16th NATIONAL POWER SYSTEMS CONFERENCE, 15th-17th DECEMBER, 2010

766

Enhancement of Transient Performance of a Single Machine Infinite Bus System Using Thyristor Controlled Braking Resistor
B.Yadagiri
Department of Electrical Engineering University College of Engineering Osmania University, Hyderabad-7 e-mail:giri0357@gmail.com

A.V.R.S.Sarma
Department of Electrical Engineering University College of Engineering Osmania University, Hyderabad-7 e-mail:avrs2000@yahoo.com of TCBR is tested under various line parameters and operation conditions. II.
MODEL FOR THE SINGLE MACHINE CONNECTED TO INFINITE BUS (SMIB)

AbstractTransient Stability studies of a power systems are necessary for the planning and reliable operation. Several techniques like hvdc, fact controllers etc. are used to enhance the transient performance of the system. In all these techniques the electrical generator output is improved during and post disturbance condition. In this paper Thyristor Controlled Braking Resistor (TCBR) is used to enhance the transient performance of Single Machine connected to Infinite Bus (SMIB). The effect of TCBR is studied over different line reactances and operating conditions. The system is simulated using MATLAB and results are presented. Results clearly indicate the effect of TCBR in improving the transient performance of SIMB under all conditions. Keywords-TCBR, SMIB

2.1 Model for single machine connected to infinite bus without TCBR

I.

INTRODUCTION

System stability studies are important for reliable operation. Growths in interconnection, use of new techniques and control strategies have increased the importance of transient stability. The system operates in a continuously changing environment i.e load variation. The system stability depends upon initial operating conditions, type of disturbance and location disturbance. A major disturbance will call upon interaction of various controllers in the system to develop forces to remain in synchronism. Inadequacy in system planning and ineffective controllers action will result in the system blackout. Hence properly designed power system, and effective controllers will operate the system in synchronism, which is otherwise threatened. A large disturbance may lead to structural changes due to the isolation of the faulted elements. At an equilibrium set, a power system may be stable for a given (large) physical disturbance, and unstable for another. It is impractical and uneconomical to design power systems to be stable for every possible disturbance [1]. In this paper TCBR is used to enhance the transient performance of the system following a sudden and large disturbance. The rotor speed deviation is used in firing the thyristor of the TCBR in order to obtain required braking resistor for stability, thus control action is continuous till the generator speed equals to synchronous speed. The performance

Fig. 1.

SMIB Power system model without TCBR

Fig. 2.

.A

Steady state phasor diagram for lower-order synchronous generator

Department of Electrical Engineering, Univ. College of Engg., Osmania University, Hyderabad, A.P, INDIA.

16th NATIONAL POWER SYSTEMS CONFERENCE, 15th-17th DECEMBER, 2010

767

2.2

Steady State Equations

2.3

Model for Synchronous Generator

Algebraically the machine currents and bus voltages are related by: Rotor angle at generator terminal

The third order synchronous machine model is considered in this study. Swing equation

g = sin 1
2 2

Pi * X l Eb * E g

Load current and power factor angle are

Il =

E g + E b 2 * E g * E b * cos ( g ) Xl
1
2

d Pi Po = dt M d = o * ( 1) dt
E fd E q 1 I ld * X d X d 1 = 1 Tdo

Field decrement Equation

Pi = cos E *I b l
q-axis voltage is
Eq =

E q

) * t

AVR Equation

Eb 2 + I l 2 * 2 * X l + X q 2 + 2 * Eb * I l * X l + X q * sin ( )

K r * Et E fd E fd = Tr
During Short circuit q-axis component of load current is

* t

Initial rotor angle

go

cos( ) * I l * (X l + X q ) = sin 1 Eq

I ld =

Eq

1 1

q-axis component of load current is

Xd

I lq = I l * cos ( go + )

The generator electrical power output is

d-axis component of load current is

Po = 0
Post fault Equations d-axis component of load current is

I ld = I l * sin ( go + ) Ebq = Eb * cos( go )

q-axis component of infinite bus voltage is d-axis component of infinite bus voltage is

I ld =

E q E b * cos
1

E bd = E b * sin ( go )

(2 * X

+ Xd

q-axis component of load current is

q-axis component of generator terminal voltage is

E gq = E bq + I ld * X l
d-axis component of generator terminal voltage is

I lq =

Eb * sin (2 * X l + X q )

d-axis component of generator terminal voltage is

E gd = E bd I lq * X l
Internal voltage of generator is

E gd = E b * sin I lq * 2 * X l
1 1

q-axis component of generator terminal voltage is

E o = E gq + I ld * X d
Voltage proportional to the field leakages is

E gq = E q I ld * X d
1

E q = Ebq + I ld * X l + X d
E g = E gd + E gq
2 2

q-axis component of infinite bus voltage is

E bq = E b * cos

Magnitude of generator terminal voltage and angle are

d-axis component of infinite bus voltage is

Ebd = Eb * sin

The generator electrical power output

g = tan 1
Reference voltage is

E gd E gq
Eo Kr

Po = E gd * I ld + E gq * I lq Et = E ref E g

E ref = E g +

Department of Electrical Engineering, Univ. College of Engg., Osmania University, Hyderabad, A.P, INDIA.

16th NATIONAL POWER SYSTEMS CONFERENCE, 15th-17th DECEMBER, 2010

768

2.4 AVR Model

Fig. 3.

AVR modeling

The block after summer represents the transfer function of a voltage regulator. The regulator has time constant T A =0.2 and a gain K A =25. The linear proportionality and the ceiling voltages V Rmax =3.0 and V Rmin = -3.0 are also shown in above block diagram.
Fig. 4. SMIB Power system model with TCBR

III.

MODELING OF

TCBR

The power system model along with thyristor switching circuit used for the simulation is shown in fig.4. It consists of a generator supplying power to an infinite bus over a doublecircuit line. The initial operating conditions and generator parameters used for the simulation are shown in Tables I and II respectively. It has been considered that a three-phase fault occurs at 0 sec at generator bus bar as shown in fig.4. In the next step, a controller is employed along with the TCBR. The block diagram of the control scheme used is shown in Fig 5.
TABLE I. INITIAL CONDITIONS

Fig.5(a) shows the proposed circuit of two reverse parallelconnected thyristors, T1 and T2 along with the braking resistor. Following a fault, current flows through BR if thyristor T1 or T2 is in ON state, and it decreases the accelerated power by consuming excessive transient energy. In this way, during large disturbances, the braking resistor can control the speed deviation and accelerating power in generators, and thereby makes the power system stable by bringing speed deviation and accelerating power near the equilibrium point. The typical waveforms of voltage and current through BR are shown in Fig.5 (b). Therefore, when the firing angle for the thyristor switch is as shown in Fig.5 (b), average power, P TCBR , consumed by the braking resistor is given by:

Mechanical power input, Pi (pu) Generator terminal voltage, Eg (pu) Infinite bus bar voltage, Eb (pu) Phase angles of generator terminal voltage, g (deg) Initial rotor angles, o (deg) Time interval, t (sec) Line reactance, X L (pu)
TABLE II. GENERATOR PARAMETERS

0.5 1.05 1 5.465 20.50 0.02 0.2

PTCBR = =

1 Vi R d (t ) 0 V g2 GTCBR ( + 0.5 sin 2 )

Inertia constant, H (sec) d-axis synchronous reactance, X d (pu) q-axis synchronous reactance, X q (pu) Generator transient reactance, X (pu) d- axis open circuit transient field time const, Tdo (sec) Regulator gain constant, K r Regulator time constant, T r (sec) Integral controller gain, K i Proportional controller gain, K p Conductance of braking resistor, System frequency (Hz)
1
1 d

4 1.2 0.7 0.1 5 25 0.2 15 150 1 50

Firing-angle () for the thyristor switch is calculated from the output of the PI controller (i.e., Gout). The desired power consumption determined by Gout and the real power consumption determined by G TCBR are equal and hence firingangle, , can be calculated from the following power equation.

PTCBR = Pout Vg2GTCBR ( + 0.5 sin 2 ) = Vg2Gout

Where V is the rms value of the generator terminal bus voltage and G TCBR is specified to 1.0 pu.

GTCBR (pu)

Department of Electrical Engineering, Univ. College of Engg., Osmania University, Hyderabad, A.P, INDIA.

16th NATIONAL POWER SYSTEMS CONFERENCE, 15th-17th DECEMBER, 2010

769

Therefore, it can be concluded that the improvement in the transient stability condition of the system is much more with the TCBR-controller combination. These results highlight the effectiveness of the application of a TCBR along with a controller in improving the transient stability of a power system. IV. FLOW CHART AND RESULTS

(a) TCBR

Fig. 5.

(b) Voltage and current waveforms Thyristor switching circuit for BR and waveforms. (a) TCBR. (b) Voltage and current waveforms.

The Control Scheme , and As shown in fig.6 the generator speed deviation, the desired conductance value of BR, G out , are selected as the input and output respectively. Following a fault in power system, the rotor speed deviation, , of the generator is measured, and then the desired conductance value, G out , is determined by PI controller. For the fast control of the generator disturbances, we have tuned the controller parameters by trial and error method.

Fig. 6.

PI controller model

The generator rotor speed is taken as the control variable. It is compared with the reference value of speed ref and the error is fed to a PI controller. The output of the PI is the firing angle of the TCBR, . This is passed through a limiter to keep it within the output of the limiter is supplied to the firing circuit of TCBR. The effect of the TCBR on the transient stability of the system depends largely on the proper functioning of the controller. Therefore, choice of suitable values of controller constants K P and K I .

Department of Electrical Engineering, Univ. College of Engg., Osmania University, Hyderabad, A.P, INDIA.

16th NATIONAL POWER SYSTEMS CONFERENCE, 15th-17th DECEMBER, 2010

770

One-machi ne system sw i ng curve. Faul t cl eared at 0.39s 150

X: 0.58 Y : 145

w i th TCB R P i =0.5,XL=0.2

100

D a ere e ,d e, l t g

50

-50

-100

0.5

1.5

2 2.5 ti me, sec

3.5

4.5

Fig. 9.

Rotor angle response with TCBR

Case (2): Without Braking Resistor, Mechanical power input Pi=0.5, p.u line reactance X L =0.4 p.u fault clearing time t c =0.28sec Here fault is at generator terminals and fault clearing time is t c =0.28sec, with Braking Resistor in the system such that rotor angle is increases to maximum, then decreases and oscillates with decreasing amplitude and reaches steady state as shown in figures 10. The rotor angle () Vs time (t), plot is shown.
One-machine sys tem swing c urv e. Fault cleared at 0.28s 120 110 100 90 Dt ,dg e ea er , l e 80 70 60 50 40 30 20

Fig. 7.

Flow chart for single machine connected to infinite bus system

0.1

0.2

0.3 t, s ec

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Fig. 10.

Rotor angle response without TCBR

Transient stability results for single machine connected to infinite bus system: Case (1): Without Braking Resistor, Mechanical power input Pi=0.5, p.u line reactance X L =0.2, p.u fault clearing time t c =0.39sec Here fault is at generator terminals and fault clearing time is t c =0.39sec, without Braking Resistor in the system such that rotor angle increases continuously until synchronism is lost and the system becomes unstable as shown in figure 8. The rotor angle (), Vs time (t) plot is shown
One-machine system swing curv e. Fault cleared at 0.19s 120 110 100 90 Dl a dg e e , er , t e 80 70 60 50 40 30

With Braking Resistor, Mechanical power input Pi=0.5, p.u line reactance X L =0.4, p.u fault clearing time t c =0.28sec: Here fault is at generator terminals and fault clearing time is t c =0.28sec, with Braking Resistor in the system such that rotor angle is increases to maximum, then decreases and oscillates with decreasing amplitude and reaches steady state as shown in figures. 11 The rotor angle () Vs time (t), plot is shown.
120 100 One-machine system swing curv e. Fault cleared at 0.28s with TCBR Pi=0.5,XL=0.4
X: 0.56 Y : 113.4

80 Dlta d ge , e , er e

60

40

20

-20

0.5

1.5

2 2.5 time, sec

3.5

4.5

0.05

0.1

0.15 t, sec

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

Fig. 11.

. Rotor angle response with TCBR

Fig. 8.

Rotor angle response without TCBR

With Braking Resistor, Mechanical power input Pi=0.5, p.u line reactance X L =0.2, p.u fault Clearing time t c =0.39sec: Here fault is at generator terminals and fault clearing time is t c =0.39sec, with Braking Resistor in the system such that rotor angle is increases to maximum, then decreases and oscillates with decreasing amplitude and reaches steady state as shown in figures 9. The rotor angle () Vs time (t), plot is shown.

Case (3): Without Braking Resistor, Mechanical power input Pi=1, p.u line reactance X L =0.2, p.u fault clearing time t c =0.19sec Here fault is at generator terminals and fault clearing time is t c =0.19sec, without Braking Resistor in the system such that rotor angle increases continuously until synchronism is lost and the system becomes unstable as shown in figure.12. The rotor angle (), Vs time (t) plot is shown.

Department of Electrical Engineering, Univ. College of Engg., Osmania University, Hyderabad, A.P, INDIA.

16th NATIONAL POWER SYSTEMS CONFERENCE, 15th-17th DECEMBER, 2010

771

One-machine system swing curv e. Fault cleared at 0.19s 120 110 100

with decreasing amplitude and reaches steady state as shown in figures.15. The rotor angle () Vs time (t), plot is shown.
One-machi ne system swi ng curve. Faul t cl eared at 0.05s 95 wi th T CBR Pi =1,XL=0.4 90
X: 0.56 Y : 90.16

90 Dlta d ge , e , er e 80
85

70
Dt ,d re e a e e, l g

80 75 70 65 60

60 50 40 30

0.05

0.1

0.15 0.2 t, sec

0.25

0.3

0.35

55 50

Fig. 12.

. Rotor angle response without TCBR

45

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

ti me, sec

With Braking Resistor, Mechanical power input Pi=1, p.u line reactance X L =0.2, p.u fault clearing time t c =0.19sec: Here fault is at generator terminals and fault clearing time is t c =0.39sec, with Braking Resistor in the system such that rotor angle is increases to maximum, then decreases and oscillates with decreasing amplitude and reaches steady state as shown in figures.13 The rotor angle () Vs time (t), plot is shown.
One-machi ne system swi ng curve. Faul t cl eared at 0.19s 120
X: 0.38 Y : 118.9

Fig. 15.

. Rotor angle response with TCBR

By observing the above four cases, we can say that by providing braking resistor to the system the oscillations will die out and they will settle to a final steady state value with in a very short time duration. V. CONCLUSIONS

100 wi th TCBR Pi =1,XL=0.2 80 D ad re e , e e, l t g

60

40

20

In this paper, the transient stability assessment of a single machine connected to infinite bus system is carried out for three phase fault at generator terminals using R.K. fourth order method. A TCBR controller has been modeled and implemented on a single machine connected to infinite bus system
4 4.5

0.5

1.5

2 2.5 ti me, sec

3.5

Fig. 13.

Rotor angle response with TCBR

Case (4): Without Braking Resistor, Mechanical power input Pi=1, p.u line reactance X L =0.4, p.u fault clearing time t c =0.05sec Here fault is at generator terminals and fault clearing time is tc=0.05sec, with Braking Resistor in the system such that rotor angle is increases to maximum, then decreases and oscillates with decreasing amplitude and reaches steady state as shown in figures.14 The rotor angle () Vs time (t), plot is shown.
One-machine system swing curve. Fault cleared at 0.05s 80

PI controller determines the firing angle, , which is input to the Thyristor Controlled Braking Resistor (TCBR) which controls the accelerating power in generator and makes the system transiently stable. Without TCBR the rotor angle increases continuously until synchronism is lost and system becomes unstable as shown in the figures 8,10,12,14. Using the TCBR the rotor angle increases to a maximum, then decreases and oscillates with decreasing amplitude and reaches steady state as shown in the figures 9,11,13,15.
REFERRENCES [1] Prabha Kundur, John Paserba, Definition and Classification of Power System Stability, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems., Vol. 19, No. 2, pp 1387- 1401, May 2004. D.P.Kothari and I.J Nagrath, Modern Power System Analysis, 3rd Edition, Augt. 2006. E.W.Kimbark, Power System Stability, Vol.2,Wiley,New York,2004. Masaki Yagami,Junji TamuraEnhancement of Transient Stability Using Fault Current Limiter and Thyristor Controlled Braking Resistor,IEEE proceedings, PowerTech 2007, pp.238-243,2007. M.H.Ali, T.Murata, and J.Tamura, An analysis of the fuzzy logic controlled braking resistor for transient stability improvement in multimachine power system, IEEJ Trans. PE. vol.124, no.4, pp.553-560, 2004. H.Jiang, J.Dorsey, and T.Habetler, A cost effective generator brake for improved generator transient response, IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol.9, no.4, pp.1840-1846, 1994. A.H.M.A. Rahim and A.I.J. AI-Sammak, Optimal Switching of Dynamic Braking Resistor, Reactor or Capacitor for Transient Stability of Power Systems, IEE Proceedings, Part C, Vol. 138, No. 1, pp.89-93, January 1991.

75

[2] [3] [4]

70 Dlt , d ge , ea er e

65

60

55

50

[5]
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 t, sec 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35

45

Fig. 14.

Rotor angle response without TCBR

[6]

With Braking Resistor, Mechanical power input Pi=1, p.u line reactance X L =0.4, p.u fault clearing time t c =0.05sec: Here fault is at generator terminals and fault clearing time is t c =0.05sec, with Braking Resistor in the system such that rotor angle is increases to maximum, then decreases and oscillates

[7]

Department of Electrical Engineering, Univ. College of Engg., Osmania University, Hyderabad, A.P, INDIA.