See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/3268372

The Effective Role of AVR and PSS in Power Systems: Frequency Response
Analysis

Article  in  Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on · December 2007

DOI: 10.1109/TPWRS.2007.908404 · Source: IEEE Xplore

CITATIONS READS
81 14,565

5 authors, including:

W.E. Leithead Adam Dyśko

University of Strathclyde University of Strathclyde
217 PUBLICATIONS   4,963 CITATIONS    124 PUBLICATIONS   1,924 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

J.R. Mcdonald
University of Strathclyde
348 PUBLICATIONS   6,607 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Assessment of Increased Risks Imposed by a Relaxation of Loss-Of-Mains Protection Settings Applied to Generation Connected to the Electricity Network in Northern Ireland
View project

OMASES - Open market access and security assessment system View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Adam Dyśko on 04 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


The effective role of AVR and PSS in Power
Systems: Frequency Response Analysis
Graham J. W. Dudgeon, Member, IEEE, William E. Leithead, Adam Dyśko, Member, IEEE,
John O’Reilly, Senior Member, IEEE, James R. McDonald, Senior Member, IEEE
Abstract— Two trade-offs in the effectiveness of automatic
voltage regulators (AVRs) and power system stabilizers (PSSs)
are investigated together for the first time. The first is the effect
of a high-gain fast response AVR on decreasing power system
oscillation stability as well as increasing transient stability, and
vice versa. The second is that a PSS can reduce transient stability
by overriding the voltage signal to the exciter as well as
increasing oscillation stability, and vice versa. In essence, the
actions of the AVR and PSS devices are dynamically interlinked.
A novel Bode frequency response framework for dynamic
analysis of AVR and PSS performance and trade-offs is
presented. Bode frequency response also assists with the
determination of suitable generator locations for PSSs and the
assessment of robustness under changing power system operating
conditions.
Index Terms— Transient stability, electromechanical
oscillations, automatic voltage regulators, power system
stabilizers, Bode frequency-response analysis.
I. INTRODUCTION
D ISTURBANCES, sustained power system oscillations,
and their effective amelioration have for many years
presented a major challenge to the electricity supply industry.
This is especially the case in the context of the rapidly growing
integration of distributed generation and loads into power
transmission and distribution networks [1]. Much previous
work [4] has centred round the question as to what effective
role such widely used devices as the generator automatic
voltage regulator (AVR) and power system stabilizer (PSS)
play in the attenuation of these power system instabilities.
Other related questions concern the best power system location
for PSSs and how best to assess their proper tuning and
robustness [2] in the face of changing power system operating
conditions.
Manuscript submitted April 20, 2004; revised December 22, 2005,
October 10, 2006 and 27 April 2007. The work in this paper was supported
by UK EPSRC Grant No. GR/R40593/01.
Graham J. W. Dudgeon is with Mathworks, Cambridge, UK (e-mail:
Graham.Dudgeon@mathworks.co.uk).
William E. Leithead, Adam Dyśko and James R. McDonald are with the
Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University of
Strathclyde, Glasgow, G1 1XW. (e-mail: w.leithead@eee.strath.ac.uk,
a.dysko@strath.ac.uk, j.mcdonald@eee.strath.ac.uk)
John O’Reilly is with the Department of Electronics and Electrical
Engineering, University of Glasgow, G12 8LT. (e-mail:
j.oreilly@elec.gla.ac.uk)
1
The functions of the AVR and the PSS in multi-machine
power systems are widely documented [3,4]. As the name
suggests, the AVR provides regulation or maintenance of the
terminal voltage of the machine to which it is attached. In
addition, a high-gain fast-response AVR improves large-signal
transient stability in the sense that it increases the ability of the
power system to maintain synchronism when subjected to
severe transient disturbances, for instance network faults. The
traditional method of assessing AVR transient stability
performance has been large-signal (nonlinear) time-domain
simulation. High-gain fast-response AVR action can however
lead to reduced damping of system electromechanical modes
of oscillation. Standard ways of eliminating this loss of system
damping are either to employ transient gain reduction [3] on
the AVR or more commonly attach a PSS to appropriate
machines [3,4]. The traditional method of analysing
oscillatory instability is small-signal eigen-analysis [5-7]. A
recent discussion of the definitions of large-signal transient
stability and small-signal oscillation stability is found in [28].
This paper addresses two basic issues in detail together for
the first time. The first issue is that a high-gain AVR can have
a detrimental effect on oscillation stability. The second issue is
that a PSS can reduce transient stability by overriding the
voltage signal to the exciter; see Chapter 7 of [4]. The first
issue is widely appreciated, the second issue less so with the
notable exceptions of [8,9]. In other words, a PSS ostensibly
well tuned can impair the action of the AVR, and vice versa. In
essence, the actions of the AVR and PSS devices are
dynamically interlinked. At a basic level, there is a trade-off
between synchronizing torque provided by the AVR and
damping torque provided by the PSS [3]. This interlinking of
the action of the AVR and PSS devices and the trade-offs
involved has not previously been investigated.
A new analysis of both the above dynamic interaction issues
is presented here using Bode frequency-response methods.
Bode frequency response methods also assist with the
determination of suitable generator locations for PSSs and the
assessment of robustness under changing power system
operating conditions. They provide small-signal information.
However, good transient behaviour in a small-signal sense is a
necessary condition for good transient behaviour in a large-
signal sense. As usual, good transient behaviour must be
confirmed by large-signal simulation.
Frequency response methods have previously been usefully
applied to multi-machine power systems [5,8,10-23, 27] and
have several advantages over eigen-analysis [5-7]: frequency
 2

response methods are valid at frequencies not restricted to the
system natural oscillation frequencies [10]; they are able to
analyse controller interactions at non-oscillatory modes [10];
they can be used to analyse necessary requirements for
transient stability; with direct Bode over-plotting, robustness
assessment of changing power system operating conditions or
configurations is accomplished with ease. The papers [8,19] in
particular are seminal in favouring control engineering Bode
and Nyquist stability methods over traditional synchronizing
and damping torque analysis [3] for PSS tuning, not least
because the former are directly verifiable through plant
frequency-response measurements.
The paper is organized as follows. A two-area four-
generator test power system is described in Section II. Bode
frequency-response methods in Sections III and IV are used
respectively to characterize the impact of a high-gain AVR on
oscillation stability and the impact of a PSS on the voltage
signal to the exciter (on transient stability). Further verification
of the generality of these methods is provided by application to
a second 10 machine 39 bus New England Test System study
in Section V. In Section VI, Bode methods are additionally
used to provide direct assessment of two robustness scenarios,
changing inter-area power flows and changing from an
islanded to a grid-connected system. Conclusions are
presented in Section VII.
∆EFD is the perturbation generator field voltage, ∆ω is the
perturbation generator shaft speed and ∆ET is the perturbation
generator terminal voltage. The subscripts 1-4 denote the
generator number.
U = [∆PM 1 ∆EFD1 ∆PM 2 ∆EFD 2 ∆PM 3 ∆EFD3 ∆PM 4
′
∆EFD 4 ] (1)
′
Y = [∆ω1 ∆ET 1 ∆ω 2 ∆ET 2 ∆ω 3 ∆ET 3 ∆ω 4 ∆ET 4 ] (2)
The two-area Test System I, depicted in Fig.1, has four
lightly damped electromechanical modes of oscillation. Table I
gives the frequencies of oscillation and damping of the four
modes at nominal system operating point without AVRs or
PSSs. Mode 1 is an intra-area mode in Area 1 where
generators 1 and 2 swing against each other. Mode 2 is an
intra-area mode in Area 2 where generators 3 and 4 swing
against each other. Mode 3 is a generator/motor mode where
all the generators swing in unison against the motor, with
generators 3 and 4 being most dominant. Mode 4 is an inter-
area mode where the generators in Area 1 swing in unison
against the generators in Area 2.
Using this well-known test system, the complementary role
of the AVR and PSS is elucidated by frequency-response in
Sections III and IV respectively.

II. TEST SYSTEM I TABLE I

ELECTROMECHANICAL MODES OF OSCILLATION
The main network under study is the four-machine two-area Frequency Hz (rad/s) Damping Ratio
power system shown in Fig. 1 as Test System I, essentially Mode 1 1.02 (6.41) 0.099
equivalent to [4], p.813, but with a dynamic load on bus 8. The Mode 2 1.05 (6.60) 0.097
generators are rated at 900 MVA and 20kV, with connection Mode 3 0.61 (3.83) 0.093
Mode 4 0.46 (2.92) 0.075
to the network through a 20/230 kV step-up transformer. The
nominal system is operating with Area 1 exporting 400 MW to
Area 2. The generators are modelled as round-rotor III. AVR FREQUENCY RESPONSE ANALYSIS
representations. Electrical loads L7 and L9 are static loads and Consider each generator of Test System I in Fig.1 has an
L8 is a dynamic load modelled as a round rotor generator that AVR connected to it where each AVR has the transfer
produces negative power (details in Appendix). Active power function,
load demand of 2,734 MW is met by the four generators
supplying equal active power. Although a simple network, it 200
ki = , i = 1…4 (3)
has very interesting dynamics and provides an exemplar for the 0.01s + 1
assessment of AVR or PSS performance.
The focus here is on the system electrical dynamics and
400 MW associated AVR and PSS devices. The specification of these
G1 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3 G3 devices is essentially independent of the choice of governors
due to bandwidth separation. Consequently, a 4-input 4-output
230 kV C7 C9 system model accurately representing electrical dynamics over
a 10 rad/s bandwidth is considered. Within this 4-input 4-
2 L7 L9 4
20 kV L8 output system model, each of the four generators has an input-
G2 G4 output pairing between generator field voltage input ∆EFD and
Area 1
generator terminal voltage output ∆ET. Fig. 2 is a schematic of
Area 2
the AVR system with AVR1 feedback loop open and all other
Fig. 1. Four machine two area Test System I. AVR feedback loops closed.
Coordinated decentralized regulation by AVRs: Associated
An 8 × 8 linear (small-signal) dynamical model of Test with each generator input-output pairing, an individual open-
System I generated from the power systems software package loop AVR channel is defined as the transmission between the
PSS/E has the following inputs, U, and outputs, Y, where ∆PM terminal voltage reference input and the terminal voltage
is the perturbation mechanical power input to the generator,
 3

output ∆ET with its corresponding feedback loop open, but 40

with all other feedback loops closed as in Fig. 2 for Test

Magnitude (dB)
20
System I. The transmittance, y1/r1, is open-loop AVR channel
1 or C1. There are four such open-loop AVR channels, the 0
others being denoted by C2, C3, C4.
-20

r1 y1
AVR1 EFD1 ET1 -40
0 1 2
10 10 10
r2 EFD2 ET2 y2
AVR2 0

r3 y3 -50

Phase (deg)
AVR3 EFD3 ET3
-100
r4 EFD4 ET4 y4 -150
AVR4
-200

-250
0 1 2
10 10 10
Frequency (rad/s)

Fig. 2. Four-generator Test System I with AVR1 feedback loop open,
feedback loops AVR2, AVR3 and AVR4 closed, defining open-loop AVR
channel 1 or C1.
The analysis of each SISO AVR channel is thereby
undertaken in a natural coordinated decentralized manner
[10,14,18,25] in that analysis, through that channel, is based
upon the whole power network as seen from that AVR. It
accords with industrial de-regulated power system practice,
allowing transient stability and oscillation mode stabilization
issues to be addressed for multiple-machine scenarios [2].
Unlike [10], neither restriction to open-loop multi-input multi-
output system diagonal dominance nor sequential feedback
loop closure is required. If any oscillation instability occurs, it
can be observed and analyzed in any AVR channel, since all
closed-loop AVR channels possess the same poles [26].
AVR provides transient stability at expense of robust
oscillation stability: A high-gain fast-response AVR provides
an AVR channel gain markedly above 0dB (of the order of
20dB or more) The higher the AVR gain and the faster the
AVR response, the broader the range of frequencies in the
AVR channel frequency response that are maintained at high
gain. A high AVR gain over a significant frequency range
improves the ability of the system to recover from system
disturbances in a small-signal sense. Good recovery of the
system from system disturbances in a small-signal sense is a
necessary condition for good recovery of the system from
system disturbances in a large-signal sense, that is to say
transient stability. The Bode diagram of AVR channel C2 for
Test System I in Fig. 3 immediately demonstrates the
effectiveness of the AVR in channel C2 in a small-signal sense;
AVR channel C2 gain is markedly greater than 0dB over a
frequency range approaching 3 rad/s. The presence of the
electromechanical modes of oscillation around 3.5 rad/s and
6.5 rad/s in Fig. 3 is apparent. Since the AVR channel gain at
these frequencies is in the vicinity of 0dB, the mode dynamics
are modified by the AVR, almost always causing a reduction
Fig. 3. Bode plot of open-loop AVR channel C2 (∆ET2/r2 with all other AVR
loops closed) for Test System I.
Characteristic Bode signature and robust stability: In Test
System I, each AVR channel has a lightly damped mode
consisting of a pair of poles accompanied by a pair of zeros;
the characteristic Bode signature is a switchback near 3.5
rad/s, the frequency of the inter-area electromechanical mode,
as illustrated for AVR channel C2 in Fig. 3. The frequencies of
the right-half-plane (RHP) poles and zeros relevant to the
Bode switchback near 3.5 rad/s are listed in Table II. When
the pole-zero pairs are in the RHP, as in the case of AVR
channels C1, C3 and C4, see Table II, the characteristic Bode
signature is a magnitude peak accompanied by a step-up in
phase and a magnitude trough accompanied by a step-down in
phase: oscillation stability by the AVR cannot then be
achieved. (By the Nyquist Criterion, to stabilize the 2 RHP
poles the Nyquist plot must encircle the -1 point twice in an
anti-clockwise direction; that is, the phase must advance by
360degrees while the gain is above 0dB. However, although
the RHP poles induce a 180degree phase advance, the RHP
zeros induce a 180degrees phase lag resulting in no net
encirclements.) When the generator pole-zero pairs are in the
LHP, as in the case of AVR channel C2, see Table II, the
characteristic Bode signature (see Fig. 3) is a magnitude peak
accompanied by a step-down in phase and a magnitude trough
accompanied by a step-up in phase: oscillation stability by the
AVR alone is now possible. (By the Nyquist Criterion, to keep
the 2 LHP poles stable, the Nyquist plot must not encircle the -
1 point. The LHP poles induce a 180degree phase lag while
the LHP zeros induce a 180degrees phase advance. No
encirclements can result.)
TABLE II
RIGHT HALF PLANE (RHP) CHANNEL POLE-ZERO STRUCTURE
Channel RHPZs RHPPs
C1 1.3526e-02 ± 3.4849e+00j 4.9695e-02 ± 3.3575e+00j
C2 _____________ _____________

in damping. A consequence of a high-gain fast-response AVR C3 5.0886e-02 ± 3.4776e+00j 4.9419e-02 ± 3.4741e+00j

is thus to reduce damping of system oscillatory modes C4 5.5583e-02 ± 3.4739e+00j 5.6217e-02 ± 3.4910e+00j
sometimes to the point of oscillation instability.
 4

Focusing therefore on AVR channel C2, oscillation mode generator feeds an auxiliary signal (usually generator speed ∆ω
stabilization is possible either by decreasing or increasing as here) back to the exciter/AVR voltage input of that
channel (AVR) gain. The first oscillation stabilization option generator.
of decreasing AVR gain would be at the expense of reduced A standard PSS [4] with the transfer function
recovery from system disturbances, i.e. transient stability. It is
not considered further. The second oscillation stabilization 200 s 0.05s + 1 3.0s + 1
p( s) = (4)
option of increasing the AVR gain in k2 of (3) from 200 to at 10 s + 1 0.02 s + 1 5.4s + 1
least 900 cures this oscillation instability by raising the open-
loop AVR channel C2 gain trough in the frequency response of is attached to generator 2. The open-loop generator PSS
Fig. 3 above 0dB. Increased channel C2 gain however lacks channel 2 is defined as the response between AVR2 input
stability robustness to power system uncertainty with small deviation and generator 2 output speed deviation ∆ω2 with the
robustness margins, in particular, the small channel C2 gain PSS loop open but all four AVR loops closed. (Other open-
margin of 3.1dB in Table III. Of course, because of the loop PSS channels would be defined similarly).
coordinated decentralised manner of the analysis, if any other Bode signature criterion for damping and oscillation
AVR channel had LHP pole-zero pairs it could equally well be stabilization: Consider the open-loop PSS channel 2 Bode
considered. diagram of Fig. 4 for Test System I. The inter-area and intra-
TABLE III
FREQUENCY RESPONSE CHARACTERISTICS OF CHANNEL 2
area modes correspond to the peaks in the gain plot. When an
Channel ω0dB PM deg ω-180° GM dB oscillation mode is stable, the Bode signature in the PSS
C2 3.45 -50.5 3.20 37.8 channel is a magnitude peak accompanied by a step-down in
(k2 = 200) 3.68 92.6 3.51 -10.0 phase. The higher the gain of the peak is above 0dB in Fig. 4,
12.12 81.3 the greater the system damping by the PSS. This is the case
C2 47.6 47.0 3.20 50.9
(k2 = 900) 3.51 3.1
here for the gain peak at intra-area mode (mode 1) frequency
6.6 rad/s; see Table IV. When applied, this PSS increases the
This lack of stability robustness is confirmed by nonlinear damping ratio of this intra-area mode from 0.117 to 0.209 and
increases the frequency to 7.5 rad/s.
simulation (not shown) of generator 1 terminal voltage ∆ET
response to a 120 msec three-phase fault to ground applied at
TABLE IV
bus 2 of Test System I in Fig. 1. Increased channel C2 gain TEST SYSTEM I ELECTROMECHANICAL MODES OF OSCILLATION
also lacks stability robustness to changes in power system Without PSS With PSS
loading. If the loading of 400MW from Area 1 to Area 2 in Frequency Hz Damping Ratio Frequency Hz Damping Ratio
Fig. 1 were reversed, channel C2 would be dynamically similar (rad/s) (rad/s)
1.06 (6.64) 0.117 1.19 (7.50) 0.209
to channel C4 under the original loading with channel RHPPs 1.09 (6.83) 0.121 1.09 (6.83) 0.121
and RHPZs, see Table II. Stabilization is no longer possible. 0.65 (4.07) 0.095 0.65 (4.08) 0.098
The dynamic impact of different power loadings is further 0.55 (3.47) -0.014 0.56 (3.49) 0.024
explored in Section VI where the characteristic switchback
20
pole-zero behaviour is evaluated over a wide range of power PSS
Magnitude (dB)

0
flow. no PSS

In summary, the effectiveness of a generator AVR in a -20

multi-machine system is analysed through its open-loop AVR -40

channel. The information from the Bode plot of the open-loop -60
AVR channel signals the trade-off, when the oscillation modes -80
0 1 2
are lightly damped, between transient stability and oscillation 10 10 10

mode stability. The characteristic signature of a lightly damped 600

oscillation mode is a switchback in the AVR channel Bode
Phase (deg)

plot. Furthermore, when the characteristic signature for a 400

particular AVR indicates that the pole-zero pairs are in the 200
LHP, oscillation stabilization by the AVR is possible but at the
0
expense of either performance (by reducing its gain) or
stability robustness (by increasing its gain). -200
0 1 2
10 10 10
Frequency (rad/s)
IV. PSS FREQUENCY-RESPONSE ANALYSIS
Fig. 4. Bode plot of Generator 2 open-loop PSS channel (∆ω2 /r2 with all
Additional PSS stabilization: With high-gain AVR’s on the AVR loops closed) with PSS (solid) and without (dashed) for Test System I.
generators in Test System I, the analysis in Section III leads to
consideration of additional stabilization using power system When an oscillation mode is unstable, the Bode signature in
stabilizers (PSS) attached to one or more generators. It is the PSS channel is a magnitude peak accompanied by a step-
recalled [3,17] that any given PSS attached to a particular up in phase. The PSS stabilizes the mode provided the gain of
 5

the peak is above 0dB. This is the case here for the gain peak 10
gen2
in Fig. 4 at inter-area mode (mode 4) frequency 3.5 rad/s.

Magnitude (dB)
gen4
When applied, this PSS stabilizes the inter-area mode, by 0

increasing the damping ratio from -0.014 to 0.024 with little

change in frequency. -10

From the presence or otherwise of the required Bode

-20
signatures as discussed above, the appropriate choice of 10
0
10
1 2
10
generator for locating a PSS is readily determined from the
Bode plots of all the open-loop PSS channels (without PSS). 50

The properties of the gain peaks for the two oscillatory modes

Phase (deg)
0
in Fig. 4 confirm that generator 2 is a good location for a
-50
stabilizer in Test System I. Through adjustment of the gain
peaks, the Bode plot of the PSS channel can be used to directly -100
tune the stabilizer.
-150
PSS provides damping and oscillation stability at expense 10
0
10
1 2
10
of AVR: This is demonstrated with reference again to the PSS Frequency (rad/s)
located at generator 2. Fig. 5. Bode plots of closed-loop AVR channels C2 and C4 (∆ET2/r2 and
The Bode plots of the generator 2 open-loop PSS channel, ∆ET4/r4 respectively with all other AVR loops closed) with PSS2 loop closed
with the PSS located at generator 2, are shown in Fig. 4 and for Test System I.
the corresponding closed-loop AVR channels C2 and C4 in Fig.
5. Over the frequency range, 3 rad/s to 8 rad/s, in which the
gain of the Bode plot in Fig. 4 for the open-loop generator 2
PSS channel is above or near 0dB, the generator 2 PSS
overrides the voltage signal to the exciter reducing transient
stability. This overriding of the exciter voltage signal by the
PSS is observed directly from the Bode plots of the open-loop
AVR channels in Fig. 5. The closed-loop AVR channel C2 has
significant loss of gain (as low as –10dB gain) in the vicinity
of the electromechanical mode frequencies, 3.5 rad/s and 6.5
rad/s. In contrast, the gain of closed-loop AVR channel C4
remains close to 0dB at frequencies up to 10 rad/s. In other
words, the AVR at generator 2 is not effective between 3 rad/s
and 8 rad/s but the AVR at generator 4 is. For instance, the
terminal voltage response at generator 2 to a system
disturbance would exhibit markedly more persistent transients.
Good recovery of the system from system disturbances in Fig. 6. Terminal voltage responses ET for generator 2 with fault at bus 2 and
the above small-signal sense is a necessary though not a generator 4 with fault at bus 4 for Test System I.

sufficient condition for the good recovery of the system from

In summary, the effectiveness of a particular generator PSS
system disturbances in a large-signal sense. Hence, the
in a multi-machine system is analysed through its open-loop
relatively poor recovery of the generator 2 terminal voltage
PSS channel. The presence of the required Bode signatures in
deduced from the preceding small-signal analysis implies the
a particular generator open-loop PSS channel signals that
same in the large-signal case, see the voltage responses in
generator as an appropriate location for a PSS. The higher and
Fig.6 obtained by nonlinear simulation. This simulation
wider the Bode PSS gain signature in Fig. 4 (increasing the
involved a three-phase fault to ground applied at bus 2 of Test
desired oscillation mode stability), the greater is the loss of
System I in Fig. 1 for 120 ms duration; likewise at bus 4. (The
closed-loop AVR channel gain over a wider frequency range
output limiter values used in all simulations here are ± 0.25p.u.
in Fig. 5 (increasing the unwanted override of the voltage
for the PSSs and ± 10p.u. on the AVRs.) Fig. 6 confirms that
signal to the exciter) and vice versa. The overall effectiveness
locating the PSS at generator 2 results in poorer recovery of
of the PSS is determined by this trade-off.
generator 2 to a fault at generator 2. The PSS at generator 2 is
however observed to have little adverse effect on the recovery
V. NEW ENGLAND TEST SYSTEM II
of generator 4 to a fault at generator 4. The significant
frequency components of the generator 2 voltage response in The trade-offs concerning the AVR and PSS exist in multi-
Fig.6 correlates with the marked loss of gain in the vicinity of machine power systems in general. A second larger network
3.5rad/s and 6.5rad/s of the closed-loop AVR channel C2 in studied is the 10-machine 39-bus New England system
Fig. 5. designated Test System II. The data for this system can be
found in [24]. As with Test System I, for the purposes of
 6

generator performance comparison, attention is focused on two 1.2

generators, specifically, generators 4 and 9. With all the AVRs Gen 9 ET following Gen 9 bus fault

having, as in [24], transfer function 1.1

25 1
ki = , i = 1…10 (5)
0.025s + 1

Voltage (pu)
0.9 Gen 4 ET following Gen 4 bus fault
the system is unstable. For oscillation mode damping and
stabilization, a PSS is attached to machine 9. To provide a fair 0.8
comparison between the performances of generators 4 and 9,
the gain of the AVR at generator 4 is increased from 25 to 60; 0.7
that is, the AVRs are made active over the same range of
frequencies. The transfer function, p(s), for the PSS is 0.6

1.54 s 9.09 s + 1 0.3s + 1

p(s) = (6) 0.5
s +1 s +1 0.02 s + 1 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time (s)

When applied, this PSS affects the three oscillatory modes Fig. 8. Terminal voltage responses ET for generator 9 with fault at bus 9 and
generator 4 with fault at bus 4 for Test System II.
shown in Table V leaving all other system eigenvalues
unchanged. As observed, the PSS damps the inter-area mode at TABLE V
3.8rad/s, stabilizes the intra-area mode at 5.7rad/s and damps TEST SYSTEM II ELECTROMECHANICAL MODES OF OSCILLATION
the intra-area mode at 7.6rad/s. Without PSS With PSS
The Bode plots for the closed-loop AVR channels C9 and C4 Frequency Hz Damping Ratio Frequency Hz Damping Ratio
(rad/s) (rad/s)
with the PSS at generator 9 in Fig. 7 demonstrate again that 1.21 (7.63) 0.073 1.22 (7.66) 0.088
PSS stabilization and damping comes at the price of overriding 0.91 (5.72) -0.046 0.88 (5.50) 0.192
the voltage signal to the exciter. In the vicinity of the mode 0.61 (3.82) 0.016 0.60 (3.79) 0.057
frequencies, 3.8 rad/s, 5.5 rad/s and 7.7 rad/s, the PSS impairs
the effectiveness of the AVR attached to generator 9 (loss of VI. ANALYSIS OF CHANGING OPERATING
AVR channel gain) in improving the ability of the system to CONDITIONS
recover from system disturbances, but not that of the AVR The Bode frequency response methods of Sections III and
attached to generator 4 (negligible loss of AVR channel gain). IV demonstrate that the inclusion of a single PSS on generator
This is confirmed in the corresponding relatively poor terminal 2 is sufficient for the oscillation stability and damping of the
voltage response of generator 9 to a fault at bus 9 and the overall four-generator two-area Test System I. In Test System
relatively good response of generator 4 to a fault at bus 4 I, Fig. 1, it is assumed that there is a nominal steady-state
shown in Fig. 8. The similarity of Fig. 7 and 8 of Test System export of 400 MW of power from Area 1 to Area 2 and that
II to Figs 5 & 6 of Test System I is striking. the two-area network forms an islanded system. System
stability and dynamic performance must be robust to inevitable
20 changes in power system operating conditions. Two important
gen9
Magnitude (dB)

gen4 robustness scenarios are considered.

0
A. Changing Inter-Area Power Flows for Test System I
-20
In order to assess the effect of changing power flow between
the two areas of Test System I in Fig. 1, 20 linear models were
-40
10
0
10
1 2
10
created ranging from a power flow of 400MW from Area 1 to
Area 2 (the nominal case), through no power flow, to a power
0
flow of 400MW from Area 2 to Area 1. The Bode plots of
-50 Figs. 9 and 10 directly show the impact of changing the power
Phase (deg)

-100 flow (load L7 and load L9 demands) on the open-loop AVR

-150 channel C2 terminal voltage ∆ET dynamics when only AVRs
-200 are attached. Under load reversal, the pole-zero pairs of AVR
-250 channel C2 go from the LHP (Bode signature is a magnitude
0 1 2
10 10 10 peak accompanied by a step-down in phase and a magnitude
Frequency (rad/s)
trough accompanied by a step-up in phase) to the RHP (Bode
Fig. 7. Bode plots of closed-loop AVR channels C9 and C4 (∆ET9/r9 and
signature is a magnitude peak accompanied by a step-up in
∆ET4/r4 respectively with all other AVR loops closed) with PSS9 loop closed
for Test System II. phase and a magnitude trough accompanied by a step-down in
phase); with the transition point roughly when loading is equal.
 7

60 At full load reversal in Fig. 10 (load L7 1567MW and load

L7=1057.0
Magnitude (dB)
40
L7=767.0 L9=1276.0 L9 767MW), both the AVR channel C2 Bode gain and phase
L9=1567.0
characteristics are flat but this does not imply that the poles
20
and zeros no longer exist, only that the pole-zero frequencies
0 are very close together. The PSS at generator 2 still stabilizes
-20 the system but with reduced damping. The signature of
10
0.5
10
0.6 degraded oscillation performance at full load reversal is the
sharp Bode magnitude peak accompanied by a sharp 360 deg
100 phase loss (system RHPZs) in the closed-loop system of Fig.
11. This is corroborated by the nonlinear simulation in Fig. 12
Phase (deg)

0
of the generator 2 terminal voltage ET response to a 120 ms
-100
three-phase fault for a power transfer of 400MW from Area 1
-200 to Area 2, and a power transfer of 400MW from Area 2 to
-300
Area 1.
0.5 0.6
10 10 1.03
Frequency (rad/s) area1-area2 400MW
area2-area1 400MW
Fig. 9. Bode plot of open-loop AVR channel C2 (∆ET2/r2 with all other AVR
1.02
loops closed) with AVRs only for range of power transfer from Area 1 to Area
2 in Test System I.
1.01

Voltage (pu)
40 L7=1106.4 L7=1567.0
Magnitude (dB)

L9=1227.6 L9=767.0
20 1

0
0.99

-20
0.54 0.56 0.58 0.6
10 10 10 10
0.98

100
0.97
Phase (deg)

50 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time (s)
0
Fig. 12. Generator 2 with PSS2 terminal voltage ET response to a 120 ms
-50 three-phase fault for complete range of power transfer from Area 1 to Area 2
in Test System I.
-100
0.54 0.56 0.58 0.6 10
10 10 10 10
Magnitude (dB)

Frequency (rad/s) 0
Fig. 10. Bode plot of open-loop AVR channel C2 (∆ET2/r2 with all other AVR
loops closed) with AVRs only for range of reversed power transfer from Area -10
1 to Area 2 in Test System I.
-20
10
Full reverse flow -30
Magnitude (dB)

0 1 2
0 10 10 10

-10 50
-20
Phase (deg)

0
-30
-50
-40
0 1 2
10 10 10
-100
200
-150
0 1 2
0 10 10 10
Phase (deg)

Frequency (rad/s)
-200
Fig. 13. Bode plot of closed-loop AVR channel C2 (∆ET2/r2 with all AVR
-400 loops closed) with PSSs connected to both generators 2 and 4 for complete
range of power transfer from Area1 to Area 2 in Test System I.
-600
0 1 2
10 10 10
Under load reversal, the roles of the PSSs at generators 2
Frequency (rad/s)
Fig. 11. Bode plot of closed-loop AVR channel C2 (∆ET2/r2 with all AVR
and 4 are reversed. Generator 4 now becomes the appropriate
loops closed) with PSS2 loop closed for complete range of power transfer location for a PSS as can be confirmed from the generator 4
from Area 1 to Area 2 in Test System I. open-loop PSS channel Bode plot. Location of a PSS at
 8

generator 4, in addition to the PSS at generator 2, gives good System I.

performance in all circumstances. The oscillation performance Above 80% generator load penetration level for the system
degradation at load reversal is no longer present and the with AVRs but no PSSs, a Bode switchback characteristic with
system remains adequately damped throughout the operating LHP pole-zero signature at the inter-area mode appears in
range of power flow and power flow reversal as shown by the open-loop AVR channel C2 of Fig. 15. Above 95% penetration
closed-loop AVR channel C2 Bode plots in Fig. 13. This is level, the Bode switchback characteristic assumes a RHP pole-
corroborated by the nonlinear simulation in Fig. 14 of zero signature. The conclusion is that a PSS on generator 2 is
generator 2 terminal voltage response to a 120 ms three-phase recommended for damping above 80% penetration, but above
fault with different power transfers, for a PSS on both 95% penetration a PSS on generator 2 is required for
generators 2 and 4. stabilization. Fig. 16 depicts the Bode plot of the closed-loop
1.03 AVR channel C2 with AVRs and a single fixed gain PSS
area1-area2 400MW
area2-area1 400MW connected to generator 2 in Test System I. It shows adequate
1.02 robust stability and damping of oscillatory modes for all levels
of load penetration up to 100%. In general, the range of
circumstances requiring a PSS will vary with the loading
1.01
condition.
Voltage (pu)

1 10
20%

Magnitude (dB)
0
0.99
-10

0.98 -20
100%

-30
0 1 2
10 10 10
0.97
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time (s) 50
100%
Fig. 14. Generator 2 terminal voltage ET response to 120 ms three-phase fault
Phase (deg)

0
with PSS on generators 2 and 4 for complete range of power transfer from
Area 1 to Area 2 in Test System I. -50
20%
B. Changing from an Islanded to a Grid-Connected System -100
This second scenario for Test System I uses Bode frequency
-150
response methods to assess the impact on overall power 10
0
10
1
10
2

system dynamics of connecting the nominal network to an Frequency (rad/s)

infinite bus system at bus 8 through a low reactance branch, Fig. 16. Bode plot of closed-loop AVR channel C2 (∆ET2/r2 with all AVR
loops closed) with AVRs and PSS on generator 2 for 20% - 100% load
and then changing the load penetration of the four network
penetration in Test System I.
generators – that is, the percentage of load demand provided
by the four network generators. The penetration of the VII. CONCLUSION
generators ranges from 20 – 100% of total load demand.
40
Two trade-offs in the effectiveness of AVRs and PSSs are
96% 92% investigated together in detail for the first time. The first trade-
Magnitude (dB)

100%
20 off is the effect of a high-gain fast response AVR on
decreasing power system oscillation stability as well as
88%
0 83%
increasing transient stability, and vice versa. The second trade-
off is that a PSS can reduce transient stability by overriding the
-20
0.5 0.6
voltage signal to the exciter as well as increasing oscillation
10 10
stability, and vice versa. In essence, the actions of the AVR
400
and PSS devices are dynamically interlinked.
96% New dynamic analysis of AVR and PSS performance and
Phase (deg)

200 trade-offs is presented within a Bode frequency response

framework. In an AVR channel Bode plot, the characteristic
0 88% 100%
83% signature of a lightly damped oscillation mode is a switchback.
92% It is the prime indicator of the adverse impact of the AVR on
-200
0.5 0.6
system oscillation stability and the need for additional
10 10
stabilization through a PSS. In a PSS channel Bode plot, the
Frequency (rad/s)
characteristic signature of a system oscillation mode is a peak
Fig. 15. Bode plot of open-loop AVR channel C2 (∆ET2/r2 with all other AVR
loops closed) with AVRs only for 80% - 100% load penetration in Test at the mode frequency. The higher and wider the signature

(increasing the desired oscillation mode stability), the greater
is the loss of closed-loop AVR channel gain over a wider
frequency range (increasing the unwanted override of the
voltage signal to the exciter) and vice versa. The effectiveness
of AVRs and PSSs, that takes into account their dynamically
interlinked actions, is thereby determined.
The basic approach to the dynamic analysis of AVR and
PSS performance and trade-offs is developed on a well-known
4-machine system. This approach applies to multi-machine
systems in general as illustrated by the 10-machine New
England system.
Other benefits of the Bode frequency response analysis are
that they assist with the determination of suitable generator
locations for PSSs and the assessment of robustness under
changing power system operating conditions.
APPENDIX
SYNCHRONOUS MOTOR PARAMETERS
The synchronous motor L8 of Test System I in Fig. 1 is
modelled as a round rotor machine with the following
parameters.
′ = 8.0, Tdo
Tdo ′′ = 0.03, Tqo
′ = 0.4, Tqo
′′ = 0.05, H = 15, D = 0
X d = 1.8, X q = 1.7, X ′d = 0.3, X ′q = 0.55, X ′d′ = 0.25
REFERENCES
[1] M.K. Donnely, J.E. Dagle, D.J. Trudnowski and G.J. Rogers, “Impact
of the distributed utility on transmission system stability,” IEEE Trans.
Power Systems, vol. 11, no. 2, May 1996, pp 741-746.
[2] CIGRE Task Force 38.02.16, “Impact of interaction among power
system controls,” Paris, Technical Report, Fall 1999.
[3] F.D. DeMello and C. Concordia, “Concepts of synchronous machine
stability as affected by excitation control,” IEEE Trans. Power
Apparatus and Systems, vol. 88, no. 2, April 1969, pp. 316-329.
[4] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, McGraw Hill Press,
1994.
[5] N. Martins, “Efficient eigenvalue and frequency response methods
applied to power system small-signal stability studies,” IEEE Trans.
Power Systems, vol. PWRS-1, no. 1, February 1986, pp. 217-226.
[6] P. Kundur, G.J. Rogers, D.Y. Wong, L. Wang and M.G. Lauby, “A
comprehensive computer programme package for small signal stability
analysis of power systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 5, no. 4,
November 1990, pp. 1076-1083.
[7] M.J. Gibbard, N. Martins, J.J. Sanchez-Gasca, N. Uchida, V. Vital and
L. Wang, “Recent applications of linear analysis techniques,” IEEE
Trans. Power Systems, vol. 16, no. 1, February 2001, pp. 154-162.
[8] K.E. Bollinger, R. Winsor and A. Campbell, “Frequency response
methods for tuning stabilizers to damp out tie-line power oscillations:
theory and field- test results,” IEEE Trans. Power Apparatus and
Systems, vol. PAS-98, no. 5, September 1979, pp. 1509-1515.
[9] K.T. Law, D.J. Hill and N.R. Godfrey, “Robust controller structure for
coordinated power system voltage regulator and stabilizer design,” IEEE
Trans. Control Systems Technology, vol. 2, no. 3, September 1994, pp.
220-232.
[10] I. Kamwa, R. Grondin and Y. Hebert, “Wide-area measurement based
stabilizing control of large power systems – a decentralized/hierarchical
approach,” IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 16, no. 1, February 2001,
pp. 136-153.
[11] E.L. Busby, J.D. Hurley, F.W. Keay and C. Raczkowski, “Dynamic
stability improvement at Monticello Station – analytical study and field
tests,” IEEE Trans. Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-98, no. 3,
May 1979, pp. 889-897.
9
[12] P. Kundur, D.C. Lee and H.M. Zein El-Din, “Power system stabilizers
for thermal units: analytical techniques and on-site validation,” IEEE
Trans. Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-100, no. 1, January
1981, pp. 81-95.
[13] E.V. Larsen and D.A. Swann, “Applying power system stabilizers: Part
I, II, III,” IEEE Trans. Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-100, no.
6, June 1981, pp. 3017-3046.
[14] G.E. Boukarim, S. Wang, J.H. Chow, G.N. Taranto and N. Martins, “A
comparison of classical, robust and decentralized designs for multiple
power system stabilizers,” IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 15, no. 4,
November 2000, pp. 1287-1292.
[15] J.V. Milanovic and I.A. Hiskens, “Damping enhancement by robust
tuning of SVC controllers in the presence of load parameters
uncertainty,” IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 13, no. 4, November
1998, pp 1298-1303.
[16] D.M. Lam and H. Yee, “A study of frequency responses of generator
electrical torques for power system stabilizer design,” IEEE Trans.
Power Systems, vol. 13, no. 3, August 1998, pp. 1136-1142.
[17] Z. Fadlalmoula, S.S. Robertson, J. O’Reilly and W.E. Leithead,
“Individual channel analysis of the turbogenerator with a power system
stabilizer,” Int. J. Control, vol. 69, no. 2, 1998, pp. 175-202.
[18] H. Quinot, H. Bourles and T. Margotin “Robust coordinated AVR+PSS
for damping large scale power systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Systems,
vol. 14, no. 4, November 1999, pp. 1446-1451.
[19] N. Martins and L.T.G. Lima, “Eigenvalue and frequency domain
analysis of small-signal electromechanical stability problems,” IEEE
Special Publication on Eigenanalysis and Frequency Domain Methods
for System Dynamic Performance, pp. 17-33, 1989.
[20] G.J.W. Dudgeon, W.E. Leithead, J. O’Reilly and J.R. McDonald,
“Prospects for the decentralised control of small-scale power networks
with embedded generation,” in Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE PES
Winter Meeting, Singapore, January 22-27, 2000.
[21] F.E. Edwards, G.J.W. Dudgeon, J.R. McDonald and W.E. Leithead,
‘The dynamics of distributed generation in distribution systems,” in
Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE PES Summer Meeting, Seattle, WA July
15-21, 2000.
[22] A. Heniche and I. Kamwa, “Control loops selection to damp inter-area
oscillations,” IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 17, no. 2, May 2002, pp.
378-384.
[23] M. J. Gibbard and D. J. Vowles, “Reconciliation of methods of
compensation for PSS’s in multimachine systems,” IEEE Trans. Power
Systems, vol. 19, no. 1, February 2004, pp. 463-472.
[24] K.R. Padyar, Power System Dynamics Stability and Control, J. Wiley,
1996.
[25] D.R. Ostojic, “Stabilization of multimodal electromechanical
oscillations by coordinated application of power system stabilizers,”
IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 6, no. 4, 1991, pp. 1439-1445.
[26] W.E. Leithead and J. O’Reilly, “M-input m-output feedback control by
ICD,” Int. J. Control, vol. 56, 1992, pp. 1347-1397.
[27] A. Elices, L. Rouco, H. Bourles, and T. Margotin, “Physical
interpretation of state feedback controllers to damp power system
oscillations,” IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 19, no. 1, February
2004, pp. 436-443.
[28] P. Kundur, J. Paserba, V. Ajjarapu, G. Andersson, A. Bose, C.
Canizares, N. Hatziargyriou, D. Hill, A. Stankovic, C. Taylor, T. Van
Cutsem, and V. Vittal, “Definition and classification of power system
stability,” IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 19, no. 2, May 2004, pp.
1387-1401.
Graham D. Dudgeon (M’99) received his M.Eng, and PhD degrees in
Avionics at the University of Glasgow, UK, in 1993 and 1998. He is currently
with MathWorks, Cambridge, UK.
William E. Leithead received the B.Sc degree in Mathematical Physics in
1971 and the Ph.D degree in Theoretical Physics in 1976 from the University
of Edinburgh, Scotland. Currently, he is Professor and Director of Systems
and Control Engineering in the Department of Electronic and Electrical
Engineering at the University of Strathclyde, Scotland. His interests include
power system dynamics and control and integrated design of wind turbines.
 10

Adam Dyśko (M'06) has received his MSc from the Technical University of
Łódź, Poland, in 1990 and PhD from the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow,
U.K in 1998. Currently he is a lecturer in the Department of Electronic and
Electrical Engineering at the University of Strathclyde. His main research
areas are Power System Modelling and Simulation, Power System Protection
and Power Quality.

John O'Reilly (M'81-SM'00) received B.Sc, PhD., and D.Sc. degrees in

engineering in 1972, 1976 and 1985 from Queens University, Belfast, N.
Ireland. Currently, he is Professor of Control Engineering in the Department
of Electronics and Electrical Engineering at the University of Glasgow,
Scotland. His interests include power system dynamics and control with
renewable energy.

James R. McDonald (M'90-SM'98) received the B.Sc. degree in electrical

engineering from the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, U.K., in 1978. He
was appointed Manager of the Centre for Electrical Power Engineering in
1990 and took up the Rolls-Royce Chair in power engineering in 1994. He is
currently the Director of the Institute for Energy and Environment, University
of Strathclyde, and has recently been appointed Deputy Principal of the
University of Strathclyde.

View publication stats