Professional Documents
Culture Documents
www.elsevier.com/locate/ijepes
Robust controller for synchronous generator with local load via VSC
J. Cabrera-Vázquez a, Alexander G. Loukianov b,*
, José M. Cañedo b, Vadim I. Utkin c
a
Universidad de Guadalajara, Centro Universitario de Ciencias Exactas e Ingenierı́as, Departamento de Electrónica, Av. Revolución No. 1500, Módulo
‘‘O’’, Apdo. Postal 44840, Guadalajara Jalisco, Mexico
b
Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados del IPN, Apdo. Postal 31-438, Plaza La Luna, C. P. 44550, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico
c
Department of Electrical Engineering, The Ohio-State University, Columbus, OH 43210-1272, United States
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to design a nonlinear observer-based excitation controller for power system comprising a single synchro-
nous generator connected to an infinite bus with local load. The controller proposed is based on the using first singular perturbation
systems concepts and then Sliding Mode Control technique combining with Block Control Principle. To reduce ‘‘chattering’’ a nonlinear
observer with estimation of the mechanical torque and rotor fluxes is designed. This combined approach enables to compensate the
inherent nonlinearities of the generator and to reject external disturbances.
2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Synchronous generator; Singular perturbations; Sliding mode; Nonlinear observer; Lyapunov stability
0142-0615/$ - see front matter 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijepes.2006.09.001
J. Cabrera-Vázquez et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 29 (2007) 348–359 349
2. Plant model T e ¼ ðLq Ld Þid iq þ Lmd iq ðif þ ikd Þ Lmq id ðig þ ikq Þ ð4Þ
3.1. Speed control design where x11 is the steady-state value of angle x1 corre-
sponded to the value of mechanical torque Tm. Addition-
The subsystem (16a), (16b) and (16c) has the Block Con- ally, from rx(t) = 0 for t P ts it follows:
trollable form [30]. Therefore, this subsystem can be linear-
x3 ðtÞ ¼ x3d ðx4 ðtÞ; x5 ðtÞ; T m Þ;
ized using block control technique by the following
transformation: 1 ð27Þ
x3d ¼ ½f2 ðx4 ; x5 Þ þ d 2 T m
b2 ðx5 Þ
z1 ¼ x1 :¼ u1 ðxÞ
The basic property of the control for sliding mode is that
z2 ¼ x2 xs :¼ u2 ðxÞ
the control provides the subspace {n = (x1,x2,x3)T = (x11
1 f2 ðx4 ; x5 Þþ ,xs,x3d)T,g 2 R7} invariant where g = (x4,x5,x6)T. The
rx ¼ x3 :¼ u3 ðx; T m Þ
b2 ðx5 Þ þd 2 T m k z ðx2 xs Þ dynamics of vector g on this subspace are the zero dynam-
ð17Þ ics. To obtain these dynamics, it is necessary to substitute
the equivalent value of the control on the invariant sub-
where kz > 0. The transformed subsystem (16a), (16b) and space, uxeq ðx11 ; xs ; x31 ; g; T m Þ (24) and the values
(16c) then is represented in new variables z1, z2 and rx as x1 = x11, x2 = x21 = xs (26) and x3 = x3d (27) in (16d),
z_ 1 ¼ z2 (16e) and (16f), that yields
z_ 2 ¼ k z z2 þ b2 ðx5 Þrx ð18Þ g_ ¼ f g ðx11 ; xs ; x3d ; g; V d ; V q ; Þ
r_ x ¼ fx ðx; T m Þ þ
bx ðxÞu ð19Þ þ bg uxeq ðx11 ; xs ; x3d ; g; T m Þ ð28Þ
where where fg = (f4(g), f5(x11,xs,x3d,g), f6(xs,g,Vd,Vq))T,
fx ¼ ou 3
ox2
ðf2 þ b2 x3 þ d 2 T m Þ þ ou 3
ox3 3
f þ ou
ox4
3
ðA44 x4 A45 x5 Þ þ f4(g) = A44x4 + A45x5, bg ¼ ð0; 0; 0; b7 ; 0; 0; 0Þ
T
and
ou3
f ,
b ¼
b b 7
ða x þ a x a
28 8 Þ; and bx ðtÞ is a
x b7 ¼ b7 bz .
ox5 5 x 3 a23 x8 24 4 26 6
positive function of time. Dividing the right part of this system into linear and
A discontinuous control law is proposed as nonlinear parts, then the zero dynamics can be represented
u ¼ U m signðrx Þ; U m > 0: ð20Þ as
4. Real sliding mode with solutions close to those of the ideal system. An asymp-
totic observer serves as a bypass for the high-frequency
The key feature of the designed sliding controller is its component; therefore the unmodeled dynamics are not ex-
robustness to uncertainties. During the reaching time per- cited. Preservation of sliding stage modes in systems with
iod, the task of forcing the trajectories toward the sliding asymptotic observers enabled successful applications of
manifold rx = 0 and rv = 0 and maintaining them, is discontinuous control.
achieved by the control (35), provided the plant parameters
variations satisfy the inequality (37). However, the pro- 4.2. Observer- based solution
posed controller provides the desired performance of the
closed-loop system only in the ideal case, i.e. in the absence To prevent chattering and estimate unmeasured excita-
of unmodeled dynamics (13d), sf = 0. tion flux x3, rotor flux x4 = (x4,x5,x6)T, and mechanical tor-
que Tm, a nonlinear observer is proposed as
4.1. Chattering problem
x4 ; x5 ðtÞÞ þ d 2 Tb m þ l1 ðx2 ^x2 Þ
^x_ 2 ¼ f^ 2 ð^ ð41aÞ
In the case sf50, the switching control leads to finite fre- _
Tb m ¼ l2 ðx2 ^x2 Þ ð41bÞ
quency oscillations in the state vector, ‘‘chattering’’ [1,31],
since discontinuities in the control excite the unmodeled ^x_ 3 ¼ f^ 3 ð^
x4 ; x5 ðtÞÞ þ b3 u ð41cÞ
dynamics (13d). In this case we have ^_ 4 ¼ A44 x
x ^4 þ A45 x5 ðtÞ ð41dÞ
r_ x ¼ fx ðx; T m Þ þ bx ðxÞz
where ^x3 ; x^4 ¼ ð^x4 ; ^x5 ; ^x6 ÞT and Tb m are the estimated vari-
1 bf ables, l1 and l2 are observer gains, f^ 2 ð^ x4 ; x5 ðtÞÞ ¼
z_ ¼ z þ u ð38Þ
sf sf a23 x8 ðtÞ^x3 þ a24 x7 ðtÞ^x4 a25 x8 ðtÞ^x5 þ a26 x7 ðtÞ^x6 þ a28 x7 ðtÞ
where bx ¼ b3 a23b7x8 ða24 x4 þ a26 x6 a28 x8 Þ and the deriva- x8 ðtÞ and f^ 3 ð^
x4 ; x5 ðtÞÞ ¼ a33^x3 þ a35^x5 a37 x7 ðtÞ.
tive V_ x (22) depends on the variable z only, but not on Considering the stator current x5(t) = is(t) in (41a)–
the control input u: (41c) and (41d) as a known (measured) function of time,
the dynamics of the estimation errors can be obtained by
V_ x ¼ fx ðx; T m Þrx þ bx ðxÞzrx : ð39Þ subtracting the Eqs. (16b)–(16d), (6), (41a)–(41c) and
In order to examine the system behavior, assume steady- (41d) as the following linear system with time varying
state conditions with parameters:
zðtÞ ¼ bf uðtÞ ¼ bf U max : e_ 1 A11 A12 ðtÞ e1
¼ ð42Þ
The step response of the exciter system (38) for the first e_ 2 0 A22 e2
switch at ts from u(t) = Umax to u(t) = Umax at rx = 0 is
where e1 = (e2, em)T, e2 = (e3, e4, e5, e6)T, ei ¼ xi ^xi ,
given by
i = 2, . . ., 6, em ¼ T m Tb m ,
tts
zðtÞ ¼ bf U max 1 2e sf : ð40Þ l1 a29
A11 ¼ ;
l2 0
For some initial time interval Dt = t ts variable z(t) < bf
u(t) = bfUmax and V_ x > 0 in (39) results for the case a23 ðtÞ a24 ðtÞ a25 ðtÞ a26 ðtÞ
A12 ðtÞ ¼ ;
fx(x,Tm)rx > 0. It is only after the decay of the exponential 0 0 0 0
term in (40), i.e. after some delay period D t(sf), that 2 3
a33 0 a35 0
j zðtÞ j>j b1
x ðxðtÞÞfx ðxðtÞ; T m Þ j is established once more 60 a44 0 a46 7
and V_ x < 0 indicates convergence to sliding manifold 6 7
A22 ¼ 6 7;
4 a53 0 a55 0 5
rx = 0. During this delay period the trajectory has a devi-
ation from ideal motion. Similar derivations hold for the 0 a64 0 a66
next switch from u(t) = Umax to u(t) = Umax. Repetition a23 ðtÞ ¼ a23 x8 ðtÞ; a24 ðtÞ ¼ a24 x7 ðtÞ
of this process creates the ‘‘zig-zag’’ motion or chattering. and a25 ðtÞ ¼ a25 x8 ðtÞ;
Chattering results in low control accuracy and high heat
losses in electrical power circuits. This phenomenon has a26 ðtÞ ¼ a26 x7 ðtÞ:
been considered as serious obstacles for applications of
It is easy to see that the spectrum of the system (42)
sliding mode control in many papers and discussions. A re-
consists of
cent study and practical experience showed that chattering
caused by unmodeled dynamics may be eliminated in sys-
(1) the eigenvalues of the block A11, which can be
tems with asymptotic observers. This idea was proposed
assigned by appropriatechoice
of the observer
gains
by Bondarev et al. in [31]. In spite of the presence of 0 dm
unmodeled dynamics, ideal sliding mode is possible. It is l1 and l2, since the pair ; ½ 1 0 is obser-
0 0
described by a singularly perturbed differential equation vable, and
354 J. Cabrera-Vázquez et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 29 (2007) 348–359
Table 1
Calculated mathematical model parameters and their variations
Nominal Increment Nominal Increment Nominal Increment
a23 0.48514 – a48 0.322 – a74 0.26017 –
a24 0.13789 – a53 30.321 – a76 1.5008 –
a25 0.46667 – a55 33.333 – a78 1.0377 –
a26 0.800 – a57 5.000 – a81 685.44 –
a28 0.020 – a64 9.849 – a84 13.630 –
am 0.00003763 – a66 14.286 – a86 20.133 –
a33 0.71222 +0.11745 a68 7.143 – a88 46.799 –
a35 0.64556 +0.12911 a71 711.30 – a83 0.84848 –
a37 0.11067 +0.02213 a73 26.046 0.521 a85 0.96364 –
a44 2.776 – a75 28.759 0.118 a87 0.88207 –
a46 2.579 – a77 42.203 0.020 b7 345.08 –
1 1.4
^x ¼ ^x3
r ½f2 ð^x4 ; x5 Þ þ d 2 Tb m k z ðx2 xs Þ :
b2 ðx5 Þ 1.2
¼u ^4 ; x5 ; Tb m Þ
^ 3 ðx2 ; ^x3 ; x ð44Þ 1
0.8
that allows definition of an ideal sliding mode controller
0.6
for the observer loop as
0.4
rx Þ
u ¼ U m signð^ ð45Þ
0.2
Time [sec.]
Then 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
^_ x ¼ f^ x ðx1 ; x2 ; ^x3 ; x
r ^4 ; x5 ; T^ m Þ þ ^
bx ð^
x4 ; x5 Þu ð46Þ Fig. 3a. Angle x1.
where f^ x ¼ o^ u3
ox2
ðf2 þ b 2x3 þ d 2 T m Þ þ o^ u3 ^
o^x3
f 3 þ o^
u3
o^
x4
ðA44 x
^4
o^
u3
A45 x5 Þ þ ox5 f 5 þ o^u3 ^ b7
l2 ðx2 ^x2 Þ,bx ¼ b3 a23 x8 ða24^x4 þ a26^x6 2
ob
Vg [p.u.]
Tm
^
a28 x8 Þ and bx ðtÞ it is a positive function of the time. 1.8
1.6
Stability of the auxiliary observer loop is examined via a
similar Lyapunov function as in (21) 1.4
1.2
1 2
Vb x ¼ r
^ ð47Þ
2 x 1
0.8
Substitution of (46) under control (45) into time derivative
of (47) results in 0.6
_ 0.4
Vb x ¼ f^ x ðx1 ; x2 ; ^x3 ; x
^4 ; x5 ; Tb m Þ^
rx U m ^
bx ð^
x4 ; x5 Þsignð^
rx Þ^
rx
0.2
rx j½U m ^
P j^ bx ð^ ^4 ; x5 ; Tb m Þ
x4 ; x5 Þ f^ x ðx1 ; x2 ; ^x3 ; x 0
Time [sec.]
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Hence, under similar assumption as in (23) Fig. 3b. Terminal voltage Vg.
J. Cabrera-Vázquez et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 29 (2007) 348–359 355
385 -0.45
X2, X2est, (p.u.)
X4, X4est [p.u.]
-0.5
-0.55
380
-0.6
-0.65
375
-0.7
-0.75
Time, (sec.)
370 Time, [sec.]
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
-0.8
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Fig. 3c. Speed x2 and its estimate ^x2 .
Fig. 3f. q-axis(1) damper winding flux x4 and its estimate ^x4 .
1.5 1
Tm, Tmest (p.u.) X5, X5est [p.u.]
0.95
Tm 0.9
1
0.85
0.8
Tmest
0.5 0.75
0.7
1.4
X3, X3est [p.u.]
1.3 -0.45
X6, X6est [p.u.]
1.2 -0.5
1.1
-0.55
1
-0.6
0.9
-0.65
0.8
0.7 -0.7
0.6 -0.75
Time, [sec.] Time, [sec.]
0.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 -0.8
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Fig. 3e. Excitation flux x3 and its estimate ^x3 .
Fig. 3h. q-axis(2) damper winding flux x6 and its estimate ^x6 .
5. Simulation results
The parameters of the synchronous machine, transmis-
The performance of the proposed sliding mode obser- sion and exciter systems and load, all in p.u., except where
ver-based controller was tested on the complete power sys- indicated, are Rs = 0.003, Rf = 0.021, Rg = 0.725,
tem (see Fig. 1). Rkd = 10.714, Rkq = 8.929, Re = 0.05, Ld = 1.81,
356 J. Cabrera-Vázquez et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 29 (2007) 348–359
2 1
X1, [rad.] Tm, Tmest (p.u.)
1.8 0.9
1.6
0.8
1.4 -20% Lmd
0.7
1.2
Tm
0.6
1
0.5
0.8
Tmest
0.6 0.4
0.4 0.3
- 20 % Lmd
0.2
0.2
Time, [sec]
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0.1
Time, (sec.)
Fig. 4a. Angle x1. 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
1.2
Vg, [p.u.]
1.4
X3, X3est, [p.u.]
1
1.3
0.8 1.2
-20% Lmd
0.6 1.1
1
0.4
0.9
0.2 -20% Lmd
0.8
0
0.7
Time, [sec]
-0.2 0.6
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time, [sec]
0.5
Fig. 4b. Terminal voltage Vg. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
378 -0.45
X2, X2est [p.u.]
X4, X4est, [p.u.]
377.5 -0.5
377 -0.55
376.5 -0.6
-20% Lmd
376 -0.65
-20% Lmd
375.5 -0.7
375 -0.75
Fig. 4c. Speed x2 and its estimate ^x2 . Fig. 4f. q-axis(1) damper winding flux x4 and its estimate ^x4 .
Lq = 1.76, Lkd = 1.831, Lkq = 1.735, Lmd = 1.66, For these parameters we obtain the parameters of math-
Lmq = 1.61, Le = 0.3, H = 3.525 s, bf = 1, sf = 0.015 s, ematical model (13a)–(13f) and (13g) presented in Table 1,
dref = 1.3314, xs = 377 rad s1, Tm = 0.9463 and V1 = 1. considered as nominal parameters. After Lmd experienced
J. Cabrera-Vázquez et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 29 (2007) 348–359 357
1 -0.45
X5, X5est, [p.u.] X6, X6est, [p.u.]
0.95
-0.5
0.9
-0.55
0.85
-0.6
0.8
-20% Lmd
-0.65
0.75 -20% Lmd
-0.7
0.7
0.65 -0.75
Fig. 4g. d-axis damper winding flux x5 and its estimate ^x5 . Fig. 4h. q-axis(2) damper winding flux x6 and its estimate ^x6 .
an increment of 20%, some parameters of model (13a)–(13f) same Table 1. The controller gain was adjusted to kz = 7
and (13g), namely, a33, a35, a37, a73, a75 and a77 are modified and the observer gains were chosen as l1 = 200 and
and their corresponding increments are presented in the l2 = 187, resulting in the eigenvalues k1 = k2 = 100. The
remaining observer eigenvalues were calculated using (43) as [2] Ghandakly A, Idowu P. Design of a model reference adaptive
k3 = 0.123, k4 = 33.922, k5 = 0.883 and k6 = 16.179. stabilizer for the exciter and governor loops of power generators.
IEEE Trans Power Syst 1990;5:887–93.
The mechanical torque disturbance is presented in the [3] Mao C, Malik O, Hope G, Fan J. An adaptive generator excitation
second 10. Also a short circuit in the 30th s with a release controller based on linear control. IEEE Trans Energy Conver
time of 150 ms. Figs. 3a–3g and 3h show the behavior of 1990;5:673–8.
the variables of states when a short circuit is caused in [4] Ghandakly A, Dai J. An adaptive synchronous generator stabilizer
the 6th s with a release time of 150 ms. The system SMIB design by generalized multivariable pole shifting (GMPS) technique.
IEEE Trans Power Syst 1992;7:1239–44.
undergoes a step change in the torque at the 10th s. The [5] Pogromsky AY, Fradkov AL, Hill DJ. Passivity based damping of
nominal value 0.902 p.u. goes down 0.5 p.u. The dynamics power system oscillations. In: Proceedings of the IEEE CDC, Kobe,
related to the weight of the coils have not been modeled for Japon; 1996. p. 512–7.
this system. Figs. 4a–4g and 4h show the behavior of the [6] Ortega R, Stankovic A, Stefanov P. A passivation approach to power
state variables, and also, besides the two previous perturba- systems stabilization. In: Proceedings of the IFAC NOLCOS,
Enshede, Netherlands; 1998. p. 320–5.
tions, an internal perturbation in introduced with Lmd [7] Catherine FM. Robust output feedback controllers for power system
decreasing 50% from the nominal value of 1.66 p.u. This stabilization. Thesis Doctor of Philosophy in Electrical and Computer
variation takes place in the interval from 20 to 30 s. The Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology; 2000.
system has no dynamics modeled for the one reeled of [8] Xi Z, Cheng D. Passivity based stabilization and H1 control of
the excitatory one. hamiltonian systems with dissipation and its applications power
systems. Int J Control 2000;73(18):1686–91.
Fig. 5 shows the comparison that became between a sys- [9] Galaz M, Ortega R, Bazanella A, Stankovic A. An energy-shaping
tem of conventional control (line dashed) with respect to approach to excitation control of synchronous generator. In:
the proposed control (line solid). Proceedings of the American Control Conference, Arlington, VA;
June 2001. p. 817–2.
6. Conclusions [10] Shi J, Herron L, Kalam A. A fuzzy logic controller applied to power
system stabilizer for a synchronous machine power system. In:
Proceedings of the IEEE region 10th conference Tencon 92; 1992. p.
A nonlinear controller based on the combination of the 346–50.
sliding mode control, block control linearization and singu- [11] Lim C, Hiyama T. Comparison study between a fuzzy logic stabilizer
lar perturbations techniques has been proposed. A model, and self tuning stabilizer. Comp Ind 1993;21:199–215.
which takes into account all of the interactions between [12] Dash P, Mishra S, Liew A. Design of a fuzzy PI controller for power
system applications. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 1995;3:155–63.
the electrical and mechanical dynamics and load con- [13] Hoang P, Tomsovic K, Design and analysis of an adaptive fuzzy
straints, has been described. A nonlinear observer for the power system stabilizer. In: Proceedings of the IEEE PES Winter
estimation of the excitation and rotor fluxes and the Meeting; 1996. p. 7.
mechanical torque, has been designed. This new controller [14] Hernández Romero N, Romero D.R. Control de excitación tipo
has been tested through simulation under three very impor- ANFIS para un Generador Sı´ncrono’’. RVP-AI/02-GEN-II. Reunión
de Verano, Acapulco; 2002.
tant perturbations in the power systems: [15] Hsu Y, Chen H. Tuning of power system stabilizers using an artificial
neural network. IEEE Trans Energy Conv 1991;6:612–9.
• variation of the mechanical torque; [16] Bazanella AS, Silva AS, Kokotovic P. Lyapunov design of excitation
• a large fault (a 150 ms short circuit); control for synchronous machine. In: Proceedings of the 36th IEEE
• variation of parameters. CDC, San Diego, California, USA; 1997. p. 211–6.
[17] Machowski J, Robak S, Bialek JW, Bumby JR, Abi-Samra N.
Decentralized stability-enhancing control of synchronous generator.
The results of the simulation show that with the pro- IEEE Trans Power Syst 2000;15(4):1336–45.
posed observer-based sliding mode controller, we can elim- [18] Chapman JW, Ilic MD, King CA, Kaufman H. Stabilizing a
inate many of the problems encountered with other types multimachine power system via decentralized feedback linearizing
of controllers, such as eliminating oscillations and high excitation control. IEEE Trans. Power Syst 1993;8(3):830–9.
[19] Wang Y, Hill DJ, Middleton RH, Gao L. Transient stability,
variations after internal and external perturbations to the enhancement and voltage regulation of power systems. IEEE Trans.
system. This controller takes into account all of the electri- Power Syst 1993;8(2):620–7.
cal and mechanical dynamics. This controller is much more [20] Mielczarski W, Zajaczowski AM. Multivariable nonlinear controller
robust, simple to design, and uses much less CPU power for synchronous generator. Optim Contr Appl Meth 1994;15:49–65.
than other alternatives. [21] Lahdhiri T, Alouani AT. On the robust control of synchronous
generator. In: Proceedings of the ACC. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;
June 1998. p. 3798–01.
Acknowledgements [22] Akhkrif O, Okou Fr, Dessaint L, Champagne R. Application of
multivariable feedback linearization scheme for rotor angle stability
The authors thank the support of CONACYT Mexico, and voltage regulation of power system. IEEE Trans Power Syst
Grant 46069Y. 1999;14(2):620–8.
[23] Ramos R, Bretas NG, Costa LF. Feedback linearization improving
an LMI-based design: application power system. In: Proceedings of
References the 15th triennial word congress, Barcelona, Spain; 2002 IFAC.
[24] Schleif FR, Hunkins HD, Martin GE, Hattan EE. IEEE excitation
[1] Utkin VI, Guldner J, Shi J. Sliding mode control in electromechanical control to improve power line stability. IEEE Trans Power Appl Syst
system. London, UK: Taylor and Francis; 1999. 1968.
J. Cabrera-Vázquez et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 29 (2007) 348–359 359
[25] de Mello FP, Concordia C. Concepts of synchronous machine [29] Son KM, K Park J. On the robust LQR control of TCSC for damping
stability as affected by excitation control. IEEE Trans Power Appl power system oscillations. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2000;15(4):
Syst. 1969:316–29. 1306–12.
[26] Crenshaw ML, Miller WJ, Schulz PRP, Temoshok M. Althyrex [30] Loukianov AG. Nonlinear block control with sliding mode. Automat
excitation system with power stabilizer. In: IEEE Paper 70 CP 563- Rem Contr 1998;59(7):916–33.
PWR; 1970. [31] Bondarev AG, Bondarev SA, Kostylyeva NYe, Utkin VI. Sliding
[27] El-Sherbiny MK, Mehta DM. Dynamic system stability: part I – modes in systems with asymptotic state observers. Automat Rem
investigation of the effect of different loading and excitation systems. Contr 1985;46:679–84.
IEEE Trans Power Appl Syst 1973. [32] Anderson PM, Fouad A. Power system control and stability. New
[28] Leirbukt AB, Chow JH, Sanchez-Gazca JJ, Larsen EV. Damping York: IEEE Press; 1994.
control design based on time-domain identified models. IEEE [33] Khalil HK. Nonlinear systems. New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 1996.
Transaction on Power Systems, Vol. 5 pp. 172-178, 193.11.