International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 4, April-2015 1703

ISSN 2229-5518

Enhancement of SMIB Performance Using

Robust Controller

N.Siva Mallikarjuna Rao#1, B.V.Haritha*2


Abstract— This paper represents the use of Robust stabilisation technique to enhance the performance of Single Machine connected to Infinite bus. H∞ loop shaping Technique is used for the analysis and the controller is developed for the same. The order of the controller obtained is high and thus, model order reduction technique is used to reduce the computational effort. The results are compared with the conventional Power system stabilizer.

Keywords— SMIB, H∞ controller, Order Reduction Technique.

—————————— ——————————


The power system is a highly non linear system whose dynamic performance is influenced by a wide array of devices with different response rate and characteristics. The tendency of the system to develop restoring forces equal to or greater than the disturbing forces is known as stability. The stability problem is concerned with the behaviour of synchronous machines after a disturbance. Small disturbance stability is related to the ability of controlling signals such as voltage, rotor angle and speed etc., following small perturbations such as incremental changes in the system load. This form of
Under normal operating conditions, the relative positions of the rotor axis and the resultant magnetic field axis is fixed. The angle between the two is known as toque or power angle. When a disturbance occurs, the rotor will accelerate or decelerate with respect to rotating air gap MMF, and motion begins. The equation describing this motion is known as swing equation. After the oscillatory period, if the rotors locks back into synchronous speed, the generator will remain in stable state. If the disturbance is due to change in generation, load or any network conditions, the rotor goes to a new operating power angle relative to synchronously revolving field. The swing equation is represented as
stability is determined by the characteristics of load,
continuous controls and discrete controls at a given instant of time. Static analysis is done to determine the stability


180 𝑓0

𝑑2 𝛿

𝑑𝑡2 = 𝑃𝑚 − 𝑃𝑒---- (1)

margins and to identify the factors influencing factors.


Synchronous generators form the principal source of electrical energy in power systems. Many large loads are driven by synchronous motors. Power system stability deals with keeping of interconnected synchronous machines in synchronism. Therefore, the characteristics and accurate modelling of the system is very important for stability studies. A mathematical model is developed for the review of steady state and transient performance characteristics. Any disturbance, may be small or big leads to oscillation for which rotor angle stability analysis is significant and the behaviour of rotor dynamics is analysed using swing equation.

A..Swing Equation

Where 𝛿 is expressed in electrical degrees and H as per unit
inertia constant, Pm and Pe are per unit mechanical and
electrical power respectively.


A general system configuration of SMIB connected to a large system through transmission lines is shown in Fig 1..

IJSER © 2015

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 4, April-2015 1704

ISSN 2229-5518

𝑝𝜑𝑓𝑑 =



𝐸𝑓𝑑 − 𝜔0𝑅𝑓𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑑 ---(3)

Where Efd is field voltage and Ladu is the mutual flux
The state space form including the change in flux is given by
∆𝜔̇ 𝑟
� ∆𝛿̇ � =


𝑎11 𝑎12 𝑎13
𝑏11 0
�𝑎21 0 0 � � ∆𝛿
� + � 0 0 � �

𝑚 —(4)

0 𝑎32 𝑎33


0 𝑏32
𝑎11 =




Analysis of systems having such simple configurations is
useful to understand basic effects and concepts. In order to deal with large complex systems an equivalent transmission network is used which is known as single line representation.
𝑎12 = 2𝐻 --(6)

𝑎 = −𝐾2--(7)


𝑎21 = 𝜔0 = 2𝜋𝑓0 --(8)


Developing the expressions for the elements of state matrix as
𝑎32 =


𝑚1 𝐿𝑎𝑑𝑠 --(9)
explicit functions of system parameters is useful in

−𝜔0𝑅𝑓𝑑 1𝑎𝑑𝑠 1

developing the mathematical model of the system under

33 𝐿𝑓𝑑

+ 𝑚2 𝐿 𝑎𝑑𝑠 ]--(10)


small signal disturbances.

𝐸𝐵(𝑋𝑇𝑞𝑠𝑖𝑛𝛿0−𝑅𝑇𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛿0 )

= ---(11)


A. Classical Generator Model:

𝑚2 = 𝑎𝑑𝑠 ---(12)
The generator represented by the classical model is shown in






Fig 2. Here E\1 is the voltage behind Xd 1 .Its magnitude is
𝑏11 =


assumed to remain constant at pre-disturbance value .Let 𝛿 be
the angle by which E1 leads the infinite bus voltage EB . As the
rotor oscillates during a disturbance, 𝛿 changes.
𝑏32 =



C .Effects Of Excitation System :

The input control signal to the excitation system is normally
the generator terminal voltage Er . In the classical generator model, Et is not a state variable. Here, Et is expressed in the terms of other state variables. The state space representation including the excitation system signal perturbations is given by
∆𝜔̇ 𝑟
⎛ ∆𝛿̇
𝑎11 𝑎12 𝑎13 0
⎞ = � 0 0 0 � �
� + �
� ∆𝑇
⎝ ∆𝑣1̇ ⎠
Where ,


0 𝑎32 𝑎33 𝑎34
0 𝑎42 𝑎43 𝑎44
− (15)
0 𝑚
When the speed deviation ∆𝜔𝑟 and rotor angle deviation ∆𝛿
are considered the state space representation is
𝑎34 =



𝐾𝐴 --(16)

𝑑 ∆𝜔̇ 𝑟



𝑎42 = --(17)



� = � 2𝐻
2𝐻 � �
� + �2𝐻� ∆𝑇𝑚 − (2)
𝑎43 =





Where KD is damping torque coefficient, KS is synchronizing
𝑎44 =



torque coefficient and H is the inertia constant.

B. Effect Of Field Circuit Dynamics

The field circuit dynamic equation is given by
Where KA is the exciter gain and TR is the terminal voltage
transducer time constant.

IJSER © 2015

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 4, April-2015 1705

ISSN 2229-5518

For the equations shown above , it can be induced that , with
∆𝜔̇ 𝑟
0 0 0
positive K5 the effect of excitation will introduce a negative
⎛ ∆𝛿̇ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0
synchronising torque and positive damping torque component.
⎛ 0 𝑎 𝑎 𝑎
0 𝑎
⎞ ⎛ ⎞
With negative K5 positive synchronising and negative ⎜
⎟ = ⎜

32 33 34

36 ⎟ ⎜ ⎟

damping torque component is introduced for which higher
⎜ ∆𝑣̇ 1
⎜ 0 𝑎42 𝑎43 𝑎44 0 0 ⎟ ⎜ ∆𝑣1
response exciter is beneficial in increasing synchronising
∆𝑣̇ 2
𝑎51 𝑎52 𝑎53 0 𝑎55 0
torque. But this results in negative damping. An effective way
to meet the required exciter performance with regard to system stability is by introducing power system stabilizer.
⎝ ∆𝑣̇ 𝑠
⎝𝑎61 𝑎62 𝑎63 0 𝑎65 𝑎66 ⎠ ⎝ ∆𝑣𝑠
− (20)
𝑎51 = 𝐾𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑏 𝑎11 --(21)
𝑎52 = 𝐾𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑏 𝑎12--(22)
𝑎53 = 𝐾𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑏 𝑎13 --(23)


𝑎55 =




The basic function of a power system stabilizer is to add
damping to the generator rotor oscillations by controlling its

𝑎 = 𝑇1 𝑎 ----(25)

61 𝑇2 51

𝑎 = 𝑇1 𝑎 ----(26)

62 𝑇2 52


excitation using auxiliary stabilizing signal. To provide
damping, the stabilizer must produce a component of
𝑎63 =





electrical torque in phase with rotor speed deviations.

𝑎65 = 𝑇 𝑎55 + 𝑇 --(28)
The PSS consists of 3 blocks i) Phase compensation 2)a
signal washout signal 3)a gain block.
𝑎66 =







The phase compensation block provides the appropriate phase-lead characteristic to compensate for the phase lag between the exciter input and the generator electrical torque. The signal washout block serves as a high pass filter, with the time constant TW high enough to allow signals associated with oscillations in wr to pass unchanged. The stabilizer gain Kstab determines the amount of damping introduced by the stabilizer. The state space form including power system stabilizer is given by
Power system stabilizer is pertained to certain network configurations. If the configurations change, the system no longer operates in the stability range. In order to overcome this problem, advanced controlling techniques have been developed among which robust stabilisation is one of the modern control techniques.
Robust stability is the minimum requirement of any practical control system. Robust control theory was first developed by Zames and it addresses both the performance and the stability criterion of a control system.
H infinity controlling technique is used for robust stability of the system. Robust Hcontrollers are developed to provide high robust control environment to linear systems.

IJSER © 2015

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 4, April-2015 1706

ISSN 2229-5518

Generally the Hnorm of a transfer function F, is the maximum value over the complete spectrum and is represented as
‖𝐹(𝑗𝑤)‖= 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝜎 (𝐹(𝑗𝑤))-(30). Here σ is the singular value
of the transfer function. In Hcontroller synthesis, two
transfer functions are used which split complex control
problem into separate sections one dealing with stability and the other with performance. The sensitivity function S, and complementary sensitivity function T are used in controller synthesis and is given by

𝑆 = 1



𝑇 = 𝐺𝐾 ---(32)


Considerable advances have been made in the Hcontrol synthesis since it’s inception. One can find number of theoretical advantages of this method such as high disturbance rejection , high stability and many more. Mixed weight Hcontrollers provide a closed loop response of the system according to the design specifications such as model uncertainty, disturbance attenuation at higher frequencies, required bandwidth of the closed loop plant etc. Practically, Hcontrollers are of high order which, may lead to large control effort requirement. Moreover, the design may also depend on specific system and can require its specific analysis. When H∞-optimal control approach is applied to a plant, additional frequency dependent weights are incorporated in the plant and are selected to show particular stability and performance specifications relevant to the design objective as defined.
Various techniques are available in literature for the design of Hcontroller and Hloop shaping is one of the widely accepted among them as the performance requirements can be embedded in the design stage as performance weights. H∞ based robust control deals with the characteristics such as amplifiers delay or sensors offset .Considering G (s) and K(s) as the open loop transfer function of the plant and controller transfer function respectively, robustness and good performance of closed loop system. Controller K(s) can be derived, provided it follows three criterions, which are:
1) Stability criterion: If the roots of characteristic equation 1+G(s)K(s)=0 are in left half side of s plane, then stability is ensured.
2)Performance criterion : It establishes that the sensitivity
Where G and K are transfer function and controller transfer functions respectively.
From Fig 4, shown above, w is the vector of disturbance signals ,z is the signal positioning of all errors. v is the vector of measurement variables and u is the vector of all control variables. Here the disturbance signal is considered as Vref . Controller is designed by minimising the norm
𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑘 = ‖𝑁(𝑘)‖----(33)
𝑁 = � 𝑤𝑠 𝑆 �-----(34)
𝑤𝑇 𝑇
Where Ws and Wt are the weight functions assigned to the
problem by the designer. The ultimate objective of the robust
control is to minimize the effect of disturbance on output. The sensitivity S and the complementary function T are to be reduced . To achieve this it is enough to minimize the magnitude of |S| and |T| which is done by making
|S(jw)|<1/Ws (jw) and |T(jw)|<1/Wt (jw) . Ws is the weighting function to limit magnitude of sensitivity function.
Wt is the robustness weighting function to limit magnitude of complementary sensitivity function .This technique is called
as loop shaping technique and is widely used for synthesis of the controller .The shaping objective is to make the output
𝑦 = ∆𝜔 (Generator frequency variation).
Thus, a stabilising controller k(s) is achieved by minimising
cost function ɣ. To obtain the desired frequency response for
the plant, loop shaping is employed with the weight functions. There are various methods for loop shaping. The parameters of the weight functions are to be varied so as to get the frequency response of the whole system within desired limits. The block diagram in Fig. 5 describes the mixed Sensitivity problem.

𝑠= 1

- is small for all frequencies where disturbances


and set point changes are large.
3)Robustness criterion : It states that stability and performance
should be maintained not only for the nominal model but also for a set of neighbouring plant models that result from unavoidable presence of modelling errors. Robust controllers are designed to ensure high robustness of linear systems.

IJSER © 2015

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 4, April-2015 1707

ISSN 2229-5518

The generalised plant P(s) is given by
𝑊𝑠 𝑆
𝑚𝑖𝑛‖𝑃‖ = 𝑚𝑖𝑛 �𝑊𝑘𝑠 𝐾𝑆� = 𝛾—(42)
𝑊𝑡 𝑇
Where P is the transfer function w to z. i.e., |Tzw|=ɣ.
Applying minimum gain theorem, we can make the Hnorm
of |Tzw| | less than unity .
𝑊𝑠 𝑆
𝑚𝑖𝑛‖𝑇𝑧𝑤 ‖ = 𝑚𝑖𝑛 �𝑊𝑘𝑠 𝐾𝑆� < 1—(43)
𝑊𝑡 𝑇
The weights Ws, Wks and Wt are the tuning parameters and it
requires some iterations to obtain weights that yields a good
controller . The starting point of weights is given as

𝑠 +𝜔0

𝑊𝑠 = 𝑀 --(44)


Wks =constant

𝑠 𝜔0

𝑊𝑡 = 𝑀 ---(45)


𝑊𝑠 −𝑊𝑆 𝐺
�𝑍2 � = � 0 𝑊𝑘𝑠 � �
Where A is the allowed steady state offset,ω0 is the desired
0 𝑊𝑡 𝐺 𝑢
𝐼 −𝐺
bandwidth and M is the sensitivity peak. Typically, A=0.01
and M=2.
Considering the following state space realizations
𝐺 𝑠 = �𝐴 𝐵�--(36)
𝐴𝑠 𝐵𝑠

A. Algorithm to synthesize Robust controller:

𝑊𝑠 𝑠 = �
𝐶𝑠 𝐷𝑠
1 .Defining the subsystems: In this the open loop transfer
function (G) of the system is defined .
𝑊𝑘𝑠 𝑠 = �
𝐴𝑘𝑠 𝐵𝑘𝑠
𝐶𝑘𝑠 𝐷𝑘𝑠
2 .Weights are to be selected.
3. Creating the generalised plant.
𝑊𝑡 𝑠 = �
𝐴𝑡 𝐵𝑡
𝐶𝑡 𝐷𝑡
4. Synthesizing the controller.
5.Reducing the order of controller
6.Obataining the controller transfer function of desired phase margin.
The possible state space realization for P(s) is given as


For the SMIB system represented in this paper, P=0.9,Q=0.3
Et =1.0 at 360 and EB =0.995
𝑊𝑠 −𝑊𝑆 𝐺
𝐴 𝐵1 𝐵2
Thyristor exciter K

A=200, T

R =0.02S

𝑃 = � 0 𝑊𝑘𝑠
� = �𝐶1 𝐷11 𝐷12 �--(40)
PSS added is K
=1.4s,T =0.09s,T =0.3s

stab W 1 2

0 𝑊𝑡 𝐺
𝐼 −𝐺
𝐶2 𝐷21 𝐷22
The constants calculated from the equations are given by
From the equations 35 &40, a mixed sensitivity problem is written as
𝑊𝑠 𝑆
𝑃 = �𝑊𝑘𝑠 𝐾𝑆�--(41)
𝑊𝑡 𝑇
In case of mixed sensitivity problem our objective is to find a
rational function controller K(s) and to make the closed loop system stable satisfying the following expression
K1 =0.7643 K2 =0.86 K3 =0.32 K4 =1.41 K5 = -0.14
K6 =0.416
T3 =2.365 TR =0.02 KA=200. The transfer function of the
lower order robust controller obtained is given by

𝑠8 + 1884𝑠7 + 8.9𝑒05𝑠6 + 2.578𝑒06𝑠5 + 2.494𝑒06𝑠4 + 1.064𝑒06𝑠3

𝐾 = +2.05𝑒05𝑠2 + 1.522𝑒04𝑠 + 132.7

𝑠9 + 1884𝑠8 + 8.9𝑒05𝑠7 + 2.554𝑒06𝑠6 + 2.503𝑒06𝑠5 + 1.069𝑒06𝑠4

+2.054𝑒05𝑠3 + 1.457𝑒04𝑠2 − 2.666𝑠 − 1.2

IJSER © 2015

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 4, April-2015 1708

ISSN 2229-5518

And the reduced form of controller by increasing the desired phase margin is given by




Fig 6:Characteristic of Rotor angle using power system stabilizer
Fig 7: characteristic of Rotor angle using Hcontroller


The output characteristic using power system stabilizer has settling time of 5.5sec and peak overshoot of 1.5. For the output characteristic using Hcontroller settling time is 4sec and the peak overshoot is 1.2 .
From the results, it is observed that both the settling time and the peak overshoot has reduced for the controller designed using Hloop shaping technique compared with conventional power system stabilizer characteristics.

IJSER © 2015

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 4, April-2015 1709

ISSN 2229-5518


[1] P.Kundur, “Power system stability and control” New
York: Tata McGraw-Hill, 1994.
[2] P.M Anderson and A. A. Fouad, “Power System Control and Stability”, Volume- I, Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, 1977.
[3] F.P.demello, C.Concordia, “Concepts Of Synchronous Machine Stability As Affected By Excitation Control,” IEEE Trans. On Power system and apparatus, Vol-PAS-
88, No.4, April 1969, pp. 316-329.
[4] Larsen E.V. and Swann D.A.; “Applying power system stabilizers Part-I”, Power Apparatus and Systems, IEEE Transactions, Volume: 100, No. 6, Page(s): 3017-3024,

[5] Larsen E.V. and Swann D.A.; “Applying power system stabilizers Part- II”, Power Apparatus and Systems, IEEE Transactions, Volume: 100, No. 6, Page(s): 3025-

3033, 1981.
[6] Zames G., "Feedback of Optimal Sensitivity: Model Reference Transformations, Multiplicative Semi- norms, and Approximate Inverses", IEEETrans. AC, Vol. AC-

26, 1981, pp301-320.

[7] Verde C. and Flores J., “Nominal model selection for robust control design”, proceedings of the American control conference, seatle, Washington, 1996.
[8] Jiankun Hu, Christian Bohn, Wu H.R., “Systematic H∞ weighting function selection and its application to the real-time control of a vertical take-off aircraft”, Control Engineering Practice 8 (2000) 241-252.
[9] Engell S., “Design of robust control systems with time- domain specifications”, control eng. practice,

[10] Glover K. and Doyle J.C., State-Space Formulae for all Stabilizing Controllers that Satisfy an - Norm Bound and Relations to Risk Sensitivity, Systems and Control Letters 11, 167/172 (1988).

IJSER © 2015