of the step or impulse
response is as a simple "finger print" check on the overall
performance of the control system. As such it is useful for
final commissioning and regular maintenance checks. A

- 46 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

typical step response with the stabilizer out of service and PSS(s) frequency response in Figure 5.4.
in service is shown in Figures 5.1a and 5.1b
15.40 640 The combination of characteristics 1 and 3 determine the
15.35 635 ability of the stabilizer to contribute damping at the various
15.30 630
machine-system and inter-area modes. The combination of
15.25 625
characteristics 2 and 3 (the stabilizer open loop response)
Terminal Voltage, Vt (kV)

allows determination of gain and phase margins of the

Output Power (MW)

15.20 620
stabilizer control loop. This technique is shown in [31],
15.15 615
[32], [33].
15.10 610
0
15.05 605
-5
15.00 600

Gain (dB)
-10
14.95 595 -15
-20
14.90 590
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 -25 Without PSS
With PSS
Time (s) -30
0.1 1.0 10
Vt MW Frequency (Hz)
0
Figure 5.1b Typical system step response with PSS on
-50

Phase (deg)
-100
This test is easily performed with the transducers and -150
data acquisition discussed in section II and a simple circuit -200
and switch (or software tools) to generate the input signal. -250

Results of step response tests can be compared with similar -300

0.1 1.0 10
responses from time domain models. This allows Frequency (Hz)

validation of the model and hence increased confidence in Figure 5.2 Frequency Response of Et(s)/Et-Ref(s)

use of the model for machine or system conditions beyond 10

the scope of field testing. When compared with previously

0
-10

obtained responses it allows validation of the condition of

Gain (dB)

-20
-30
the PSS and excitation system. -40
-50
Pe/Vref
B. Frequency Response Testing -60 Freq/Vref
-70
Frequency response characteristics permit much greater 0.1 1.0 10
Frequency (Hz)
insight into the small signal operation and tuning of a 200
control system than time responses. There are three 100

frequency response characteristics that are important for 0

Phase (deg)

-100
the tuning of the PSS: -200
-300

1. The transfer function relating generator terminal -400

-500
voltage variation to a signal at the stabilizer output, Et(s) / 0.1 1.0 10
Frequency (Hz)
PSS(s). This characteristic is useful because Et(s) is in Figure 5.3 Frequency Responses of Pe(s) / Et - Ref(s)
phase with the component of electrical torque produced by
40
exciter action if machine angle were held constant [23].
This transfer function is normally the same as the transfer 20
Gain (dB)

function relating generator terminal voltage variation to 0 Gain Margin

terminal voltage reference changes, Et(s)/Et-Ref(s). An -20

example of this function is shown in Figure 5.2. -40

-60
1.0 10
2. The transfer function ((s)/PSS(s)) describing the Frequency (Hz)

turbine generator shaft speed change resulting from a 180

change in stabilizer output signal, for speed or power based 90

Phase (deg)

0
stabilizers. The transfer function can also be deduced from
-90
the more readily measurable change in electrical power vs. -180 Speed/Vref

stabilizer output as shown in Figure 5.3. -270

PSS
Speed/ Vref + PSS

-360

3. The overall stabilizer frequency response: 1.0

Frequency (Hz)
10

PSS(s)/(s); PSS(s)/Pe(s); PSS(s)/Pacc(s); or Figure 5.4 Overall PSS Frequency Response (Open Loop Responses)
equivalent, as shown superimposed on the Pe(s) /

- 47 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
C. Equipment and Techniques for Frequency Domain
Analysis
While frequency response characteristics could be
measured using a signal generator and recorder,
commercially available signal analyzers greatly facilitate
such measurements, automate the procedure and allow
much higher transfer function resolution with lower levels
of disturbance input. These commercially available
analyzers include both frequency response analyzers that
take sine-wave measurements at discrete frequencies and
analyzers that use random noise techniques.
Sine-wave analyzers allow the measurement of the
magnitude and phase of the ratio of output to input of a
control block at the distinct frequency at which the system
is excited. Because correlation techniques are employed,
accurate measurements can be obtained even when the
measured signal at the test frequency is deeply "buried" in
noise.
To determine the transfer characteristic of an arbitrary
control system block, the instrument actually measures two
characteristics and performs the following calculation:
V 2 ( j ) V 0 ( j ) V 2 ( j )
G ( j ) = = (5.1)
V 0 ( j ) V1 ( j ) V1 ( j )
The instrument generates the sinusoidal signal V0 which
drives the control system, generally through addition to the
terminal voltage reference signal to obtain the system
transfer functions Et(s) / PSS(s) and (s) / PSS(s).
With this instrument, care must be exercised in the
choice of signal frequency and amplitude, particularly near
system resonance. The machine-system resonant local
mode frequency (0.8-2 Hz) should be approached with
caution.
Due to possible excitation of torsional modes, tests
should not be conducted at frequencies higher than 7 Hz on
turbogenerators without special precautions which are
beyond the scope of this work.
With random-noise type analyzers, the distinct frequency
excitation V0(j) is replaced by a random noise input,
generated either by the instrument or by a suitable external
source. The source does not have to be synchronized with
the measurement system. Using the ratio of the cross-power
to auto-power spectra, the system obtains information
about the transfer function over the chosen frequency range
and displays or records the appropriate magnitude and
phase characteristics. Averaging is provided to allow
increased resolution and the use of a coherence function
allows an indication of the quality of the measurement.
As with sine-wave analyzers, useful results can be
obtained even when the response to the test signal is
smaller than the uncorrelated system noise. Random noise
analyzers can obtain the frequency response over the entire
spectrum simultaneously, thereby reducing the testing time.
- 48 -
In addition, because of the random frequency distribution,
there is a lower probability of over exciting sharply tuned
resonances.
Most random-noise analyzers have features that allow
them to be used in a manner similar to sine-wave analyzers
by replacing the random noise input signal with a
sinusoidal input signal.
D. General Comments
It is not always convenient or expedient to perform
frequency response tests over the desired range of possible
machine and system conditions. If the field test results can
be used to confirm computer models, the models can then
be used to investigate the desired range of system
conditions. When the frequency response characteristics
have been measured, the stabilizer phase lead
characteristics can be adjusted as described in other
sections.
After the stabilizer phase compensation has been
suitably adjusted, the stabilizer frequency response can be
checked. The combination of the appropriate
machine/system transfer function and the stabilizer transfer
function provides the open loop characteristic which can be
used for the determination of control loop stability.
IV. ON SITE TUNING AND STABILITY ASSESSMENT
A. The Excitation System
The generator excitation system is normally designed to
meet a host of cost and performance criteria described by
the purchaser. It is then set up to meet specified steady-
state regulation requirements and to respond at the rate and
with a forcing capability specified for the desired transient
stability enhancement through excitation control. The
voltage regulator should be adequately damped on open
circuit. Typical open circuit voltage responses to step
change in voltage reference are shown in Figure 5.5.
1.025
1.020
Terminal Voltage (pu)
1.015
1.010
1.005
1.000
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time (seconds)
Figure 5.5 Off-line voltage step responses
After the excitation system has been properly adjusted,
the power system stabilizer should be able to contribute
sufficient damping to prevent oscillatory instability over
the range of possible system configurations and conditions
envisaged for any machine. In other words, the stabilizer
should have the effect of moving the small-signal stability
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
limit beyond other power system stability limits.
High speed excitation systems, while contributing to
better transient stability and allowing larger operating
angles than slower excitation systems, can unfortunately
produce an additional negative component of damping.
Fortunately, a well-tuned PSS can overcome this negative
damping and provide substantial additional positive
damping for both inter-area and local machine-system
modes. While providing the required damping, action of
the PSS should not detract significantly from the high-
speed excitation system contribution to improvement of
system transient stability.
Slower excitation systems do not contribute as much to
the improvement of transient stability, but at the same time
do not contribute significantly to negative damping of the
local mode. With slow systems it is difficult to add much
damping to the machine-system mode via a power system
stabilizer, but in turn little is required. Depending upon the
system, it still may be possible to provide a significant
contribution to inter-area mode stability.
With modern excitation systems, high steady-state gain
(200) or integral gain (in many digital systems) is
normally employed. Depending upon power system
requirements and design philosophy, transient gain
reduction may also be used. Systems without transient gain
reduction can contribute more to transient stability, but at
the expense of an additional negative contribution to local
mode damping. However, this can be overcome by using
slightly higher stabilizer gains. For this reason, care should
be exercised in the comparison of stabilizer gains for
systems with and without transient gain reduction. A factor
of approximately the value of the transient gain reduction
separates the two types of systems for an equivalent
contribution to system damping (when the stabilizing
signal is injected before the TGR circuit) [30]. Also, gain
for inter-area modes and the machine-system local mode
will be different for these two types of systems. In either
case, it should be possible to tune the stabilizer to entirely
remove the power system oscillatory instability.
B. Tuning Criteria
The most important PSS tuning criterion is that, after
choosing and setting up the excitation system, the power
system stabilizer should move any oscillatory stability
limitations beyond all other power system limitations. This
criterion should hold for all possible machine and system
operating conditions. In some power systems, providing
damping of inter-area modes may be of primary
importance. If so, adequate gain and phase relationships
must be maintained for all known oscillatory modes. Many
times these modes are not visible during field testing, so
computer models and analytical techniques must be used to
verify proper tuning.
The degree of difficulty experienced in providing
damping for all oscillatory modes is dependent on the
performance required from the excitation system. If
- 49 -
excitation system response requirements are low, it will be
relatively easy to provide a satisfactory stabilizer - in fact it
may not be necessary to add damping at all for the local
machine/system mode of oscillation. For inter-area mode
stability, the unit must provide an appropriate damping
contribution relative to its share of generation in the area.
C. PSS Testing
The first critical step in PSS testing is measuring the
transfer function from the PSS output to terminal voltage as
shown in Figure 5.2. This is normally performed with the
unit on-line at light load, so the effect of rotor swings on
the response is minimal. Then, the PSS compensation
transfer function is selected and documented as in Figure
5.4. [30] Finally, PSS gain is chosen and a benchmark step
response is obtained as in Figure 5.1.
V. SHAFT TORSIONAL OSCILLATION
Consider first a simple model of a spring and mass in
torsion as shown in Figure 5.6. The equation for rotational
motion of the mass can be written as:
d 2
J + K + T = 0 (5.2)
dt 2
where J is the inertia
K is the spring constant of the shaft
T is an external torque input.
If the external torque is a constant or zero (T=0), the
equation is one of an undamped system which would
oscillate continuously if set in motion. Assume now that
the external torque input T can be manipulated, say as a
function of the speed of the mass as shown in Fig 5.6.
T
G
Figure 5.6 - Simplified torsional oscillation model
In a turbine-generator, torque changes could be produced
in this manner through the field of the generator, if shaft
speed were used as an input to the excitation control.
If this feedback path constitutes a straight gain G,
equation 5.2 becomes:
d 2 d
J 2 +G + K = 0 (5.3)
dt dt
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

in which case damping of the torsional oscillation is it would be necessary to ensure that these torsional modes
produced as a function of the amplitude of G. If, however, could not be excited.
the transducer produces not just gain but phase lag of In practice, a combination of selective speed location
greater than 90 at the oscillating frequency, a negative and/or sharply tuned rejection filters at the torsional
damping component of torque is produced and oscillation frequencies is employed to preclude torsional excitation.
will build spontaneously. Because the lowest torsional frequency is only about a
In the frequency domain a transfer function of the form decade away from frequencies at which stabilization is
required, the torsional filter does add some small
T ( s ) G undesirable phase lag to the stabilizing loop, and has the
G( s) = = (5.4) effect of limiting the maximum usable stabilizer gain.
( s ) (1 + As )(1 + Bs )
In a stabilizing system which uses terminal frequency as
an input, torsional frequencies are attenuated somewhat
could produce the necessary phase lag to provide a
compared to a stabilizer which uses an end of shaft speed
negative component to undamp this mode.
signal [31], [32], [33]. In stabilizers using electrical or
The rotating components of a large steam turbine form a
accelerating power as input, the torsionals are inherently
more complex torsional system with many shaft sections.
highly attenuated [31], [32], [33], [58].
The torsional components are all very lightly damped with
decay time constants measured in seconds. The frequencies
of the torsionals are functions of turbine generator
configuration and design. Some large units may have first
torsional modes as low as 7 Hz, while other units may have
a highest torsional mode near 55 Hz.
The rotating system is connected to the outside world
through the rotating air gap torque. The strength of this tie
can be represented by a spring connected to a fixed
reference. The steady state rotation of the shaft is now
effectively removed from the problem. A dashpot in
parallel with this spring represents machine-system
damping. The total mass, spring and dashpot define the
machine-system mode of oscillation to be damped by the
PSS.
The objective of the PSS is to enhance this machine-
system damping by generating a torque in phase with speed
changes at the frequency of this oscillation. If the signal is
Figure.5.7 Typical Shaft System And Torsional Mode Shapes
generated directly from shaft speed measurement, it is
difficult to find a place on the shaft where the transducer
responds only to the mode in which the shaft acts as a rigid
body oscillating against the power system. If speed is
measured at the generator end of the shaft and if the speed
to torque transfer function constitutes strictly a gain and no
phase lag, damping would be provided for both the system
mode and the first torsional mode. Analysis of damping of
this first torsional mode is directly related to the simple
modal analysis in the first part of this section.
Unfortunately, the phase lags through the stabilizer and
generator (Equation 5.4) are sufficient to cause instability
of the first torsional mode when the stabilizer is adjusted
for appropriate damping of the system mode. This
possibility of torsional excitation through the power system
stabilizer and excitation system has been well documented.
[55][41]
Placing the speed sensor at the node of the first torsional
mode would make this mode invisible to the control
system, but this location would normally not be equipped
for speed measurement and might be inaccessible. Even if
speed could be measured at this node, other torsional signal
components would still be detected by the transducer, and

- 50 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

80

Exciter Field Voltage, VR

60
CHAPTER 6 40

APPLICATION CONSIDERATIONS 20
0

Murray Coultes -20

-40
-60

I. INTRODUCTION 7.0

Generator Field Voltage

6.0

Around the year 2000 two significant changes occurred 5.0

4.0
in the field of excitation systems. The most significant was 3.0

the use of digital processors rather than circuit components 2.0

1.0

to implement the voltage regulator, limiter and PSS 0.0

functions. The second was widespread installation of small 1.2

Generator Term inal Voltage

1.1
gas turbine generators in utility rather than industrial 1.0

applications. 0.9

0.8

II. UNIDIRECTIONAL EXCITERS

0.7

0.6

Small gas turbine generators are usually equipped with 1.3

rotating main exciters and low-power (less than 10A) pilot 1.2
1.1

exciter/voltage regulators. These pilot exciters are often 1.0

Pow er
0.9

equipped with half-controlled full-wave bridges. These 0.8

0.7

bridges can only produce positive voltages, so no negative 0.6

0.5

field forcing is possible. Although this may be acceptable 0.4

for isolated or industrial applications, it is highly 0.15

0.10
undesirable in a utility application when a PSS is also used. 0.05

During large disturbances, in which the PSS signal can

PSS

0.00

exceed 0.05 pu of the terminal voltage reference, the result -0.05

-0.10
is a generator overvoltage. -0.15

Fig.6.1 is a simulation of an external fault. The first part 0 1 2 3 4

Time (s)
5 6 7 8

of the record is for a full-controlled bridge; the second part

is a half-controlled bridge. The half-controlled bridge
produces a generator terminal voltage increase of over
10%. The settings for PSS on these systems must consider
this effect. Typically, the output limits of the PSS are set at
+/-0.05 pu, instead of the recommended +/-0.1 pu.
III. DIGITAL EXCITERS
When voltage regulators and power system stabilizers
were implemented with operational amplifiers, speed and
resolution were seldom issues in the bandwidth that they
were required to handle. Such is not the case with digital
types.
A. Processor Cycle Time
The rate at which the PSS algorithm is recalculated
limits the minimum time constant that can be implemented
- the faster the execution time, the shorter the time constant
that can be used. Fig.6.2 compares the nominal phase lead
compensation that was set with what was measured on a
voltage regulator with a 5 ms cycle time.
(1 + 0.15s )(1 + 0.15s )
(1 + 0.01s )(1 + 0.01s )
Figure 6.1 Performance With Bi-Directional And Uni-Directional Exciters
The calculation of phase lead settings for a digital exciter
must account for the phase error at higher frequencies if the
compensation is to be correct.
Most digital voltage regulators utilize two or more
different cycle times for different parts of the algorithm. It
is important that the PSS be in the fastest loop so that the
short time constants are realized with as much fidelity as
possible.
B. Integer Or Floating Point Arithmetic
Because of the large dynamic range that a PSS must
handle correctly, floating point arithmetic is preferred. If
integer is used it is important to check that both large and
small signals are reproduced with sufficient accuracy.
C. Passwords And Security
The computer industry is accustomed to using passwords
to protect software from unauthorized tampering.
Unfortunately this mindset has carried over into digital
exciters and power system stabilizers. While there is some
(6.1)
merit in this security, it is a dangerous practice.
The commissioning of a PSS is a good example. A
common method is to calculate and apply all of the settings
except the gain, and then raise the gain slowly toward the
final setting. On circuit component types, this was usually
done via a knob; it was easy to turn the gain up slowly and
also quick and easy to turn it down if the system started to

- 51 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

become unstable. IV. MINIMUM EXCITATION LIMITERS

On digital systems, there are two problems. First, it is
not difficult to enter a gain that is a factor of 10 higher than
was intended. Second, it is inherently slower to set the
gain back to zero quickly since it has to be entered via
keystrokes rather than turning a knob. If a password also
has to be entered before a gain change can be made, it is a
recipe for disaster.
If a customer insists on password protection, it should
only have to be entered once at the beginning of the
commissioning procedure, never in the midst of it. A
preferable solution is no password at all.
Minimum excitation limiters are usually one of two
types: takeover, or additive.
The takeover versions effectively disable the voltage
regulator and PSS functions while they are active. The
additive ones inject a "raise signal into the voltage
regulator summing junction.
If a PSS is part of the excitation system, the additive type
is preferred since it will permit the PSS to continue to
function during potentially unstable situations when the
minimum excitation limiter is active.

1000.00 140

Measured
Nominal 120

100
100.00

Phase (degrees)
Magnitude (V/V)

80

60

10.00
Magnitude
40

20

Phase

1.00 0
0.10 1.00 10.00
Frequency (Hz)

Figure 6.2 Phase Error Caused By Limited Processor Speed

- 52 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
CHAPTER 7
FUTURE DIRECTIONS IN PSS DESIGN
Om Malik, Jos Taborda,
Robert Grondin, Innocent Kamwa, Gilles Trudel
I. INTRODUCTION
Power systems are non-linear and operate over a wide
range. For example, the gain of the plant increases with
generator load. Also, the phase lag of the plant increases as
the ac system becomes stronger. A power system stabilizer
(PSS) is employed on an electric generating unit to
improve its damping and the stability of the power system.
Design of the conventional power system stabilizer
(CPSS), done off-line, is primarily based on the linear
control theory using a model of the power system
linearized at one operating point. Such a CPSS can provide
optimal performance only for the specific parameters used
in the design. To further improve the performance and
stability of the power system, various other approaches
using the linear quadratic optimal control, H-infinity,
variable structure, rule based, and artificial intelligence
(AI) techniques [31], [32], [33], [63] - [69] have been
proposed in the literature to design a fixed parameter PSS.
One common feature of all fixed parameter controllers is
that the design is done off-line.
Due to the non-linear characteristics, wide operating
conditions and unpredictability of perturbations in a power
system, the fixed parameter PSS generally cannot maintain
the same quality of performance under all conditions of
operation.
Adaptive control can be described as the changing of
controller parameters on-line based on the changes in
system operating conditions. Whenever an adaptive
controller detects changes in system operating conditions, it
responds by determining a new set of control parameters.
The adaptive control theory provides a possible way to
solve many of the problems associated with the control of
non-linear time-varying systems, such as power systems.
A number of examples of development and successful
implementation of adaptive PSSs (APSSs) based on
analytical and artificial intelligence techniques, that are
capable of being employed in the power systems in the
future, are described.
II. ANALYTICAL ADAPTIVE CONTROL BASED APSS
The common procedure in process control is to compare
the actual measured values of the output with the desired
values and the difference, the control error, is fed as input
to the process via a regulator and an actuator. Various
criteria are available for the computation of the control.
Using this technique, the desired control law is obtained
as:
u ( t ) = f [ s ( t ), y( t ), u ( t T )]
where: s(t) is the system parameter vector
y(t) is the output vector [y(t), y(t-T) ]
U(t-T) is the control vector [u(t-T) u(t-2T) ]
denotes the transpose,
T is the sampling period
f[.] denotes function
If the parameter vector is known, control to meet specific
performance criterion can be computed directly. However,
the dynamics of a complex non-linear system vary with
time depending upon the operating conditions,
disturbances, etc.
An adaptive controller has the ability to modify its
behavior depending on the performance of the closed-loop
system. The basic functions of the adaptive controller may
be described as:
Identification of unknown parameters, or
measurement of a performance index,
Decision of the control strategy,
On-line modification of the controller parameters.
Depending on how these functions are synthesized,
different types of adaptive controllers are obtained.
Various adaptive control techniques have been proposed
for excitation control since the mid 1970s. A brief review
of the adaptive control techniques from the excitation
control aspect is presented in this section.
Two distinct approaches direct adaptive control and
indirect adaptive control can be used to control a plant
adaptively. In the direct control, the parameters of the
controller are directly adjusted to reduce some norm of the
output error. In the indirect control, the parameters of the
plant are estimated as the elements of a vector at any
instant k, and the parameters vector of the controller is
adapted based on the estimated plant vector.
A. Direct Adaptive Control
A very common form of direct adaptive control is the
Model Reference Adaptive Control (MRAC). The
objective of an MRAC system is to update the controller
parameters such that the closed-loop system maintains a
performance specified by a reference model. It requires a
suitable model, an adaptive mechanism and a controller.
The structure of a MRAC system is shown in Fig.7.1. In
MRAC, the actual system performance is measured against
a desired closed-loop performance specified by a reference
model that is driven by the same input as the controlled
system. The objective is to minimize the error, the
difference between the actual system output and the
reference model output. The "Adaptation Mechanism
block in Fig.7.1 is used to update the parameters of the
controller. Various methods are available to minimize the
error function.
(7.1)
- 53 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

Reference model Field Vt Vg

Generating unit

AVR
+ yr &
uc y_
u Exciter
Controller System

e Transmission Lines
yc
Adaptation Mechanism
u yr + - y
Fiure.7.1 MRAC Structure Reference +
Model
e -
Reference model must be selected such that the actual Z-1
FLC
system is capable of matching its performance
characteristics. The ideal reference model is 1. However, e
when this is not achievable due to system limitations, delay Figure 7.2 System Configuration
of inputs will occur even for a first order model. This
might cause the response of the reference model to be Results of a number of studies show that this APSS
substantially different from that of the actual system and provides good damping over a wide operating range and
will be interpreted as system fault even under normal improves the performance of the system. An illustrative
conditions. example showing the system response to a three phase to
The most important feature in ensuring the success of ground fault with the self-learning MRAC based FLC and a
MRAC is the selection of a proper reference model and its fixed center FLC is given in Fig.7.3.
parameters. The selected parameters must be such that the
system is capable of following the reference model output
and that the control signal remains within the physical
control limits.
A systematic method to determine a proper reference
model for the plant is described in [70]. In this approach
time domain performance of the controlled system with an
analytical pole-shift APSS [71] was studied by simulation
studies under various operating conditions and
disturbances. The best closed-loop pole locations that do
not violate the control constraints were obtained. A set of
average zeros and closed-loop pole locations of the poles
obtained from these studies was used as the parameters of a
discrete third order reference model.
Application of an APSS based on the MRAC principle is
shown in Fig.7.2. An FLC with self-learning capability is
used to adapt the system performance to track the reference Figure 7.3 Three-Phase To Ground Fault At The Middle Of One
model. Two inputs, generator speed deviation and its Transmission Line And Successful Reclosure With APSS (MRAFC) And
Fixed FLC PSS (P= 0.95 pu, 0.9 PF Lag)
derivative, and the supplementary control output, each have
seven membership functions. The FLC uses the Mamdani- B. Indirect Adaptive Control
type fuzzy PD rule base [72]. Updating the center points of A general configuration of the indirect adaptive control
the controller input membership functions, i.e. the weights as a self-tuning controller is shown in Fig.7.4. At each
of the fuzzy controller, using the steepest descent algorithm sampling instant, the input and output of the generating
provides it with a self-learning capability. It can thus adapt unit are sampled and a plant model is obtained by some on-
the system performance to track the reference model. line identification algorithm to represent the dynamic
behavior of the generating unit at that instant in time. It is
expected that the model obtained at each sampling instant
can track the system operating conditions.

- 54 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
Figure 7.4 Block Diagram Of A Self-Tuning Controller
The required control signal is computed based on the
identified model. Various control techniques can be used to
compute the control. All control algorithms assume that
the identified model is the true mathematical description of
the controlled system.
In the analytical approach to the design of an adaptive
controller, sampled data design techniques are used to
compute the control. The indirect adaptive control
procedure involves:
-Selection of a sampling frequency, fs, about ten times
the normal frequency of oscillation to be damped.
-Updating of the system model parameters (coefficients
of system transfer function in the z-domain) each sampling
interval T(= 1/fs) using an identification technique suitable
for real-time application. A number of identification
routines, in recursive form, e.g. recursive least squares
(RLS), recursive extended least squares (RELS), etc. can
be used to determine the transfer function of the controlled
plant in the discrete domain.
-Use the updated estimates of the parameters to compute
the control output based on the control strategy chosen.
Various control strategies, among them optimal, minimum
variance, pole-zero assignment, pole assignment, pole shift,
etc. have been proposed.
C. System Model
The generating unit is described by a discrete ARMAX
model of the form:
A(z 1 ) y( t ) = B(z 1 ) u ( t ) + e( t )
where A(z-1) and B(z-1), polynomials in the delay
operator z-1, are of the form:
A( z 1 ) = 1 + a1 z 1 + .... + ai z i + ..... + ana z na (7.3)
B(z 1) = b1 z 1 + L + bi z i +L+ b n b z n b
na nb
the variables y(t) and u(t) are the system output and
system input, respectively, and e(t) is assumed to be a
sequence of independent random variables with zero mean.
D. System Parameter Estimation
The control is computed based on the identified model
parameters, ai and bi. Thus to compute the control
appropriate to the varying conditions the system parameters
have to be estimated on-line. The correctness of the
identification determines the preciseness of the identified
model that tries to reflect the true system. For a time-
varying system the tracking ability of the identification
method is very desirable.
An on-line estimate of the system parameters is obtained
by providing in the regulator a mathematical model having
a desired structure describing the actual process. Such a
model may be expressed as:
y( t ) = g[ m , ( t )] (7.5)
where: y( t ) is the predicted (estimated) value of the
system output.
m is the model parameter vector, and
(t) is the information known at the time of
prediction.
The model parameter vector may either be constant, m,
or be a function of time, m(t). For the model to track the
system dynamics, i.e. tune itself to the system, its
parameters must be updated continuously at an interval that
is consistent with the time constants of the system.
Several methods can be used to obtain an estimate for
the model parameter vector, m(t) [73]. A commonly used
technique of achieving a continuous tracking of the system
behavior is the RLS parameter estimation technique. It
minimizes the square of the error between the actual system
output and the model output, and the estimated parameter
vector, ( t ) , is given by:
m
m ( t ) = h[ m ( t T ), P( t ), ( t )] (7.6)
where P(t) is the covariance matrix of the error of
estimates. In general terms it contains the entire history of
(7.2) the process.
To enhance the ability of the identifier to track the
operating conditions of the actual system, a forgetting
factor is used to discount the importance of the older data.
It can be chosen as a constant or a variable. A variable
forgetting factor, employed to improve the tracking ability
especially under large disturbances, is calculated on-line
(7.4) every sampling interval [74].
III. INDIRECT ADAPTIVE CONTROL STRATEGIES
Four control strategies that need explicit identification
are described below.
A. Linear Quadratic Control
In the linear quadratic (LQ) control algorithm the
- 55 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

objective is to minimize a performance index [75]. The D. Pole Shift Control

performance is chosen so that the system output error is The pole-shift (PS) controller is in essence the PA
minimized with respect to the system input. The LQ controller but the closed-loop poles are obtained by shifting
controller has the advantage that it will always result in a the open-loop poles radially towards the center of the unit
stable closed-loop system provided that the parameter circle in the z-domain. Shifting the poles towards the center
estimates are exact. However, the achievement of this is directly related to increased damping. This approach has
characteristic imposes heavy computational burden because the advantage of producing a stable controller. Detailed
it requires the solution of a matrix Ricaati equation. Also, description of the PS control algorithm and its application
this controller is designed in the state space form and a as an adaptive PSS is given in the next section.
common identification technique estimates the system
parameters in the input/output form. Thus an observer is IV. PS CONTROL BASED ADAPTIVE PSS
required to convert the system parameters into a canonical
Extensive amount of work has been done to develop and
form.
implement an APSS based on the pole-shift strategy. Such
B. Minimum Variance (MV) Control a PSS can adjust its parameters on-line according to the
In this control strategy, the objective is to minimize the environment in which it works and can provide good
variance of the output [76]. Output error at the next damping over a wide range of operating conditions of the
sampling instant for zero control is predicted first. The power system.
control that will drive this predicted error to zero is then A. Self-Adjusting Pole-Shift Control Strategy
computed. Although this control strategy has nice
In the pole-shift control strategy, in closed-loop (with
properties, it has characteristics that make it difficult to use
PSS) the poles of the controlled system are shifted from
for excitation control.
their open-loop (without PSS) locations towards the center
The closed-loop system will be unstable if the dynamics
in the z-plane by a factor less than one. This factor, called
of the sampled system are non-minimum phase, i.e. the
the pole shifting factor, is varied on-line to always
system has a zero on or outside the unit circle in the z-
produce maximum damping contribution without
domain. In this strategy, the controller poles are obtained
exceeding the control limits. To determine the desired
directly from the identified system zeros. This might cause
control, such a system may be modeled by a linear low
an unstable control computation if identified zeros are not
order discrete model with time-varying parameters.
cancelled exactly with the system zeros. When the
The parameters of the system model of a given structure,
cancellation of large parameter errors is not possible within
estimated as in section g above, are used in the control
one sample due to the limits on the control signal, the MV
algorithm to compute the updated control. A block-
controller will produce an oscillatory response. The
diagram of the regulator is shown in Fig.7.4. Because the
excitation signal is band limited and the use of MV
control is based on the estimated model parameter vector,
controller will result in excessive control and a poor control
action. These problems associated with the MV controller ( t ) , equation (7.1) now becomes:
m
can be avoided by using a pole-zero or pole assigned
controller. u ( t ) = f [ m ( t ), y( t ), U( t T)] (7.7)
C. Pole-Zero And Pole Assigned Control
In the pole-zero assignment (PZA) controller the poles For the system modeled by equation (7.2), assume that
and zeros in the closed-loop are pre-specified by the the feed-back loop has the form (c.f. Fig.7.5)
designer [77]. Whereas, in the MV case all the poles are
shifted towards the center of the unit circle, poles and zeros u (t ) G (z 1 )
= (7.8)
in the PZA case are shifted to locations that produce the y( t ) F(z 1)
desired closed-loop characteristics. This permits a trade-
off between performance and control effort. Although this
controller does not suffer from the problems of non-
minimum phase and band limited output associated with
the MV controller, the designer has to know the system
characteristics to achieve the desired characteristics. In this
respect, this algorithm can be compared to MRAC.
Pre-selection of the locations of poles and zeros is
difficult for non-deterministic case and their poor choice
may lead to unstable control computations.
In the pole-assigned (PA) controller only poles, instead
of both poles and zeros, are assigned [78]. Otherwise, it is
exactly the same as the PZA controller.

- 56 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
Figure 7.5 Closed-Loop System Block Diagram
Figure 7.6 Pole-Shifting Process
From (7.2) and (7.8) the closed loop characteristic
polynomial T(z -1 ) can be derived as
A(z -1)F(z -1) + B(z -1 )G(z -1 ) = T(z -1 )
Unlike the pole-assignment algorithm in which T(z 1)
is prescribed [78], the pole-shift algorithm makes T(z 1)
take the form of A(z 1) but the pole locations are shifted
by a factor , i.e.
T(z -1 ) = A (z -1 )
In the pole-shift algorithm, , a scalar, is the only
parameter to be determined and its value reflects the
stability of the closed-loop system. Supposing is the
absolute value of the largest characteristic root of A(z 1),
then . is the largest characteristic root of T(z 1). To
guarantee the stability of the closed-loop system, ought to
satisfy the following inequality (stability constraint):
1 1
<>
The pole-shift process is presented schematically in
Fig.7.6. It can be seen that once T(z -1) is specified, F(z -1)
and G(z 1) can be determined by (7.9), and thus the control
signal u(t) can be calculated from (7.8).
To consider the time domain performance of the
controlled system, a performance index J is formed to
measure the difference between the predicted system
output, (t+1), and its reference, yr(t+1):
J = E[ y(t + 1) - y r (t + 1)] 2 (7.12)
E is the expectation operator. (t+1) is determined by
system parameter polynomials A(z 1), B(z 1) and past y(t)
and u(t) signal sequences. Considering that u(t) is a
function of the pole-shifting factor , the performance
index J becomes
min J = f [ ( z 1 ), ( z 1 ), u ( t ), y( t ), , y r ( t + 1)] (7.13)
The pole-shifting factor is the only unknown variable
in (7.13) and thus can be determined by minimizing J.
Constraints:
When minimizing J(t+1, ), it should be noted that will
be subject to the following constraints:
1. The stabilizer must keep the closed-loop system
stable. It implies that all roots of the closed-loop
characteristic polynomial A(z 1) must lie within the
unit circle in the z-plane (c.f. equation 7.11).
2. The control limit should be taken into account in the
stabilizer design to avoid servo saturation or
equipment damage. The optimal solution of
should also satisfy the following inequality (control
constraint):
u min u(t, ) u max (7.14)
(7.9)
Pole-patterns of T(z 1) for a 50 ms three-phase to ground
fault at the middle of one line of a double circuit
transmission line connecting a generator to a constant
voltage bus, Fig.7.7, are shown in Figs. 7.8 and 7.9. The
pole-pattern before the application of control is shown in
Fig.7.8. Since two poles map outside the unit circle, the
(7.10) closed-loop system is in an unstable state. The pole-pattern
after the pole-shift control is applied is shown in Fig.7.9.
Since all the poles lie within the unit circle, the closed-loop
system is stable. It shows that the pole-shift control assures
the stability of the closed-loop system and also optimizes
the performance given by (7.13).
(7.11)
- 57 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
Figure 7.7 Power System With Adaptive PSS
Figure 7.8 Pole Pattern For T(z 1) With Pole-Shift Control
Figure 7.9 Pole Pattern For T(z 1) Without Pole-Shift Control
V. PERFORMANCE STUDIES WITH POLE-SHIFTING CONTROL
PSS
Performance of the self-tuning adaptive controller based
on the pole-shifting control algorithm has been investigated
by conducting simulation studies on single machine [71],
[74] and multi-machine system [79], on a single machine
- 58 -
[80] and on a multi-machine physical model [81] in the
laboratory and on a 400MW thermal machine under fully
loaded conditions connected to the system [82].
The single machine power system consists of a
synchronous generator connected to a constant voltage bus
through two transmission lines (Fig.7.6). A non-linear
seventh order model is used to simulate the dynamic
behavior of this system. The differential equations used to
simulate the synchronous generator and the parameters
used in simulation studies are given in [71], [74]. The
generator has an IEEE Standard 421.5, Type ST1A AVR
and Exciter. An IEEE Standard 421.5, PSS1A Type CPSS
[36] is used for comparative studies.
The system output is sampled at the rate of 20 Hz for
parameter identification and control computation. Studies
performed with various sampling rates show that the
performance is practically the same for a sampling rate in
the range of 20-100 Hz. Sampling frequencies above 100
Hz are of no practical benefit and the performance
deteriorates for sampling rate under 20 Hz. A sampling
rate of 20 Hz is chosen to make sure that there is enough
time available for updating the parameters and control
computation. In most studies, deviation of electrical power
output is used as the input to the PSS. The control output
is limited to 0.1 pu.
Results of a simulation study to demonstrate the effect of
the APSS on the transient stability margin are shown in
Table VII. With the single machine infinite bus system
initially operating at 0.95 pu power, 0.9 pf lag, a three
phase to ground fault was applied near the sending end of
one transmission line. It can be seen from Table VII that
the APSS provides the largest maximum clearance time.
TABLE VII
TRANSIENT STABILITY MARGIN RESULTS
Without PSS With CPSS With
APSS
Maximum 120 ms 150 ms 165 ms
Clearing Time
This APSS was implemented on a microprocessor and
tested in real-time on a physical model of a single-machine
infinite bus system. With the system operating at a stable
operating point, the APSS was applied and the torque
reference increased gradually to the level, P = 1.307 pu, pf
= 0.95 lead, vt = 0.950 pu. At this load, the system was
still stable with the APSS.
At 5s, Fig.7.10, the APSS was replaced by the CPSS.
After the switch over, the system began to oscillate and
diverge, which means that the CPSS is unable to keep the
system stable at this load level. At about 25s, the APSS
was switched back to control the unstable system and the
system came under control very quickly as shown in
Fig.7.10. This test demonstrates that the ASPSS can
provide a larger dynamic stability margin than the CPSS.
Also, more power can be transmitted with the help of the
APSS if an overload operation is necessary under certain
circumstances.
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

Fig.7.12. Details of the five-machine system are given in

[84]. The adaptive neural network based PSSs were
installed on two generators and CPSSs were installed on
the other three generators. It can be seen that both the local
mode and the inter-area mode oscillations are damped
effectively.

Figure 7.10 Dynamic Stability Improvement By The APSS

VI. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE BASED PSS

A. Adaptive PSS With NN Predictor And NN Controller

Identification of the power plant model using an on-line
recursive identification technique is a computationally
extensive task. Neural networks (NNs) offer the alternative
of a model-free method. An adaptive neural network based
controller using indirect adaptive control method has been
developed. It combines the advantages of neural networks
with the good performance of the adaptive control. This
controller employs the learning ability of the neural Figure 7.11 Controller Structure For Single-Machine Study
networks in the adaptation process and is trained each
sampling period.
The controller consists of two sub-networks as shown in
Fig.7.11. One network is an adaptive neuro-identifier
(ANI) that identifies the power plant in terms of its internal
weights and predicts the dynamic characteristics of the
plant. It is based on the inputs and outputs of the plant and
does not need the states of the plant. The second sub-
network is an adaptive neuro-controller (ANC) that
provides the necessary control action to damp the
oscillations of the power plant.
The success of the control algorithm depends upon the
accuracy of the identifier in predicting the dynamic
behaviour of the plant. The ANI and ANC are initially
trained off-line over a wide range of operating conditions Figure 7.12 System Response With NAPS Installed On Generators G1
and a wide spectrum of possible disturbances. After the And G3 And CPSS On G2 , G4 ,G5
off-line training stage, the controller is hooked up in the
system. Further training of the ANI and ANC is done on- B. Adaptive Network Based Fuzzy Logic Controller
line every sampling period. On-line training enables the The characteristics of fuzzy logic and neural networks
controller to track the plant variations as they occur and to complement each other in respect of their pros and cons.
provide control signal accordingly. That offers the possibility of using a hybrid neuro-fuzzy
Employing a feed-forward multi-layer network in each approach in the form of an adaptive network based Fuzzy
of the two sub-networks, an adaptive neural network based Logic controller (FLC) whereby it is possible to take
PSS has been built [83]. The two networks are trained advantage of the positive features of both Fuzzy Logic and
further in each sampling period using an on-line version of neural networks. Such a system can automatically find an
the back-propagation algorithm. The errors used to train appropriate set of rules and membership functions [85].
the ANI and ANC are both scalar and the learning is done
only once in each sampling period for each of the two sub- C. Architecture
networks. This simplifies the training algorithm in terms of In the neuro-fuzzy controller, the system is implemented
the computation time. in the framework of a network architecture. Considering
System performance in response to a three-phase to the functional form of the fuzzy logic controller, Fig.7.13,
ground fault on one circuit of a double-circuit transmission it becomes apparent that the FLC can be represented as a
line in a five machine interconnected network is shown in five layer feed-forward network, in which each layer

- 59 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
corresponds to one specific function with the node
functions in each layer being of the same type. With this
network representation of the fuzzy logic system, it is
straightforward to apply the back-propagation or a similar
method to adjust the parameters of the membership
functions and inference rules.
Figure 7.13 Basic Structure Of Fuzzy Logic Controller
In this network, the links between the nodes from one
layer to the next layer only indicate the direction of flow of
signals and part or all of the nodes contain the adjustable
parameters. These parameters are specified by the learning
algorithm and should be updated according to the given
training data and a gradient-based learning procedure to
achieve a desired input/output mapping. It can be used as
an identifier for non-linear dynamic systems or as a non-
linear controller with adjustable parameters.
D. Training And Performance
Because the neuro-fuzzy controller has the property of
learning, fuzzy rules and membership functions of the
controller can be tuned automatically by the learning
algorithm. Learning is based on the error in the controller
output. Thus it is necessary to know the error that can be
evaluated by comparing the output of the neuro-fuzzy
controller and a desired controller.
To train this controller as an adaptive network based
fuzzy PSS (ANF PSS), training data was obtained from a
self-optimizing pole-shifting APSS. Training was
performed over a wide range of operating conditions of the
generating unit including various types of disturbances.
Based on earlier experience, seven linguistic variables for
each input variable were used to get the desired
performance.
Extensive simulation [86] and experimental studies with
the ANF PSS show that it can provide good performance
over a wide operating range and can significantly improve
the dynamic performance of the system over that with a
fixed parameter CPSS.
E. Self-Learning ANF PSS
In the above case the ANF PSS was trained by data
obtained from a desired controller. However, in a general
situation, the desired controller may not be available. In
that case, the neuro-fuzzy controller can be trained using a
self-learning approach [87].
In the self-learning approach two neuro-fuzzy systems
- 60 -
are used in a manner similar to Fig.7.11, one acting as the
controller and the other acting as the predictor. The plant
identifier can compute the derivative of the plants output
with respect to the plants input by means of the back-
propagation process illustrated by the line passing through
the forward identifier and continuing back through the
neuro-fuzzy controller that uses it to learn the control rule.
The self-learning ANF PSS was initially trained off-line
on a power system simulation model over a wide range of
operating conditions and disturbances. Electric power
deviation and its integral were used as the input to the
stabilizer. The ANF PSS, with the parameters, membership
functions and inference rules obtained from the off-line
training procedure, was implemented on a DSP mounted on
a PC and its performance was evaluated on a physical
model of a power system in the laboratory. A digital CPSS
was also implemented in the same environment on the DSP
board for comparative studies.
Out of the various tests, results for a 0.25 pu step
decrease in the input torque reference applied at 1s and
removed at 9s with the generator operating at 0.9 pu power,
0.85 pf lag and 1.10 pu Vt are shown in Fig.7.14. The
ANF PSS provides a consistently good performance for
either of the two disturbances.
Simulation studies on a single machine connected to a
constant voltage bus and on a multi-machine power system
[80] and experimental studies on a physical model of a
power system have demonstrated the effectiveness of the
ANN PSS in improving the performance of a power system
over a wide operating range and a broad spectrum of
disturbances.
Figure 7.14. Comparison Of ANF PSS and CPSS Responses to a
0.25 p.u. Step Torque Disturbance (P= 0.9 p.u., 0.85 PF Lag)
F. Neuro-Fuzzy Controller Architecture Optimization
Adaptive fuzzy systems offer a potential solution to the
knowledge elicitation problem. The controller structure,
expressed in terms of the number of membership functions
and the number of inference rules, is usually derived by
trial and error. The number of inference rules has to be
determined from the standpoint of overall learning
capability and generalization capability.
The above problem can be resolved by employing a
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
genetic algorithm to determine the structure of the adaptive
fuzzy controller. By employing both genetic algorithm and
adaptive fuzzy controller, the inference rules parameters
can be tuned and the number of membership functions can
be optimized at the same time.
VII. AMALGAMATED ANALYTICAL AND AI BASED PSS
A. Adaptive PSS With NN Identifier And Pole-Shift
Control
A self-tuning APSS described above can improve the
dynamic performance of the synchronous generator by
allowing the parameters of the PSS to adjust as the
operating conditions change. However, proper care needs
to be taken in the design of the RLS algorithm for
identification to make it stable, especially under large
disturbances.
It is possible to make the identification more robust by
using a NN for identifying the system model parameters.
An analytical technique, such as the pole-shift control, can
be retained to compute the control signal. One approach,
using a radial basis function (RBF) network for model
parameter identification, is described below. The PSS
shown in Fig.7.4 now consists of an ANN identifier and the
pole-shifting control algorithm described above.
The RBF network, Fig.7.15, is used to identify the
system model parameters, ai, bi, (7.13) and (7.14). The
network consists of three layers: the input, hidden and
output layers. The input vector is:
V ( t ) = [ Pe ( t T ), Pe ( t 2 T ),
Pe ( t 3 T ), u ( t T ),
u ( t 2 T ), u ( t 3 T )]
Figure 7.15 Radial Basis Function Network Model
Each of the six input variables is assigned to an
individual node in the input layer and passes directly to the
hidden layer without weights. The hidden nodes, called the
RBF centers, calculate the Euclidean distance between the
centers and the network input vector. The result is passed
through a widely used Gaussian function characterized by a
response which has a maximum value of 1 when the
distance between the input vector and the center is zero.
Thus a radial basis neuron acts as a detector which
produces 1 whenever the input vector is identical to the
center (active neuron). The other neurons with centers
quite different from the input vector will have outputs near
zero (non-active neurons).
The connections between the hidden neurons and the
output node are linear weighted sums as described by the
equation:
nh pc 2
y= exp .
2
i
(7.16)
i =1
where ci, , and nh are the centers, widths, weights
and the number of hidden layer neurons, respectively.
To make the proposed RBF identifier faster for on-line
applications, the hidden layer is created as a competitive
layer wherein the center closest to the input vector becomes
the winner and all the other non-active centers are
deactivated. Also, the scalar weights are modified as a
vector whose size equals the size of the input vector.
The weight vector is given by:
[
( t ) = a 1' a 2' a 3' b1' b 2' b 3' ] (7.17)
Linearizing the output of the RBF, y(t) = f [y(t-1), u(t-
1)], by Taylor series expansion at each sampling instant, a
one-to-one relationship between the weight vector and
the system model parameters ( t ) (equation 7.6) can be
m
obtained. These parameters are then used in computing the
control signal.
The RBF identifier was first trained off-line to choose
(7.15) appropriate centers using data collected at a number of
operating points for various disturbances. The n-means
clustering algorithm used for training yielded 15 centers for
the RBF model. After the off-line training, the weights
(system parameters) were updated on-line to obtain the
appropriate control signal using the pole-shifting controller.
A 100ms sampling period was chosen for digital
implementation.
Results of an experimental study for a 0.10 pu decrease
in torque reference applied at 10s and removed at 20s, with
the generator operating at 0.6 pu power, 0.92 pf lead and Vt
of 0.99 pu are shown in Fig.7.16. It can be seen that the
APSS can provide a well-damped response.
- 61 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
Figure 7.16 Pe Response For 0.1 p.u. Input Torque Reference Step
Change With APSS
B. Adaptive PSS with Fuzzy Logic Identifier and Pole-
Shift controller
Takagi-Sugeno (TS) fuzzy systems have been
successfully employed in the design of stabilization control
of non-linear systems.
A non-linear plant can be represented by a set of linear
models interpolated by membership functions of a TS
fuzzy model. Although the TS system identifier is a
NARMAX model, at each sample an average linear
discrete ARMA model can be determined to identify the
controlled plant according to the current active rules. This
ARMA model can be used to determine the control signal
by the pole-shifting control strategy. Using this approach,
a self-tuning adaptive controller has been developed and
applied as a PSS [88].
The proposed single-input single-output TS model used
for the identification of dynamic systems is composed of
fuzzy rules , the consequent part of which provides the rule
output at time k based on the past inputs and past outputs
with fuzzy sets designed in universe of discourse. The
consequent part of the rule then identifies the parameters of
a desired order discrete model of the plant. Two parallel
on-line learning procedures, one each for the identification
of premise and consequent parameters, are used to track the
plant in real-time [89].
In the proposed TS system for generating unit
identification, two input signals, the past control input, u(k-
1), and the past generator speed output, y(k-1), are used to
identify a 3rd. order model of the plant. The output at
sample k is the estimated generator speed output, (k). The
TS system is trained by using the steepest descent
algorithm for the premise parameters and RLS algorithm
for the consequent parameters using the error of the system
output and the estimated TS output. Initially a set of three
equally spaced membership functions, over the normalized
universe, are used for the inputs of the system.
The response of the system with the TS system based
identifier and pole-shift controller based APSS has been
studied for various disturbances at different operating
conditions. One illustrative result for a three phase to
ground fault is shown in Fig.7.17.
- 62 -
Figure 7.17 Three Phase To Ground Fault At The Middle Of One
Transmission Line And Successful Reclosure (P=0.95 pu, 0.9 PF Lag)
C. Adaptive PSS With RLS Identifier And Fuzzy Logic
Control
Fuzzy logic controllers (FLCs) have attracted
considerable attention as candidates for novel
computational systems because of the advantages they offer
over the conventional computational systems. They have
been successfully applied to the control of non-linear
dynamic systems, especially in the field of adaptive
control, by making use of on-line training.
A self-learning adaptive fuzzy logic controller has been
developed. Only the inputs and outputs of the plant are
measured and there is no need to determine the states of the
plant. Using on-line training by the steepest descent
method and the identified system model, the adaptive FLC
is able to track the plant variations as they occur and
compute the control.
In the proposed controller, a discrete model of the plant
is first identified using the RLS parameter identification
method. This allows a continuous tracking of the system
behavior.
The control learning is based on the prediction of the
identified model. The identified model output is used as
input to the Mamdanitype PD controller [72]. The center
points of the controller inputs are updated [89] by treating
them exactly the same as the weights of an NN and by
using the steepest descent algorithm with chain rule.
The proposed adaptive FLC has been applied as an
adaptive fuzzy PSS (AFPSS) [90]. For the AFPSS, the
generating unit is identified as a 3rd. order model. The
controller has two input signals, the generator speed
deviation and its derivative, with an initial set of seven
equally spaced membership functions over the normalized
universe of discourse. The output, the supplementary
control signal, also having seven membership functions, is
added to the AVR summing junction. A number of
simulation studies have been performed for various
disturbances at different operating conditions. An
illustrative result for a 0.05 pu increase in torque and return
to initial condition, shown in Fig.7.18, demonstrates the
performance of this AFPSS.
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

0.69
APSS VLMAX
CPSS LI
0.68
No PSS KL

0.67 FL VLMIN

VSTMAX
Power Angle [rad]

0.66 VIMAX
KI
+
VST
+
0.65

+
FI VIMIN
0.64
Speed VSTMIN
Transducers
KH
0.63 VH MAX

0.62
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
H
time [s] FH
Figure 7.18 Response To A 0.05 p.u. Step Increase In Torque And Return VH MIN
To Initial Condition (P= 0.95 p.u., 0.9 PF Lag)
Figure 7.19 Multiband PSS Algorithm Structure

VIII. MULTI BAND PSS

The multi band PSS consists of robust classical 3-band
pass parallel filter structure to enable optimum tuning for
all oscillation modes. The design has been included in the
IEEE standard 421.5 2005 with designation PSS4B and it
already been installed as a commercial product by Hydro
Qubec and ABB.
The simplified structure of the MB-PSS is represented in
Figure 7.19. It uses the calculated shaft speed deviation
obtained from two transducers. The stabilizing network
Figure 7.20 Multiband Speed Deviation Transducers
consists of three sets of band-pass filters for three different
frequency ranges. The filters are tuned for low frequency, VLmax
intermediate frequency and high frequency.
KL11 + sTL1 1+ sTL3 1+ sTL5 +
To build the stabilizing signal, the MB-PSS uses the KL1 KL
1+ sTL2 1+ sTL4 1+ sTL6
-
calculated speed deviation and active power. These VLmin
quantities are calculated from the primary electrical KL2
KL17 + sTL7 1+ sTL9 1+ sTL11
1+ sTL8 1+ sTL10 1+ sTL12
machine quantities (stator voltages and currents). Figure LI
7.20, shows the representation of the speed deviation VImax VSTmax
transducers that are required to feed the three band +
+
KI11 + sTI1 1+ sTI3 1+ sTI5 +

structure used as lead-lag compensation as shown in Figure KI1
1+ sTI2 1+ sTI4 1+ sTI6
KI
- +
7.21. VImin VSTmin
Two tunable notch filters are provided for applications in KI2
KI17 + sTI7 1+ sTI9 1+ sTI11
1+ sTI8 1+ sTI10 1+ sTI12
turbo generating units and are mainly intended for selective
rejection of the first and second torsion oscillation modes. VHmax

As shown in figure 7.21, each band-pass filter is formed KH1

KH11 + sTH1 1+ sTH3 1+ sTH5 +
KH
H 1+ sTH2 1+ sTH4 1+ sTH6
by the two branches of symmetrical lead-lag filters that -
VHmin
contain three lead-lag elements and three individual gain KL17 + sTH7 1+ sTH9 1+ sTH11
KH2
factors. This simple and robust filter structure provides a 1+ sTH8 1+ sTH10 1+ sTH12

remarkable tuning flexibility.

The low band is taking care of very slow oscillating Figure 7.21 Multiband PSS according to IEEE 421.5 2005 PSS4B
phenomena such as common modes found on isolated
system. The intermediate band is used for inter-area modes The lead-lag filter branches can be adjusted in many
usually found in the range of 0.2 to 0.8 Hz. The high band different ways upon the specific application needs. Figure
is dealing with inter-machine/plant and local modes. 7.22 shows in a detailed view of the high frequency band
pass filter.
KH11 + sTH1 1+ sTH3 1+ sTH5 +
KH1 KH
H 1+ sTH2 1+ sTH4 1+ sTH6
-

KL17 + sTH7 1+ sTH9 1+ sTH11

KH2
1+ sTH8 1+ sTH10 1+ sTH12

- 63 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

Figure 7.22 The high frequency band differential filter

Each band pass filter branch has an independent output

MW Deviation
10

limitation for the individual influence restriction according 0

to the needs stabilizing in the three different frequency 10

ranges. The resulting stabilizing signal is formed by the 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

summation of all three filters and the maximum and

PSS Signal(%)
0

minimum amplitudes of stabilizing signal can be limited as 1

well by individual and adjustable maximum and minimum 2
PSS4B(Normal Gain)
PSS4B(High Gain)
Existing PSS
adjustable limitation parameters. 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

A. Tuning Methodology 0.02

Speed Deviation(Hz)
Each branch of a differential filter was designed to
0

provide similar flexibility to a conventional PSS. Taking 0.02

the figure 7.21 as base and concentrating just in the high 0.04

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

frequency filter branch, it has two lead-lag blocks and an Time in seconds

hybrid block that either can be used as washing-out when Figure 7.23a MVAr step response in LG2 HPS-simulation
KH11= K17=0 or for lead-lagging when KH11=KH17=1. With
such an arrangement, one can use a single branch (the
+50MVARS STEP
positive or negative) to tune the PSS similar to the usual
PSS.

MW Deviation
10

As published in [92], [93] there are different ways to 0

tune the parameters of MB-PSS, however, the simplest and 10

most natural tuning strategy of the differential band filters 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

is the symmetrical approach as presented in [92]. With this

approach, it is possible to set the PSS with only two high- PSS Signal(%) 0

level parameters and the whole lead-lag compensation 1 PSS4BNormal Gain (Test #7d16)
PSS4BHigh Gain(Test #17d16)
circuit is defined by six parameters. They are the three filter 2
Existing PSS (Test #5d16)

central frequencies FL, FI, FH and gains KL, KI, KH. 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

The time constants and gains are derived from simple 0.02
Speed Deviation(Hz)

equations as shown in [92] and on annex H21 of [36]. 0

B. Application Experience 0.02

0.04
Beside the several laborious theoretical investigations, 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Hydro Qubec also is carrying out extensive field testing of Time in seconds

the MB-PSS equipment. The obtained field results were

Figure 7.23b MVAr step response in LG2 HPS-field test
also compared with other conventional PSS technologies
and published in [92] and [93]. The example of figure 7.23 The system response for the new MB-PSS (red) and
shows 50MVAR step in closed loop (applied to one out of original PSS (blue) are being compared. Interestingly, it
sixteen generators) in the La Grande 2 (LG2) hydro power may be observed that the MB-PSS response to the global
station. mode is such that it significantly contributes to a reduction
Figure 7.23a is showing the simulation results and figure of the plant frequency deviation by decreasing its generator
7.23b the results obtained during field testing. The blue and output voltage in accordance with the decreasing speed. On
red curves represent the signals (active power deviation, the other hand, the original PSS, with its inherent transfer
PSS output signal and speed deviation) obtained with two function limitations, can not be properly tuned at this mode
different gain levels of MB-PSS (high and low gain). The and reacts in a reverse way. The resulting frequency
black curves correspond to the response to the original deviation is 0.12 Hz instead of 0.02 Hz with the MB-PSS.
conventional PSS installed prior to the inclusion of MB-
PSS. This practical case illustrates the superior
performance of MB-PSS when compared with the original
PSS equipment.
For the same LG2 HPS, Figure 7.24 shows a MW step
response for which both global (0.05Hz) and inter area
(0.5Hz) oscillation modes are excited.

- 64 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

M W S TE P - B b lu e : A c tu a l L G 2 P S S ; R e d : M B -P S S ( N o r m a l G ai n )

0 M B - P S S i n c lo s e d -lo o p ( T e s t # 1 0 d 1 6 )
C on ve n ti o n a l P S S i n c lo s e d - l o o p ( T e s t # 4 d 1 6 )
MW Deviation -1 0
-2 0
-3 0
-4 0
-5 0
-6 0
0 5 10 15

1
0 .5
PSS Signal(%)

0
- 0 .5
-1
- 1 .5
-2
0 5 10 15

0
Speed Deviation(Hz)

- 0 .0 2
- 0 .0 4
- 0 .0 6
- 0 .0 8
- 0 .1
- 0 .1 2
0 5 10 15

20

Fig 7.25b 1% setpoint pulse test with MB-PSS in service

MVAR Deviation

-2 0

-4 0

-6 0
G e n tilly 2 e ve nt r e c o r d e d o n J ul y 1 8 , 2 0 0 0 1 2 : 1 8 d ur i n g o p en - lo o p te s ti n g o f th e M B - P S S
0 5 10 15
sec R a w S p e e d E s tim a te s
0 .2

0 .15

Deviation (Hz)
0 .1
Figure 7.24 MW step response test in closed loop at LG2
0 .05

Figure 7.24 shows the results of a 1% AVR setpoint - 0 .0 5

pulse done in the unit 3 of Outardes HPS. The tests were

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

carried out at power level of 200MW. Figure 7.23a shows 0 .15 T un e d -N o tc h F ilte r e d S p e e d
f n 1= 9 .9 5 Hz a nd f n 2 = 17 . 8 2 H z

the system response without PSS and figure 7.23b with 0 .1

Deviation (Hz)

MB-PSS. Also in this case a significant damping

0 .05
improvement has been achieved.
Tests have also been carried out in Gentilly Nuclear 0

Power Station in order to verify the influence of torsional 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

modes on MB-PSS signal. Figure 7.26 shows for an open 0 .06

N o m i na l G a i n M B - P S S

loop test the raw speed signal including torsional

0 .05 1 0 x C o n ve n ti on a l P S S

0 .04

oscillation modes, the filtered speed signal after the notch 0 .03
PSS (p.u.)

0 .02

filters and the MB-PSS output signal compared with the 0 .01

conventional PSS (values multiplied by 10). From these - 0 .0 1

measurements, it is possible to verify how effective the 2 4 6 8 10

T i m e (s e c )
12 14 16 18 20

notch filters are suppressing the turbo-machine 9.95 Hz and

17.82 Hz main torsional modes while not affecting the MB-
Fig 7.26 Measurement of torsional modes on PSS signal
PSS.

C. Multiband PSS Conclusions

After years of theoretical investigations [91] - [93],
equipment development and extensive field testing, the
MB-PSS is proving its efficacy and flexibility for all kind
of electromechanical oscillation modes. Due to its robust
and flexible structure it can be tuned in order to attend all
specific power system needs on damping enhancement.
The notch filters are able to suppress any kind of
undesired influence of torsional modes on turbo units and
provides a very selective stabilizing signal in the frequency
range of interest.
Since 2005 the MB-PSS is included in the IEEE 421.5
2005 and named as PSS-4B and most commercial power
system analysis software already includes the PSS-4B
Figure 7.25a 1% setpoint pulse test with MB-PSS out of model.
service Due to its properties and characteristics, the MB-PSS

- 65 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

will certainly play in important role on the world wide on

going restructuring of power systems and energy markets.

IX. CONCLUDING REMARKS

Power system stabilizers based on the control algorithms
described above have been studied extensively in
simulation. They have also been implemented and tested in
real-time on physical models in the laboratory with very
encouraging results. The pole-shifting control algorithm
based adaptive PSS has also been tested on a multi-
machine physical model [81], on a 400 MW thermal
machine under fully loaded conditions connected to the
system [82], and is now in regular service in a hydro power
station after extensive testing in the field [97]. These
studies have shown clearly the advantages of the advanced
control techniques and intelligent systems.
Very satisfactory adaptive controllers can be developed
and implemented using a number of approaches, i.e. purely
analytical, purely AI techniques or by amalgamating the
analytical and AI approaches. Which approach to use
depends upon the expertise of the designer and the
developer of the controller, and the confidence that they or
the client have in a particular technology.

- 66 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
CHAPTER 8
REFERENCES
[1] C.R.Wylie, Jr., "Advanced Engineering Mathematics" (3rd Edition),
McGraw-Hill.
[2] Robert A. Gabel, Richard A. Roberts, "Signals And Linear Systems,"
John Wiley & Sons.
[3] R. C. Dorf, "Modern control systems," Addison Wesley Co.
[4] Ogata, "Modern Control Engineering," Prentice Hall.
[5] O. I. Elgerd, "Control System Theory," McGraw-Hill.
[6] Kuo, "Automatic Control System," Prentice-Hall.
[7] Sivan & Kwakkernaak, "Linear Optimal Control Systems," John
Wiley.
[8] B. Watkins, "Introduction To Control Systems," McMillan
Company.
[9] Sage, "Optimum System Control," Prentice-Hall.
[10] "Excitation System Dynamics Characteristics," IEEE Committee
Report, pp. 64-75.
[11] E.J. Davison and N.S. Rao, "The Optimal Output Feedback Control
Of A Synchronous Machine," IEEE Winter Power Meeting, New
York, Jan. 31 -Feb. 5, 1971, pp. 2123-2134.
[12] A.K. Laha and K.E. Bollinger,. "Power Stabilizer Design Using
Pole-Placement Techniques On Approximate Power System
Models," Published in IEE Proceedings, Vol. 122, No. 9. September
1975, pp. 903-907.
[13] K.J. Astrom, U. Borisson, L. Ljung and B. Wittenmark, "On Self-
Tuning Regulators," Automatic, Vol. 9, 1973.
[14] M.A.H. Sheirah, O.P. Malik and G.S. Hope, "Self-Tuning Voltage
Regulator-Implementation And Test Results," Presented at IEE
Winter Power Meeting, New York, Feb. 1979, Abs. 79-060-5.
[15] K.E. Bollinger, P.A. Cook and P.S. Sandhu, "Synchronous Generator
Controller Synthesis Using Moving Boundary Search Techniques
With Frequency Domain Constraints," Presented at 1979 IEEE
Winter Power Meeting, New York No. F79-264-3. To be published
in full in PAS Transactions.
[16] MathWorks, Inc., MATLAB users guide, version 12.1.
[17] "Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control," IEEE Tutorial
course 1981, 81EHO175-0 PWR.
[18] "Excitation System Models For Power System Stability Studies,"
IEEE Committee Report, IEEE Transactions on Power Applications
and Systems Vol PAS-100, No.2, Feb 1981, pp.494-509.
[19] C.W. Taylor, "Power System Voltage Stability," McGraw-Hill, 1994.
[20] "Analysis And Modeling Needs Of Power Systems Under Major
Frequency Disturbances," CIGRE TF 38.02.14 report, January 1999
[21] A. Murdoch, S. Venkatraman, R. A. Lawson, W. R. Pearson,
"Integral Of Accelerating Power Type PSS Part 1 Theory, Design,
And Tuning Methodology," IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, Vol. 14, No. 4, December 1999.
[22] P. Kundur, "Power System Stability And Control," McGraw-Hill,
1994.
[23] F. P. de Mello and C. Concordia, "Concepts Of Synchronous
Machine Stability As Affected By Excitation Control," IEEE
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-88, April
1969, pp. 316-329.
[24] F.R. Schleif, J. H. White, "Damping For The Northwest-Southwest
Tie Line Oscillations - An Analog Study," IEEE Trans, Vol. PAS-85,
December 1966, pp. 1239-1246.
[25] F.R. Schleif, G.E. Martin, R.R. Angell, "Damping Of System
Oscillations With A Hydrogenerating Unit," IEEE Trans, Vol. PAS-
86, April 1967, pp. 438-442.
[26] F.R. Schleif, H.D. Hunkins, E.E. Hattan, W.B. Gish, "Control Of
Rotating Exciters For Power System Damping: Pilot Experience,"
IEEE Trans., Vol. 1969, pp. 1259-1266. Applications and PAS-88,
August.
[27] E. J. Warchol, F.R. Schleif, W. B. Gish, J.R. Church, "Alinement
And Modeling Of Hanfoid Excitation Control For System Damping,"
IEEE Trans., Vol. PAS-90, March/April 1971, pp. 714_724.
[28] A.D. Gerhart, T. Hillesland, Jr., J.F. Luini, M.L. Rockfield, Jr.,
"Power System Stabilizer Field Testing And Digital Simulation,"
IEEE Trans., Vol. PAS-90, September/October 1971, pp. 2095-2100.
- 67 -
[29] K.E. Bollinger, A. Laha, R. Hamilton, T. Harras, "Power System
Stabilizer Design Using Root Locus Methods," IEEE Trans., Vol.
PAS-94, September/ October 1975, pp. 1484-1488.
[30] P. Kundur, D.C. Lee, H.M. Zein El-Din, "Power System Stabilizers
For Thermal Units: Analytical Techniques And On-Site Validation,"
Trans PAS, Vol. PAS-100, Jan 1981, pp. 81-95.
[31] E.V. Larsen, D.A. Swann, "Applying Power System Stabilizers, Part
I: General Concepts," IEEE Trans PAS, Vol. PAS-100, June 1981,
pp. 3017-3032.
[32] Ibid, "Part II: Performance Objectives And Tuning Concepts," IEEE
Trans PAS, Vol. PAS-100, June 1981, pp. 3025-3033.
[33] Ibid, "Part III: Practical Considerations," IEEE Trans PAS, Vol.
PAS-100, June 1981, pp. 3034-3046.
[34] M.L. Crenshaw, J.F. Cutler, G.F. Wright, and W.J. Reid, Power
System Stabilizer Application in a Two-unit Plant Analytical
Studies and Field Tests, trans PAS, Vol 102, No. 2, Feb 83, pp. 267-
274.
[35] R. Grondin, et. al., An Approach to PSS Design for Transient
Stability Improvement Through Supplementary Damping of the
Common Low-Frequency, IEEE Trans. PWRS, Vol. 8, No. 3,
August 1993, pp. 954-963.
[36] IEEE Recommended Practice for Excitation System Models for
Power System Stability Studies, IEEE Standard 421.5 -2005.
[37] A. Murdoch, H.C. Sanderson, and R.A. Lawson, Excitation
Systems-Performance Specification to Meet Interconnection
Requirements, IEEE Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting,
2000, Vol. 1, pp. 597-602.
[38] A. Murdoch, S. Venkataraman, R.A. Lawson, "Integral of
Accelerating Power Type PSS - Part 2 - Field Testing and
Performance Verification", IEEE Trans. EC, Vol 14, No. 4,
December 1999, pp. 1664-1672.
[39] A. Murdoch, S. Venkataraman, J.J. Sanchez-Gasca, R.A. Lawson,
Practical Application Considerations for Power System Stabilizer
Controls, IEEE Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, 1999,
Vol. 1, pp. 83-87.
[40] E.V. Larsen and W.W. Price, MANSTAB/POSSIM Power System
Dynamic Analysis Programs A new Approach Combining
NonLinear Simulation and Linearized State-Space/Frequency
Domain Capabilities IEEE PICA proceeding, 1977, pp. 350-359.
[41] R.A. Lawson, D.A. Swann, and G.F. Wright, Minimization of
Power System Stabilizer Torsional Interaction on Large Steam
Turbine-Generator IEEE Trans. PAS, Vol. 97, Jan./Feb. 1978, pp.
183-190.
[42] M. Klein, G.J. Rogers, P. Kundur, A Fundamental Study of Inter-
Area Ocillation in Power Systems, IEEE Trans PWRS, Vol. 6,
No.3, Aug. 1991, pp. 914-921.
[43] Martins, A.A. Barbosa, J.C.R. Ferraz, M.G. dos Santos, A.L.B.
Bergamo, C.S. Yung, V.R. Oliveira, N.J.P. Macedo, "Retuning
stabilizers for the north-south Brazilian interconnection," Panel on
System Reliability as Affected by Power System Stabilizers, IEEE
Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, 18-22 July 1999, vol.
1, pp. 58 -67.
[44] J. M. Soares, et. al., Operational Aspects of the Actuation of Power
System Stabilizers: Coordination with Protection and other
Controllers, V SEPOPE, May 19-24, 1996 Recife. Brazil.
[45] E.F. Figeiredo, et. al., The Brazilian Experience on the Utilization
of Stabilizing Signals for Damping Electromechanical Oscillations -
Survey of Problems Found, Methods and Solutions Adopted and
Recommendations, Paper 38-101, CIGRE, 1994 Session.
[46] K.E. Bollinger, L.D. Nettleton and J.H. Gurney, Reducing the
Effect of Penstock Pressure Pulsations on Hydro Electric Plant
Power System Stabilizer Signals, IEEE Trans. EC, Vol. 8, No. 4,
December 1993, pp. 628-631.
[47] K.E. Bollinger and S.Z. Ao, PSS Performance as Affected by its
Output Limiter, IEEE Trans. EC, Vol. 11, No. 1, March 1996, pp.
118-124.
[48] K.E. Bollinger, et.al. Experience with Digital Power System
Stabilizer at Steam and Hydro Generating Stations, IEEE Trans.
EC, Vol. 8, No. 2, June 1993, pp. 172-177.
[49] R.J. Koessler, R.C. Cough, J.N. Jack and W.D. Hurley, Testing
Power System Stabilisers at Teesside Power Project, 1995 Power
Generation Technology, Sterling Publications, London, ISSN 0951-
1361.
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
[50] M. Klein, G.J. Rogers, S. Moorty, P. Kundur, Analytical
Investigation of Factors Influencing Power System Stabilizers
Performance, IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. 7,
September 1992, pp. 382-390.
[51] Analysis and Control of Power System Oscillations, CIGRE Task
Force 38.01.07 Final Report, December 1996.
[52] P.L. Dandeno, A.N. Karas, K.R. McClymont, and W. Watson,
"Effect Of High-Speed Rectifier Excitation Systems On Generator
Stability Limits," IEEE Trans., Vol. PAS-87, pp. 190-201, January
1968.
[53] P. Kundur, M. Klein, G.J. Rogers, and M.S. Zywno, "Application Of
Power System Stabilizers For Enhancement Of Overall System
Stability," IEEE Trans., Vol. PWRS-4, pp. 614-626, May 1989.
[54] W. Watson and G. Manchur, "Experience With Supplementary
Damping Signals For Generator Static Excitation Systems," IEEE
Trans., Vol. PAS-92, pp. 199-203, January/February 1973.
[55] W. Watson and M.E. Coultes, "Static Exciter Stabilizing Signals On
Large Generators Mechanical Problems," IEEE Trans., PAS-92,
pp. 204-212, January/ February 1973.
[56] F.P. deMello, L.N. Hannett, and J.M. Undrill, Practical Approaches
To Supplementary Stabilizing from Accelerating Power," IEEE
Trans., Vol. PAS-97, pp. 1515-1522, September/October 1978.
[57] D.C. Lee, R.E., Beaulieu, and J.R.R. Service, "A Power System
Stabilizer Using Speed And Electrical Power Inputs Design And
Field Experience," IEEE Trans., Vol. PAS-100, pp. 4151-4167,
September 1981.
[58] J.P. Bayne, D.C. Lee, W. Watson, "A Power System Stabilizer For
Thermal Units Based On Derivation Of Accelerating Power," IEEE
Trans., Vol. PAS-96, Nov/Dec 1977, pp 1777-1783.
[59] F.W. Keay, W.H. South, "Design Of A Power System Stabilizer
Sensing Frequency Deviation," IEEE Trans., Vol. PAS-90, Mar/Apr
1971, pp 707-713.
[60] J.M.C. Soares, F.H. Pons, F.Reichert, D.O. Reis, "Modelling And
Field Tests Of A Supplementary Stabilizing Signal For General
Use," National Seminar on the Generation and Transmission of
Electrical Energy, Brazil, 1987.
[61] P. Kundur, G.R. Berube, L.M. Hajagos, R.E. Beaulieu, Practical
Utility Experience with and Effective Use of Power System
Stabilizers, IEEE PES Meeting July 2003, Vol 3, pp 1777-1785
[62] "IEEE Guide for Identification, Testing, And Evaluation Of The
Dynamic Performance Of Excitation Control Systems" IEEE
Standard 421.2-1990.
[63] M.M. El-Metwally, N.D. Rao, and O.P. Malik, "Experimental
Results On The Implementation Of An Optimal Control Of
Synchronous Machines," IEEE Trans. on Power Apparatus and
Systems, Vol. PAS-94(4), 1975, pp. 1192-1200.
[64] S. Chen. and O.P. Malik, "An H Optimization Based Power System
Stabilizer Design," IEE Proceedings-Generation, Transmission and
Distribution, Vol. 142(2), 1995, pp. 179-184.
[65] W.C. Chan, and Y.Y. Hsu, "An Optimal Variable Structure Stabilizer
For Power System Stabilizer," IEEE Trans. on Power Apparatus and
Systems, Vol. PAS-102, 1983, pp. 1738-1746.
[66] T. Hiyama, "Application Of Rule-Based Stabilizer Controller To
Electric Power System," IEE Proceedings C, Vol. 136(3), 1989, pp.
175-181.
[67] L.H. Zadeh, et. al., "Calculus Of Fuzzy Restriction In Fuzzy Sets
And Their Application To Cognitive And Decision Process,"
Academic Press, 1975, pp. 1-40.
[68] K.A. El-Metwally, G.C. Hancock,. and O.P. Malik, "Implementation
Of A Fuzzy Logic PSS Using A Micro-Controller And Experimental
Test Results," IEEE Trans. on Energy Conversion, Vol. 11(1), 1996,
pp. 91-96.
[69] Y. Zhang, O.P. Malik, and G.P. Chen, "Artificial Neutral Network
Power System Stabilizer In Multi-Machine Power System
Environment," IEEE Trans. on Energy Conversion, Vol. 10(1), 1995,
pp. 147-155.
[70] Abdelazim, Tamer and O.P. Malik, "Power System Stabilizer Based
On Model Reference Adaptive Fuzzy Control," Electric Power
Components and Systems, Vol. 33(9), 2005, pp. 985-998.
[71] O.P. Malik, G.P. Chen, G.S. Hope, Y.H. Qin, and G.Y. Yu,
"Adaptive Self-Optimizing Pole-Shifting Control Algorithm," IEE
Proceedings-D, Vol. 139(5), 1992, pp. 429-438.
- 68 -
[72] M. Mamdani, Application Of Fuzzy Algorithm For Control Of
Simple Dynamic Plant," Proc. IEE, Vol. 121(12), 1974, pp. 1585-
1588.
[73] P. Eykhoff, "System Identification," Wiley London, 1974.
[74] S.J. Cheng, Y.S. Chow, O.P. Malik, and G.S. Hope, "An Adaptive
Synchronous Machine Stabilizer," IEEE Trans. on Power Systems,
Vol. PWRS-1(3), 1986, pp. 101-109.
[75] B.D.O. Anderson, J.B. and Moore, "Linear Optimal Control,"
Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1971.
[76] K.J. Astrom, U. Borisson, L. Ljung, and B. Wittenmark, "Theory
And Application Of Self-Tuning Regulators," Automatica, Vol. 13,
1977, pp. 457-476.
[77] P.E. Wellstead, J.M. Edmunds, D. Prager, and P. Zanka, "Self-
Tuning Pole/Zero Assignment Regulators," Intl. J. of Control, Vol.
30, 1979, pp. 1-26.
[78] P.E. Wellstead, D. Prager, and P. Zanka, "Pole-Assignment Self-
Tuning Regulator," Proc. IEE, Vol. 126, 1979, pp. 781-787.
[79] S.J. Cheng, O.P. Malik, and G.S. Hope, "Damping Of Multi-Modal
Oscillations In Power Systems Using A Dual-Rate Adaptive
Stabilizer," IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, Vol. PWRS-3(1), 1988,
pp. 101-108.
[80] G.P. Chen, O.P. Malik,. and G.C. Hancock, "Implementation and
Experimental Studies Of An Adaptive Self-Optimizing Power
System Stabilizer," Control Engineering Practice, Vol. 2(6), 1994,
pp. 969-977.
[81] O.P. Malik, V.A. Stroev, V.A. Strobel, G.C. Hancock, and R.S.
Beim, "Experimental Studies With Power System Stabilizers On A
Physical Model Of A Multi-Machine Power System," IEEE Trans.
on Power Systems, Vol. 11(2), 1996, pp. 807-812.
[82] O.P. Malik, C.X. Mao, K.S. Prakash, G.S. Hope and G.C. Hancock,
"Tests With A Microcomputer Based Adaptive Synchronous
Machine Stabilizer On A 400MW Thermal Unit," IEEE Trans. on
Energy Conversion, Vol. 8(1), 1993, pp. 6-12.
[83] P. Shamsollahi and O.P. Malik, "An Adaptive Power System
Stabilizer Using On-Line Trained Neutral Networks," IEEE Trans.
on Energy Conversion, Vol. 12(4), 1997, pp. 382-387.
[84] A. Hariri. and O.P. Malik, "A Self-Learning Adaptive-Network-
Based Fuzzy Logic Power System Stabilizer In A Multi-Machine
Power System," Engineering Intelligent Systems, Vol. 9(3),
September 2001, pp. 129-136.
[85] J.G. Jang, "Adaptive-Network-Based Fuzzy Inference System,"
IEEE Trans. on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Vol. 23(3), 1993, pp.
665-684.
[86] A. Hariri, A. and Malik, O.P., "A Fuzzy Logic Based Power System
Stabilizer With Learning Ability," IEEE Trans. on Energy
Conversion, Vol. 11(4), 1996, pp. 721-727.
[87] J.G. Jang, "Self-Learning Fuzzy Controllers Based On Temporal
Backpropagation," IEEE Trans on Neural Networks, Vol. 3(5), 1992,
pp. 714-723.
[88] Abdelazim, Tamer and O.P. Malik, "Fuzzy Logic Based Identifier
And Pole-Shifting Controller For PSS Application," Proceedings,
IEEE Power Engineering Society 2003 General Meeting, July 13-17,
2003, Toronto, Canada.
[89] J.M. Adams and K.S. Rattan, "Backpropagation Learning For A
Fuzzy Controller With Partitioned Membership Functions,"
Proceedings, NAFIPS 2002 Annual Meeting of the North American
Fuzzy Information Processing Society, pp. 172-177.
[90] Abdelazim, Tamer and O.P. Malik, "An Adaptive Power System
Stabilizer Using On-Line Self-Learning Fuzzy System,"
Proceedings, IEEE Power Engineering Society 2003 General
Meeting, July 13-17, 2003, Toronto, Canada.
[91] R. Grondin, I. Kamwa, G.Trudel, J. Taborda, R. Lenstroem, L.
Grin-Lajoie, J.P. Gingras, M. Racine, and H. Baumberger, "The
Multi-Band PSS: A flexible Technology Designed to Meet Opening
Markets," CIGRE 2000 in Paris, Paper 39-201.
[92] R. Grondin, I. Kamwa, G.Trudel, J. Taborda. "Modeling and closed-
loop validation of a new PSS concept, the Multi-Band PSS" IEEE
Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, 2003, panel section.
[93] I. Kamwa, R. Grondin, G.Trudel, " IEEE PSS2B versus PSS4B: The
Limits of Performance of Modern Power System Stabilizers", IEEE
Trans. on Power Systems, Vol. 20. No.2 May 2005, pp 903-915
[94] L.Grin-Lajoie, D. Lefebvre, M. Racine, L. Soulires, I. Kamwa,
"Hydro-Qubec Experience with PSS tuning", Panel on System
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

Reliability as Affected by Power System Stabilizers, IEEE Power

Engineering Society Summer Meeting, 18-22 July 1999, vol. 1, pp.
88-95.
[95] I. Kamwa, G. Trudel, L. Grin-Lajoie, "Low-Order Black-Box
Models for Control System Design in Large Power Systems," IEEE
Trans. on Power Systems, 11 (1), Feb. 1996, pp. 303-312.
[96] I. Kamwa, L. Grin-Lajoie, "State-Space Identification - Towards
MIMO Models for Modal Analysis and Optimization of Bulk Power
Systems," paper PE-192-PWRS-0-06-1998, to appear in IEEE Trans.
on PWRS
[97] Eichmann, Armin, Kohler, Allessandro, O.P. Malik, and Jos
Taborda, "A Prototype Self-Tuning Adaptive Power System
Stabilizer For Damping Active Power Swings," Conference
Proceedings, Vol. 1, IEEE Power Engineering Society 2000 Summer
Meeting, 16-20 July, Seattle, pp. 122-127.

- 69 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007
CHAPTER 9
BIOGRAPHIES
J. C. Agee received his BSEE degree
from Rose-Hulman Institute of
Technology in 1979. Upon graduation,
he joined the Bureau of Reclamation as a
power systems engineer. He is currently
employed in the Hydroelectric Research
and Technical Services Group as a
technical specialist in the fields of
governor control, excitation control, and power system
stability. His research interests include feedback control
systems, digital control, and power system stability
analysis. He is a senior member of IEEE, past chair of the
Excitation Systems Subcommittee, and is currently chair of
the IEEE Energy Development & Power Generation
Committee.
Roger Beaulieu graduated from the
University of Waterloo in Ontario
Canada, with a B.A.Sc, in 1967. After
a 26-year career at Ontario Hydro, in
the areas of power system protection,
stabilizers and power system modelling
and testing, he retired to the life of an
adviser to utilities and electrical
equipment manufacturers. He is a senior engineer with
Goldfinch Power Engineering.
Roger Brub received his Bachelor
and Masters of Engineering degrees
from McGill University in Montreal
Canada 1981 and 1982 respectively.
He worked for Ontario Hydro between
1982 and 2000 in various roles
involving the design, testing and
simulation of generator control systems.
Since 2000 he has been working as Senior Engineer with
Kestrel Power Engineering Ltd. a leading firm in the area
of generator control consulting and regulator compliance
testing. He is a member of the IEEE Power Engineering
Society and a participant in the Excitation Systems Sub-
Committee and associated Working Groups.
Dr. George E. Boukarim received the
B.S., M.E., and Ph.D. degrees in
electric power engineering from
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy,
NY, in 1987, 1988, and 1998,
respectively. From 1988 to 1994 and
from 1998 to the present he was with
the Power Systems Energy Consulting
(PSEC) Department of the General Electric Company,
Schenectady, NY, working in the area of power system
- 70 -
dynamics and control. He also worked for the Transmission
Technology Institute, ABB Power T&D Company,
Raleigh, NC, for a short period from 1997 to 1998. His
interests include robust multivariable control, and power
system dynamics and control.
Murray Coultes has an electrical
engineering degree from the University
of Western Ontario and an MBA from
the University of Toronto. He worked
at Ontario Hydro Research on the early
development of speed-based power
system stabilizers and frequency
response testing for generator models.
He then moved to Ontario Hydro Operations and retired in
1993 as the System Security Manager. Since then, he has
been a senior engineer at Goldfinch Power Engineering
where he works on excitation system testing and modeling
and commissioning power system stabilizers.
Robert Grondin received his B.Sc.A.
in Electrical Engineering from
University of Sherbrooke, Canada in
1976 and his M.Sc.from INRS Energie,
Varennes, Canada in 1979. He then
joined Hydro-Qubec research
institute, IREQ. Currently a Senior
Research Engineer in the Power
System Analysis, Operation and Control Department, he is
leading research activities in the field of power system
dynamics and defense plans. Member of IEEE Power
Engineering society and of CIGR, he is also a registered
professional engineer in province of Qubec, Canada
Professor Arjun Godhwani is an
emeritus professor of Electrical
Engineering at Southern Illinois
University Edwardsville. He has been
a member of IEEE Excitation Systems
Subcommittee for over 10 years. He
actively consults in the field of
excitation systems.
Les Hajagos received his B.A.Sc. in
1985 and his M.A.Sc. in 1987 from
the University of Toronto. Since 1988
he has worked mainly in the analysis,
design, testing and modeling of
generator, turbine and power system
control equipment and power system
loads, first at Ontario Hydro, and since 2000 as one of the
principals at Kestrel Power Engineering. He is a registered
Professional Engineer in the Province of Ontario and an
active member of the IEEE Power Engineering Society as
chair of the Generator Model Validation and Excitation
System Modeling task forces.
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

Dr. Innocent Kamwa received a PhD Dr. Alexander Murdoch is received

in electrical engineering from Laval the B.S.E.E. degree from Worcester
University, Qubec, Canada, 1988, Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA,
after graduating in 1984 at the same in 1970, and the M.S.E.E. and Ph.D.
university. Since then, he has been degrees from Purdue University, West
with the Hydro-Qubec Research Lafayette, IN, in 1972 and 1975,
Institute, where he is at present a respectively. Currently, he is a
Principal Researcher with interests Consulting Engineer with General
broadly in bulk system dynamic Electric, working in Energy Consulting, Schenectady, NY.
performance. Since 1990, he has held an associate He joined General Electric in 1975 and has worked
professor position in Electrical Engineering at Laval primarily at Energy Consulting but also for Drive System,
University. A member of CIGR, Dr. Kamwa is a recipient Salem, VA. His areas of interest include rotating machine
of the 1998 and 2003 IEEE PES Prize Paper Awards and is modeling, excitation system design and testing, and
currently serving on the System Dynamic Performance advanced control theory. Dr. Murdoch is a member of the
Committee AdCom. He is also the acting Standard Excitation System Subcommittee in the IEEE.
Coordinator of the PES Electric Machinery Committee.
Shawn Patterson received his BS and
Professor Om P. Malik has done MS degrees in Electrical Engineering
pioneering work in the development of from the University of Colorado in
adaptive and artificial intelligence 1985 and 1995. He works for the
based controllers for application in Bureau of Reclamation specializing in
electric power systems over the past power system stability, computer
thirty years. After extensive testing in modeling, and technical studies. He is
the laboratory and in actual power a registered Professional Engineer in the state of Colorado
systems, these controllers are now and an active member of the WECC Modeling and
employed on large generating units. Validation Work Group and IEEE PES working groups.
Professor Malik graduated in 1952 from Delhi
Polytechnic, India. After working for nine years in electric Jos Taborda was born in Brazil
utilities in India, he returned to academia and obtained a 1961. He received the degree on
Masters Degree from Roorkee University, India in 1962, a electrical engineering from the
Ph.D. from London University and a DIC from the University of So Paulo in 1985.
Imperial College, London in 1965. Since 1985 he has been working for
He was teaching and doing research in Canada from ABB where he occupied several
1966 to 1997 and continues to do research as Professor positions starting from development,
Emeritus at the University of Calgary, Canada. commissioning, design, product management, technical
Professor Malik is a Fellow of the Engineering Institute sales support and electrical studies. His speciality is
of Canada, Canadian Academy of Engineering, Institution control systems and power electronics applied to electrical
of Electrical Engineers, World Innovation Foundation and machines. Jos Taborda is IEEE member and currently
a Life Fellow of IEEE. He has received many awards from working as senior system consultant of Excitation System
IEEE, EIC and APPEGA and the University of Calgary. He Group in ABB Switzerland Ltd.
is a member of the Association of Professional Engineers,
Geologists and Geophysicists of Alberta and Professional Robert Thornton-Jones received his
Engineers Ontario. Professor Malik is also actively BEng. Degree in Electrical and
involved in IFAC and is currently Chair of the IFAC Electronic Engineering in 1986 from
Technical Committee on Power Plants and Power Systems the University of Bradford, United
Control. Kingdom, after which he joined Brush
Electrical Machines Ltd. He specializes
in generator excitation systems and
power management systems for
industrial power generation projects providing load
shedding, automatic generator dispatch, power and power
factor control. Robert is a Chartered Engineer in the
United Kingdom, a member of the IET, a member of the
IEEE Power Engineering Society and a participant in the
Excitation Systems Sub-Committee and associated
Working Groups.

- 71 -
 IEEE Tutorial Course Power System Stabilization via Excitation Control June 2007

Gilles Trudel received his B.Sc.A.

(1978) and M.Eng (1986) in Electrical
Engineering from cole Polytechnique
Universit de Montral, Canada. In
1978, he joined Hydro-Qubec, where
he was first involved in the design of
control and protection for substations.
Eight years later, he moved to the
System Planning department where he is now involved in
high-voltage network planning and design of special
protection systems.Trudel is a member of the IEEE Power
Engineering Society and a registered professional engineer
in the province of Qubec.

- 72 -