International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)

ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887

Volume 6 Issue XII, Dec 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Jaya Algorithm Based Automatic Generation

Control of Two Area Load Frequency Control with
Nonlinearities
Kavita Sharma1, Kapil Parikh2
1
M.tech Scholar Electrical Engineering SITE, Nathdwara, India
2
Assistant Professor Electrical Engineering SITE, Nathdwara, India

Abstract: In a complex power system, often two or more areas are interconnected to each other for having the mutual benefits of
peak load supply, reliability of supply, increase in reserve capacity and diversity factor etc. For a proper operation interconnected
powers system it is of utmost importance to have constant frequency and tie line power exchange. To manage the changes and
keeping record of it, in each area uses Automatic Generation control (AGC) is provided. The difference between the load side
demand and the generation at the moment is Area Control Error (ACE). The AGC in each area is carried out by a controller. In
the present piece of work to regulate AGC Proportional Integral Derivative (PID) controller is installed in each area. It is one of
the conventional methods. For enhancing the performance of controller in the past many optimization techniques have been
involved. To name some of it are, hybrid Firefly Algorithm and Pattern Search (hFA–PS) technique, Bacteria Foraging
Optimization Algorithm (BFOA), Genetic Algorithm (GA) and conventional Ziegler Nichols (ZN) which are separately based on
PI or PID controller.
The use of very new technique in this field has been made here which is JAYA algorithm. It is partly based on Artificial
Intelligence. To optimize the PID controller Integral Time multiply Absolute Error (ITAE) as objective function is utilized.
Under different loading conditions, system parameters of controller are changed to test its sensitivity. Also, it variation of time
constants for speed governor, turbine and tile line power were considered here under the Generation Rate Constraint(GRC)
values of ±0.05 and ±0.025. While performing all these analysis certain definite constraints are considered such as time delay,
reheat turbine, and GRC. The typical GRC for a thermal power plant lies between 2% and 5% per minute. Later it was
compared with the conventional and several other techniques to evaluate its performance particularly conventional ZN
controllers, GA PID controller and BFOA PID controller. The proposed system model has been developed using the platform
provided by the MATLAB/SIMULINK.
Keywords: Automatic Generation Control (AGC), Jaya Algorithm, Load frequency control, Sensitivity analysis, Two area system

I. INTRODUCTION
Power system is a vast network that has several ways to generate power. To have the maximum benefit of such a vast network these
power generation sources are usually connected to each other. Therefore, these are commonly termed as different areas that are
interconnected. To name some of the benefits from such a state of power system are reduces reserve capacity, reliability of
operation, supplying peak load, operation would be much cost effective and increase in diversity. The areas are interconnected via
tie line therefore, it is necessary to keep the tie line power and frequency of the interconnected areas at constant or scheduled values.
This is a very complex task. It requires continuous monitoring of the system. If the values deviate from the desired one than the
stable point of the operation will also deviates and it will affect the entire operation of tie line and area connected via it. Hence, a
system is needed to keep the track of these parameters of interconnected areas[1]. Automatic Generation Control (AGC) is the
system to satisfy the above mention needs of interconnected areas in power system. Like it was already mentioned, it will keep a
track of the generated power in the system it is connected in. It will keep the system update with the most recent load demand or the
demand by the any other area connected to area it is connected in. In short it observes the tie line power and frequency regularly. Its
working concept is quiet simple to understand. Each time a load demand changes, it see the present stats of the generating units of
the area for the amount of power generated and determines how much more power is needed to be generated. Or it could give
commands to one or two generating units to slow down in case there is decrease in load demand. The difference calculated between
the present generated power and the demand at the same time is known as Area Control Error (ACE). It includes the change in
frequency as well as tie line power too[5]. In the present context, the AGC is provided to maintain the frequency of areas at the

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 383

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue XII, Dec 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

same level whenever there is change. This type of AGC is called as Load Frequency Control (LFC). This problem has been
addressed several times in the past and still being addressed with the better solution each time. From traditional ways of controlling
via only simple controllers only like Proportional (P), Proportional Integral (PI) and Proportional Integral Derivative (PID) to
methods where these controllers are further modified to give better results[6]. The modification has been incorporated using many
optimization techniques such as Genetic Algorithm (GA), Neural Network (NN), fuzzy logic Genetic Algorithm (GA), Particle
swarm optimization (PSO) or Bacteria Foraging Optimization Algorithm (BFOA) etc. Also some recently used developed
optimization techniques too like hybrid Firefly Algorithm (FA) and Pattern Search (PS) or Teaching learning Based Optimization
Technique (TLBO). But the present work has taken very newly developed techniques inspired by TLBO named as JAYA Algorithm
(JA)[4]. The system which has been outlined as discussed so far has been developed and realized using the platform provided by the
MATLAB/SIMULINK. The two area non reheat interconnected system has been analyzed by utilizing this software tool with
different load conditions under variable system parameters.

II. SYSTEM MODELING

Fig.1 shows two area non reheat thermal power systems and their rating are 2000 MW (area-1 and area-2) with a nominal load of
1000 MW. Two area non-reheat thermal system is extensively used in the literature for design and investigation of automatic load
frequency control of interconnected areas [25]. Fig.1 shows different parameter classifies as B1& B2-frequency bias parameters;
ACE1 & ACE2 -area control errors; u1&u2 -control outputs from controller; R1 &R2 - governor speed regulation parameters(p.u.);
TG1 &TG2-speed governor time constants(seconds); ∆PV1 &∆PV2 -change in governor valve positions (p.u.); ∆PG1& ∆PG2 -
governor output command (p.u.); TT1 & TT2 - turbine time constant(seconds); ∆PT1 & ∆PT2 - change in turbine output powers;
∆PD1 & ∆PD2-load demand changes; ∆Ptie -incremental change in tie line power (p.u.); KP1 &KP2 -power system gains; TP1
&TP2 - power system time constant(seconds); T12 - synchronizing coefficient and ∆F1 &∆F2 -system frequency deviations(Hz).
The generation of power by Thermal power plants can be modified or changed at a specific maximum rate (2-5% per min) and this
is Generation Rate Constraint (GRC). Both areas of the power system consist of the speed governing system, turbine and generator.
Both areas have three inputs and two outputs. The inputs are the controller input ∆Pref (also denoted as u), load disturbance ∆PD
and tie-line power error ∆Ptie the outputs are the generator frequency ∆F and Area Control Error (ACE).

∆PD1

∆PG1
+ ACE1
_ ∆PT1 _
U1 ∆F1
α
∑ PID
Controller + ∑ ∑ + ∑
+
+ Controller Governor _ _ Power System
Turbine with GRC
∆P12
+
∆Ptie
∑
_

∆P21

+ ACE 2
∆PG2 ∆PT2 _ ∆F2
U2 α
∑ PID
Controller + ∑ + ∑ + ∑
+ _ _ _
Controller Power System
Turbine with GRC
∆PD2

Fig.1 Two area non-reheat thermal plant consideration of with GRC [1]

= ∆ +∆ (1)
where, B is the frequency bias parameters.
The turbine is represented by the transfer function
∆ ( )
( )= ( )
= (2) The transfer function of
∆
a governor is given in (2) as above.
∆ ( )
( )= ( )
= (3)
∆
The speed governing system has two inputs ∆Pref and ∆ with one output ∆PG(s) given as in (4),
∆ ( )=∆ ( )− ∆ ( ) (4)
The generator and load is represented by the transfer function

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 384

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue XII, Dec 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

( )= (5)
Where, KP=1/D and TP =2H/FD
The generator load system has two input ∆PT(s) and ∆PD(s) with one output ∆F(s) is specified by (6) and referred to [22],
∆ ( ) = ∆ ( )[∆ ( ) − ∆ ( )] (6)

III. JAYA ALGORITHM

A. Introduction
There are several algorithms for optimizing in case of different problems. These are mostly categorized as evolutionary based and
swarm intelligence based. Some of the examples are Genetic algorithm (GA), Differential Evolution (DE), Particle swarm
optimization (PSO), Ant Colony Optimization (ACO), Artificial Bee Colony (ABC), Fire Fly (FF) algorithm and many more like
these. The criterion for the optimization is to work with control parameters as these are probabilistic. Some algorithm like GA, DE
may use parameters more specific to terms of the algorithm i.e. algorithm specific parameters. Therefore, in case of such algorithm
it is important to tune the algorithm specific control parameters carefully. Any error in tuning would cause the computational work
to increase and may result in the local optimal solution. Taking account of this very point an algorithm that does not uses algorithm
specific parameters for control is developed for example it uses population size and generation number as the controlling
parameters. This algorithm was developed in 2011 and named as teaching learning-based optimization (TLBO). Development of
this algorithm has leaded the new algorithm which has only one phase of operation instead of two as in TLBO. Also, due to this it is
very simple. Its working is different form TLBO and is known as Jaya Algorithm (JA)[1]. Fig.2 shows the flow chart of Jaya
Algorithm.

B. Description
Let,,f(x)= objective function to be minimized
i= iteration
j= designed variables
m= number of designed variables (j=1, 2,…, m)
k= population size
n= number of candidate solution (k=1, 2…, n)

Fig.2: Flow chart of Jaya algorithm

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 385

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue XII, Dec 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

It assumed that there are two types of candidates exist i.e. best and worst where best candidates acquires the best value of f(x)
(f(x)b). On the other hand worst candidate acquire the worst value for f(x) (f(x)w) in the pool of whole solution of candidates.
Above is the flow chart description Jaya Algorithm. Where it has each and every step involved in the process of deciding optimal
solution from the given set of population.
Let it be ith iteration. Here, kth candidate
jth variable= Xj,k,i (value)
The above value of variable is modified as for ith iteration within [0,1],
, , = , , + , , , , − , , − ,, , , − , , (7)
where,
th
, , =Best candidate value of j variable
th
, , = Worst candidate value of j variable

, , = , , ‘s modified value
th
, , , , , = nay tow arbitrary number for j variables

, , , , − , , =represents inclination of solution towards best solution

− ,, , , − , , = represents affinity of solution to evade worst solution
If the , , has the better value than the , , , then it will be maintained and treated as the input to the next iteration.
The concept of above algorithm is very simple. As, in every iteration it will always tend to put effort to acquire the best solution
while getting away from the worst solution. Hence, it can be said that the algorithm will achieve victory on getting the best solution
which its name Jaya, Sanskrit word synonymous to victory[4].

C. Objective Function
The objective function, here for the designing of controller, there are certain criterions to follow. The criterion used here is the
Integral of Time multiplied Absolute Error (ITAE). It was observed that ITAE use in AGC is better option as an objective function.
J = ITAE = ∫ (|∆F | + |∆F | + |∆P |). t. dt (8)
Where,
∆F & ∆F = change in system frequency
∆P = Change in the power of tie line (increasing change), t = simulation time
While designing PID controllers it is restricted by certain constraints too. Hence, the given problem is expressed as,
For minimizing the function J, the following constraints bound it,
K ≤K ≤K ,K ≤K ≤K ,K ≤K ≤K (9)

IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The systematic study with different cases as dynamic response analysis with SLP in area-1,area-2, area-1 and area-2 simultaneously
& sensitivity analysis with parameter variations for TG, TT, T12. The influence of the proposed JA based PID controller has been
verified by comparing the results with some newly published heuristic optimization techniques such as the BFOA, GA and
conventional ZN based PID controllers same kind of system. Table 1 shows value of different parameters of KP, Ki, Kd at different
algorithm as BFOA, GA, conventional ZN and JA at Generation rate constraint ± 0.05 & ± 0.025[26]

TABLE: 1
Controller parameters for different cases

Conventional GA PID BFOA PID JAYA PID Controller

Controller (ZN) Controller Controller GRC = ± 0.05 GRC = ± 0.025
Controller
Kp 0.5865 0.0955 0.1317 2.5279 0.001
parameters
Ki 0.51 0.4712 0.4873 0.8106 0.3381
Kd 0.1686 0.0679 0.2506 0.8741 0.2705

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 386

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue XII, Dec 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

A. Analysis of Results And Discussion

The proposed JA is compared with other conventional approaches suggested in and heuristic techniques such as ZN, GA and BFOA
as shown in table 2 from which it is clear that with same PID controller structure, the saturation limit (GRC = ±0.05), objective
function, least ITAE values is obtained with proposed JA (ITAE = 00.10617) compared to BFOA (ITAE = 0.4788), GA (ITAE =
0.5513) and ZN (ITAE = 0.6040) techniques. Hence, it can be concluded that the proposed Jaya algorithm better the conventional
ZN technique and heuristic techniques GA, BFOA as least objective function cost is obtained with the proposed Jaya algorithm.
Therefore, superior system performance in term of minm conditions least settling times in frequency and tie-line power deviations is
achieved with proposed Jaya optimized PID controller compared to others.

TABLE: 2
Settling time and error
GRC = ± 0.05 GRC = ± 0.025
Performance Performance
Techniques Settling time Ts (Sec.) Settling time Ts (Sec.)
indices indices
ΔF1 ΔF2 ΔPtie ITAE ΔF1 ΔF2 ΔPtie ITAE
Proposed JAYA 2.7 2.8 3.2 0.10617 5.3 3.7 7.1 0.462
BFOA 4.7 6.4 5.1 0.4788 9 7.9 8.3 1.5078
GA 6.9 8 5.7 0.5513 11.1 11.2 11 2.4668
ZN 8.1 9.2 6.7 0.604 15.3 14.1 15.3 3.4972

B. Dynamic Response Analysis

To understand the dynamic response of the system given below different Step Load Perturbation (SLP) and GRC values, the
subsequent cases are considered. Table-3 shows the controller parameters for different cases.
1) Case (i): Step load perturbation in area-1 with saturation limit (GRC = ±0.05)
Fig.3-5 show Frequency deviation of area-1, area-2, & tie line power deviation of 5% SLP applied in areas-1 at t=0 with
GRC=±0.05. It is clear from Fig. 3–5, the proposed Jaya algorithm optimized PID controller shows best dynamic performance
compared to ZN, GA, BFOA optimized PID controllers.

Fig.3 Frequency deviation of area-1for 5% SLP in area-1 with GRC=±0.05

Fig.4 Frequency deviation of area-2 for 5% SLP in area-1 with GRC=±0.05

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 387

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue XII, Dec 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Fig.5 Tie line power deviation for 5% SLP in the area-1, with GRC=±0.05

2) Case (ii): Step load perturbation in area-1 and area-2 simultaneously with saturation limit (GRC = ±0.05)
Fig.6-8 show frequency deviation of area-1for 5% SLP in area-1 and 2% SLP in the area-2, at t=0 with GRC=±0.05. It is clear from
Fig. 6–8 that the designed controllers are emphatic and carry out satisfactory operation when we employ Jaya Algorithm and system
show less settling times compared to newly published ZN, GA and BFOA optimized PID controllers.

Fig.6 Frequency deviation of area-1for 5% SLP in area-1 and 2% SLP in area-2, with GRC=±0.05

Fig.7 Frequency deviation of area-2 for 5% SLP in area-1 and 2% SLP in area-2, with GRC=±0.05

Fig.8 Tie line power deviation of 5% SLP in area-1 and 2% SLP in area-2, with GRC=±0.05

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 388

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue XII, Dec 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

3) Case (iii): Step load perturbation in area-1 with saturation limit (GRC = ±0.025)
Fig.9 to11 show frequency deviation of area-1, area-2, tie line power deviation of 5% SLP applied in area-1 at t=0 with
GRC=±0.25. It can be seen from Fig. 9–11 that the proposed Jaya algorithm optimized PID controller gives superior dynamic
response having comparatively lesser peak overshoot and lesser settling times compared to newly published ZN, GA and BFOA
optimized PID controllers.

Fig.9 Frequency deviation of area-1 for 5% SLP in area-1, with GRC=±0.025

Fig.10 Frequency deviation of area-2 for 5% SLP in area-1, with GRC=±0.025

Fig.11 Tie line power deviation for 5% SLP in area-1, with GRC=±0.025

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 389

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue XII, Dec 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

4) Case (iv): Sensitivity analysis

Sensitivity analysis is carried out to study the power system due to large changes in the system parameters. Taking one at a time,
the parameter variation and time constants of speed governor, turbine, tie-line power is altered from their nominal values in the
value of +50% to -50% . Table 3 gives the tuned PID controller parameters under parameter variations of GRC is ± 0.05 and
±0.025. The Sensitivity analysis of parameter variations for Tg, Tt, T12 at different GRC of ± 0.05 and ±0.025 shows in table 4 and 5
respectively. It is obvious from Tables 4 and 5 that the dynamic performance with proposed Jaya algorithm tuned PID controller is
superior to BFOA optimized PID controller for every cases. Fig. 12 to 17 show various responses at parameter variations of Tg, Tt,
T12 increase 50%, with GRC=±0.05 and ±0.025. Hence, it can be concluded that the proposed control approach provides a strong
control under large changes in the system parameter variations.

TABLE : 3
Tuned PID controller parameters under parameter variation.
% GRC = ± 0.05 GRC = ± 0.025
Parameter Variation
Change KP KI KD KP KI KD
Nominal Loading
0 2.5279 0.8106 0.8741 0.001 0.3381 0.2705
Condition
50 10 0.7493 5.0889 1.00E-03 0.3183 0.2805
Tg
-50 4.739 0.8519 1.3795 1.00E-03 0.361 0.2491
50 9.7975 0.793 3.9953 1.00E-03 0.322 0.3182
Tt
-50 7.0147 0.7864 3.0209 0.001 0.3514 0.3007
50 4.7895 0.7317 2.6299 1.00E-03 0.3676 0.214
T12
-50 2.4739 0.8413 0.8631 0.0884 0.2993 0.3425

TABLE : 4
Sensitivity analysis with GRC = ± 0.05
Proposed JAYA Technique BFOA Technique
Parameter Variation % Change Settling Time (Sec.) Settling Time (Sec.)
ITAE ITAE
ΔF1 ΔF2 ΔPtie ΔF1 ΔF2 ΔPtie
Nominal Loading
0 2.7 2.8 3.2984 0.10617 4.7 6.4 5.1 0.4788
Condition
50 2.7 3.5 3.703 0.1155 4.8 6.8 5.5 0.476
Tg
-50 2.2 2.0 2.7605 0.1021 5.2 6.5 5.4 0.4843
50 2.6 3.1 3.3579 0.1079 5 7 5.6 0.4634
Tt
-50 2.1 3.2 3.2397 0.1073 5.2 6.2 5.1 0.4911
50 3.3 2.9 3.9567 0.1119 5.4 6.3 5.4 0.4771
T12
-50 3.3 3.7 3.9432 0.1632 2.2 6.9 5.6 0.5048

TABLE : 5
Sensitivity analysis with GRC = ± 0.025
Proposed JAYA Technique BFOA Technique
Parameter Variation % Change Settling Time (Sec.) Settling Time (Sec.)
ITAE ITAE
ΔF1 ΔF2 ΔPtie ΔF1 ΔF2 ΔPtie
Nominal Loading
0 5.3 3.7 7.1582 0.462 9 7.9 8.3 1.5078
Condition
50 5.5 4.6 8.1855 0.5002 7.9 7.4 9.2 1.7988
Tg
-50 5.2 3.7 6.1648 0.4319 9.4 8.1 8.7 1.3011
50 5.6 5.6 8.4516 0.5046 9.2 8.4 7.5 1.3957
Tt
-50 5.4 3.6 5.7189 0.4272 9.6 8.6 8.3 1.1458
50 4.9 4.7 8.5674 0.456 8 7.6 5.6 1.2758
T12
-50 5.9 5.8 6.9284 0.5074 11.1 8.2 10.2 2.1568

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 390

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue XII, Dec 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Fig.12 Frequency deviation of area-1 due to increase for T12 by 50%, with GRC=±0.05

Fig.13 Frequency deviation of area-2 due to increase for Tg by 50%, with GRC=±0.05

Fig.14 Tie line power deviation due to increase for Tt by 50% ,with GRC=±0.05

Fig.15 Frequency deviation of area-1 due to increase for T12by 50% ,with GRC=±0.025

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 391

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue XII, Dec 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

Fig.16 Frequency deviation of area-2 due to increase for Tg by 50% ,with GRC=±0.025

Fig.17 Tie line power deviation due to increase for Tt by 50%, with GRC=±0.02

V. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, Jaya Algorithm (JA) is applied to optimize PID controller parameters for two area non-reheat thermal power systems
with non linearity. It optimized the parameters of PID controller employing an ITAE objective function. The proposed JA based PID
controllers provided better performance compared to some already applied techniques such as Ziegler Nichols, Genetic Algorithm
and Bacterial Foraging Optimization Algorithms for the equal interconnected power system. Furthermore, the sensitivity analysis is
performed by varying the system parameters from their nominal values. It is observed that the proposed controller is robust for wide
range of system parameters variations from their nominal values.

REFERENCES
[1] Rabindra Kumar Sahu, Sidhartha Panda, and Saroj Padhan, A hybrid firefly algorithm and pattern search technique for automatic generation control of multi
area power systems Electrical Power and Energy Systems 2015;64: 9–23.
[2] Neha Modi, Manju Khare and Kanchan Chaturvedi.Performance analysis of load frequency control in single area power system using GA and PSO based PID
controller. International Journal of Electrical, Electronics 2013;2 :108-114.
[3] Kundur P. Power system stability and control. Tata McGraw Hill; 2009 [8th reprint].
[4] Rabindra Kumar Sahu, Sidhartha Panda, and Pratap Chandra Padhan , Design and analysis of hybrid firefly algorithm-pattern search based fuzzy PID controller
for LFC of multi area power systems, Electrical Power and Energy Systems 2015;69: 200–212.
[5] Nanda J, Mangla A, Suri S. Some findings on automatic generation control of an interconnected hydrothermal system with conventional controllers. IEEE
Trans Energy Conv 2006;21:187–93.
[6] Parmar KPS, Majhi S, Kothari DP. Load frequency control of a realistic power system with multi-source power generation. Int J Elect Power Energy Syst
2012;42:426–33.
[7] Ghoshal SP. Application of GA/GA–SA based fuzzy automatic generation control of a multi area thermal generating system. Electr Power Syst Res
2004;70:115–27.
[8] Gozde H, Taplamacioglu MC. Automatic generation control application with craziness based particle swarm optimization in a thermal power system. Int J Elect
Power Energy Syst 2011;33:8–16.
[9] Sahu RK, Panda S, Rout UK. DE optimized parallel 2-DOF PID controller for load frequency control of power system with governor dead-band nonlinearity.
Int J Elect Power Energy Syst 2013;49:19–33.
[10] Chandrakala KRMV, Balamurugan S, Sankaranarayanan K. Variable structure fuzzy gain scheduling based load frequency controller for multi source multi
area hydro thermal system. Int J Elect Power Energy Syst 2013;53:375–81.
[11] Saikia LC, Mishra S, Sinha N, Nanda J. Automatic generation control of a multi area hydrothermal system using reinforced learning neural network Controller.
Int J Elect Power Energy Syst 2011;33:1101–8.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 392

 International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 6.887
Volume 6 Issue XII, Dec 2018- Available at www.ijraset.com

[12] Saikia LC, Nanda J, Mishra S. Performance comparison of several classical controllers in AGC for multi-area interconnected thermal system. Int J Electr Power
Energy Syst 2011;33:394–401.
[13] Nanda J, Mishra S, Saikia LC. Maiden application of bacterial foraging based optimization technique in multiarea automatic generation control. IEEE Trans
Power Syst 2009;24:602–9.
[14] Ali ES, Abd-Elazim SM. Bacteria foraging optimization algorithm based load frequency controller for interconnected power system. Int J Electr Power Energy
Syst 2011;33:633–8.
[15] Youssef L. Abdel and Magid M.A. Abido.AGC tuning of interconnected reheat thermal systems with particle swarm optimization.IEEE ICECS-2003.
[16] K.S.S. Ramakrishna and T.S. Bhatti .Load frequency control of interconnected hydro-thermal power systems. International Conference on Energy and
Environment, 2006.
[17] R.N. Patel, S.K. Sinha and R. Prasad.Design of a robust controller for AGC with combined intelligence techniques. International Science Index World
Academy of Science,Engineering and Technology 2008;2: 607-613.
[18] B. Venkata Prasanth and Dr. S.V. Jayaram Kumar.Load frequency control for a two area interconnected power system using robust genetic algorithm
controller.Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology 2008; 3:1204-1212
[19] Dr. K. Rama Sudha, V.S.Vakula and R. Vijaya Shanthi.PSO based design of robust controller for two area load frequency control with
nonlinearities.International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology 2010; 2:1311-1324.
[20] Seyed Abbas Taher, Masoud Hajiakbari Fini and Saber Falahati Aliabadi.Fractional order PID controller design for LFC in electric power systems using
imperialist competitive algorithm. Ain Shams Engineering Journal 2014;5: 121-135.
[21] Azadani, H.N.Design of GA optimized fuzzy logic-based PID controller for the two area non-reheat thermal power system. IEEE Fuzzy Systems (IFSC), 13th
Iranian Conference on 2013; 1-6.
[22] Yogendra Arya and Narendra Kumar.Fuzzy Gain Scheduling Controllers for Automatic Generation Control of Two-area Interconnected Electrical Power
System. Electric Power Components and System 2016;1-15.
[23] R.Venkata Rao, Jaya: A simple and new optimization algorithm for solving constrained and unconstrained optimization problems, International Journal of
Industrial Engineering Computations 2016; 7:19–34.
[24] E.S.AliS.M.Abd-Elazim, BFOA based design of PID controller for two area Load Frequency Control with nonlinearities Electrical Power and Energy Systems
2013;51: 224–231.
[25] Sugandh P. Singh, Tapan Prakash, V.P. Singh, and M. Ganesh Babu, Analytic hierarchy process based automatic generation control of multi-area
interconnected power system using Jaya algorithm Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 2017;60: 35–44.
[26] E.S.AliS.M.Abd-Elazim, BFOA based design of PID controller for two area Load Frequency Control with nonlinearities Electrical Power and Energy Systems
2013;51: 224–231.

©IJRASET: All Rights are Reserved 393