Understanding low frequency oscillation in power systems *K. Prasertwong, **N. Mithulananthan and *D. Thakur *Electric Power System Management, Energy Field of Study, Asian Institute of Technology, Klongluang, P.O. Box 4, Pathumthani, Thailand **Power and Energy System Group, School of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia Campus, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia Email: mithulan@itee.uq.edu.au Abstract: This paper presents a complete overview of low frequency oscillation phenomena in power systems. Definition of low frequency oscillation and its classification is clearly explained. Some power system blackout incidents due to low frequency oscillation and the lesson learned from those incidents are given in the paper. Widely used methodology for studying low frequency oscillation among power utilities is also presented. Methods for oscillation damping, both at operational and planning stages of power system are briefly discussed. A comprehensive case study of low frequency oscillation in simple system is presented using eigenvalue analysis. Time domain results are presented to support the eigenvalue analysis. Conclusions are duly drawn. Keywords: AVR, eigenvalue analysis, low frequency oscillation, PSS, SSSC, TCSC Introduction The main function of power system is to convert energy from one of the naturally available forms to electricity and transport it through grids to points of consumption. As electrical energy can not be destroyed like any other forms of energy, whatever produced from generators should be utilized or stored. However, technology for storing electricity in large quantities has not yet matured. Thus many equipment and controllers have been used to maintain the balance between what is being demanded and generated in a reliable manner with high degree of quality. In modern power systems, apart from a large number of generators and associated controllers, there are many types of load, ranging from a simple resistive load to more complicated loads with electronic controllers. The influx of more and more controllers and loads, increase the complexity and nonlinearity of power systems. As a result power systems are viewed as complex nonlinear dynamical system that shows a number of instability problems. Instability problems in power systems that can lead to partial or full blackout can be broadly classified into three main categories, namely voltage, phase angle and frequency related problems [1]-[10]. Though instability eventually blackout or collapse never happened in a pure form of voltage or phase angle or frequency problems, the initial part of the incident can be clearly related to one of the categories. If one looked back the history of power system since its evolution, operation engineers faced with transient instability problem and researchers struggled to find counter measures to overcome it [4]. Transient instability problem, considered as part of the phase angle related problem, is defined as the ability of power system to maintain synchronism when subjected to large disturbances. When the system faces large disturbances such as large load increase, loss of tie lines, loss of generating units, maintaining constant electrical speed among all the generators were challenging as some machines speed up while some other slow down to adjust to post disturbance situation. If there is no control mechanism to keep the speeding up or slowing down generators within the allowable speed limits, there is a good chance that these generators would fall out of the grid by losing synchronism. Hence, fast exciter or Automatic Voltage Regulators (AVR) was introduced in the system as one of the remedial measures to solve the problem. The introduction of fast AVR was able to give the “coarse adjustment” to keep electrical speed of synchronous generators within the limits and successful in maintaining synchronism by controlling the first swing. However, the fast AVR could not do the “fine adjustment” to control oscillation in the speed. Then, Power System Stabilizer (PSS) was introduced in generator to give that fine adjustment to damp out power oscillations that are referred to as electromechanical or low frequency oscillations (LFO) [4], [7]. Apart from the fast exciter there are a number of other sources that contribute to oscillation in modern power system such as frequency load dependency, network characteristics and negative interaction of controllers. 1 Though oscillations are inherent in power system if not properly controlled could lead to partial or full blackout of the system as it happened in many practical power systems. Hence a complete understanding of the problem would help in finding effective remedial measures, ways and means to control them. Rest of the paper is organized as follows. Following introduction, the paper describes what low frequency oscillation is. Some noteworthy oscillation related incidents and lesson learned is covered next. Then the methodologies available for power system oscillation studies are described along with general power system modeling. Most widely used methodology for low frequency oscillation study, eigenvalue analysis is presented in details in the methodology section. Some remedial measures that have been used all around the world by utilities for oscillation damping is given in the next section. A simple case study showing the effect of different controllers on power system oscillation modes in a systematic way is also presented in the paper with some discussion. Finally, conclusions and contributions of the paper are summarized. Low Frequency Oscillation The ability of synchronous machines of an interconnected power system to remain synchronism after being subjected to a small disturbance is known as small signal stability that is subclass of phase angle related instability problem. It depends on the ability to maintain equilibrium between electromagnetic and mechanical torques of each synchronous machine connected to power system. The change in electromagnetic torque of synchronous machine following a perturbation or disturbance can be resolved into two components – (i) a synchronizing torque component in phase with rotor angle deviation and (ii) a damping torque component in phase with speed deviation. Lack of sufficient synchronizing torque results in “aperiodic” or non-oscillatory instability, whereas lack of damping torque results in low frequency oscillations. Low frequency oscillations are generator rotor angle oscillations having a frequency between 0.1 -2.0 Hz and are classified based on the source of the oscillation [4]. The root cause of electrical power oscillations are the unbalance between power demand and available power at a period of time. In the earliest era of power system development, the power oscillations are almost non observable because generators are closely connected to loads, but nowadays, large demand of power to the farthest end of the system that forces to transmit huge power through a long transmission line, which results an increasing power oscillations. The phenomenon involves mechanical oscillation of the rotor phase angle with respective to a rotating frame. Increasing and decreasing phase angle with a low frequency will be reflected in power transferred from a synchronous machine as phase angle is strong coupled to power transferred. The LFO can be classified as local and inter-area mode [4][10]. Local modes are associated with the swinging of units at a generating station with respect to the rest of the power system. Oscillations occurred only to the small part of the power system. Typically, the frequency range is 1-2 Hz. Interarea modes are associated with swinging of many machines in one part of the system against machines in other parts. It generally occurs in weak interconnected power systems through long tie lines. Typically frequency range is 0.1-1 Hz. Besides these modes, there can be other modes associated with controllers which happen due to poor design of controllers [10]. Torsional oscillation is another type of oscillation that happened in series capacitor compensated system and the frequency of oscillation is typically in sub synchronous frequency range [10]. Oscillatory Instability Incidents and Lesson Learned Though there have been many incidents related to LFO, not an in-depth study has been performed to see the real reasons behind many of these incidents. Some of the incidents and the lesson learned are summarized below to give an understanding of the underlying problem. Noteworthy incidents related to LFO include [11]: 2 United Kingdom (1980), frequency of oscillation about 0.5 Hz. Taiwan (1984, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992), frequency of oscillation around 0.78 – 1.05 Hz. West USA/Canada, System Separation (1996), frequency of oscillation around 0.224 Hz. Scandinavia (1997), frequency of oscillation about 0.5 Hz. China Blackout on 6 March (2003), frequency of oscillation around 0.4 Hz. US Blackout on 14 August (2003), frequency of oscillation about 0.17 Hz. Italian Blackout on 28 September (2003), frequency of oscillation about 0.55 Hz. Most of these incidents involved in a low frequency of oscillation in the range of 0.1 to 0.7 Hz that is considered as the most serious and could lead to wide spread blackouts [11]. Apart from this, oscillatory incidents in power systems in Ontario-Canada, Sri Lankan, Malaysia and Bangladesh are also reported in the literatures [11]. Most of the incidents had happened due to faults triggered by some disturbances such as a tree contacting with a transmission line, some component failure, faults in transmission lines etc. Because of the faults, these lines have been disconnected from the grid. Then some other lines in the network has been overloaded and sagged on trees causing more earth faults. Those incidents have been generated sequential line tripping and generator tripping causing oscillation in power. The tripping of transmission lines significantly modifies the characteristics of the remaining grid with longer distance (greater equivalent impedance) for the power flow and consequent higher stability risk. And also the modified grid may have less damping compared with the original grid. The weak tie lines and the nature of the longitudinal structure are one of the causes for low frequency oscillations. Concentration of outputs to major power plants with insufficient reserve margins, heavy flow across transmission interfaces due to seriously imbalanced regional power and pumped storage units were in pumping mode operation are common causes for low frequency oscillation observed in some of the cases above mentioned [11]. With the heavy tie line power, low frequency electromechanical oscillation modes have been captured the cases mentioned above and decreasing the tie line power flow made those modes disappeared. Most of the events happened either during very cold day during winter season or in a very hot day in summer season [11]. The use of thermostatically controlled loads, such as space heaters, coolers, water heaters are increasing in these days. One of the properties of these loads is to operate longer period even during low voltage conditions. As a result, the total number of these devices connected to the system will increase in a few minutes after a drop in voltage. Therefore there might be some influence on low frequency oscillations from thermostatically controlled loads [11]. In some cases, during postmortem analysis, it has been identified that the past data of system modeling has differences with actual values. The analysis with past data has been showed positive damping for power oscillations but in the actual case it was negatively damped. There are various reasons for this type of discrepancy. In order to avoid this and to have a complete knowledge of the system, components contribute to oscillatory problem need to be modeled accurately and good understanding of the phenomena under different operating conditions are required. With this type of knowledge and understanding a counter measure can be implemented easily to avoid disastrous consequences. Methodology Low frequency oscillation study requires dynamic modeling of most of the power system components. Once the mathematical model is available different methodologies can be applied to study the system oscillatory behavior in low frequency range. Eigenvalue analysis, time domain simulation and Prony analysis are used among researchers. Though each method of these methods has its own merits and demerits, eigenvalues and time domain simulations are typically used among the utilities to get a complete understanding of system oscillatory phenomena. Power system modeling Dynamic modeling of power system includes a set of differential and algebraic equations (DAE). Low frequency oscillation studies can be done in two ways depending on the interest. If the interest is to capture the local behavior related to an area or particular power plant, then that area of power plant can be modeled in details and 3 the rest of the system with simple models. If the interest is to capture both local and global modes such as interareas mode each and every machine in the system and their associated controllers should be modeled in details. It is important to include loads, controllers and other power system components that would influence the LFO. A general mathematical model of power system is given by (1). x f ( x, y, l , p ) 0 g ( x, y , l , p ) (1) Where x is a vector of state variable; y is a vector of algebraic variables; l and p are uncontrollable and controllable parameters, respectively. Machine and control dynamics will be included in the differential equations while basic load flow and other network equations will be included in algebraic equations. Eigenvalue analysis The small signal stability or LFO study of the system can be determined by system eigenvalues at an operating point. The relative participation of state variables and their contribution in certain oscillation mode are given by the corresponding elements in the right and left eigenvectors. Hence, combination of left and right eigenvectors yield participation factor matrix. The participation factor matrix can be used to identify the dominant state variable in a particular mode. The following steps are followed in studying LFO of power systems. Step I: Finding equilibrium or operating point Equilibrium point or operating point of the system can be found by simultaneously solving differential and algebraic equations given in (1). Assume the equilibrium point is given by (x0, y0, p0) for a fixed value of uncontrollable parameter l0. Step II: Linearization DAE model around the equilibrium point Once the equilibrium point is known DAE model can be linearized around the equilibrium point as given in (2). Here, the linearized model is considered valid as the disturbances considered is small where nonlinearities can be ignored. x J1 J 2 x (2) 0 J J y 3 4 J Where J1 f x ; J2 ( xo , y o , l o , po ) f y ; J3 ( xo , y o ,l o , po ) g x and J 4 ( xo , y o ,l o , po ) g y . ( xo , y o ,lo , po ) Step III: Forming the reduced system state matrix Assuming J4 is nonsingular, (2) can be rewritten by eliminating algebraic variable as shown in (3). x ( J1 J 2 J 41J 3 )x Ax (3) That is, the linearized DAE system can be reduced to a set of ODE equations as shown in (3). Matrix A in (3) is referred to as reduced system state matrix. Step IV: Finding eigenvalues, eigenvectors and Participation matrix Small signal stability or steady state stability of the equilibrium point of the system can be analyzed by looking at the eigenvalues of A or reduced system state matrix. Eigenvalues of A are given by (4) and the number of eigenvalues depends on the dimension of matrix A or the number of state variables considered in the system. 4 (4) [ A I ] 0 Where represents eigenvalue and represents right eigenvector. For non-trivial solution determinant of [A-I] equals to zeros and the eigenvalues can be calculated. Similarly, another equation can be written to find out the left eigenvector as given in (5) [ A I ] 0 (5) In order for the system to be stable or oscillation free, all the eigenvalues should be located in the open left half plane. This means that real part of the eigenvalues should be negative and damping ratio should be positive with more than a pre specified value according to utilities‟ practice (typically damping ratio should be higher than 0.05). If at least one of the eigenvalues has positive real part the system is said to be unstable. More specifically, in oscillatory unstable cases, a pair of complex eigenvaues will appear with positive real part [12]. Given an eigenvalue in complex format, -±j, the initial frequency of oscillation (f) and damping ratio () can be calculated using expressions given in (6). f 2 ; 2 2 (6) Participation factor matrix Once both right and left eigenvectors are known for different eigenvalues, the participation factor matrix can be calculated by combining the left and right eigenvectors as shown in (7). P P1 P2 Pn (7) with P1i 1i i1 P P i 2i 2i i 2 Pni ni in Element Pki ki ik ; where ki is the kth entry of the right eigenvector with ith mode. ik is the kth entry of the left eigenvector associated with ith mode. Time domain analysis Time domain analysis involves no approximation in the DAE model and considered as the most accurate way to study LFO problem. However, pertinent information such as various weak modes, the dominant states variable associated with those modes and sensitivity of those modes to parameter variation and other details can not be obtained using time domain simulation. Hence, eigenvalue and time domain analyses can be used as complementary solutions to support each other and verify the results. In time domain analyses, mode is perturbed and the behavior of state variable is calculated by solving differential equations in (1) using some numerical integration techniques with the known initial values [13]-[15]. The initial values in this case, are the initial equilibrium point. In this paper, both eigenvalue and time domain analyses have been used. Prony analysis In Prony analysis, given signal is analyzed to determine modal, damping, phase, and magnitude information contained in the signal [16]-[18]. It is an extension of Fourier analysis where damping as well as frequency information is obtained. The Prony analysis gives an optimal fit to a signal Y(t) in the form 5 n Y (t ) Bi e it (8) i 1 The n distinct eigenvalues ( i ‟s) and signal residues (Bi‟s) in (8) are identified by Prony analysis. It is important to note that Prony analysis results in a residue and eigenvalue decomposition of an output signal; it does not identify transfer functions directly. Consider the linear system represented in the Laplace domain as shown in (9). Conventional Prony analysis identifies a modal of Y(s) but it does not use the knowledge of input signal I(s), therefore it cannot identify the transfer function G(s). G ( s) Y ( s) I (s) (9) But, Prony analysis can give transfer function in the form n G ( s) s i 1 Ri (10) i for a given class of inputs I(s). The distinct eigenvalues ( i ‟s) are associated with the transfer function residues ( Ri ‟s). Obtaining transfer functions in the form as in (10) is valuable to power system analysis in a variety of areas other than PSS design which is considered as one of the effective ways to damp low frequency oscillation. The draw back of the method is that the need for an output signal which will capture the modes and related information. Damping Low Frequency Oscillation The traditional approach to address low frequency oscillation problem is to equip PSS in the machines which has tendency to damp out power oscillations [1]-[8]. However, the present power systems are too complex as many utilities around the world are interconnected each other to deliver reliable and cheap power from environmentally clean resources. Moreover, introduction of competition had invited many generating plants to be connected to power system and started to dispatch power. PSS in some cases founds not sufficient and even detrimental, this has open the door for a number of FACTS controllers applied to add damping on weak modes. The remedial measures for oscillation damping can be classified in two broad categories, one at operational level and the other one is at planning stage. Operational level approaches for power system oscillation damping include re-tuning excitation control system and PSS. Re-dispatching of generators and adjusting of load changers can also be considered. At the operational level, load shedding can also be used as the last line of defense to damp low frequency of oscillation [19],[20]. Planning level: At planning stage a number of damping controllers can be considered for implementation. New PSS, FACTS controllers [21]-[26], Superconducting Magnetic Energy Storage (SMES) and fly wheel are some of them [27]-[30]. Case Study and Discussion A simple test system shown in Fig. 1 is used in the study to show LFO behavior. As this system is similar to single machine infinite bus system only local modes will be captured in the study. In order to study inter-area LFO, where generators in one area oscillate against generators in the other area, a larger system should be considered. The smaller test system used in the study shows the modes from various dynamics of the system and the impact of various controllers on the critical mode. PSAT (Power System Analysis Tool) an open source software tool is used to carry out both eigenvalue analysis and time domain simulations [13],[14]. 6 Fig. 1 Simple test system. In order to study LFO phenomena in the simple system, first eigenvalue analysis is carried out with only machine in the system. Here, a generator model with six ordinary differential equations (6th order model), including electromechanical and flux decaying dynamics is considered. Figure 2 shows the eigenvalue plot of the system with machine only. This case is referred to as the base case and there are six eigenvalues, including a complex mode related to the electromechanical dynamics of the system. The participation matrix calculated using (7) reveals and relates different state variables to different eigenvalues as shown in Table 1. In Table 1, 3 and 4 are complex and its conjugate modes, respectively and the dominant state variables are states 1 and 2, that are (rotor angle) and (rotational speed) of generator. As the complex mode is closer to the imaginary axis i.e. with the lowest damping ratio, the mode is considered as critical mode of the system. 8 6 4 Imag 2 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 Real -15 -10 -5 0 Fig. 2 Eigenvalue plot of the system for base case (machine only). In a larger system, participation factor analysis can be used in identifying problematic machines for the placement of PSS. TABLE 1 Participation Matrix for the Bases Case 1 2 3 4 5 6 State 1 0.00409 0.00484 0.47667 0.47667 0.00234 0.00055 State 2 0.00409 0.00484 0.47667 0.47667 0.00234 0.00055 State 3 0.00771 0.00001 0.01811 0.01811 0.00625 0.99053 7 State 4 0 0.04856 0.0066 0.0066 0.94131 0.00762 State 5 0.98407 0.00025 0.01205 0.01205 0.00008 0.00008 State 6 0.00005 0.94149 0.0099 0.0099 0.04769 0.00066 Now, AVR or excitation system is introduced in the machine to see the impact of it on the critical mode. The eigenvalue plot of the system with AVR is given in Fig. 3. The installation of AVR has introduced new modes, including an additional complex mode, as expected. However, the complex mode related to the AVR is far away from the imaginary axis or damping ratio of the mode is higher. It is interesting to note that the damping ratio of the critical mode has been reduced by pushing it toward the imaginary axis as AVR is put in place. 20 15 10 Imag 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20 -80 -70 -60 -50 -40 Real -30 -20 -10 0 Fig. 3 Eigenvalue plot of the system with machine and AVR. Figure 4 shows the eigenvalue plot of the system with AVR and PSS installed at machine. As can been clearly seen, the introduction of PSS has pull out the critical eigenvalue to the open left half plane by adding more damping on it. Effect of adding Static Synchronous Series Compensator (SSSC) and Thyristor-Controlled Series Compensator (TCSC) in addition to AVR and PSS are shown in Figs. 5 and 6, respectively. 25 20 15 10 Imag 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20 -25 -80 -70 -60 -50 -40 Real -30 -20 -10 0 Fig.4 Eigenvalue plot of the system with machine, AVR and PSS. However, in a larger system the placement of these FACTS controllers and the best control input signals to add more damping is critical issues. Controllability and observability indices methods can be used in identifying locations and best control input signals respectively [26]. Extended eigenvector method also proposed in the literature for placement of FACTS controllers for oscillation damping. In this simple system, SSSC and TCSC are placed in transmission line between buses 2 and 3. 8 Introduction of SSSC and TCSC has introduced new eigenvalues as shown in Figs. 5 and 6, respectively and also added damping on the critical mode as well as other complex mode. Comparison of critical mode with different controllers is presented in Table 2. 20 15 10 Imag 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20 -80 -70 -60 -50 -40 Real -30 -20 -10 0 Fig. 5 Eigenvalue plot of the system with AVR, PSS and SSSC. 20 15 10 Imag 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20 -80 -70 -60 -50 -40 Real -30 -20 -10 0 Fig. 6 Eigenvalue plot of the system with AVR, PSS and TCSC. Table 2 shows the comparison of critical eigenvalue, associated frequency of oscillation and damping ratio for various cases. Introduction of AVR has reduced the damping ratio on the critical mode and the corresponding initial frequency of oscillation has been increased, slightly. However, the combination AVR and PSS is the best among all the cases and gives maximum damping ratio on the critical mode. Introduction of SSSC and TCSC, in addition to PSS controller has not improved the damping ratio on the critical mode. Comparison between SSSC and TCSC cases along with AVR show the damping ratio on the critical mode is higher in SSSC along with AVR case. But when PSS is introduced along with SSSC and TCSC, TSCS is showing a better performance. All these results have been verified with time domain simulation as shown in Figs. 7 to 9. SSSC and TCSC give almost a comparable performance under different combinations. 9 TABLE 2 Comparison of Critical Eigenvalue, Frequency and Damping ratio Case Critical Eigenvalue Base AVR AVR+PSS AVR+SSSC AVR+TCSC AVR+PSS+SSSC AVR+PSS+TCSC Frequency (Hz) 1.1738 1.2205 1.0417 1.0873 1.1096 0.9626 0.9795 -0.34310±7.3752 -0.19071±7.6685 -2.1570±6.54490 -0.31507±6.8315 -0.29064±6.9716 -1.8910±6.04850 -1.93660±6.1544 Damping Ratio 0.0465 0.0249 0.3130 0.0461 0.0417 0.2984 0.3002 1.0004 1.0003 Rotor speed (pu) 1.0002 1.0001 1 0.9999 AVR AVR+PSS AVR+TCSC AVR+SSSC 0.9998 0.9997 0.9996 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 Time (s) 2.5 3 3.5 4 Fig. 7 Comparison of rotor speed for different cases. 1.0004 AVR+PSS AVR+SSSC AVR+PSS+SSSC 1.0003 Rotor speed (pu) 1.0002 1.0001 1 0.9999 0.9998 0.9997 0.9996 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 Time (s) 2.5 3 3.5 4 Fig. 8 Comparison of rotor speed with PSS, SSSC and PSS and SSSC together. Time domain simulation is performed for a small perturbation in mechanical power to the machine in all the cases. 10 1.0004 AVR+PSS AVR+TCSC AVR+PSS+TCSC 1.0003 Rotor speed (pu) 1.0002 1.0001 1 0.9999 0.9998 0.9997 0.9996 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 Time (s) 2.5 3 3.5 4 Fig. 9 Comparison of rotor speed with PSS, TCSC and PSS and TCSC together. Conclusions The paper presents a comprehensive low frequency oscillation study in a simple test system to capture local electromechanical mode in a step by step manner. Base case system shows an electromechanical mode with low damping ratio and the introduction of AVR push the critical mode towards the imaginary axis by adding negative damping on it. Adding PSS on the machine with AVR is pulling the critical eigenvalue by adding more damping. Similarly, TCSC and SSSC, two of the series FACTS controllers also help system improving the damping which got reduced due to AVR. However, adding TCSC or SSSC to the system with machine, AVR and PSS not improving the damping on the critical mode, in this case. Overall, the PSS is found to be very effective in adding damping on critical mode. All the eigenvalue results have been corroborated with the helping of time domain simulations. References F. P. deMello and C. Concordia, „Concept of Synchronous Machines Stability as Affected by Excitation Control‟, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., PAS-88 (April 1969), 189-202. 2. E. V. Larsen and D. A. Swann, „Applying Power System Stabilizers, Parts I-III‟, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., PAS-100, (June 1981), 3017-3046. 3. P. Kundur, M. Klein, G. J. Rogers, and M. S. Zywno, „Application of Power System Stabilizers for Enhancement of Overall System Stability‟, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., PWRS-4, (May 1989), 614-626. 4. P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, (McGraw-Hill: New York, 1994). 5. G. Rogers, „Demystifying Power System Oscillation‟, IEEE Computer Applications in Power, 9(3), (July 1996), 30-35. 6. J. Machowski, J. W. Bialek and J. R. Bumby, Power System Dynamics and Stability, (John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1997). 7. G. Rogers, Power System Oscillations, (Kluwer: Massachusetts, 2000). 8. J. H. Chow, J. J. Sanchez-Gasca, H. Ren, and S. Wang, „Power System Damping Controller Design‟, IEEE Control Systems Magazine, (August 2000), 82-90. 9. IEEE/CIGRE, „Definition and Classification of Power System Stability‟, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 19(2), (May 2004), 1387-1401. 10. B. Pal and B. Chaudhuri, Robust Control in Power Systems (Springer Inc. New York, 2005). 11. M. C. J. Angammana, Analytical study of factors affecting to electromechanical oscillations in power systems, Master thesis, Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand, (May 2006). 1. 11 12. C. A. Cañizares, N. Mithulananthan, F. Milano, and J. Reeve, „Linear Performance Indices to Predict Oscillatory Stability Problems in Power Systems‟, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, 19(2), (May 2004), 1104-1114. 13. F. Milano, „An Open Source Power System Analysis Toolbox‟, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 20(3), (August 2005), 1199-1206. 14. F. Milano, PSAT: Power System Analysis Toolbox, version 2.0.0-beta, (March 2007). 15. IEEE Std 421.5-2005 „IEEE Recommended Practice for Excitation System Models for Power System Stability Studies‟, IEEE, NY, USA, (April 2006). 16. J. F. Hauer, C. J. Demeure and L.L. Scharf, „Initial Results in Prony Analysis of Power System Response Signals‟, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 5(1), (February 1990), 118-126. 17. J. F. Hauer, „Application of Prony Analysis to the Determination of Modal Content and Equivalent Models for Measured Power System Response‟, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 6(3), (August 1991), 1062-1068. 18. D. J. Trudnowski, J. R. Smith, T. A. Short, and D. A. Pierre, „An Application of Prony Methods in PSS Design for Multimachine Systems‟, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 6(1), (February 1991), 118126. 19. R. Wang and R. H. Lasseter, „Re-dispatching generation to increase power system security margin and support low voltage bus‟, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 15(2), (May 2000), 118-126. 20. C. Y. Chung, L. Wang, F. Howell, and P. Kundur, „Generation rescheduling methods to improve power transfer capability constrained by small-signal stability‟, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 19(1) (February 2004), 524-530. 21. N. G. Hingorani, „Flexible AC Transmission‟, IEEE Spectrum, 30(4), (April 1993), 40-45. 22. J. J. Paserba, N. W. Miller, E. V. Larsen, and R. J. Piwko, „A Thyristor Controlled Series Compensation Model for Power System Stability Analysis‟, IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, 10(3), (July 1995), 14711478. 23. H. F. Wang, and F. J. Swift, „Capability of the Static VAr Compensator in Damping Power System Oscillations‟, IEE Gene. Transm. Didtrib., 143(4), (July 1996), 353-358. 24. N. G. Hingorani, and L. Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS, (IEEE Press, 2000). 25. N. Mithulananthan, C. A. Cañizares, J. Reeve, and G. J. Rogers, „Comparison of PSS, SVC and STATCOM Controllers for Damping Power System Oscillations‟, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, 18(2), (May 2003), 786-792. 26. B. K. Kumar, S. N. Singh and S. C. Srivastava, „Placement of FACTS controllers using modal controllability indices to damp out power system oscillations‟, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 1(2), (March 2007), 209-217. 27. Y. Mitani, K. Tsuji, and Y. Murakami, „Application of superconducting magnet energy storage to improve power system dynamic performance‟, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 3(4) (1988), 1418-1425. 28. M. G. Rabbani, J. B. X. Devotta, and S. Elangovan, „Application of Simultaneous Active and Reactive Power Modulation of SMES Unit under unequal α-mode for Power System Stabilization‟, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, 14(2), (May 1999), 547-552. 29. Y. Mitani, K. Tsuji, and Y. Murakami, „Fundamental analysis of dynamic stability in superconductive power systems‟, IEEE Trans. on Magnetics, 27(2), (March 1991), 2349-2352. 30. A. Soni and C. S. Ozveren „Improved Control of Isolated Power System by the Use of Feeding‟, IEEE UPEC '06. Proceedings of the 41st International, 3(Sept. 2006), 974-977 12