## 5 Results
### Step Change of Load
When both mechanisms operate simultaneously, \(|\Delta W_{\text{uni}+}|\) and \(|\Delta W_{\text{uni}-}|\) are reduced according to Table 4, except in one case where only \(|\Delta W_{\text{uni}+}|\) was increased, while \(|\Delta W_{\text{uni}-}|\) was reduced considerably. Furthermore, the results of the separate operation of the mechanisms show that the INP almost completely eliminates unintentional deviations, while the impact of the CBRR is not very pronounced. When both mechanisms operate simultaneously, \(|W_{\text{cori}+}^{\text{INP}}|\), \(|W_{\text{cori}-}^{\text{INP}}|\), \(|W_{\text{cori}+}^{\text{CBRR}}|\) and \(|W_{\text{cori}+}^{\text{CBRR}}|\) are slightly reduced compared to separate operation of the INP and CBRR according to Table 5. This is due to the \(P_{\text{cori}}\) adjustment mechanism, which is only required in the case of simultaneous operation of the INP and CBRR. Moreover, simulations of the simultaneous operation of the INP and CBRR were performed for different values of \(H_{i}\), \(T_{ij}\), and \(R_{i}\). The results are given in Figures 14-16. There are no unambiguous conclusions about the impact of the mechanisms on \(\sigma_{\text{A}fi}\), and the differences are extremely small, as shown in Figure 14 (left). In addition, the impact of \(H_{i}\) and \(T_{ij}\) is not clear, whereas the increase of \(R_{i}\) results in an increase of \(\sigma_{\text{A}fi}\). However,  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Indicator**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\(\sigma_{\Delta fi}\) **[mHz]**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\(\sigma_{\Delta CEi}\) **[pu\(\cdot\)10\({}^{3}\)]**} \\ \cline{2-10}  & **wo** & **INP/CBRR** & **INP** & **CBRR** & **wo** & **INP/CBRR** & **INP** & **CBRR** \\ \hline CA\({}_{1}\) & 5.263 & 5.256 & 5.251 & 5.272 & 8.873 & 6.310 & 6.654 & 8.649 \\ CA\({}_{2}\) & 5.252 & 5.256 & 5.250 & 5.260 & 9.612 & 5.844 & 7.033 & 8.185 \\ CA\({}_{3}\) & 5.265 & 5.267 & 5.273 & 5.260 & 8.823 & 6.063 & 6.439 & 8.281 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{indicator} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\(\mu_{\text{RoCoFi}+}\) **[mHz/s]**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\(\mu_{\text{RoCoFi}-}\) **[mHz/s]**} \\ \cline{2-10}  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{wo} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{INP/CBRR} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{INP} & CBRR & \multicolumn{2}{c}{wo} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{INP/CBRR} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{INP} & CBRR \\ \hline CA\({}_{1}\) & 0.682 & 0.606 & 0.611 & 0.677 & \(-\)0.724 & \(-\)0.645 & \(-\)0.674 & \(-\)0.692 \\ CA\({}_{2}\) & 0.879 & 0.776 & 0.832 & 0.818 & \(-\)1.233 & \(-\)1.039 & \(-\)1.072 & \(-\)1.193 \\ CA\({}_{3}\) & 0.752 & 0.690 & 0.722 & 0.711 & \(-\)0.841 & \(-\)0.740 & \(-\)0.743 & \(-\)0.830 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{indicator} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\(\mu_{\text{PsG}+}\) **[pu\(\cdot\)10\({}^{3}\)]**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\(\mu_{\text{PsG}-}\) **[pu\(\cdot\)10\({}^{3}\)]**} \\ \cline{2-10}  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{wo} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{INP/CBRR} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{INP} & CBRR & \multicolumn{2}{c}{wo} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{INP/CBRR} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{INP} & CBRR \\ \hline CA\({}_{1}\) & 46.17 & 36.60 & 31.20 & 46.38 & \(-\)47.08 & \(-\)28.87 & \(-\)29.69 & \(-\)45.97 \\ CA\({}_{2}\) & 58.62 & 32.95 & 43.77 & 49.68 & \(-\)41.10 & \(-\)23.06 & \(-\)22.40 & \(-\)31.63 \\ CA\({}_{3}\) & 53.09 & 35.58 & 39.46 & 47.99 & \(-\)50.11 & \(-\)29.81 & \(-\)31.01 &both mechanisms significantly reduce \(\sigma_{ACEi}\), as shown in Figure 14 (right), whereas \(H_{i}\), \(T_{ij}\) and \(R_{i}\) have no impact on \(\sigma_{ACEi}\). Generally, both mechanisms reduce the \(|\mu_{\text{ReCoFi}+}|\) and \(|\mu_{\text{ReCoFi}-}|\), as shown in Figure 15. In addition, an increase of \(H_{i}\) and \(R_{i}\) results in a decrease of \(|\mu_{\text{ReCoFi}+}|\) and \(|\mu_{\text{ReCoFi}-}|\), whereas an increase of \(T_{ij}\) results in an increase of \(|\mu_{\text{ReCoFi}+}|\) and \(|\mu_{\text{ReCoFi}-}|\). Note that, when \(T_{ij}=1/15\) pu/Hz, \(|\mu_{\text{ReCoFi}+}|\) and \(|\mu_{\text{ReCoFi}-}|\) is increased with the mechanisms.