I. H. Altas and J.

Neyens, A Fuzzy Logic Load-Frequency Controller for Power Systems, International

Symposium on Mathematical Methods in Engineering, MME-06, Cankaya University\ Ankara, Turkey, April
27 - 29 , 2006.

A Fuzzy Logic Load-Frequency Controller

for Power Systems

smail H. Alta1 and Jelle Neyens2

1
Department Of Electrical and Electronics Engineering,
Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey
[email protected]

2
Department Electrical energy, Systems & Automation,
Gent university, Gent, Belgium
[email protected]

Abstract A fuzzy logic based load frequency controller model for power systems is
developed and simulated in this paper. The proposed simulation model is compared
with the classical regulating systems in order to verify and show the advantages of
the model and controller developed. The design process of the proposed fuzzy logic
controller is given in detail step by step to show a direct and simple approach for de-
signing fuzzy logic controllers in power systems.

1 Introduction
Load-Frequency (L-F) control is an important task in electrical power system design and
operation. Since the load demand varies without any prior schedule, the power generation
is expected to overcome these variations without any voltage and frequency instabilities.
Therefore voltage and frequency controllers are required to maintain the generated power
quality in order to supply constant voltage and frequency to the utility grid. The fre-
quency control is done by load-frequency controllers, which deals with the control of
generator loadings depending on the frequency. Many research has been done and differ-
ent approaches has been proposed over the past decades regarding the load-frequency
control of single and multi area power systems [1-12].
The main purpose of designing load-frequency controllers is to ensure the stable and re-
liable operation of power systems. Since the components of a power system are non lin-
ear, a linearized model around an operating point is used in the design process of L-F
controllers. Some of the proposed methods in literature deal with system stability using
fixed local plant models ignoring the changes on some system parameters [8-12].
Fuzzy set theory provides a methodology that allows modeling of the systems that are
too complex or not well defined by mathematical formulation. Fuzzy logic controllers
based on fuzzy set theory are used to represent the experience and knowledge of a human
operator in terms of linguistic variables that are called fuzzy rules. Since an experienced
human operator adjusts the system inputs to get a desired output by just looking at the
ALTA, NEYENS

system output without any knowledge on the systems dynamics and interior parameter
variations, the implementation of linguistic fuzzy rules based on the procedures done by
human operators does not also require a mathematical model of the system. Therefore a
fuzzy logic controller (FLC) becomes nonlinear and adaptive in nature having a robust
performance under parameter variations with the ability to get desired control actions for
complex, uncertain, and nonlinear systems without the requirement of their mathematical
models and parameter estimation. Fuzzy logic based controllers provide a mathematical
foundation for approximate reasoning, which has been proven to be very successful in a
variety of applications [10].
As in many different areas, the use of fuzzy logic controller has been increased rapidly
in power systems, such as in load-frequency control, bus bar voltage regulation, stability,
load estimation, power flow analysis, parameter estimation, protection systems, and many
other fields. Fuzzy logic applications in power systems are given in [8] with a detailed
survey.
Any load change in one of the L-F control areas affect the tie line power flow causing
other L-F control areas to generate the required power to damp the power and frequency
oscillations. The response time of the L-F controllers is very important to have the power
system to gain control with increased stability margins. Therefore the proposed L-F con-
troller must reduce the response time as well as reducing the magnitude of the oscillations
when compared to that of classical types.
The results of the classical controller and the fuzzy logic controller are compared, and
since the response time of the stabilizer of the load frequency is very important, a quicker
an more stable solution is achieved with FL controller than the one found by controlling
in a classical way

2 The Load-Frequency (L-F) Control

The principle block of the power system studied in this paper is given in Figure 1. Two
parts of this system can be considered. A considerable attention should be pay to the
LFC (Load Frequency Control) section. Changes in real power mainly affect the system
frequency, while reactive power is less sensitive to changes in frequency and is mainly
dependent on changes in voltage magnitude. The LFC thus controls the real power and
the frequency of the system. It also has a major role in the interconnection of different
power plants [6].
The LFC is used to maintain a reasonable uniform frequency. The first step of control
engineering consists of mathematical modeling. Two methods are well-known: the trans-
fer function method and the steady state method. Linear systems can not often be found
in real situations, but a close approximation by linearizing is suitable for simulation. A
simulation model derived here using the transfer function model [6]. The block diagram
that represents the approximation of the real system behaviors is shown in Figure 2. This
is a small signal model used to represent the influence of load changes.
The source of mechanical power, commonly known as the prime mover, may be either
hydraulic energy or steam. The mathematical model for the turbine relates the changes in
mechanical power output Pm to changes in steam valve position PV. Both Pm and PV
are represented by x2 and x1, respectively, in Figure 2. The most simple prime mover
model can be approximated with a single time constant such as the one given by g in
Figure 2 where the variables x1, x2, x3 and x4 are equal to PV, Pm, and output of the
 A FUZZY LOGIC LOAD-FREQUENCY CONTROLLER FOR POWER SYSTEMS

integral controller signal, respectively. The steady state equations can be drawn from the
simulation diagram easily as in Equation (1).

Water or
steam input
vfs
Controlled
gate
Substation

Turbine EXCITER GENERATOR

Transmission
vt a
vLL

lines
-
Rectifier
vt
GOV
+
AVR

+
- vt Power
grid
ref vref

Figure 1. Control block diagram of the power system.

+ 1 1 x1 + 1 1 x2 + -
g s T s
- -

x3 PL
- 1 1 1 +
R s 2H
- - impulse
x4 1
Ki s D
plot
Figure 2. Simulation block diagram of a single area power system with an integral controller.

1 1 1
0
g x1 0
x&1 g gR

x& 1 1
2 = 0 0 x2 + 0 P (1)
1
x&3 T T
x3 2 H
0 1 D
x& 4 0 x4 0
2H 2H
0 0 KI 0

3 Fuzzy Logic Controller

As explained in the introduction, the FLC performs the same actions as a human operator
by adjusting the input variables, only looking at the system output. The controller con-
sists of three sections: fuzzifier, rule base and defuzzifier, as shown in Figure 3. The
fuzzifier first converts its two input signals, the main signal ( in this case), and the step
change of every sample (), to fuzzy numbers. This numbers are the input of the rule
table, which calculates the fuzzy-number of the controlled output signal by taking the
right decisions. Finally this resulting number is converted in the defuzzifier to the crisp
values.
ALTA, NEYENS

As the classical controller the FLC also Fuzzy Inference System P(k-1)
has an integrating part to be implemented. (k)

Defuzzifier
( P(k)) +

Fuzzifier
Therefore the controller has to be designed + ((k))
Rule
in such a way that the resultant incre- Base +
mental output (P(k)) is added to the -
previous value (P(k-1) to yield the cur- (k1) P(k)
rent output (P(k). It should be noted
that this is nothing but the digital imple- Figure 3. Basic structure of fuzzy logic
mentation of an integrator, using Euler controller.
integration.
The FL rules in the FLC are developed to yield a similar but more effective output than
an integrator gives. The difference between a fuzzy logic controller and an integral con-
troller is the procedure used to calculate (P(k)).

3.1 Fuzzy Inference System

Figure 3, there are two inputs to the fuzzy inference system. The first one is the change
in angular velocity, the other one is the change of it ((k)). As we want the angular
velocity to be constant, the change of this velocity can be considered as the disturbance of
the system, and should be reduced to zero as soon as possible. These two inputs are
fuzzified and converted to fuzzy membership values that are used in the rule base in order
to execute the related rules so that an output can be generated. The fuzzy rule base, or the
fuzzy decision table, is the unit mapping two crisp inputs, the just mentioned ones, to the
fuzzy output space defined on the universe of (P(k)). To simplify the following text,
the iteration counter will be omitted from now on.
The time response of the disturbed change in angular velocity for an impulse input can
be represented by the generalized impulse response error of a second order system. We
are interested in the impulse response for the reason that when a uniform step in the angu-
lar velocity, , appears, the derivative of will be one, and zero at any other time. Since
the intention is to design a fuzzy logic controller with a better performance (shorter set-
tling time, less over-shoot) than the classical controller, the response signal of this system
can be taken as a reference to construct the rule table on. The impulse response of the
system generated without any controller is given in Figure 4. This response is used to
represent the operational behavior of frequency changes in a single area power system in
order to generate fuzzy rules.
The fuzzy rules represent the knowledge and abilities of a human operator who makes
necessary adjustments to operate the system with minimum error and fast response. It is
necessary to observe the behaviors of the error signal and its ()on different oper-
ating regions in order to model the actions a human operator would take, in every differ-
ent case, deciding whether the change, (P), in the controller output should be increased
or decreased according to the inputs of the fuzzifier. This controlled output is the re-
quired change in the input of the system. The derivative of the impulse response signal of
the system without ant controller is shown in Figure 5.
As been told, the results shown in both Figure 4 and 5 can be useful to construct the
rule table. The values we read on this graphics will be used to define the first fuzzy set
intervals. By applying trial-and-error in order to achieve improved results with the FLC,
these intervals may change.
 A FUZZY LOGIC LOAD-FREQUENCY CONTROLLER FOR POWER SYSTEMS
-4 -5
x 10 x 10
4
1
2
0.5
Change in Frequency (pu)

Change in frequency (pu)

0
0
-2

-0.5
-4

-6 -1

-8 -1.5

-10 -2
0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Time (sec.)
Time (sec.)
Figure 4. Impuls response of the system with- Figure 5 Classical controller impuls response
out any controller signal's derivative.

We first try to develop an initial rule base (with only 3 fuzzy sets), which we will ex-
tend to a 5 fuzzy sets base. According to the signs of and (), we decide whether
the sign of (P) has to be positive or negative. A summary of all possible situations, or
so called operation regions, is given in Table 1.

Operating Regions
+ 0 - - 0 + - + 0
() - - - + + + 0 0 0
(P) + - - - + + - + 0

Table 1. Output decision making table.

The sign of (P) should be positive if P has to be increased and it should be negative
otherwise. This simple rule is applied as in Table 1 to determine the sign of (P). A
verbal example of these rules is: The error is positive and decreasing towards zero.
Therefore, (P) is set to positive to reduce the error. This example expresses the first
column of Table 1. Similar reasoning can be applied for the other columns. A 'program-
ming language translation' of this table gives:
IF is zero THEN (P) takes the sign of () ELSE IF (P) takes the sign of . (2)

Table 1 shows that each one of , () and (P) has three different options for the
signs to be assigned. They are either positive, negative or zero. With this knowledge, an
initial rule decision table with twenty five rules can be formed like in Table 2, whwre 'N'
means negative, 'O' zero and 'P' positive. The main part without shading represents the
rules as well as the signs of (P).
From this table on, some logical reasoning should be considered. A closer look at Table 2
shows that in some cases, there is a transition from negative to positive, without passing
zero. Therefore, an adjustment in the initial rule table leads to another table without this
inconvenience. The influence of () must stay, and a symmetric solution has to be
advised, so the modified rule table is the one that can be found as in Table 3.
ALTA, NEYENS

M N 0 P Q
M N N N N 0
N N N N 0 0
0 N N 0 P P
P N 0 P P P
Q 0 P P P P
() (P)

Table 2. Initial rule table.

M N 0 P Q
M M M N N 0
N M N N 0 0
0 N N 0 P P
P N 0 P P Q
Q 0 P P Q Q
() (P)

Table 3. Modified rule table.

In Table 3, a slightly different meaning of the applied letters is used: 'M' means large
negative, 'N' small negative, 'O' stays zero, 'P' becomes small positive and 'Q' large positive.
Now the output values of (P) are extended to five regions as it is done for input spaces.
This rule table is the final one; the one that's going to be used in the FLC.
As suggested, the initial limits of the fuzzy

(())
M N 0 P Q
sets will be derived from the diagram ob-
tained by using the classical controller.

The set values can be derived immediately ()

-4
10

from Figures 4 and 5; but a plot of ver-

Q

sus () is preferred. The fuzzy sets

1
P

consist of triangular functions. A visuali-

zation of the definition of these fuzzy sets
0
0

can be seen on Figure 6. In this case, the

scaling of the fuzzy sets representing the
N

-1

partitioning will be different for and

M

(). As shown in Figure 6, the interval

-2

of the latter is much smaller yielding diffe- ()

-1 0 1 2 3 -6
10
rent scaling for a proper operation of the
controller. The fuzzy sets will initially be Figure 6. Partitioning input spaces into five
defined in the interval regions.
[1.5 10 4 ,1.5 10 4 ] for , and [1.5 10 6 ,1.5 10 6 ] for () (3)

The combination of Table 3 and Figure 6 gives a well defined summary of the fuzzy
sets and the rules that should be applied on those. The next step in the design process is
the fuzzy reasoning as discussed below.
 A FUZZY LOGIC LOAD-FREQUENCY CONTROLLER FOR POWER SYSTEMS

3.2 Fuzzy Reasoning

The crisp universes of , () and (P) have been partitioned into five regions as
M, N, O, P and Q as explained earlier. These five regions in all three universes are repre-
sented by triangular fuzzy membership functions defined by (4) and shown in Figure 7
where b is the crisp value with a membership degree of 1 in the corresponding fuzzy
set. 'a' and 'c' define the limits of the triangular fuzzy set (symmetric in this paper.)
xa cx
( x) = max min , ,0 (4)
ba cb
The universe of , b=-1.510-4 for M, b=-0.7510-4 for N, b=0 for O, b=0.7510-4
-4
for P, b=1.510 for Q. A similar, equal-regions and symmetric partition is made for the
universes of () and (P). In addition to the definition of these triangular functions,
it is required to calculate the membership degree of (P), as well. The following exam-
ple is given to clarify the method used to obtain the membership values in output space.
When =0.4510-4 it intercepts with the fuzzy sets N and O in the input universe of ,
and when ()=0.1510-4 it intercepts with the fuzzy sets O and P in the input universe
of () as shown in Figure 8 which is a close-up of the fuzzy-sets of Figure 6.

(x)
(x) 1.0 N 0 P
1.0 3=0.6667
1=0.6
(x(k))
2=0.4
4=0.3333

a -6
x(k) b c =0.45x10-4 ()=0.15x10

Figure 7. Triangular fuzzy membership Figure 8. Snapshot of the process at a certain time.
function.

The membership degrees of all fuzzy triangular functions can easily be found by apply-
ing formula (4), in which we substitute a, b and c by the appropriate limits; x takes the
value of either or (). The horizontal lines drawn through the intercepting points
of on N and O in Figure 8 gives the membership values of on N and O, respec-
tively, while the horizontal line passing through the intercepting points of () and O
and P gives the membership values of () on these fuzzy sets, respectively. These
membership values of and () on N, O, O and P are evaluated by Table 3 to yield
the fuzzy membership values of the following active rules at the output space.

R1: If is N and () is O then (P) is N

R2: If is N and () is P then (P) is O
R3: If is O and () is 0 then (P) is O
R4: If is O and () is P then (P) is P
ALTA, NEYENS

The application of the min-operator results in the following membership values from each
active rule to be used in the output space (P).

R1 ((P)) = min( N ( ), O (( ))) = min(0.63,0.67 ) = 0.63

R 2 ((P)) = min ( N ( ), P (( )) ) = min (0.63,0.33) = 0.33
R3 ((P)) = min(O ( ), O (( )) ) = min(0.40,0.67 ) = 0.40
R 4 ((P)) = min(O ( ), P (( ))) = min(0.40,0.33) = 0.33

These resultant membership values of the active rules determine the weights of the fuzzy
sets in the universe of (P). The average of these membership values, multiplicated
with the crisp value corresponding with the respective fuzzy set, is used to obtain final
crisp output as (P(k)). This final process is called defuzzification of the fuzzy output.
Several defuzzification methods have been applied in literature. However, the method,
called 'the center of area' is widely used in fuzzy logic control applications. The method
can be implemented as follow using the data of the example given.
4
Ri ((P)).((P)i
(P (k ) ) = i =1 (5)
4
Ri ((P))
i =1
(0.63)(0.5) + (0.33)(0) + (0.4)(0) + (0.33)(0.5) 0.15
(P(k ) ) = = = 0.08876
0.63 + 0.33 + 0.4 + 0.33 1.69

4 L-F Control with Fuzzy Logic

The FL controller is placed on the path where the frequency variation, , is fed back
governor in power system as shown in Figure 9. The steady state matrices for the FLC
can be constructed using Figure 9.

+ 1 1 x1 + 1 1 x2 + -
g s T s
- -

x3 PL
- 1 1 1 +
R s 2H
- - impulse
Fuzzy d
D
Logic dt
Controller plot

Figure 9 The block diagram of the FL controlled L-F scheme.

 A FUZZY LOGIC LOAD-FREQUENCY CONTROLLER FOR POWER SYSTEMS

Figure 9is the main simulation diagram of the L-F control scheme to be used with FL
controller. As it can be seen from the fact that the system has third order equations with
FLC instead of four as it is the case with classical integrator. From Figure 9, the steady
state equations can be composed as in (6) where x1=Pv, x2=Pm and x3=.

1 1 1
0
gR x
g
0
x1 g
& 1
x& = 1 1 du
2 0 x2 + 0 0 (6)
T
x&3 T PL
0 1 D x3 1
0
2H 2 H 2 H

5 Results
Both of the systems, L-F control with classical integral and fuzzy controller, will be simu-
lated using the parameter values as
t = 0.5, g = 0.2, H = 5, D = 0.8, R = 0.05, K i = 7, PL = 0.2
The resultant graph of the classical system is already shown in Figure 4. The results ob-
tained by the fuzzy logic controlled system are shown in Figure 10. Both graphics have
the same steady state results: zero. On this point, no improvements can be made. Never-
theless the settling time and the overshoot can be adjusted. First a plot of the impulse
response is obtained as given in Figure 10, while the intervals of the fuzzy sets are those
described and derived from the results of the classical controller given by equation (6).
As expected, the response of the fuzzy logic system with the initial intervals gives simi-
lar results as the classical system. Although, some damping effects with longer settling
time can also be observed from the response given in Figure 11.
By making some adjustments in the intervals, found by using trial-and-error, soon a bet-
ter result is achieved, as shown in Figure 11. The overshoot is almost reduced to zero
with a considerable decrement in settling time.
-4 -4
x 10 x 10
4 1

2 0.5
Change in Frequency (pu)

Change in Frequency (pu)

0
0
-2
-0.5
-4

-1
-6

-8 -1.5

-10 -2
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
Time (sec.) Time (sec.)

Figure 10. Response of the system with ini- Figure 11. Response of the system with
tial intervals of fuzzy sets. adjusted interval of fuzzy sets.
ALTA, NEYENS

6 Conclusion
A frequency load controller based on fuzzy logic theory has been designed and compared
with the classical one, commonly known as the governor system. The results from both
proposed FL based controller and classical methods were obtained for an impulse refer-
ence input for comparison. The output of the load change was controlled with less over-
shoot and shorter settling time using the fuzzy logic based controller. The same perform-
ance could not be obtained using the other method. And since many expensive electrical
devices are very sensitive to high frequency fluctuations and the FLC restricts the over-
shoot, it is highly recommended to apply the fuzzy logic controller instead of the classical
one.
As the classical methods increase the order of the system's dynamic model due to addi-
tional delaying terms, the desired results can be reached faster using FL controller. Since
the response time is very important in control systems, FL controller giving faster time
response and better damping performance is also preferred in L-F controller. The simpli-
fication made by fuzzy logic controller is a cost reduction advantage that is still one of
the most important industrial decision making elements.

References
[1]. P. M. Anderson and A. A. Fouad, Power system control and stability, 2nd edn, IEEE Press,
1993, New Jersey.
[2]. IEEE Committee Report , Excitation system models for power system stability studies, IEEE
Trans. On Power Apparatus and and Systems, Vol. PAS-100, No.2, 1981, pp.494-509.
[3]. IEEE Committee Report, Computer representation of Excitation Systems, IEEE Trans. On
Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-87, No.6, 1968, pp.1460-1464.
[4]. F. P. Demello and C. Concordia, Concepts of synchronous machine stability as affected by
excitation control, IEEE Trans. On Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-88, No.4, 1969,
pp.316-329.
[5]. E. V. Larsen and D. A. Swann, Applying power system stabilizers Part I: General concepts
IEEE Trans. On Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-100, No.6, 1981, pp.3016-3024.
[6]. H. Saadat, Power System Analysis, McGraw Hill Book Company, 1999, New York.
[7]. P. W. Sauer and M. A. Pai, Power Systems Dynamics and Stability, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1998,
New York.
[8]. M. E. El-Hawary, Electric power applications of fuzzy systems, IEEE Press, 1998, New Jer-
sey.
[9]. C. C. Liu and H. Song, Intelligent system applications to power systems, IEEE Computer
Applications in Power. 1997 October, pp. 21-24.
[10]. J. Maiers and Y. S. Sherif , Applications of fuzzy set theory, IEEE Transactions on Systems,
Man, and Cybernetics. Vol. SMC-15, No. 1, 1985, pp.175-189.
[11]. T. Hiyama, K. Miyazaki and H. Satoh, A fuzzy logic excitation system for stability en-
hancement of power systems with multi-mode oscillations, IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 1996, pp. 449-454.
[12]. I. H. Altas, A Fuzzy Logic Controlled Static Phase Shifter for Bus Voltage Regulation of
Interconnected Power Systems, ICEM98 - International Conference on Electrical Machines,
stanbul, 1998, pp. 66-71.