You are on page 1of 7

Versatile Model for Power Flow Control Using FACTS :Devices

Ying Xiao Y.H.Song Y.Z. sur1


Brunel Institute of Power Systems Department of Electrical Engineering
Brunel University, UK Tsinghua University, China

Abstract - Increased loading of power systems, and environmental Static Synchronous Series Compensator (SSSC) and static
restrictions, combined with a world wide deregulation of the power var compensator (SVC), VSM is formulated as series or
industry, require more effective control means for power flow control (and) shunt inserted voltage (-current) source, while as a
and voltage support. special case of VSM, the thyristor-controlled series
From the point view of steady-state analysis, this paper concentrates capacitor (TCSC) is expressed using controllable reactance.
on building up a versatile model for all types of FACTS devices. In The VSMs of the FACTS devices are all formulated
this respect, decomposed Power Injection Model (PM) is proposed. according to their principles, thus, have a more intuitive
Based on the model, a novel framework for power flow control using representation of the corresponding FACTS devices. But,
FACTS devices, is adopted to derive FACTS control parameters. the disadvantage of the VSM is that, it destroys the
In order to take full advantage of Optimal Multiplier Newton- symmetric characteristics of admittance matrix [3]. Apart
Raphson power flow method (OMNR) for power flow with from that, for power flow operatiojn and control using VSM,
embedded FACTS devices and Interior Point Linear Programming trigonometric functions are involved [24]. However,
(IPLP) for power flow control, a rectangular - polar hybrid different from normal polar formulation load flow
formulation is adopted. Numerical results on a modified IEEE 5-node equations where all angles of nodal voltages are supposed
network are presented to illustrate the proposed approach. to be small, the range of angle of the source is between 0
Keywords- Flexible AC Transmission System; power flow control; and 2 z , which will inevitably lead to oscillation of
decomposed power injection model calculation of power flow control. Derived from the VSM,
power injection representation IS initially proposed by
I. Introduction Z.X.Han [3] in 1982 for Phase Shifter (PS). With the
In the last few years, there has been a worldwide movement of conversion of inserted voltage or (and) current source to
deregulation to facilitate the development of competitive power injections to related node!;, it enables to keep the
electric energy markets, stipulating the ‘unbundling’ of power symmetric characteristics of admittance matrix. Just
generation from transmission and mandating open access to because of this advantage, its applications are extended to
transmission services [2]. The arrival of Flexible AC nearly all kinds of FACTS devices and are wide spread in
Transmission System (FACTS) technology has coincided with most of the literatures of operation and control of power
major restructuring of the Electricity Supply Industry around systems with embedded FACTS devices [4,5,8, 121.
the world. By use of the power electronics-based controllable With the further development of power electronics
components, the possibility of controlling power flow without technique, more and more new FACTS devices are
generation rescheduling or topological changes is being expected to be applied in the near future. It is very clumsy
realised. The flexibility, effectiveness and versatility offered and inconvenient to integrate every different kind of
by FACTS, present pressing challenges for power flow FACTS devices installed in inetwork into advanced
operation and control. application programs of energy management system
In order to investigate the impact of FACTS devices on power (EMS). Since different type of FACTS devices possesses
systems effectively, it is essential to formulate a correct and different models and different control parameters, it is
appropriate model for them. Generally speaking, in terms of difficult to cover all types of FACTS devices in the power
steady-state model of FACTS devices, there are two kinds, flow control methods aforementioned. In 1996, a versatile
one is decoupled model, another one is coupled model. The model is proposed by Arabi et.al [18]. It seems that the
former is proposed in [20] by Nabavi-Niaki et.al. in 1995 for model only focuses on the coordination of intemal control
power flow control using the Unified Power Flow Controller parameters of FACTS electronics devices themselves, whle
(UPFC). The model, while neglecting losses of the UPFC and neglecting the consideration of the interface with power
the line, decouples the line in which the UPFC installed, and systems. From the view of steady state power system, a
takes the voltage controlled node as PV node, and the opposite versatile model of FACTS devices for power flow control is
node as PQ node. However, the model cannot be applied to still in demand.
deal with the situation where the reactive capacity of the In addition to the model of FACTS devices themselves, as
UPFC is not large enough to support the specified voltage of far as the topic of this paper is concemed, application of
the PV node. Through classifying existing FACTS devices, D. effective methodology to deal with power flow control with
J. Gotham et.a1.[6] improved the model to cover other types of embedded FACTS devices is another important issue to be
FACTS devices, and expanded it to the field of power flow considered. In the past, various methods have been
calculation. Nevertheless, for such an ideal model, with proposed to derive control strategies for FACTS devices.
fictitious nodes added, it will modify the structure of Jacobian The error-feedback adjustment [3, 41 involves modifications
matrix. of a control variable to maintain another functionally
In contrast to the decoupled model, generally, coupled model dependent variable at a specified value. Generally, this
consists of two major models: Voltage (-current) Source method is simple and easy to lbe implemented but the
Model-(VSM) [5, 12, 231 and Power Injection Model (PIM). convergence speed is slow. There are other three methods
For -the UPFC, Static Synchronous Compensator based on this solution with the aim to improve the algorithm
(STATCOM), Thyristor-controlled Phase-Shifter (TCPS), convergence or flexibility, such as sensitivity method [5, 12,

- 868 -
131, distribution factors [14] and user defined models [17]. Apart 4)In order to take full advantage of OMNR method for
from the error-feedback adjustment, another major algorithm is power flow with embedded FACTS devices and IPLP for
automatic adjustment method [8, 9, 111, in which the control power flow control, a rectangular - polar hybrid
parameters are directly considered as independent state formulation is applied in this method.
Variables in power flow calculation. Although the method has a 5)In general, as system becomes more heavily loaded, and
good convergence, it is inevitable that the resultant Jacobian with the utilization of the FACTS devices, especially the
matrix will be enlarged. Moreover, about the methodology of UPFC, there is highly physical P-Q coupling existing in
power flow control using FACTS devices, there are a number of power system network. Coniparing to P-Q coupled
important issues which need to be addressed further: network framework, the decoupled model is inaccurate
l)It is widely recognized that conventional power flow and can lead to poor or even failed convergence during
algorithms are convergence failure-prone when applied to the power flow iterations. Therefore, in the paper, the
power systems with embedded FACTS devices [8, 181. As coupled network model is applied.
FACTS devices are used to better exploit the existing power
system resource, the system is often pushed to the verge of 11. Power Flow Control Model
operational ranges. If the power flow method for control is 2.1 Classification of FACTS Devices
not flexible enough to sustain such situations, it is
impossible to evaluate their impacts on the system correctly. In order to build a versatile model for all kind of FACTS
2)While undertaking power flow control to make the specified devices, whether it is Thyristor Controlled or Converter
nodal voltage and line flow attain predetermined targets, the based, it is necessary to classify them into several types
state variables of other nodes, such as node voltages and according to their steady-state characteristics and functions.
angles, should be guaranteed to be within the given operating As stated, applying series compensation, the TCSC, TCPS
ranges. Otherwise, even though control targets are satisfied as well as the SSSC can be effective in active power flow
with control parameters calculated, from the view of the redistribution [2]. For the SVC and the STATCOM, they
whole system, the power flow scenario achieved is still are normally operated to regulate the voltage of the
infeasible. It is obvious that neither error-feedback transmission system at a selected terminal [2]. With the
adjustment nor automatic adjustment method can deal with series inverter and the shunt inverter, UPFC offers a unique
this aspect. capability of independently regulating the active and
3)As is well known, power flow control can also be tackled via reactive power flow on the transmission line, while also
equality constraints in Optimal Power Flow (OPF) efficiently. regulating the local bus voltage [l]. Thus, for power flow
However, if the capacity of the FACTS devices is not large >studies,with respect to their capabilities, it is undoubtedly
enough to support the prescribed target, i.e., the limits of the logical to classify FACTS devices into such three types,
FACTS device and the equality Constraints for local control which are Series Controller, Shunt Controller and Unified
targets can not be fulfilled simultaneously, this will result in Controller respectively.
the OPF problem unsolvable. 2.2 Decomposed Power Injection Model
Taken into account of all these factors aforementioned, a One of the most important advantages of power injection
versatile model of FACTS devices and a novel framework for representation is that it does not destroy the symmetric
deriving FACTS control parameters are presented in this characteristics of a b t t a n c e matrix [3]. Moreover, it is
paper. The new methodology has the following characteristics: highly noticeable that all the FACTS devices can be
1)Applying active and (or) reactive power injections as reformulated to power injection model, which is shown in
control variables, it is a versatile approach which is capable Fig. 1 (b). Thus, active and (or) reactive power injections
of modelling virtually any type of FACTS devices represent all the features of the steady-state FACTS model. It
effectively. Once the required power injections are derived, is natural to take active and (or) reactive power injections as
they can be easily converted into original control parameters independent control variables to formulate a versatile
according to the type of the FACTS devices. approach for power flow control. Once the required power
2)Since in the model built, power injections are treated as injections are derived, they can be easily converted into
independent variables, which do not vary with the connected control parameters according to the type of the FACTS
node voltage amplitudes and phases, thereby the Jacobian devices.
matrix needs not to be modified in terms of the changes of
the power injections of FACTS devices during the power For an N node system, L is the controlled line in which the
flow iterations. Thus, it is easy and efficient to implement FACTS device is installed, shown in Fig.1. Normally, in
the proposed method. VSM model, the line flow of L is a function of voltage and
3)Taken into consideration the operating limits of state angle of node Z and J , as well as control parameters of
variables and internal limits of FACTS devices to ensure the related FACTS devices, that is,
feasibility of the resultant scenario, optimisation algorithm PL = P L (VI VJ,8,,8J,
t VT,qT 1, )
t (1)
is applied in this module. With respect to the advantage of QL = Q L V i VJ,el , e J > v r,VT, I q ) (2)
reliability and extraordinary speed, a Primal-dual Interior Essentially, power flow redistribution is caused by an
Point Lineal Programming (IPLP) is used to implement the additional load flow through the related line, which is
power flow control. Furthermore, if it is not possible to superimposed on the ‘nature’ line flow. Based on this
attain the specified control target within the feasible area of analysis, when applying power injections as control
the FACTS device, the available nearest target in terms of
the capacity of the FACTS device installed can be achieved variables, the relevant line flow PL + j Q L should be
and suggested to the system operator, if necessary. reformulated as line flow PLO+jQLopertaining to the
voltage and angle of node Zand J which consider the
- 869 -
effects of the FACTS device, together with active and reactive flow PL + j Q L fiom the node I side along line L shown in
power injections of the FACTS device which flow along the Fig. 1, even though Q.,(,,,,, has impact on the operational state
line. At the same time, voltage of the target node should be
determined by reactive power injection direct to the node. In of power system, it is still not put into the list of control
this formulation, for active power injection, there is no doubt parameters. Based on the assumptions stated above, the line
that it flows along line L . In terms of reactive power injection, flow control vector of the Controllers and the corresponding
for Series Controller, the relevant active power injection can available control target are listed in Tab. 1.
only flow via line L ;while it must inject directly to node I for Thus, based on the decomposed model, eqs.(l) and (2)
Shunt Controller, that is, there is no reactive injection through Should be converted to (3) and (4) accordingly:
line L . For Unified Controller, as a matter of fact, there are two 'f. = ('1 > vJ > ' 1 > - 'I(t"J) (3)
reactive injections, one is for regulating voltage, and another is
for reactive line flow control. When applying conventional Q L = QLo (v, ,v,,e,, e, - QILr,nJ, (4)
power injection model, which is shown in Fig. l(c), even 2.3 Application of Interior Point Linear Programming
though the total reactive power injection to node I is known in and OMNR Power Flow Algorithm
each control iteration, there is still no way to determine these
two factors separately. As a result, the actual line flow PL + j Q L Regarding the third shortcoming of the current methods for
power flow control, a further advancement in the proposed
can not be calculated without the reactive power injection along technique is the consideration of unfeasible results because
the line. In light of those analyzed above, a decomposed power of state variables of some other nodes beyond the operating
injection model (DPIM) is proposed in this paper, as shown in limits. Additionally, in this paper, in order to ensure the
Fig. l(c). In DPIM, obviously, Qr,,) is decomposed into two feasibility of the resultant control scenario, internal physical
parts, one is reactive power injection of FACTS devices QrL(lnJ) limits of the FACTS devices have been taken into
through the line L . Another is direct reactive power injection consideration. For Shunt controller, only limit for current
QII(rn,)to the node I , which only affects the voltage of node through the shunt transformer or converter I, should be
I . That is, @(tnj) = &(inj) + QIL(mnj) . considered. For Series controlbar, in VSM, three limits
should be checked, such as series inserted voltage angle pr ,
The detailed power injections of DPIM are shown in Fig. l(c). current I,, through the series transformer limit, and active
It is no doubt that the DPIM is not only clearer and more
intuitive than the conventional one. The most important point is, power Pdc transferred through thyristor switches or
it is the key to the versatile model for power flow control using converters limit, while for TCSC, the limits is only for
FACTS devices, which can not carry out using the conventional reactance x, . It is undoubted that for Unified Controller, all
PIM without the decomposition of the reactive power injection of the five limits should be taken into considered [4]. It is
and further definition of the exact paths and affects of the power very convenient for optimisation programming to consider
injections. it by using relevant constraints.
When considering no loss in FACTS devices, active power It is widely recognized that, Linear Programming (LP) has
injection to the second node PJ(,n,,is equal to that to the first the advantages of reliability and high speed. As stated, the
one PI(mn,), while the directions are opposite to each other. And current Interior Point Method [(IPM) has surpassed the
conventional simplex method for large scale LP problems
for the UPFC, since line flow control target is set as the line in the solution speed by a factor of 10-100[27]. Therefore,
in this module, a Primal-dual Interior Point LP is used to
solve the problem of FACTS devices control.
Aimed at overcoming the problem of divergence of power
flow with embedded FACTS devices, OMNR power flow
algorithm in terms of the rectangular form is adopted in
jI, Ir
...................................................... ! DEVICES power flow as it offers a number of advantages in handling
Fig l(a). Voltage (-current) source model of the FACTS device ill-conditioned power system successfully [4,15,16].

n However, normally, the control parameters of FACTS


devices are given in polar form which is more intuitive
because the state variables are voltage magnitudes and
angles. In this respect, a rectangular - polar hybrid
formulation is employed in this method. That is, in order to
PJoll + jQJ,,,
take full advantage of OMNR method, rectangular form is
Fig l(b). Conventional PIM of the FACTS device utilized in power flow, while in ]power flow control, polar
formulation is adopted. The cost is both of the two form of

V, & , + j Q L o GU
U+ ~ B u VJ
Jacobian matrices have to be developed, and another job is to
transform the rectangular formulation power flow result to

* , polar one before forming the linear programming problem


during every iteration. Nevertheless, as one form can be
transformed to another easily, and OMNR method has
iQ1i,lnl, advantage of good convergence and much fewer iterations, it
Fig l(c). The DPIM of the FACTS device is still more progressive and effective when compared with
Fig 1. Formulation of the DPIM of the FACTS device conventional methods.

- 870 -
111. Problem Formulation Nodal voltage limits: (for PQ node i )
Essentially, the optimizationproblem is based on minimizing an Vi,mmIKIV;,,,,i=Nl + I , - . . , N - l (17)
objective function with regard to the control vector U . From Series inserted voltage magnitude limit
what have been analyzed, minimizing the mismatch of control
PIVT PIVT" (18)
target is set as the optimization objective for the problem of Series inserted voltage angle range
power flow control using FACTS devices, whch is shown in
(5). The representation of the objective function depends on the 0 2 p i n PI 27r (19)
chosen target. According to different types of controller Current through the shunt transformer or (and) converter
classified, the model can be transformed into three expressions limit
that represent the three different types of FACTS devices q ~ 3 I mq a
q 5~ 3 I I
~ 3 I mm (20)
respectively, by suitably setting the coefficient p I ,p l , p3 Current through the series transformer limit
according to eqs.(6), (7), (8). Power flow equations are used as pIIse= P @ +VT - < ) ( G I J + J ~ I J ) ~ ~ ~ i ~ (21)
s e m
equality constraints. Apart from the normal inequality
constraints of operating limits of voltage of PQ nodes and nodal Active power transferred through thyristor switches or
converters limit
angle, there are also several additional constraints which
describe the limits of internal limits of the FACTS device. P ~<P&
L ,=~
P , R ~ ~ ( ( ~ + ~ - ~ ) ( G ~ , + ~ B (22)
,,~).]IP/~~~~
Where
The power flow control of FACTS devices with power
injections as control variables, can be formulated as follows:
N : the total number of nodes;
N I : the number of PV nodes;
3.1 Objective Function: V, : the voltage of node i ;
The objective is to minimize the deviations from the e,: the voltage angle of node i ;
prescribed control target, which is represented by
e,,,=e,-e,
F = PIldpl + PZldQl+ ~3 ldvl (5) G, + jB, : the impedance of line i,j
For power flow control of the Series Controller:
& ,QIG: the active and reactive power generations of node
PI = Lp2 = p3 = 0 (6) i;
For voltage control of the Shunt Controller:
pi = P z = o , P ~ = 1 (7)
eL,QIL: the active and reactive load of node i ;
For the Unified Controller: PLT,QLT : the control target of active and reactive line flow
along line L ;
PI = PZ = p3 (8)
V, : the control target of voltage of node I .
When applying the decomposed model, according to eqs.(3),
(4), the objective can be reformulated as Subscript min and max in each equation represents the
minimum and maximum limits of the variable respectively.
=pl(f?O - E T y +/%(a -eTy +P3(&
-e(,,") -&!nj) (9)
IV. Implementation
3.2 Operating and Control Constraints:
From the model built above, it is obvious that in the
These constraints are categorized as follows: versatile model, for different type FACTS devices, Jacobian
3.2.1 Equality Constraints matrix and control framework need not be reconstructed,
even though they have different physical forms and
For PV node i : i # I,i f J , i = l ; . . ,N I different control parameters. Essentially, it is a versatile
N-J model in terms of the process of the iterations of power
Ptc - P;r - Vi V j(GUcos 8i,j+ BUsin 6i,j) = 0 (10) flow calculation and power flow control. Meanwhile, it
j=J
should be noted that, power injection model and VSM are
ForPQnodei: i # I , i + J , i = N l + l , - . . , N - l inseparable. Actually, DPIM is only a transitional model,
N-1 since in power flow calculation, the known variables of
& -&-K~Vj(GUcos81:,j+BUsinei,j)=0 (1 1) FACTS devices are magnitudes and angles of voltage and
j d
(or) current sources. Besides that, in power flow control, the
Qic -QL -KyVj(GUsinBi.j -B,cosei,j)=O (12) known limits are only for the initial control parameters.
j=J And the ultimate control scenario should also be provided
For node I: in the form of their original control parameters.
P,~ -eL+ p , ~ , , ,cos^^,^
~~ cos^^,^ +B,sine,,j)=o (13) For the IPLP-application in this paper, the non-linear term
I-) of the objective must be piecewise linearized. And each
segment is treated as a separated linear programming. Thus,
an iterative procedure is needed. Actually, each iteration
For node J consists of power flow part and control part. The outline for
the implementation of the methodology for power flow
control using FACTS devices is given below:

1. Calculate conventional power flow without FACTS


device;
2. Set the initial power injections U0 = 0 . Accordingly, set the threshold value or not.) If no, go back to step 3, and
original control parameters of the corresponding FACTS follow the iterations described above;
devices as 0, which are all listed in Tab. 1 respectively; 8.According to the present U and system state variables,
3. Calculate AU ,get U I+! = U + AU ;
1
derive the original control parameters of the FACTS
4. If the FACTS device is a Series Controller, according to the device using Newton method.
present U t , determine the original control parameter using If the objective value is less than the given threshold, it
Newton method. Then calculate e(,,, , QIL(,,,,) and Q,, ,",,; means €hat according to the resultant control scenario, the
5.For Unified Controller, according to the present Ut , prescribed target can be fulfilled. If the objective value'is
determine the corresponding original parameters using larger than the given threshold value, the available nearest
Newton method. Then Obtain e,,*, ; control target under the current operating limits of FACTS
6. Solve power flow with the current power injections; devices can also be obtained.
7. According to a given threshold value, check if the difference
between the current objective value and the value of the
previous iteration is less than the value or not. (For the first
iteration, check if the current objective value is less than the

Table 1. Classifications of all of the FACTS Devices, their control variables for the available control target and original control
parameters of different devices
Classifr- Elements of Control
Steady-state functions ~~~e~ Control Variables FACTS Devices Parameters
cation DPIM
TCPS Pr
Series
active line flow control pI(inj) 3 pJ(inj) PL Plrinj) Tc TCSC xc
Controller
CB sssc VT
Shunt TC svc
Controller voltage regulation Qwinj) , VI Qw i u ) CB STATCOM 1,

Unijied active line flow control pl/iaj) PJ(inJ) 3 PL Q L P l ( i n j ) Qa(iM) 3


TC
Vr SPr
Controller reactive line flow control
voltage regulation Q/~.(tnj, 7 Q,,(iM) 3 vi ' Q ii(w , CB UPFC I,

From the data of case 2 in Tab. 2, it is noticeable that under


V. Test Results and Case Studies heavy load, voltage of node 2 is lower than their normal limits,
which is set as 95% - 105% of the nominal voltage. Meanwhile,
In order to investigate the feasibility of the proposed technique, a
since thermal limit of line 2-5 arid line 1-2 is 25.000 p.u. and
large number of power systems of different sizes under different
system conditions have been tested. All the results indicate good 30.000 p.u respectively, power sharing between the lines is
performance and high accuracy achieved by the proposed unbalanced and there is enough capacity left for line 2-5 to
transfer power without exceeding thermal limits. Apparently,
method.
the transfer capability of line 2-5 and 1-2 is limited by
In this section, a modified IEEE 5-bus system is presented to violations of thermal limits of line 1-2.
numerically demonstrate its performance. Several of the main
aspects of power flow control via FACTS devices, including In order to alleviate the situations, a UPFC is installed along
obtaining a specified operating condition, alleviating heavy line 2-5, near the side of node 2. 'The control target of line flow
burden of line flow, improving voltage profile, enhancing is pre-assigned as -2O.OOO-j2.000. And the target of voltage of
available transmission capability etc., are illustrated using the node 2 is set as 0.95. The controlded scenario is also shown in
network. Tab. 2, in which the mismatch for the real and reactive line
flow is only 1.0200E-3 and 3.1240E-3, at the same time, the
In order to assess the control performances fully, in addition to deviation of controlled voltage is 0.0087E-3, after 10
the base case which is under normal operation pattern as case iterations. The exact control parameters of the UPFC are also
1, an alternative pattern of the same test system is employed. In shown in the table. The iteration of d p , d Q , d V a n d the
this constructed case (case 2), the generation and load at each objective of power flow control using the UPFC are
location is raised by up to 600% from the base pattern, which demonstrated in Fig.2 and Fig.3. hdeanwhile, iteration processes
results in an increase of power transfer along all the lines of original control parameters of the UPFC are also set out in
significantly. Various schemes of controlling node voltage and Fig.4.
line transfer power have been studied to testify the proposed
method, which are analysed as follows respectively. It is clear that due to the reactive power injection of shunt part
of the UPFC, the voltage of nodlc 2 is raised to be within the
5.1 Control Performance Analysis operational range. Additionally, power injections of the series
5.1.1 Unined Controller part of the UPFC force more power flow through line 2-5, thus
alleviate the stress of line 1-2. It seems very effective and
The performances of a typical d i e d controller-UPFC on the convenient to improve the available transmissioncapability via
test system are evaluated, which are shown in Tab. 2. The data redistribution of load sharing between connected lines using
beyond the operational limits are all marked using grey blocks FACTS devices. Therefore, it is I O doubt that UPFC can play
for clarification. an important role in enhancing the system from these aspects.
- 872 ,- \
-

5.1.2 Series Controller


Table 2 Power flow control and voltage control ofthe unified controller
Voltage of ' Line (2-5) Line (1-2) The test about power flow control of a series controller is based
Node on the base case. The results are listed in Tab.3 as scenario 2. In
2 1 5 Q Q scenario 2, a series controller, for example TCPS, is applied to
regulate the initial line flow to the target one after 5 iterations. It
is very clear that with series controller,the power flow of the line
concerned can be redistributed directly and effectively.
I I V r L & 2 0 . 2 2 8 1 1.403, I, =0.920 I Table 3 Power flow control of the series controller

1 &Delta-P +Delta-Q +Objective I .--cDelta-P


12 I 4.00 7 1

-1.00 I ' 7 3
iteration T i m e s
A r;

Fig.5 The iteration of dp of power flow control using the TCPS


-4 ' Scenario Line Active Line Flow
Iteration T i m e s VT
initial 1 target I controlled
Fig2 The iteration of AP,AQ and the objective of power 2 2-5 -2.003 I -5.000 1 -5.001 4.736

flow control using the UPFC 5.1.3 Shunt Controller


0.000 * . . - - - . .
w , " , - , - ' " From case 2, it is apparent that under heavy load, the voltage of
-0.002 - 1 2 3 f l5 6 7 8 9 10 node 2 exceeds the lower limit. In order to support it, a shunt
-0.004 -
controller, such as SVC or STATCOM, is installed on the
corresponding node to provide direct reactive power injection.
The voltage of node 2 attained the target after 5 iterations and
the results are shown in Tab.4 in details.
iteration T i m e s 1 Table 4 Voltage control of the shunt controller
I 1
~

Fig.3. The iteration of AV of power flow control using the Voltage I.


1P F C

VI. Conclusion
Decomposed-PIM based versatile control algorithm is proposed
to obtain the FACTS control strategy in order to achieve a
given target for different types of FACTS devices, whether in
-0.10 the form of specified power flow or bus voltage magnitude. In
-0.15 the method, the controllable active and reactive power
-0.20 injections are taken as control variables, which allows for

1 -0.25

0.50
Iteratlon Tlm e s

iteration
4 ' 5 Times
' 6 ' 7 ' 8 ' 9 ' I O ' (
studying the control of all types of FACTS devices effectively.
Meanwhile, the OMNR power flow method for ill-conditioned
system and a Primal-dual Interior Point Linear Programming
are integrated to implement the proposed control model. The
effectiveness of the proposed control method has been
demonstrated on a modified IEEE 5-bus system. The presented
method not only shows its satisfactory abiiity of tracidg control
objectives, but also derives FACTS control parameters directly
and simply without needing any initial values.
+IQ V'II. References
[l] Colin Schauser, The unified power jlow controller - a concept becomes
rea& Colloquium of Flexible AC Transmission Systems - the FACTS,
23. Nov. 1998
[2] Laszlo Gyugyi, Converter-based FACTS controllers, Colloquium of
Flexible AC TransmissionSystems -the FACTS, 23. Nov. 1998
I31 Han, Z.X., Phase Shifferand Power Flow Control, IEEE Trans. on PAS, Vol.
101, NO. 10, 1982, pp.3790-3795
[4] Y.H.Song, J.Y.Liu, Powerjlow control and voltage support by using UPFC
Fig.4 Iteration processes of the original control parameters constrained by internal limits, 200-03, CERE, June 1999
[5] M.Noroozian, Ghdersson, Power jlow control by use of controllable
of the UPFC series components, IEEEPES 1992 Summer Meeting, Seattle, WA, July
12-16, 1992

- 873 -
[6] Gotham, D.J., Heydt, G.T., Powerflow control and powerflow studies for [22] Tae-Hyun Kim, et al. A decoupled un,$ed powerflow controller model for
systems with FACTS devices, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vo1.13, powerflow considering limit resohion, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems,
No.1, Feb. 1998, pp.60-65. V01.5, N0.3, August 1998, pp. 1190-1195
[7] Nedal Deeb, S. M. Shahidehpour, Linear reactive power optimization in a [23] C E R E TF38-01-06-Final Report, ‘Load Flow Control in High Voltage
large power network using the decomposition approachJEEE Transactions Systems Using FACTS Controllers’, Oct., 1995
on Power Systems, Vo1.5, No.2, May 1990, pp. 428-436 [24] M.Noroozian, et al., Use of UFPC for optimal power flow control, IEEE
[SI Fuerte-Esquivel,C.R., Acha, E., Newton-Raphson Algorithm for the Reliable Transactions on Power Delivery, 1997, V01.12, No.4, pp.1629-1634
Solution of Large Power Networks with Embedded FACTS Devices, h o c [25] Bian, J., Ramey, D.G., Nelson, R.J., Edris, A., A Study ofEquipment Sues and
IEE, Pt.C, Vo1.143,No.S, 1996,pp.447-454. Constraintsfor A Unijed Power Flow Controller;Roc IEEE Transmission
[9] Brian Stott, Review of Load-Flow Calculation Methods, Proceedings o f The and Distribution Conference, 1996, Los Angeles, USA.
IEEE, V01.62, N0.7, July 1974, pp.916-929. [26] R. Mihalic, I. Papic, Static Synchronous Series Compensator - a mean for
[lo] Youssef, R.D., Phase-Shij2ing Transformers in Load Flow and Short Circuit dynamic power flow control in electric power systems Electric Power
Analysis: Modelling and Control Proc IEE, Pt.C, Vo1.140, No.4, 1993, System Research 45,1998,65-72.
pp.33 1-335 [27] N.K.Karmarkar, “Computational Results of an Interior Point Algorithm
[l I ] Peterson, N.M., Meyer, W.S., Automatic Adjustment of Transformer and for Large Scale Linear Programming”, Mathematical Programming, 52,
Phase Shifter Taps in the Newton Power Floy IEEE Trans. on PAS, Vol. 1991
90,No. 1, 1971,pp.104-106
[12] Ge Shaoyun and T S Chung, Optimal active power flow incorporating MII. Acknowledgement
power flow control needs in flexible AC transmission systems, IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, 1999, Vo1.14, No.2, pp.738- 744 The work is partly supported by the Chinese National Key
[I31 John Peschon, Dean S. Piercy, W.F.Tinney, Sensitivity in Power Systems, Basic Research Special Fund CNO.Gl998020310) and the
IEEE Trans. on PAS, VoLPAS-87, No.8, August 1968, pp. 1687-1696. Overseas Youth Cooperation Grant of Natural Science
[14] N. Srinivasan, K. S.Prakasa Rao, C. Shdulkar, S. S. Venkata, On-Line
Computation of Phase Shifter Distribution Factors and Line Load Foundation, China.
Alleviation, IEEE Trans. on PAS, Vol. PAS-104, No.7, July 1985,
pp.1656-1662. IX. Biographies
[15] Hiskens, LA., Analysis Tools for Power Systems - Contending with
Nonlinearities, Proceedings o f the IEEE, Vo1.83, No.11, November 1995, Ying Xiao was born in Beijing, China, in 1972. She received
pp.1573-1587 the degrees of BEng and MSc in China in 1993 and 1996
[I61 Iwamoto, S., Tamura, Y., A Load Flow Calculation Method for Ill- respectively. Currently, she is a PhD student at Brunel
Conditioned Power System IEEE PAS, Vol. PAS -100, No.4, 1981, pp. University in UK. Her main research areas of interest are
1736-1743
[17] User’s manual of power system analysis package, EPRl of China, 1990. FACTS, operation and planning of power system, and
[18] Arabi, S., Kundur, P., A VersatileFACTS Device Model For Power Flow application of stochastic and fuzzy set method.
and Stability Simulatioq IEEE 96 Winter Meeting, 1996, paper 96 WM
258-4 PWRS Y.H. Song is Professor of Electrical Energy Systems at Bmnel
[19] 0. Alsac, et al. Further developments in LP-based optimal powerflowJEEE
Trans. on Power Systems, Vo1.5, No.3, August 1990, pp. 697-71 1. University where he also holds the Royal Academy of
[20] Nabavi- Niaki, A., Iravani, M. R., Steady-State and Dynamic Models of EngineeringDTuclear Electric/Siemens Chair of Power
Unified Power Flow Controller (UPFC)for Power System Studies IEEE Systems.
96 Winter Meeting, 1996, paper 96 W M 257-6 PWRS
[21] Arabi, S., Kundur, P., A Versatile FACTS Device Model For Power Flow
and Stability SimulatioG IEEE 96 Winter Meeting, 1996, paper 96 WM Y.Z. Sun is Professor of Power Systems at Tsinghua
258-4 PWRS University, Beijing, China.

- 874 -

You might also like