IRJET- Load Frequency Control of an Interconnected Power System using Grey Wolf Optimization Algorithm with PID Controller

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 03 | Mar 2019 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2019, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.211 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 2153
Load Frequency Control of an Interconnected Power System using
Grey Wolf Optimization Algorithm with PID Controller
A. Reetta1, B. Prakash Ayyappan2
1PG Student, M.E- Power Electronics and Drives, Chendhuran College of Engg. & Tech., Lenavilakku,
Pudukkottai, India.
2Asst.Professor/Dept. of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Chendhuran College of Engg. & Tech., Lenavilakku,
Pudukkottai, India
---------------------------------------------------------------------***----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - The interconnected two area LFC system has
number of generators are connected together and run in
unison manner to meet the load demand. InthisprojectaGWO
optimization with PID controller techniques are proposed for
load frequency control is used to improve the dynamic
response of the system. The load frequency control system is
modeled and simulated using MATLAB-SIMULINK
environment and the control parameters are tuned based on
GWO algorithm. The main objective is to obtain a stable,
robust and controlled system by tuning the PID controllers
using GWO algorithm. The power system is subjected to aload
disturbances to validate the effectivenessoftheproposedGWO
optimized PID controller. The incurredvalue is comparedwith
the PI controller and is proved that the PID with GWO gives
better optimal solution. The simulated resultsareobtainedfor
different load configurations of the GWO basedcontroller. The
proposed approach has superior feature, including easy
implementation, stable convergence characteristics and very
good computational performance efficiency.
Key Words: Load frequency control, PID controller, Grey
Wolf Algorithm,
1. INTRODUCTION
In interconnected power systems, a nominal system
frequency depends on a balance between produced and
consumed real power. A real power inequality in which
occurs any where of the system is perceived in a whole
network as a frequency deviation. Nevertheless, if it is taken
into consideration that the properly working of industrial
loads connecting to the power system depends on quality of
electric energy, this balance is had to keep for holding the
steady-state frequencyerror betweenacceptablevalues.The
balance of real power in an interconnected power system is
provided by the amount of production of the synchronous
generators connected to the system is made sense for
frequency deviations. If the amount of produced power is
less than the demanded one, the speed and also frequency of
the generators decrease, and vice versa. For bringing
frequency deviation to desired level back is provided by
control of the turbines which turn the generators. For this
purpose, the PI-controller is classically used, and by tuning
the controller gains, the steady-state error of the system
frequency is minimized. However, due to the complexity of
the power systems such as nonlinear load characteristics
and variable operating points, the PID controllers tuning
with conventional methods may be unsuitable in some
operating conditions. In literature, some different control
strategies have been suggested based on the digital, self-
tuning, adaptive, variable structure systems and
intelligent/soft computing control. Recently, different GWO
based controllers are commonly used in literature as a self
tuning control strategy for LFC. In this study, a GWO
algorithm is used to optimizing the PID controller gains for
load frequency control of a two area thermal power system
including governor dead-band. To obtain the best
convergence performance, new cost function with weight
coefficients is derived by using the tie-line power and
frequency deviations of the control areas and their rates of
changes according to time. An algorithm needs to have
stochastic operators to randomly and globally search the
search space in order to support this phase. However,
exploitation refers to the local search capability around the
promising regionsobtainedinthe explorationphase.Finding
a proper balance between these two phases is considered a
challenging task due to the stochastic nature of meta-
heuristics. This work proposes a new SI technique with
inspiration from thesocial hierarchyandhuntingbehaviorof
grey wolf packs.
1.1 Block diagram of two area system
The power systems, frequency are dependent on active
power and voltage dependence on reactive power limit. The
control power system is separated into two independent
problems. The control of frequency by active power iscalled
load frequency control. An important task of LFC is to
maintain the frequency deviation constant against due to
continuous variation of loads, which is referred as unknown
external load disturbance. Power exchange error is an
important task of LFC. Generally a power system consists of
several generating units are interconnectedthroughtielines

to become fault tolerant. This use of tie line power creates a
new error in the control problem, which isthetie-linepower
exchange error. Area controlled error [ACE] is play major
role in interconnected power system and also minimizing
error function of the given system.
Load frequency control (LFC) is of importance in electric
power system operation to damp frequency and voltage
oscillations originated from load variations or sudden
changes in load demands. In a deregulated environment
load-frequency control (LFC) is very important in order to
supply reliable electric power with good quality and to
provide better conditions for the electricity trading. The
main goal of LFC is to maintain zero steady state errors for
frequency deviation and good tracking load demands in a
multi-area power system, it is treated as an ancillary service
essential for maintaining the electrical system reliability at
an adequate level. LFC is one of the important power system
control problems inderegulatedpowersystems,whichthere
have been considerable control strategies based on robust
and optimal approaches. In an interconnectedpowersystem
that consists of several control areas, as the system varies,
the tie-line power will change and the frequency deviations
will occur. The load–frequency control is a part of the
automatic generation control (AGC) system. Theobjective of
LFC is to damp the transient deviations in area frequency
and tie-line power interchange. This signal is used to
regulate the generator output power based on network load
demand. Different types of controllers have been proposed
in literature for the load frequency control. To maintain the
balances of both the active and reactive powers without
control. As a result of the imbalance, the frequency and
voltage levels will be varying with the change of the loads.
Thus a control system is essential to cancel the effects of the
random load changes and to keep the frequency and voltage
at the standard values.
The foremost task of LFC is to keep the frequency constant
against the randomly varying active power loads, which are
also referred to as unknown external disturbance. Another
task of the LFC is to regulate the tie-line power exchange
error. A typical large-scale power system is composed of
several areas of generating units. In order to enhance the
fault tolerance of the entire power system, these generating
units are connected via tie-lines. The usage of tie-line power
imports a new error into the control problem, i.e., tie-line
power exchange error. When a sudden active power load
change occurs to an area, the area will obtain energy via tie-
lines from other areas. But eventually,thearea thatissubject
to the load change should balance it without external
support. Otherwise there would be economic conflicts
between the areas. Hence each area requires a separateload
frequency controller to regulate the tie-line powerexchange
error so that all the areas in aninterconnectedpowersystem
can set their set points differently. Another problem is that
the interconnection of the power systems results in huge
increases in both the order of the system and the number of
the tuning controller parameters.Asa result,whenmodeling
such complex high-order power systems, the model and
parameter approximations can not be avoided. Therefore,
the requirement of the LFC is to be robust against the
uncertainties of the system model and the variations of
system parameters in reality.
In summary, the LFC has two major assignments, which are
to maintain the standard value of frequency and to keep the
tie-line power exchange under schedule in the presences of
any load changes. In addition, the LFC has to be robust
against unknown external disturbances and system model
and parameter uncertainties.Thehigh-orderinterconnected
power system could also increase the complexity of the
controller design of the LFC.
2. TWO AREA POWER SYSTEM CONTROL MODELING
Modern day power systems are divided into various areas.
For example in our India, there are five regional grids. Each
of the regional area is generally interconnected to its
neighboring areas. The transmission lines which connect an
area to its neighboring area are called tie-lines. The power
sharing between two area is dine through these tie-lines.
Load frequency control, its name signifies that it regulates
the power flow between different areas while keeping the
frequency constant. An extended power system can be
divided into a number of load frequency control areas
interconnected by means of tie lines. Without loss of
generating, we shall consider a two-area caseconnected bya
single tie line. The control objective now is toregulatethe
frequency of each area and to simultaneouslyregulatethe tie
line power as per inter-area power contracts. As in the case
of frequency, proportional plus integral controller will be
installed so as to give zero steady state error in the tie line
flow as compared to the contracted power.
If there is interconnection exists between two control areas
through tie line than that is called a two area interconnected
power system. A two area power system where each area
supplies to its own area and the power flow between the
areas are allowed by the tie line. In this case of two area
power system an assumption is taken that the individual
areas are strong and the tie line which connects thetwoarea
is weak. Here a single frequency is characterizedthroughout
a single area; means the network area is ‘strong’ or ‘rigid’.
There may be any numbers of control areas in an
interconnected power system. The control strategy is
termed as tie line bias control and is based upon the
principle that all operating pool members must contribute
their share to frequency control in addition to taking care of
their own net interchange. It is possible to divide an
extended power system (say, national grid)intosub-areasin
which the generators are tightly coupled together so as to
form a coherent group. Such a coherent area is called a
control area in which the frequency is assumed to be the
same throughout in static as well as dynamic conditions.

A control area is interconnected not only with one tie-line to
one neighboring area, but with several tie lines to
neighboring areas in the power pool.
Area control error, ACEi
The Net interchange =
The reset control is implemented by sampled data
techniques. At sampling intervals of one second, all tie-line
power data are fed into the central energy control area,
where they are added and compared with predetermined
power. Now this error is added with biased frequency error,
to give ACE results. Under normal operating condition, each
control area should have the capacity to meet its own load
from its own spinning generator, plus the scheduled
interchange between the neighboring areas. Under
emergency condition, the energy can be drawn from the
spinning reserves of all the neighboring areas immediately
due to the sudden loss of generating unit.
The Load frequency control involves the sensing of the bus
bar frequency and compares with the tie-line power
frequency. The difference of the signal isfedtotheintegrator
and it is given to speed changer which generates the
reference speed for the governor. Thus, the frequency of the
tie-line is maintained as constant. The basic role of
Automatic Load Frequency Control(ALFC) is to maintain
desired megawatt output of a generator unit and assist in
controlling thefrequencyofthelargerinterconnection.Static
response of an ALFC loop will inform about frequency
accuracy, whereas, the dynamic response of ALFC loop will
inform about the stability of the loop.
3. PID CONTROLLER
The PID controller improves the transient response so as to
reduce error amplitudewitheachoscillationandthenoutput
is eventually settled to a final desired value. Bettermargin of
stability is ensured with PID controllers. The mathematical
equation for the PID controller is given as.
y(t)= Kpe(t) + Ki + Kd e(t)
Where y (t) is the controller output and u (t) is the error
signal. Kp, Ki and Kd areproportional,integral andderivative
gains of the controller. The limitation conventional PI and
PID controllers are slow and lack of efficiency in handling
system non-linearity. Generally these gains are tuned with
help of differentoptimizing methodssuchasZieglerNicholas
method, Genetic algorithm, etc., the optimum gain values
once obtained is fixed for the controller. But in the case
deregulated environment large uncertainties in load and
change in system parameters is often occurred. The
optimum controller gains calculated previously may not be
suitable for new conditions, which results in improper
working of controller. So to avoid such situations the gains
must be tuned continuously. A proportional controller (Kp)
will have the effect of reducing the rise time and will reduce,
but never eliminate, the steady-state error. An integral
control (Ki) will have the effect of eliminating the steady-
state error, but it may make the transient response worse. A
derivative control (Kd) will have the effect of increasing the
stability of the system, reducing the overshoot, and
improving the transient response. Kp, Ki, and Kd are
dependent of each other. In fact, changing one of these
variables can change the effect of the other two. For this
reason, the table should only be used as a reference when
you are determining the values for Ki, Kpand Kd. Traditional
LFC employs an integral controller. Famously, it is a great
integral gain can fail power scheme achievement, producing
great fluctuations and instabilities. Accordingly, the integral
gain has to make regular stage and then supply compromise
among wanted transient regaining and small overshoot in
the dynamic output response of the completesystem.Infact,
the trouble with PID plan and tuning for load frequency
control exists for a power system model of second orderand
usually under-damped. The majority of present PID tuning
methods focus on over-damped operations, thus straight
request for present PID tuning methods at LFC has been
never correct as illustrated in Fig.
3.1 Closed Loop Control of LFC with PID Controller
4. GREY WOLF OPTIMIZATION ALGORITHM
This work proposes a new meta-heuristic called Grey Wolf
Optimizer (GWO) inspired by grey wolves. The GWO
algorithm mimics the leadership hierarchy and hunting
mechanism of grey wolves in nature. Four types of grey
wolves such as alpha, beta, delta, and omega are employed
for simulating the leadership hierarchy. In addition, the
three main steps of hunting, searching for prey, encircling
prey, and attacking prey, are implemented.Theresultsshow
that the GWO algorithm is able to provide very competitive
results compared to these well-knownmeta-heuristic. Meta-
heuristic optimizationtechniqueshave becomeverypopular
over the last two decades. Surprisingly,someofthemsuchas
Genetic Algorithm (GA),AntColonyOptimization(ACO),and
Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) are fairly well-known
among not only computer scientists but also scientists from
different fields. In addition to the hugenumberoftheoretical
works, such optimization techniques have been applied in
various fields of study. There is a question here as to why
meta-heuristics have become remarkably common. The
answer to this question can be summarized into four main

reasons: simplicity, flexibility, derivation-free mechanism,
and local optima avoidance.
First, meta-heuristics are fairly simple. They have been
mostly inspired by very simple concepts. The inspirations
are typically related to physical phenomena, animals’
behaviors, or evolutionary concepts. The simplicity allows
computer scientists to simulate different natural concepts,
propose new meta-heuristics, hybridize two or more meta-
heuristics, or improve the current meta-heuristics.
Moreover, the simplicity assists other scientists to learn
meta-heuristics quickly and apply them to their problems.
Second, flexibility refers to the applicability of meta-
heuristics to different problems withoutanyspecial changes
in the structure of the algorithm. Meta-heuristics are readily
applicable to different problems since they mostly assume
problems as black boxes. In other words, only the input(s)
and output(s) of a system are importantfora meta-heuristic.
So, all a designer needs is to know how to represent his/her
problem for meta-heuristics. Third, the majority of meta-
heuristics have derivation-free mechanisms. In contrast to
gradient-based optimization approaches, meta-heuristics
optimize problems stochastically. The optimization process
starts with random solution(s), and there is no need to
calculate the derivative ofsearchspacestofindtheoptimum.
This makes meta-heuristics highlysuitableforreal problems
with expensive or unknown derivative information.
Finally, meta-heuristics have superior abilitiestoavoidlocal
optima compared to conventional optimization techniques.
This is due to the stochastic nature of meta-heuristics which
allow them to avoid stagnation in local solutions and search
the entire search space extensively. The search space of real
problems is usually unknown and very complex with a
massive number of local optima, so meta-heuristicsaregood
options for optimizing these challenging real problems.
Fig.4.1 Hierachy of grey wolf
The leaders are a male and a female, called alphas.Thealpha
is mostly responsible for making decisions about hunting,
sleeping place, time to wake, and soon.Thealpha’sdecisions
are dictated to the pack. However, some kind of democratic
behavior has also been observed, in which an alpha follows
the other wolves in the pack. In gatherings, the entire pack
acknowledges the alpha by holding their tails down. The
alpha wolf is also called the dominant wolf since his/her
orders should be followed by the pack . Thealpha wolvesare
only allowed to mate in the pack. Interestingly, the alpha is
not necessarily the strongest member of the pack but the
best in terms of managing the pack. This shows that the
organization and discipline of a pack is much more
important than its strength. The second level in the
hierarchy of grey wolves is beta. The betas are subordinate
wolves that help the alpha in decision-making or other pack
activities. The beta wolf can be either male or female, and
he/she is probably the best candidate to be the alpha in case
one of the alpha wolves passes away or becomes very old.
The beta wolf should respect the alpha, but commands the
other lower-level wolves as well. It plays the role of an
advisor to the alpha and discipliner for the pack. The beta
reinforces the alpha's commands throughout the pack and
gives feedback to the alpha.
The lowest ranking grey wolf is omega. The omega plays the
role of scapegoat. Omega wolves always havetosubmitto all
the other dominant wolves. They are the last wolvesthat are
allowed to eat. It may seem the omega is not an important
individual in the pack, but it has been observed that the
whole pack face internal fighting and problems in case of
losing the omega. This is due to the venting of violence and
frustration of all wolves by the omega(s).
The main phases of grey wolf hunting are as follows:
 Tracking, chasing, and approaching the prey .
 Pursuing, encircling, and harassing the prey until
it stops moving.
 Attack towards the prey.
Fig 4.2 Hunting behaviour of grey wolves: (A) chasing,
approaching and tracking prey (B-D) Pursuiting, harassing
and encircling (E) Stationary situation and attack
4.1. Mathematical model and algorithm
In this subsection the mathematical models of the social
hierarchy, tracking, encircling, and attacking prey are
provided. Then the GWO algorithm is outlined.
4.2. Social hierarchy:
In order to mathematically model the social hierarchy of
wolves when designing GWO,weconsiderthefittestsolution
as the alpha (α). Consequently, the second and third best
solutions are named beta (β) and delta (δ) respectively. The

rest of the candidate solutions are assumed to be omega (ѡ).
In the GWO algorithm the hunting (optimization) is guided
by , , and . The wolves follow these three wolves.
Fig 4.3 Simulation diagram of LFC control of two area
system
4.3 No Disturbance
When there is no disturbance that timethefrequencyand tie
line power performance for area 1 and area 2 is compared
with PI and PID controller. The frequency and power
response is obtained by following graph. Thus the graph is
drawn betweenfrequencyandtime.Themaximumdeviation
of frequency and power is represent the per unit value.
Time in Sec
Fig.4.3.1. Change in frequency in area 1
When no load condition the frequency response for area 1 is
compared with PI and PID controller. The settling time of PI
controller is 25sec and PID controller is 12sec.
Fig 4.3.2 Change in frequency in area 2
Fig 4.3.3 Change in tie line power
Table 1: System performance for 0% disturbance
Controller
Change in frequency
in area 1
Change in frequency
in area 2
Change in Tie line
power
Settling
time
(sec)
Maximum
deviation
(p.u)
Settling
time
(sec)
Maximum
deviation
(p.u)
Settling
time
(sec)
Maximum
deviation
(p.u)
GWO-PI 25 0. 0063 20 0. 0012 23 0.1874
GWO-PID 10.5 0. 0057 12 0. 00013 14.5 0. 0010
PI Controller
PID Controller
FrequencyinHz

4.4 2% disturbance
When there is 2% disturbance that time the frequency and
tie line power performance for area 1 and area 2 is
compared with PI and PID controller. The frequency and
power response is obtained by following graph. Thus the
graph is drawn between frequency and time. The maximum
deviation of frequency and power is represent the per unit
value.
Table 2: System performance for 2% disturbance
Controller
Change in frequency in
area 1
area 2
Change in Tie line
power
Settling
time
(sec)
Maximum
deviation
(p.u)
Settling
time
(sec)
Maximum
deviation
(p.u)
Settling
time
(sec)
Maximum
deviation
(p.u)
GWO-PI 50 0. 0011 55 0. 0031 40 0.1924
GWO-PID 12 0. 0002 15 0. 0001 13 0. 0043
Table: 3 System performance for 3% disturbance
4.5 3% disturbance
When there is 3% disturbance that time the frequency and
tie line power performance for area 1 and area 2 is
compared with PI and PID controller. The frequency and
power response is obtained by following graph. Thus the
graph is drawn between frequency and time. The maximum
deviation of frequency and power is represent the per unit
value.
Controller
area 1
area 2
Change in Tie line power
Settling
time
(sec)
Maximum
deviation
(p.u)
Settling
time
(sec)
Maximum
deviation
(p.u)
Settling
time
(sec)
Maximum
deviation
(p.u)
GWO-PI 40 0. 0076 23 0. 0086 40 0. 0069
GWO-PID 10 0. 0062 20 0. 0001 13 0. 0056
FrequencyinHz
Time in Sec
FrequencyinHz
PI Controller
PID Controller
Time in Sec

CONCLUSION
In this study, a new grey wolf optimized LFC has been
investigated for automatic load frequency control of a two
area interconnected power systems. It is shown analytically
and graphically that there is a substantial improvement in
the time domain specification in terms of lesser rise time,
peak time, settling time as well as a lower overshoot. The
proposed controller using GWO algorithm with PID
controller is proved to be better than the conventional PI
controller. The simulation results are given to validate the
disturbances for LFC. From the simulation results, the
tabulated settling time of 2% and 3% disturbances are
shown in graphical representation. Therefore, the proposed
GWO-PID controller is recommended to generate good
quality and reliable electric energy.Inaddition,theproposed
controller is very simple and easy to implement sinceitdoes
not require many information about system parameters.
Comparison of the proposed GWO-PID controller with
Genetic, Particle Swarm, Flower Pollination, Fire Fly, Ant
Colony Optimization Algorithms along with PI-PID
controllers in multi-area interconnected power system will
be subject to the future work.
REFERENCES
[1] Rajeeb Dey , Sandip Ghosh , G. Ray , A. Rakshita, “H
infinity Load Frequency Control Of Interconnected
Power Systems With Communication Delays” Electrical
Power And Energy Systems, ELSEVIER, Vol. 42, 2012,
672-684.
[2] K.R. Sudha, R. Vijaya Santhi, “Load Frequency Control of
An InterconnectedReheatThermal SystemUsingType-2
Fuzzy System Including SMES Units “Electrical Power
And Energy Systems, ELSEVIER, Vol. 43, 2012, 1183-
1392.
[3] K.P. Singh Parmar, S. Majhi, D.P. Kothari, “Load
Frequency Control Of A Realistic Power System With
Multi-source Power Generation”, Electrical Power And
Energy Systems, ELSEVIER, Vol. 42, 2012, 426-433.
[4] Isha Garg, “Multi-area Load Frequency Control
Implementation In Deregulated Power System“,
IJECE,vol.2, 2012, 2231-2307.
[5] Hassan Bevrani, Senior Member, IEEE, And Pourya
Ranjbar Daneshmand, “Fuzzy Logic-based Load-
frequency Control ConcerningHighPenetrationOf Wind
Turbines”, IEEE Systems, Vol. 6, 2012,173.
[6] Fatemeh Daneshfar and Hassan Bevrani, “An
Optimization Method For LFC Design In Restructured
Power Systems” ICEE, 2012.
[7] Anupam, A. Thatte and Le Xie, “Towards A Unified
Operational Value IndexOfEnergyStorageInSmartGrid
Environment”, IEEETransactions On Smart Grid, Vol. 3,
No. 3, 2012.
[8] Anupam, A. Thatte and Le Xie, “The Provision of
Frequency Control Reserves From MultipleMicrogrids”,
IEEE Transactions On Industrial Electronics,Vol.58,No.
1, 2011.
[9] A. Khodabakhshian, R. Hooshmand, “A new PID
controller design for automatic generation control of
hydro power systems”, Electrical Power and Energy
Systems, ELSEVIER, 32 , 375–382, 2010.
[10]H. Shayeghi a, H.A. Shayanfar b, A. Jalili, “Load frequency
control strategies: A state-of-the-art survey for the
researcher”, Energy Conversion and Management ,
ELSEVIER, 50, 344–353, 2009.
[11]Bevrani. H, Hiyama T. A control strategy for LFC design
with communication delays. In: 7th int power
engineering conference, Vol. 2; 2005, p. 1087–98.
[12]Bevrani H, Hiyama T. Robust decentralizedPIbasedLFC
design for time-delay power system. Energy Convers
Manage 2008;49:193–204.
[13]Bevrani H. Robust power system frequency control,
power electronics and power systems. Business Media,
LLC: Springer Science; 2009.
BIOGRAPHIES
A. Reetta, D/o, A. Amalraj, PG Student,
M.E - Power Electronics and Drives,
Chendhuran College of Engineering
and Technology, Lenavilakku,
Pilivalam Post, Thirumayam Taluk,
Pudukkottai. Pincode: 622 507
B.Prakash Ayyappan, Assistant
Professor, Department of Electrical
and Electronics Engineering, Co-
ordinator, M.E - Power Electronics
and Drives, Chendhuran College of
Engineering and Technology,
Lenavilakku, Pilivalam Post,
Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai.
Pincode: 622 507

IRJET- Load Frequency Control of an Interconnected Power System using Grey Wolf Optimization Algorithm with PID Controller

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot (19)

Similar to IRJET- Load Frequency Control of an Interconnected Power System using Grey Wolf Optimization Algorithm with PID Controller (20)

More from IRJET Journal (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

IRJET- Load Frequency Control of an Interconnected Power System using Grey Wolf Optimization Algorithm with PID Controller