1

AbstractThis paper presents an analytical, linear, state-

space model of a Thyristor Controlled Series Capacitor (TCSC).
Firstly, a simplified fundamental frequency model of TCSC is
proposed and the model results are verified. Using frequency
response of the non-linear TCSC segment, a simplified non-linear
state space model is derived, where the frequency of the
dominant TCSC complex poles shows linear dependence on the
firing angle. The non-linear element is linearised and linked with
the AC network model and the TCSC controller model that also
includes a Phase Locked Loop model. The model is implemented
in MATLAB and verified against PSCAD/EMTDC in the time
and frequency domains for a range of operating conditions. The
model is sufficiently accurate for most control design applications
and practical stability issues in the subsynchronous range.

Index TermsModeling, Power system dynamic stability,
State space methods, Thyristor converters.
I. INTRODUCTION
Thyristor Controlled Series Capacitor (TCSC) is a series
FACTS device which allows rapid and continuous changes of
the transmission line impedance. It has great application
potential in accurately regulating the power flow on a
transmission line, damping inter-area power oscillations,
mitigating subsynchronous resonance (SSR) and improving
transient stability.
The characteristics of a TCSC at steady-state and very low
frequencies can be studied using fundamental frequency
analytical models [1],[2]. These particular models recognize
the importance of having different approach from SVC
modeling (assuming only line current as a constant) which,
although more demanding on the derivation, gives the most
accurate TCSC model.
The fundamental frequency models cannot be used in wider
frequency range since they only give the relationship among
fundamental components of variables when at steady-state.
Conventionally, the electromechanical transient programs like
EMTP or PSCAD/EMTDC are used for TCSC transient
stability analysis. These simulation tools are accurate but they
employ trial and error type studies only, implying use of a
large number of repetitive simulation runs for varying
parameters in the case of complex analysis or design tasks. On
the other hand, the application of dynamic systems analysis

This work is supported by The Engineering and Physical Sciences
Research Council (EPSRC) UK, grant no GR/R11377/01.
D. Jovcic and G.N. Pillai are with Electrical and Mechanical Engineering,
University of Ulster, Newtownabbey, BT370QB, United Kingdom, (e-mail:
d.jovcic@ulster.ac.uk, g.pillai@ulster.ac.uk )



techniques or modern control design theories would bring
benefits like shorter design time, optimization of resources and
development of new improved designs. In particular, the
eigenvalue and frequency domain analysis are widely
recognized tools and they would prove invaluable for system
designers and operators. These techniques however always
necessitate a suitable and accurate dynamic system model.
There have been a number of attempts to derive an accurate
analytical model of a TCSC that can be employed in system
stability studies and controller design [3-6]. The model
presented in [3] uses a special form of discretisation, applying
Poincare mapping, for the particular Kayenta TCSC
installation. The model derivation for a different system will
be similarly tedious and the final model form is not convenient
for the application of standard stability studies and controller
design theories especially not for larger systems. A similar
final model form is derived in [4], and the model derivation is
improved since direct discretisation of the linear system model
is used, however it suffers other shortcomings as the model in
[3]. The modeling principle reported in [5] avoids
discretisation and stresses the need for assuming only line
current as an ideal sine, however it employs rotating vectors
that might be difficult to use with stability studies, and only
considers the open loop configuration. The model in [5] is also
oversimplified because of the use of equivalent reactance and
equivalent capacitance that might be deficient when used in
wider frequency range. Most of these reported models are
therefore concerned with a particular system or particular type
of study, use overly simplified approach and do not include
control elements or Phase Locked Loops (PLL).
In this study we attempt to derive a suitable linear
continuous TCSC model in state-space form. The model
should have reasonable accuracy for the dynamic studies in
the sub-synchronous range and it should incorporate common
control elements including PLL. To enable flexibility of the
model use with different AC systems, the model structure
adopts subsystem units interlinked in similar manner as with
SVC modeling [6].
We also seek to offer complete closed loop model
verification in the time and frequency domains.
II. TEST SYSTEM
The test system for the study is a long transmission system
compensated by a TCSC and connected to a firm voltage
source on each side. Figure 1 shows a single line diagram of
the test system where the transmission line is represented by a
lumped resistance and inductance in accordance with the
approach for sub-synchronous resonance studies [7]. Each
phase of the TCSC is composed of a fixed capacitor in parallel
with a Thyristor Controlled Reactor (TCR). The TCSC is
Analytical Modeling of TCSC Dynamics
D.Jovcic, Member, IEEE and G.N. Pillai
2
controlled by varying the phase delay of the thyristor firing
pulses synchronized through a PLL to the line current
waveform. The controller is of a PI type with a feedback filter
and a series compensator.
Three different test systems are used in order to verify the
model accuracy with different system parameters and different
operating points:
system 1 75% compensation, capacitive mode,
system 2 40% compensation, capacitive mode,
system 3 75% compensation, inductive mode,
The test system parameters are practically selected
according to the recommendations in [8] (regarding X
l
/Xc and
natural resonance) and the test system data are given in the
Appendix.

- Calculated firing angle
- PLL reference angle
- Actual firing angle
- Phase angle of
- Mag. of voltage
PLL - Phase Locked loop
PI - Voltage PI controller
TCR - Thyristor controlled
reactor
TCR
TCSC
l
l
c
c
l
c


Figure 1. Test system configuration.
III. FUNDAMENTAL FREQUENCY MODEL
The fundamental frequency model of a TCSC is derived
firstly to enable initialization of the steady-state parameters.
The voltage across the TCSC capacitor (v
c
) comprises an
uncontrolled and a controlled component [8], and it is
presumed that the line current is constant over one
fundamental cycle in accordance with [1-2],[5]. The
uncontrolled component v
1
, is a sine wave (unaffected by
thyristor switchings) and it is also constant over a fundamental
cycle since it is directly related to the amplitude of the
prevailing line current. The controlled component v
2
is a non-
linear variable that depends on circuit variables and on the
TCR firing angle.
In this study, the controlled component is represented as a
non-linear function of the uncontrolled component and firing
angle, v
2
=N
1
(v
1
,,s), as shown in Figure 2. With this
approach, N
1
(v
1
,,s) captures the non-linear phenomena
caused by thyristor switching influence and all internal
interactions with capacitor voltage assuming only that the line
current and v
1
are linear. We seek in our work to study
dynamics of N
1
(v
1
,,s) in a wider frequency range and also to
offer a simplified representation for fundamental frequency
studies.
cs
1
-
+
1
v
1
v
2
v
2
v
c
v
c
v
l
i
l
i - line current
- linear component of TCSC voltage
- non-linear component of TCSC voltage
- TCSC voltage
- firing angle
- Non-linear part dynamics
) , , (
1 1 2
s v N v =
) , , (
1 1
s v N


Figure 2. TCSC model structure.

The fundamental components of reactor current i
tcr
and the
voltages v
1
and v
2
are selected as state variables and the non-
linear state-space model is presented as:
l
i
c
sv
1
1
= (1)
tcr
i
c
g sv
1
2
= (2)
2 1
1 1
v
l
g v
l
g si
tcr tcr
tcr
= (3)
2 1
v v v
c
= (4)
where g represents the switching function: g=1 for thyristor in
conduction, and g=0 for thyristor in blocking state.
To derive the corresponding linear model at the nominal
frequency, it is postulated that the model has the following
structure:
l
i
c
sv
1
1
= (5)
tcr
i
c
sv
1
2
= (6)
2 2 1 1
v k v k si
tcr
= (7)
2 1
v v v
c
= (8)

where k
1
=k
1
() and k
2
=k
2
() are the unknown model
parameters dependent on the firing angle . The above model
structure is correct for zero firing angle (g=1, =0, i.e. full
conduction with measured from the voltage crest) and we
presume the same model structure but different parameter
values for (0,90).
Considering the two components of the thyristor current on
the right side of (7) we note that
1 1
v k produces the current
that is driven by a constant voltage v
1
(over one fundamental
cycle) in accordance to the earlier assumption. As a result, the
configuration is similar to the shunt connection of TRC in a
SVC, and the constant
1
k can be calculated using the approach
of equivalent reactance
alp
l for the TCR current in a SVC
[6,8]:
) 2 sin( 2
/ 1
1



= =
tcr
alp
l
l k (9)
3
In order to determine the constant k
2
, we represent (6)-(7) as
a transfer function in the following form:

1 /
) (
) (
) (
2 2
3
1
2
+
= =
d
fo
s
k
s T
s v
s v

(10)
with
c
k
d
2
= ,
2
1
3
k
k
k = (11)
Observing (10) it is seen that
d
is the resonant frequency
of an un-damped second order system. The proposed
expression for this frequency is given below in (12) and it is
determined using the experimental frequency response of the
model for the non-linear TCSC segment as presented later in
section IV.

c l
tcr
d

2
= (12)
Substituting that s= j
o
= j2f
o
(f
o
fundamental frequency)
in (10), and using (11) in terms of input current and the output
voltage as given in (5)-(8) the TCSC gain at fundamental
frequency is derived:

( )
( ) | | 1 /
1 /
2 2
3
2 2
+
+
=
d o o
d o
l
c
j cj
k j
i
v


(13)
and the TCSC fundamental frequency impedance is:

( )
2 2
3
2 2
csc
/ 1
1 /
d o o
d o
t
c
k
X

+
= (14)
where
| |
2
3
) 2 (
) 2 sin( 2

= k (15)
and
d
is defined in (12).
Compared with the fundamental frequency TCSC model in
[1-2], the derived model (13) is considerably simpler, yet it
will be shown that the accuracy is very similar.
The above model is tested against PSCAD in the following
way. The system is operated in open loop, i.e. with a fixed
reference thyristor firing angle, in the configuration of Figure
1. The value of the reference thyristor angle is changed in
interval (0,90
o
) and for each angle the value of the TCSC
voltage is observed. Since all other parameters are constant,
the TCSC voltage is directly proportional to the TCSC
impedance and this is an effective way to obtain accurate
information on the fundamental TCSC impedance.
Figure 3 shows the steady-state TCSC voltage against the
range of firing angle values, where the above linear model
results are shown as model 2 and also the results from
researchers [1,2] as model 1. It is seen that the proposed model
shows good accuracy across the entire firing angle range and
especially the results are very close to those from [1,2]. In fact
the above model differs negligibly from the model [1,2],
except in the less used low firing angles in range (20,30
o
)
where the difference is still below 5%. It is also evident that
the two analytical models show small but consistent
discrepancy against PSCAD/EMTDC, and despite all
simplifications in PSCAD it was not possible to obtain better
matching.



Figure 3. Testing the fundamental frequency model. Steady-state TCSC
voltage for different values of firing angles.
IV. SMALL-SIGNAL DYNAMIC ANALYTICAL MODEL
A. TCSC model
The transfer function in (10) is accurate only at fundamental
frequency and it cannot be used for wider frequency studies.
The goal of the dynamic modeling is to derive a dynamic
expression for N
1
(v
1
,,s) of satisfactory accuracy in the sub-
synchronous frequency range and for small signals around the
steady-state operating point. The steady-state for an AC
system variable is a periodic waveform at fundamental
frequency with constant magnitude and phase.
The frequency response is of TCSC is studied assuming that
the input voltage is:

) 2 sin( ) 2 sin(
0 1
t f A t f A v
inj inj o
+ = (16)
where the first sine signal denotes the steady-state operation
with all parameters constant. The second term is the input in
the experimental frequency response and it has small
magnitude A
inj
<<A
o
. The injection frequency is varied in the
range (f
inj
1,150Hz). The output v
2
is monitored and the first
harmonic of the Fourier series (same frequency as f
inj
) is
compared with the input signal to obtain the frequency
response.
If it is assumed that the injected component is small in
magnitude compared to the fundamental component, (as it is
case in a small signal study) the thyristor firing pulses will
remain synchronized to the fundamental component. We can
therefore base the study on the following assumptions:
The firing pulses are regularly spaced, i.e. unaffected by
the injected oscillations.
The conduction period is symmetrical and unaffected by
the injected signal.
The magnitude of the fundamental frequency does not
affect frequency response at other frequencies (the
magnitude of fundamental component A
o
will be assumed
zero in the study and therefore v
1
does not contain the
fundamental component).
Using the above assumptions, the non-linear segment of
the model (2)-(3) is simulated in SIMULINK environment as
shown in Figure 4. The source generates a sine signal with the
above range of frequencies f
inj
and for each frequency the
4
Gain2
v1
v2
b1
a1
Switch2
Switch1
sine
cos
period
Source
Pulse
Generator
1
s
Int2
1
s
Int1
1/(ct*ltcr)
Gain1
v2
sine
cos
period
a1
b1
Fourrier
analysis
0
Const.
1/(ct*ltcr)



Figure 4. Experimental frequency response set-up with the SIMULINK model
for the non-linear TCSC segment.

magnitude and phase of the first harmonic of the output
voltage v
2
is observed.
The pulse generator produces equally spaced conduction
intervals that are based on the fundamental frequency period
and which are dependent on the firing angle. Based on the
above assumption these firing instants are unaffected by the
injection signal.
Figure 5 shows the obtained time-domain responses for the
particular firing angle =72
o
and for two different frequencies
of the input signal. It is seen in Figure 5 b) that the output
trace for the 60Hz input frequency gives the familiar square
shape which is consistent with the results for the fundamental
frequency studies in [1,2,8]. The experimental frequency
response over the range of frequencies is repeated for all
values of the firing angle (0,90
o
) with a one-degree
increment.
For each firing angle, the gain and phase values across the
frequency range are plotted and Figure 6 shows an example
for the particular firing angle =76
o
. Observing the frequency
response curves in Figure 6 and others for other firing angles,
it is concluded that the system shows higher order properties
and it becomes clear that it has dominant second order
dynamics. The following transfer function is proposed:
input v1
input v1
output v2
output v2
first harmonic v2
first harmonic v2
time [s]
a)
b)
time [s]
m
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e

[
k
V
]
m
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e

[
k
V
]


Figure 5. Experimental frequency response of N1(v1,,s) using SIMULINK
model. Firing angle =72
o
, input frequency a) finj=12Hz. b) finj=60Hz.
g
a
i
n

[
d
B
]
p
h
a
s
e

[
d
e
g
]
frequency [rad/s]
fo
linear model
non-linear model
fund. frequency model
fo


Figure 6. Frequency response for the non-linear TCSC segment. Test system 1
with the firing angle =76
o
.
system 1 experimental
system 2 experimental
system 1 model
system 2 model
f
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y


[
r
a
d
/
s
]
firing angle [deg]


Figure 7. Linear relationship between the denominator characteristic
frequency (d) and the firing angle .

1
2
1
2
) (
) (
2
2
2
2
1
2
+ +
+ +
=
d
d
d
n
n
n
w
s
w
s
w
s
w
s
s v
s v

(17)
The characteristic peak in the gain frequency response is
caused by the dominant complex poles and each of the troughs
by a pair of complex zeros. Observing the frequency response
across the range of firing angles, the location of the dominant
peak is recorded against the firing angle values and the circuit
parameters, and the final plot is shown in Figure 7. It soon
emerges that the denominator characteristic frequency
d
is a
linear function of the firing angle where the actual
mathematical formula can be readily derived as given in (12).
5
The linear formula shows very good accuracy and it reflects
well the variation in circuit parameters as seen in Figure 7.
Analysing (12) it is seen that the resonant frequency of a
TCSC starts at the natural resonance of L-C circuit (for =0)
and it linearly reduces with the increase in the firing angle.
The formula has importance for the practical design since it
points to the TCSC firing angles that should be avoided if the
connected system is sensitive to resonance in a particular
frequency range (SSR problems for example).
There are four unknowns in (17) and they are determined in
a similar manner, by matching the frequency response and the
final step responses, and the proposed final formulae are given
below.
c l
w
tcr
d

2
= (18)
) cos( 38 . 0 =
d
(19)
|
|

\
|
+ =

) ( tan
10 7 . 1
10
4
3

c l
f
w
tcr
o
n
(20)
) cos( 2 . 0 =
n
(21)

The simulated frequency response with the above transfer
function is shown in Figure 6 where satisfactory matching is
observed, except at higher frequencies. It is emphasized here
that the model zeros fall in higher frequency region, implying
influence of sampling system phenomena, and the numerator
parameters in (17) are open for further research and
improvements.
It would be beneficial to use the simpler model as given in
(13) for the dynamic study in a wider frequency range. If we
replace the fundamental frequency in (13) with an independent
variable for frequency domain studies, j
o
=s, we can test the
model assuming the frequency variable represents deviations
around the nominal frequency. The resultant frequency
response curves are shown in Figure 6 labeled as the
fundamental frequency model. It is evident that such model
matches the frequency response only at f
o
; it has incorrect gain
for low frequencies, incorrect damping of the dominant mode
and it can not be used for wider frequency studies.
We point further that the complex poles of the transfer
function (17) have finite damping which is for capacitive
mode typically 0.07<
d
<0.15 as seen in Figure 6. If we
attempt to use an equivalent reactance and capacitance as it is
done in [5] we would still get the transfer function in form
(13) with erroneous damping
d
=0.
The model (17) is next transferred to the state space
domain:

4
4 44 3 43 2 42 1 41 4
2 33 2 32 1 31 3
3 23 2
1
) ( ) ( ) (
) ( ) ( ) (
/
x v
x a x a x a x a sx
x a x a x a sx
x a sx
c i sx
c
tc tc tc tc
tc tc tc
tc
l
=
+ + + =
+ + =
=
=


(22)

where the parameters are:
d d tc d tc d tc
tc
a a a
a
= = =
=
) ( ) ( ) (
1
33
2
32
2
31
23

f
tc
n
n
n
d d
f
tc
n
d
f
tc
n
d
f
tc
T
a
T
a
T
a
T
a
1 1
) (
1
1
) ( 1
1
) (
44
2
43
2
42
2
2
41
=
|
|

\
|
=
|
|

\
|
=
|
|

\
|
=

(23)

and the states are defined as:
,
1
,
1
1
/ ,
2 1
4 2 3
2
2
2
1 2 1 1
+

= =
|
|

\
|
+ + = =
s T
v v
x sx x
s s v x v x
f
d
d
d

(24)
The state variable x
4
is therefore the capacitor voltage
v
c
=v
1
-v
2
passed through the artificial filter with the constant T
f
.
The filter is introduced to enable capacitor voltage
representation as a state variable, which significantly
simplifies modeling, and the time constant is small to
computational limits T
f
0; therefore it does not introduce new
dynamic properties.
The parameters in (23) that depend on are linearised
around the operating point. For the linearisation purpose, the
steady-state values for the states x
1
-x
4
are obtained in the
initialization process using the steady-state model (13). The
model linearisation follows the methodology presented in [6].
B. AC System Model
The AC system model is linear, developed in the manner
described in [6] and [9], and only a derivation summary is pre-
sented here.
A single-phase dynamic model is developed firstly, using
the instantaneous circuit variables as the states. Using the
single-phase model and assuming ideal system symmetry, a
complete three-phase model in the rotating coordinate frame is
readily created. To enable a wider frequency range dynamic
analysis and coupling with the static coordinate frame, the
above model is converted to the d-q static frame using Parks
transformation.
C. Controller Model
The controller model consists of a second order feedback
filter, PI controller, Phase Locked Loop (PLL), series
compensator and a transport delay model, as shown in Figure
8. The PLL system is of the d-q-z type and its functional
diagram is given in [10], with practical implementation in
[11]. The state-space linearised second-order PLL model is
developed in [9]. The PLL synchronises thyristor firings with
the line current phase angle.
For simplicity reasons, the TCSC voltage feedback control
is used, where V
ref
can be a function of other parameters at
higher control levels. Because of the thyristor firings at
discrete time instants the system is actually a sampled data
system with the sampling frequency f
s
=360Hz [6],[12]. The
continuous model therefore includes a first order delay, given
by time constant T
d1
, to accommodate the phase lag introduced
by sampling the firing angle signal as it is discussed in [6],[8].
6
The filter time constant is of the order of 2ms, which is in line
with studies in [6],[8] and [12]. It should be noted that the
voltage phase angle also affects the firing angle because the
actual firing angle is measured with respect to the voltage
curve. Here, we have direct correlation across each phase, and
the sampling frequency is 1/3 of f
s
and therefore an additional
lag is introduced represented by the delay filter with T
d2
.
Simulation results demonstrate improvement in the response
with the introduction of this delay element. The second order
filer with v
c
reduces the harmonics on the feedback signal.

PLL
V
ref
V
ref
c
V
c
V
+
+
+

+
+

PI controller Lead-lag
Feedback filter
Delay filter
Delay filter

/2
s
k
k
i
p
+ 2 2
2
2
f f f
f
w s w s
w
+ +

1
1
1
+ s T
d
1
1
2
+ s T
d
d

- TCSC voltage magnitude

- reference voltage
- voltage angle
- delayed voltage angle
- line current angle
- PLL reference angle
- controller reference angle
- actual firing angle
1
1
2
1
+
+
s T
s T


Figure 8. The controller model and firing angle calculation.
D. Model Connections
The final model consists of three independent state-space
models: AC system, TCSC model and the controller model,
which includes PLL. The linearised TCSC model is linked
with the firing angle which is the output of the controller
model, using the artificial rotating variables as presented in
[6].
The three subsystem models are linked through the coupling
variables to create the final state space model in a similar
manner as with the SVC model in [6], and the final model has
the following structure:

out s s s
out
out s s s s
u D x C y
u B x A x
+ =
+ =
o
(25)
where s labels the overall system, and the model matrices
are:
(
(
(

=
ac tcac actc coac acco
actc tcac tc c tcco
acco coac tcco c co
s
A C B C B
C B A C B
C B C B A
A
* *
* *
* *
cot
cot
(26)
| | | | 0 , , = =
(
(
(

=
s acout tcout coout s
acout
tcout
coout
s
D C C C C
B
B
B
B


All the subsystems D matrices are assumed zero in (26)
since they are zero in the actual model and this noticeably
simplifies development. The B
s
is the external input matrix,
i.e. it links with the reference step u
out
=V
ref
whereas C
s

specifies the monitored outputs y
out
=v
c
.
The matrix A
s
has the subsystem matrices on the main
diagonal, with the other sub-matrices representing interactions
between subsystems. The following indices are used ac AC
system, tc TCSC, co controller. As an example the
matrix B
tcco
is the TCSC model input matrix that takes input
signals from the controller. The model in this form has
advantages in flexibility since, if the TCSC is connected to a
more complex AC system only the A
ac
matrix and the
corresponding input and output matrices need modifications.
Similarly, more advanced controllers can be developed using
modern control theory (H

, MPC,..) and implemented directly

by replacing the A
co
matrix. The above structure enables the
model to be readily interfaced with the MATLAB model of
other FACTS elements, HVDC or other power system units.
V. MODEL VERIFICATION
A. Time domain
The linear model is coded in MATLAB and it is verified in
time domain by comparing the reference step responses with
PSCAD model for the three test systems. All the parameters in
the PSCAD model are identical to those in MATLAB model
(AC system, controller and PLL parameters) and model for
switches includes typical snubber circuits. Figures 9.10 and 11
show the three responses of systems 1,2 and 3 respectively.
We can conclude that the model accurately reflects the system



Figure 9. Test system 1 response following a 1kV voltage reference step
change.


Figure 10. Test system 2 response following a 0.5kV voltage reference step
change.
7

Figure 11. Test system 3 response following a 0.05kV voltage reference step
change.

structure since with different circuit parameters and operating
points we consistently have good response matching. In
inductive mode, shown in Figure 11, it is most difficult to
obtain high accuracy since in this mode v
2
is larger than v
1
and
the system is highly non-linear, but this mode is seldom used
in practice.
B. Frequency domain
The time domain testing clearly indicates the dominant
oscillatory mode and also it verifies model for different
operating parameters and inputs. Step input testing however
cannot indicate the frequency range for the model validity.
The experimental frequency response is performed with the
PSCAD software in the frequency range 1Hz<f<150Hz, and
using Vref as the injection point. PSCAD does not possess the
frequency response ability and individual frequency
components are injected with measurement of gain and phase
of the capacitor voltage. The individual frequency results are
then linked to create gain and phase curves as shown in Figure
12.
Comparing with the linear model in Figure 12 we observe
good accuracy in the frequency range f<30Hz and limited
accuracy at higher frequencies. Phase angle response shows
more discrepancies as the frequency increases.
VI. ROBUST CONTROLLER DESIGN
This section demonstrates the model use in developing a
robust controller. The design goal is to develop a controller for
the system 1 (75% compensation) that will enable satisfactory
transient responses and enable robustness to the changes in the
system strength. The AC system strength is varied by
multiplying R
1
and L
1
by a factor m(1,2). The root locus for
the original (uncompensated) system and the compensated
system are shown in Figure 13, where k(0,4) is the controller
gain. It is seen that the original system (curve m=1 in fig 13
a)) has poor performance (as percentage compensation
increases the system becomes more difficult to control) and
little improvement is possible with the existing controller
structure. It is also seen that the root locus significantly
changes with the change in the AC system strength implying
much variation in the TCSC responses.


Figure 12. Test system 2. Frequency response of the linear model compared
with the PSCAD/EMTDC experimental frequency response.
m=1
m=1
m=2
m=3
m=2
m=3
k
in
c
re
a
s
e
k increase
Re
Re
Im
Im a)
b)

Figure 13. Test system 1. Root locus with changes in the system strength
where m denotes the strength factor; a) without compensator, b) with series
compensator.
8
Using the root locus and frequency domain design
techniques with MATLAB, a lead-lag compensator is
designed with the parameters as shown in the Appendix,
system 1. The root locus for the compensated system is shown
in Figure 13 b). It is seen that the damping of the dominant
mode is much improved. Also, the eigenvalue location is not
significantly changed with two times increased transmission
system impedance, as demonstrated by curves m=2, and m=3.
Our studies show that a fast capacitor voltage feedback control
with a suitable lead-lag compensator can give a very robust
stabilizing controller for a TCSC.
It is emphasized here that the above design is a
multidimensional problem involving simultaneous variation of
controller gains, system strength and the compensator
parameters. Such problem would require a very large number
of trial-and-error simulation runs with conventional time-
domain simulators. The design also involves higher frequency
dynamics requiring an analytical model with high accuracy.
VII. CONCLUSIONS
The fundamental frequency model of a TCSC is developed
in a fairly simple form and the model shows good accuracy.
The TCSC model is segmented into linear and non-linear part
and the non-linear model is analysed in frequency domain
using SIMULINK. A simplified linear-continuous model for
the non-linear dynamics is developed by matching the
frequency response. The analysis of the non-linear dynamics
concludes that the dominant oscillatory mode is a linear
function of the firing angle. The linear TCSC model is
implemented in MATLAB and tested against non-linear
digital simulation PSCAD/EMTDC and good accuracy is
observed across a range of system parameters and operating
conditions. The model is also tested in frequency domain and
it is concluded that accuracy is good at frequencies f<30Hz.
The model is used for a controller design where the goal is
good step response performance and robustness to AC
parameters. It is demonstrated that the model is suitable for
such multidimensional TCSC design tasks.



VIII. APPENDIX
TABLE I.
TEST SYSTEM DATA
System 1 System 2 System 3
AC system data
R
1
6.0852 6.0852 6.0852
L
1
0.4323 H 0.4323 H 0.4323 H
e
S1
539 kV 539 kV 539 kV
e
S2
477.8 kV 477.8 kV 477.8 kV
f
o
60Hz 60Hz 60Hz
TCSC data (at nominal point)
%comp(=90) 75% 40% 75%
X
l
/X
c
0.1343 0.1632 0.1343
c l
tcr r
/ 1 =
163.7 Hz 148.54 Hz 163.7 Hz
c
21.977 F 41 F 21.977 F
l
tcr
0.043 H 0.028 H 0.043 H
V
c
128.5 kV 28 kV 4.2 kV
Fir. angl.

76
o
72
o
22
o

Controller data
k
p
-0.002rad/kV -.006 rad/kV 0.05 rad/kV
K
I
-.06rad/(kVs) -0.7rad/(kVs) 20rad/(kVs)
T
d1
1/220s 1/220s 1/220s
T
d2
1/1400s 1/1400 s 1/1400s

f
0.9 0.9 0.9

f
50 Hz 50 Hz 20 Hz
PLL k
p
30 30 30
PLL k
I
300 1/s 300 1/s 300 1/s
T
1
0.03 s 0.0 s 0.0 s
T
2
0.007 s 0.0 s 0.0 s
IX. REFERENCES
[1] S.G.Jalali, R.A.Hedin, M. Pereira, K.Sadek, A stability model for the
advanced series compensator (ASC), IEEE Trans. On Power Delivery,
Vol 11, No 2, April, 1996. Pp 1128-1137.
[2] C.R. Fuerte-Esquivel, E.Acha, H. Ambriz-Perez, A thyristor controlled
series compensator model for the power flow solution of practical power
networks, IEEE Trans. On Power Systems, Vol 9, No 15, Feb. 2000. Pp
58-64.
[3] S.G.Jalali, R.H.Lasseter I.Dobson, Dynamic Response of a Thyristor
Controlled Switched capacitor IEEE Trans. On Power Delivery, Vol 9,
No 3, July 1994. Pp 1609-1615.
[4] A. Ghosh, G.Ledwich, Modelling and control of thyristor controlled
series compensators IEE Proc. Generation Transmission and Dis-
tribution, Vol. 142, No 3, May 1995. Pp 297-304.
[5] Mattavelli P, Verghese GC, Stankovic AM, Phasor Dynamics of
Thyristor Controlled Series Capacitor Systems IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems, Vol.12, No.3, Aug. 1997, Pp.1259-67.
[6] D.Jovcic, N.Pahalawaththa, M.Zavahir, H.Hassan SVC dynamic
analytical model IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol 18, no4,
October 2003, pp 1455-1461.
[7] IEEE SSR Task Force, First benchmark model for computer simulation
for subsynchronous resonance, IEEE Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-96, No.5, Sep/Oct 1977, Pp.1565-
1571.
[8] N.Hingorani, Laszlo Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS, IEEE Press
2000.
[9] D.Jovcic Control of High Voltage DC and Flexible AC Transmission
Systems, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Auckland, Auckland, New
Zealand, 1999
[10] A. Gole, V.K. Sood, L. Mootoosamy, Validation and Analysis of a
Grid Control System Using D-Q-Z Transformation for Static compen-
sator Systems, Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer
Engineering Montreal, PQ, Canada September 1989, Pp.745-748.
[11] Manitoba HVDC Research Center PSCAD/EMTDC Users manual
Tutorial manual, 1994.
[12] D.Jovcic, G.N Pillai Discrete system model of a six-pulse SVC"
IASTED EuroPES 2003, Marbella, September 2003, conference
proceedings pp318-323 .
X. BIOGRAPHIES
Dragan Jovcic (S97, M00) obtained a B.Sc. in Control Engineering from
the University of Belgrade, Yugoslavia in 1993 and a Ph.D. degree in
Electrical Engineering from the University of Auckland, New Zealand in
1999.
He is currently a lecturer with the University of Ulster, Newtownabbey,
UK where he has been since 2000. He also worked as a design Engineer in the
New Zealand power industry from 1999-2000. His research interests lie in the
areas of control systems, HVDC systems and FACTS.

G. N. Pillai received the M.Tech degree in Control Systems from Regional
Engineering College, Kurukshetra, India in 1989, and the Ph.D. degree from
Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Kanpur, India, in 2001. Since 1989, he is
a Faculty Member in National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra.
Currently he is a research officer at the University of Ulster,
Newtownabbey, UK. His interests are in the areas of power systems and
controls.