arxiv: v1 [cs.sy] 24 Mar 2016

Transcription

1 Nonlinear Analysis of an Improved Swing Equation Pooya Monshizadeh, Claudio De Persis, Nima Monshizadeh, and Arjan van der Schaft arxiv: v [cs.sy] 4 Mar 06 Abstract In this paper, we investigate the properties of an improved swing equation model for synchronous generators. This model is derived by omitting the main simplifying assumption of the conventional swing equation, and requires a novel analysis for the stability and frequency regulation. We consider two scenarios. First we study the case that a synchronous generator is connected to a constant load. Second, we inspect the case of the single machine connected to an infinite bus. Simulations verify the results. I. INTRODUCTION Driven by environmental and technical motivations, restructuring the classical power networks has been under vast attention during the recent decades. Among the goals are decreasing energy losses by moving towards distributed generation and preventing fault propagation through building up smart microgrids. Microgrids are small power network areas which can be seen as single entities from the large power grids. In such small-scale network, the energy consumption and production uncertainty increases to a great extent according to the fewer number of consumers and unpredictable power injections of renewables such as wind turbines and solar panels. Designing controllers for the electrical sources under such perturbations and abrupt power variations, calls for rethinking about the accuracy of the models that were mostly valid for the classical electrical systems. The main power sources in electrical networks are synchronous generators. Despite the extensive advances in extracting energy from renewables, these machines are still the main supplier of the implemented microgrids see e.g. []. Under unpredictable changes in loads and renewable generations, and to assure of the stability and frequency regulation of the micro- grid, it appears crucial to investigate the accuracy of the electrical and dynamical models of these machines. While a large number of articles have exploited the classical swing equation as the model for the synchronous generator, a few have recently brought up doubts about its accuracy and validity, and proposed models of higher accuracy [] [8]. Although some promising models are provided see e.g. the exact 8-dimensional model in [3] and the integro-differential model in [6], the use of such models in power networks is rather complicated. Pooya Monshizadeh and Arjan van der Schaft are with the Johann Bernoulli Institute for Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Groningen, 9700 AK, the Netherlands, p.monshizadeh@rug.nl, a.j.van.der.schaft@rug.nl Claudio De Persis and Nima Monshizadeh are with the Engineering and Technology Institute, University of Groningen, The Netherlands, University of Groningen, 9747 AG, the Netherlands, n.monshizadeh@rug.nl, c.de.persis@rug.nl In this paper, we provide a nonlinear analysis for an improved yet easy-to-use swing equation to fulfill higher accuracy in analysis and modeling of the synchronous generator that can also be exploited in small-scale networks. We first explicate the contradicting assumptions in obtaining the conventional swing equation and elaborate deriving the improved model. In Section III, as the first scenario, we look into the properties of the model when the generator is connected to a constant load and provide an estimate of the region of attraction through nonlinear analysis. Further in Section IV, the second scenario which is mainly referred to as Single Machine Infinite Bus SMIB is investigated. We provide analytical estimates of the region of attraction for both conventional and improved swing models in this case. Finally, simulations are provided as a verification of the results. II. CONVENTIONAL AND IMPROVED SWING EQUATIONS The mechanical dynamics of the synchronous generator reads as J + = τ m τ e, J R + is the total moment of inertia of the turbine and generator rotor kg m, R + is the rotor shaft velocity mechanical rad/s, R + is the angular velocity associated with the nominal frequency π60hz, τ m R + is the net mechanical shaft torque N m, τ e R + is the counteracting electromagnetic torque N m, and R + is the damping-torque coefficient N m s. The mechanical rotational loss due to friction is ignored. Bearing in mind that τ m = Pm and τ e = Pe we can model the synchronous generator as J + = P m P e, P m and P e are the mechanical input and electrical output power respectively. In the conventional swing equation, J and are approximated with constants M = J and A =. M + A = P m P e, 3 M R is the angular momentum and A R is the new damping coefficient. In other words, the swing equation is derived supposing that =. Such an assumption is in contradiction with the proof of stability and frequency regulation of the synchronous generator. Note that these machines posses high moment of inertia J, and hence Despite the general misuse, accounts for the damping torque generated by the damper windings amortisseur only when the generator is connected to an infinite bus [9]. In the case of a single generator connected to a load, the damping term refers to a proportional torque governor.

2 small deviations from the nominal frequency are magnified by the term J in the dynamics. Therefore we adhere to the equation and endeavor to investigate the stability and frequency regulation through a nonlinear approach. This model has been first suggested by [], however, the stability of the synchronous generator connected to an infinite bus is analyzed with the small-signal linearization analysis. Consistently with [], we refer to as the improved swing equation. III. SYNCHRONOUS GENERATOR CONNECTED TO A CONSTANT LOAD In this scenario, we assume that both the injected and extracted power P m and P e are constant. A. Stability Let R be an equilibrium of. Then, clearly = P m P e. 4 The equation above admits a real solution only if P m P e > 4, 5 which will be a standing assumption in this section. Under this assumption, we obtain the following two equilibria for system : s = +, u =, 6 := + 4 P m P e. 7 Note that > 0 by 5. Observe that s > u, 8 u = s. 9 First, we show that s is locally stable and u is locally unstable. For the moment, we assume that the set R + is positive invariant for the system, and 0 > 0. We will relax this assumption later, once a Lyapunov argument is provided. This means that is well defined for the interval of the definition of the solutions. Now, let dynamics be rewritten as = f f = Dd + P m P e. J We have f = J P m P e. By using 4 and 9, we find that f = J s s = J s u. 0 J Δ V u 0 * s - u V J * J / * J Δ u V J / * =* 0 * u s s s - u * P m > P e P m = P e P m < P e Fig.. Region of attraction for system is estimated by Ω s. Bearing in mind inequality 8, it is easy to check that f > 0 around = u, and f < 0 around = s. Hence = u is repulsive. Now, the following theorem addresses the stability of the equilibrium in 6. Theorem Consider the candidate Lyapunov function V = J s with s given by 6. Let be given by 7 and assume that 5 holds. Then the solutions of the system starting from any initial condition in the set Ω s = { R + : V J } except for 0 = u converge asymptotically to the equilibrium = s. Proof: We have V = s P m P e. The fact that stays away from zero will be made clear later. According to 4 this leads to V = s s s = s + s s = s s + s = s u, we have used u = s. Hence V is negative semi-definite on the set Ω s = { R + : u }. Below, we show that Ω s Ω s. For any Ω s we have which yields J s J + 4 P m P e s s by using 6. By 5 we have s 0. Therefore s s s

3 and hence u s u. The left hand side of gives Ω s Ω s. Now we show that remains in the positive half-line R +. By 6 and 7, in the case P m < P e, we have u > 0 and together with we obtain > 0. Therefore in this case, the point = 0 does not belong to the interval specified by. In cases P m > P e or P m = P e, the point = 0 lies within the boundaries. Figure illustrates these situations. Since s = JV, and V is strictly decreasing in Ω s, s is decreasing as well, showing that stays away from = 0 as time goes by. This proves that t > 0, t > 0. Notice that Ω s is closed and bounded by. By invoking LaSalle s invariance principle, the solutions of the system starting in Ω s asymptotically converge to the set of points s u = 0. Equality results in = s, which completes the proof. Remark Note that the Lyapunov function V = J s is a shifted version of the actual kinetic energy of the physical system, as the commonly used Lyapunov function for the swing equation, M s equivalent to J s, does not have a physical interpretation. B. Considering Mechanical Losses We add the viscous damping coefficient D m accounting for the mechanical losses N m s, modifying the dynamics as J + D m + = τ m τ e, 3 and similarly is modified as J + D m + = P m P e, 4 which can be rewritten as J + D m + Defining D := D m + and := D m + = P m P e. 5 D m+ we obtain J + D = P m P e, 6 which is analogous to the improved swing equation. Therefore the stability results also extends to the case with mechanical losses. C. Incremental Passivity Property To facilitate the control design, in this section we investigate the incremental passivity of the system associated to see Remark later on J + = u + P m P e y =. 7 Let the triple ū,, ȳ be an input-state-output solution of 7 with Assume that = ū + P m P e y =. 8 ū + P m P e > 4. 9 Then the dynamics 7 possesses the equilibria s = +, u = with a little abuse of the notation 0 := + 4ū + P m P e. Now, we have the following proposition: Proposition Consider the candidate Lyapunov function W = J s s and assume that 9 holds. Then, W computed along any solution to 7 satisfies Ẇ < y ȳu ū, as long as the solution stays within the set Ω k = { R + : W J s }. This amounts to an incremental passivity property with respect to ū,, ȳ. Proof: We have Ẇ = s u + P m P e s ū P m + P e + s s s = u ū s s s s s = s u ū s s + s s s =y ȳu ū s u. 3 s Hence the inequality holds as long as the solutions evolve in the set Ω k = { R+ : u }. The fact that Ω k Ω k follows analogously to the proof of Theorem. Remark Defining y = as in 7, results in a dimensionless output. This is consistent with the inequality of incremental passivity property, since yu has the dimension of physical power. This does not hold for the conventional swing equation is taken as the output and thus yu does not have a meaningful physical dimension.

4 D. Frequency Regulation In this section we investigate the frequency regulation of the system by an integral controller. Motivated by Proposition, we propose the controller for system 7 ξ = y = u = ξ. 4 Note that for the purpose of frequency regulation, the solution equilibrium of interest for the system 7, 4, is given by ū = ξ = P m P e, =, ȳ = 0, 5 which trivially satisfies the inequality 9. In addition, for the solution above, the quantities in 0 and are computed as s =, u = 0, =. Therefore, the dissipation equality 3 in this case reduces to Ẇ =y ȳu ū s, 6 as long as the solutions stay within the set Ω k = { R + : W J } which confines within the interval [0 ]. Now, the following theorem establishes the convergence of the solutions to the desired equilibrium associated with the nominal frequency regulation. Theorem Consider the candidate Lyapunov function Uξ, = W c ξ + W W c = ξ ξ and W = J. Then the solutions of the closed loop system 7, 4, starting from any initial condition in the set O = {ξ, R : U J } and different from ξ, = P m P e, 0 converge asymptotically to the equilibrium ξ, = P m P e,. Proof: First note that Hence, by 6 we find that Ẇ c = ξ ξ U =. 7 as long as the solutions belong to the set O. As the right hand side of the above equality is nonpositive, we conclude that the set O is forward invariant along the solution ξ,, and thus 7 is valid for all time. Now, observe that U is radially unbounded and has a strict minimum at ξ, = P m P e,. Then by invoking LaSalle s invariance principle, the solutions converge to the largest invariant subset of O in which = ū = P e P m. The latter shows that all the solutions on the invariant set O, and not starting from ξ, = P m P e, 0 converge P m-p e ξ * * J * Fig.. Region of attraction for the system 7, 4 is estimated with the oval characterized by 8. asymptotically to the equilibrium ξ, = P m P e,. Note that the solutions stay away from the point ξ, = P m P e, 0, since as ξ, P m P e, 0 +, we have + J. We can rewrite the set O as + ξ ξ J. 8 Such a set guarantees to remain in the positive half-line R + for See figure. IV. SYNCHRONOUS GENERATOR CONNECTED TO AN INFINITE BUS In this scenario we consider the case of SMIB, the synchronous generator is connected to an infinite bus through an inductive link. The infinite bus is a node with fixed voltage and frequency 60Hz. A. Stability of the Improved Swing Model It can be shown that the power delivered from the synchronous generator to the bus is sinδ δ is the voltage angle relative to the infinite bus, and := VgV b X. Here, the voltages V g, V b and the reactance of the line X are assumed to be constant. The dynamics of an SMIB system modeled with the improved swing equation is δ = J + = P m sinδ, 9 the mechanical input P m > 0 is considered constant. It is easy to check that δ, = arcsin Pm, is the equilibrium of the system 9. Theorem 3 Consider the candidate Lyapunov function and V δ, = V k + V p δ, V k = J s V p δ = [ cos δ + cos δ δ δ sin δ]

5 are associated with the kinetic and potential energy and δ = arcsin Pm. Assume that > 30 and -π δ π π P m < π. 3 Let c := minc k, c p, c k := J w and c p := V p π. Then the solutions of the system 9 starting from any initial condition in the set Ω = {δ, [ π, π] R : V δ, c} converge asymptotically to the equilibrium δ, = arcsin Pm,. Proof: Observe that V p δ has a minimum in δ and is convex within the set Ω p = {δ [ π, π ]}. We here show that Ω Ω p. Having V k > 0, the inequality V δ, < c results in V p δ < c p and reads as cos δ > π δ sin δ. 3 The inequality 3 contains a unique subset of Ω p. More precisely, under the criterion 0 < δ < arcsin π as a result of 3, there exists a δ s.t. 3 holds for all δ [δ π ]. Figure 3 shows an example interval for δ that satisfies 3 and consequently the energy function V P remains convex. Now, it remains to prove that V < 0. we have V = [ sin δ sin δ] + [ sin δ sin δ] = + sin δ sin δ = sin δ sin δ. Bearing in mind that δ is confined s.t. δ δ < π, V < 0 on the set Ω k = { R : > }. Here we show that Ω Ω k. In the set Ω we have V δ, < c which leads to V k < c k. Therefore < w, and since >, thus w < < w, w < < w. 33 The left hand side of the inequality 33 shows that Ω Ω k. Observe that U has a strict minimum at = and δ = δ, and the solutions are bounded to w < < w and δ < δ < π. By invoking LaSalle s invariance principle, the solutions converge to the largest invariant subset of Ω for 9 s.t. =. On this set, the solution to 9 satisfy δ = arcsin P m. Fig. 3. The estimate of the system 9 region of attraction V pδ < c p for δ = arcsin0. confines δ in [ 0.78π + 0.5π] green. On such an interval V pδ remains positive and convex. This shows that all the solutions on the invariant set converge asymptotically to the equilibrium arcsin Pm,. This completes the proof. Remark 3 The assumption Pm < π results in δ < arcsin π which means that at steady state the angle between the synchronous generator and the infinite bus should be less than about 40. In practice, the steady state angle is much lower even for large machines see e.g. [0]. Note that this assumption is made merely for characterizing the region of attraction, otherwise it is not necessary for the proof of local stability since V is convex around the equilibrium V δ δ= δ = cos δ > 0. B. Comparison with the Swing Equation Here we compare the results of the improved model with the swing equation. The dynamics of a synchronous generator modeled with the swing equation and connected to an infinite bus is δ = M + A = P m sinδ, 34 the mechanical input P m > 0 is considered constant. It is straightforward to see that the equilibrium of the system 34 is δ, = arcsin Pm,. Corollary Consider the candidate Lyapunov function and V δ, = V k + V p δ V k = M s V p δ = [ cos δ + cos δ δ δ sin δ]. Assume that Pm < π and let c := V p π. Then the solutions of the SMIB system described by the swing equation 34 starting from any initial condition in the set Ω = {δ, [ π, π] R : V δ, c} converge asymptotically to the equilibrium δ, = arcsin Pm,.

6 Proof: The proof is similar to the proof of the Theorem 3 and therefore omitted. Note that here, V = A and hence here the condition V < V p π suffices for proving the stability. Corollary and Theorem 3 characterize similar region of attraction estimates for both models improved swing and the conventional one if c k c p and as a result c = c p. V. SIMULATION In this section we provide simulations verifying our results. Examples depict the mismatch between the behavior suggested by the swing equation and the improved version. In all simulations, the parameters are set as follows: M = 0., A = 0.04, = π60, and =. Note that J = M w and = A. A. Constant Load: Example As described in Section III, the steady state value of the frequency differs for the swing equation and the improved swing model under similar constant loads. Figure 4a illustrates this issue. In this example, we set P m = pu and P e = pu, and start from the initial condition f0 = 60Hz. The steady state value of the frequency is 56.0Hz for the swing equation and 55.7Hz for the improved swing model. B. Constant Load: Example An estimate of the region of attraction for the improved swing equation is provided in Section III Ω s in Theorem. Figure 4b illustrates a solution that initiates just out of the domain and becomes unstable. However, the conventional swing equation is falsely depicting that the system remains stable. Here, we set P m = pu and P e = 4.65pu, and start from f0 = 4Hz. According to, the estimate of region of attraction allows for f > 5Hz. C. Constant Load: Example 3 According to the analysis in Section III, condition 5 :/ y - 0 : / should hold for the improved swing equation, so that there exist a steady state frequency value. Figure 4c shows that 38 the system becomes unstable if the inequality 5 is violated. In this example we adjust P m = pu and P e = 4.90pu such 380 that as defined in 7 possesses a negative value. D. SMIB: Different Behavior The behavior of both systems, conventional and improved, are similar when connected to an infinite bus. However still with some specific initial conditions, the systems act quite differently. Figure 4d illustrates an example of this different behavior. E. SMIB: Region of Attraction Figure 5 illustrates the phase portrait of the system 9 and the Lyapunov function V δ, level sets. It is verified that our estimate of the domain of attraction is not very conservative. Note that there are solutions outside the estimate of region of attraction that still converge, however the solutions further away from the estimate of domain of attraction diverge from the equilibrium. Frequency Hz Frequency Hz Frequency Hz Frequency Hz b c d Times a Improved Swing Equation Swing Equation Fig. 4. Simulation results for the case with constant load a-c and SMIB d show different behavior of the two models: a The models reach different steady-state frequency value while bearing the same load. b A solution of the improved swing equation starting from outside of the region of attraction estimate, diverges from the equilibrium. Nevertheless, the solution of the conventional swing equation converges. c The frequency in the improved swing equation is not stable when condition 5 does not hold. The stability of the swing equation does not necessitate such a condition. d While the conventional swing SMIB model 34 suggests divergence from the equilibrium, the frequency of the improved model converges to the desired value. Note that here, the initial condition is outside the region of attraction estimate for both models. Angular Velocity rad/s Anglerad V = c Fig. 5. The estimate of the domain of attraction for system 9 SIMB is verified. All solutions dotted green within the Lyapunov level set {V δ, = c} dark blue converge to the equilibrium δ, = π 6, π60. Note that here c p < c k, and hence c = c p = V p π.

7 VI. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK We have investigated the properties of an improved swing equation without relying on linearization. Modeling the synchronous generator by this equation, two scenarios are considered in this paper. First, the stability of a single generator connected to a constant load is proved and frequency regulation through a proposed controller is achieved. In the second scenario, the synchronous machine is connected to an infinite bus. As a contribution with respect to [], similar dynamics are investigated through linearization, here a nonlinear Lyapunov analysis is provided to prove stability and frequency regulation. Finally, simulations are carried out to show that the swing equation model gives rise to a behavior that does not match what is suggested by the improved swing equation. Future works include considering voltage dynamics and multi-machine systems. REFERENCES [] M. Shahidehpour and M. Khodayar, Cutting campus energy costs with hierarchical control: The economical and reliable operation of a microgrid, Electrification Magazine, IEEE, vol., no., pp , Sept 03. [] J. Zhou and Y. Ohsawa, Improved swing equation and its properties in synchronous generators, Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 56, no., pp , Jan 009. [3] S. Fiaz, D. Zonetti, R. Ortega, J. Scherpen, and A. van der Schaft, A port-hamiltonian approach to power network modeling and analysis, European Journal of Control, vol. 9, no. 6, pp , 03, lagrangian and Hamiltonian Methods for Modelling and Control. [4] S. Caliskan and P. Tabuada, Compositional transient stability analysis of multimachine power networks, Control of Network Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol., no., pp. 4 4, March 04. [5] S. Y. Caliskan and P. Tabuada, Uses and abuses of the swing equation model, in Decision and Control CDC, 05 IEEE 54th Annual Conference on, Dec 05, pp [6] V. Natarajan and G. Weiss, Almost global asymptotic stability of a constant field current synchronous machine connected to an infinite bus, in Decision and Control CDC, 04 IEEE 53rd Annual Conference on, Dec 04, pp [7] V. Natarajan and G. Weiss, A method for proving the global stability of a synchronous generator connected to an infinite bus, in Electrical Electronics Engineers in Israel IEEEI, 04 IEEE 8th Convention of, Dec 04, pp. 5. [8] A. J. van der Schaft and T. Stegink, Perspectives in modeling for control of power networks, Annual Reviews in Control, Spring Issue 06, to appear. [9] J. Machowski, J. Bialek, and J. Bumby, Power System Dynamics: Stability and Control, nd ed. Wiley, 008. [0] Z. Zhao, F. Zheng, J. Gao, and L. Xu, A dynamic on-line parameter identification and full-scale system experimental verification for large synchronous machines, IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 0, no. 3, pp , Sep 995.