Stability analysis of power systems described with detailed models by automatic method

The power system stability analysis is approached taking into explicit account the dynamic performance of generators internal voltages and control devices. The proposed method is not a direct method in the usual sense since conclusion for stability or instability is not exclusively based on energy function considerations but it is automatic since the conclusion is achieved without an analyst intervention. The stability test accounts for the nonconservative nature of the system with control devices such as the automatic voltage regulator (AVR) and automatic generation control (AGC) in contrast with the well-known direct methods. An energy function is derived for the system with machines forth-order model, AVR and AGC and it is used to start the analysis procedure and to point out criticalities. The conclusive analysis itself is made by means of a method based on the definition of a region surrounding the equilibrium point where the system net torque is equilibrium restorative. This region is named positive synchronization region (PSR). Since the definition of the PSR boundaries have no dependence on modelling approximation, the PSR test conduces to reliable results. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

A Parameterization Technique for the Continuation Power Flow Developed from the Analysis of Power Flow Curves

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

Stability analysis of power system including facts (TCSC) effects by direct method approach

The problem of power system stability including the effects of a flexible alternating current transmission system (FACTS) is approached. First, the controlled series compensation is considered in the machine against infinite bar system and its effects are taken into account by means of construction of a Lyapunov function (LF). This simple system is helpful in order to understand the form the device affects dynamic and transient performance of the power system. After, the multimachine case is considered and it is shown that the single-machine results apply to multimachine systems. An energy-form Lyapunov function is derived for the power system including the FACTS device and it is used to analyse damping and synchronizing effects due to the FACTS device in single-machine as well as in multimachine power systems. © 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

"What is the Value of Youth Work?" Symposium Booklet

As a group of experienced and novice youth workers, we believe that youth work is fundamentally about building trust-filled, mutually respectful relationships with young people. We create safe environments for young people to connect with other supportive adults and peers and to avoid violence in their neighborhoods and their homes. We guide those harmed by oppressive community conditions such as racism, sexism, agism, homophobia, and classism through a process of healing. As we get to know more about young people’s interests, we help them develop knowledge and skills in a variety of areas including: academic, athletic, leadership/civic, the arts, health and wellbeing, and career exploration. In short, we create transformative experiences for young people. In spite of the critical roles we play, we have largely been overlooked in youth development research, policy, and as a professional workforce. We face challenges ‘moving up’ in our careers. We get frustrated by how little money we earn. We are discouraged that despite our knowledge and experience we are not invited to the tables where youth funding, programming, and policy decisions are made. It is true—many of us do not have formal training or degrees in youth work—a reality which at times we regret. Yet, as our colleague communicates in the accompanying passage (see below), we resent that formal education is required for us to get ahead, particularly because we question whether we need it to do our jobs more effectively. Through the “What is the Value of Youth Work?” symposium, we hope to address these concerns through a dialogue about youth work with the following objectives: • Increase awareness of the knowledge, skills, contributions, and professionalism of youth workers; • Advance a youth worker professional development model that integrates a dilemma-focused approach with principles of social justice youth development; • Launch an ongoing Worcester area Youth Worker network. This booklet provides a brief overview of the challenges in ‘professionalizing’ youth work and an alternative approach that we are advancing that puts the knowledge and expertise of youth workers at the center of professional development.

Street Children and Mobile Youth Work in Africa - the 8th ISMO Symposium October 2003

The International Society for Mobile Youth Work (ISMO) and the National Council of Churches in Kenya (NCCK) organised from the 27th to 30th October 2003 at the Jumuia Conference and Country Home in Limuru/Kenya with 198 participants from 35 countries around the world the 8th International Symposium on Mobile Youth Work with special focus on children at risk (street children and youth) in Africa. For this purpose there were invited field workers, scientists and stakeholders engaged as advocates for the rights and well being of endangered children and youths. The participants came mainly from African countries and of course especially from Kenya, but also from Asia, Latin America and from Europe.

Youth Work and Schools in ‘Full-day’ education systems: International Comparison of Links between Formal and Non-formal Education

In this article I will outline the methodological approach of a non-empirical comparative research project which I began in 2003. The project is situated in the context of the research training group “Youth Welfare in Transition” at the universities of Bielefeld and Dortmund, funded by the German Research Council (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft). In that context I have organised an international conference about the modes of cooperation between school and youth work agencies with colleagues from Canada, France, Finland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Russia, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United States, Israel, and Germany. Meeting in Bielefeld from the 9th to the 11th of October 2003, we compared the respective national arrangements of formal and non-formal education (www.uni-bielefeld.de/paedagogik/agn/ag8/Ganztagsbildung.html). This note is based on the scheme of comparison which was given to the contributors in order to help them preparing their presentations. At the moment the scheme is nearing completed with significant data prepared by the contributors/authors (see Otto/Coelen 2004), supplemented with data from research works published in German and English. The next step will be to set up an empirical project about the relationships between schools and youth work agencies in three European countries (probably France, Finland and the Netherlands).

Defending Democratic Youth Work

The UK's liberal-cum-democratic welfare regime has led to a more developed state-sponsored youth work than in the majority of continental Europe, where a corporatist welfare regime has held sway (Esping Andersen 1990). To this extent British Youth Work has been more susceptible to governmental intervention. Nevertheless the ascendancy of neo-liberalism across the last three decades has disturbed significantly all models of the Welfare State, expressed in the impact of 'New Managerialism'. Thus we are seeing a convergence towards an imposed, instrumental, output-driven approach to the delivery of both education and welfare. In both the UK and continental Europe youth workers and social workers are confronted with intrusive interventions and demands from governments, which are utterly at odds with their shared desire to start from 'where young people are at'. In this paper we sketch the emergence of a campaign within Youth Work, which seeks to oppose and resist its transformation into an agency of social engineering. In contrast we stand for an emancipatory Youth Work committed to social change. In telling our story thus far we hope to reach out to and make alliances with workers across Europe sympathetic to our cause.

Semiotic Analysis in the Study of Social Work

Research and professional practices have the joint aim of re-structuring the preconceived notions of reality. They both want to gain the understanding about social reality. Social workers use their professional competence in order to grasp the reality of their clients, while researchers’ pursuit is to open the secrecies of the research material. Development and research are now so intertwined and inherent in almost all professional practices that making distinctions between practising, developing and researching has become difficult and in many aspects irrelevant. Moving towards research-based practices is possible and it is easily applied within the framework of the qualitative research approach (Dominelli 2005, 235; Humphries 2005, 280). Social work can be understood as acts and speech acts crisscrossing between social workers and clients. When trying to catch the verbal and non-verbal hints of each others’ behaviour, the actors have to do a lot of interpretations in a more or less uncertain mental landscape. Our point of departure is the idea that the study of social work practices requires tools which effectively reveal the internal complexity of social work (see, for example, Adams & Dominelli & Payne 2005, 294 – 295). The boom of qualitative research methodologies in recent decades is associated with much profound the rupture in humanities, which is called the linguistic turn (Rorty 1967). The idea that language is not transparently mediating our perceptions and thoughts about reality, but on the contrary it constitutes it was new and even confusing to many social scientists. Nowadays we have got used to read research reports which have applied different branches of discursive analyses or narratologic or semiotic approaches. Although differences are sophisticated between those orientations they share the idea of the predominance of language. Despite the lively research work of today’s social work and the research-minded atmosphere of social work practice, semiotics has rarely applied in social work research. However, social work as a communicative practice concerns symbols, metaphors and all kinds of the representative structures of language. Those items are at the core of semiotics, the science of signs, and the science which examines people using signs in their mutual interaction and their endeavours to make the sense of the world they live in, their semiosis. When thinking of the practice of social work and doing the research of it, a number of interpretational levels ought to be passed before reaching the research phase in social work. First of all, social workers have to interpret their clients’ situations, which will be recorded in the files. In some very rare cases those past situations will be reflected in discussions or perhaps interviews or put under the scrutiny of some researcher in the future. Each and every new observation adds its own flavour to the mixture of meanings. Social workers have combined their observations with previous experience and professional knowledge, furthermore, the situation on hand also influences the reactions. In addition, the interpretations made by social workers over the course of their daily working routines are never limited to being part of the personal process of the social worker, but are also always inherently cultural. The work aiming at social change is defined by the presence of an initial situation, a specific goal, and the means and ways of achieving it, which are – or which should be – agreed upon by the social worker and the client in situation which is unique and at the same time socially-driven. Because of the inherent plot-based nature of social work, the practices related to it can be analysed as stories (see Dominelli 2005, 234), given, of course, that they are signifying and told by someone. The research of the practices is concentrating on impressions, perceptions, judgements, accounts, documents etc. All these multifarious elements can be scrutinized as textual corpora, but not whatever textual material. In semiotic analysis, the material studied is characterised as verbal or textual and loaded with meanings. We present a contribution of research methodology, semiotic analysis, which has to our mind at least implicitly references to the social work practices. Our examples of semiotic interpretation have been picked up from our dissertations (Laine 2005; Saurama 2002). The data are official documents from the archives of a child welfare agency and transcriptions of the interviews of shelter employees. These data can be defined as stories told by the social workers of what they have seen and felt. The official documents present only fragmentations and they are often written in passive form. (Saurama 2002, 70.) The interviews carried out in the shelters can be described as stories where the narrators are more familiar and known. The material is characterised by the interaction between the interviewer and interviewee. The levels of the story and the telling of the story become apparent when interviews or documents are examined with the use of semiotic tools. The roots of semiotic interpretation can be found in three different branches; the American pragmatism, Saussurean linguistics in Paris and the so called formalism in Moscow and Tartu; however in this paper we are engaged with the so called Parisian School of semiology which prominent figure was A. J. Greimas. The Finnish sociologists Pekka Sulkunen and Jukka Törrönen (1997a; 1997b) have further developed the ideas of Greimas in their studies on socio-semiotics, and we lean on their ideas. In semiotics social reality is conceived as a relationship between subjects, observations, and interpretations and it is seen mediated by natural language which is the most common sign system among human beings (Mounin 1985; de Saussure 2006; Sebeok 1986). Signification is an act of associating an abstract context (signified) to some physical instrument (signifier). These two elements together form the basic concept, the “sign”, which never constitutes any kind of meaning alone. The meaning will be comprised in a distinction process where signs are being related to other signs. In this chain of signs, the meaning becomes diverged from reality. (Greimas 1980, 28; Potter 1996, 70; de Saussure 2006, 46-48.) One interpretative tool is to think of speech as a surface under which deep structures – i.e. values and norms – exist (Greimas & Courtes 1982; Greimas 1987). To our mind semiotics is very much about playing with two different levels of text: the syntagmatic surface which is more or less faithful to the grammar, and the paradigmatic, semantic structure of values and norms hidden in the deeper meanings of interpretations. Semiotic analysis deals precisely with the level of meaning which exists under the surface, but the only way to reach those meanings is through the textual level, the written or spoken text. That is why the tools are needed. In our studies, we have used the semiotic square and the actant analysis. The former is based on the distinctions and the categorisations of meanings, and the latter on opening the plotting of narratives in order to reach the value structures.