M. Tumay and A. M.

Vural

ANALYSIS AND MODELING OF UNIFIED POWER FLOW CONTROLLER: MODIFICATION OF NEWTONRAPHSON ALGORITHM AND USER-DEFINED MODELING APPROACH FOR POWER FLOW STUDIES
Mehmet Tumay
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering Cukurova University Balcali-Yuregir, Adana 01330, TURKEY

and * A. Mete Vural

Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering University of Gaziantep Gaziantep, TURKEY

:
) (UPFC ) (UJPFC ) .(FACTS ) (NR ) .(PSASP ).(UPFC VV NR PSASP . IEEE-30, TEEE-14 . . . UPFC

Address for correspondence: A. Mete Vural Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering University of Gaziantep, Sahinbey, Gaziantep, 27310, Turkey e-mail: vural@gantep.edu.tr

October 2004

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

135

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

ABSTRACT
A unified power flow controller (UPFC) is an advanced member of the group of flexible AC transmission systems (FACTS). This paper is focused on the steady-state modeling of UPFC for the implementation of the device in the conventional Newton-Raphson (NR) power flow algorithm and in a power system analysis software package (PSASP). The model, derived from twovoltage source representation, is presented and analyzed in detail. The model represents a more robust and feasible alternative to others, because it is able to take operational losses of UPFC into account. A program in Fortran-77 language has been written in order to extend the conventional NR algorithm based on the proposed model. The model has also been adapted into PSASP by means of a user-defined modeling technique. Different computer simulation studies performed on IEEE 14-bus and IEEE 30-bus test systems are presented to test and compare the two approaches. A robust and reliable convergence of the power flow studies is guaranteed by implementing the two approaches with high convergence speeds. UPFC can be theoretically located anywhere along a transmission line. In this respect, the effects of UPFC allocation on power system steady-state operation have also been investigated in detail. Keywords: Flexible AC Transmission Systems, Unified Power Flow Controller, NewtonRaphson power flow algorithm, Power Flow Analysis

136

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

October 2004

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

ANALYSIS AND MODELING OF UNIFIED POWER FLOW CONTROLLER: MODIFICATION OF NEWTON-RAPHSON ALGORITHM AND USER-DEFINED MODELING APPROACH FOR POWER FLOW STUDIES
1. INTRODUCTION During the last decade, continuous and fast improvement of power electronics technology has made flexible AC transmission systems (FACTS) a promising concept for power system applications [1, 2]. With the application of FACTS technology, power flow along transmission lines can be more flexibly controlled [3, 4]. Among a variety of FACTS controllers, UPFC is one of the more interesting and potentially the most versatile. [5]. It can provide simultaneous and independent control of important power system parameters: line active power flow, line reactive power flow, impedance; and voltage [6, 7]. Thereby, it offers the necessary functional flexibility for the combined application of phase angle control with controlled series and shunt compensation. The UPFC operation mode (terminal voltage regulation, series compensation, phase shift, or any combination of them) can be changed from one state into another without hardware alterations to adapt to particular changing system conditions. This feature makes it a competent device. Computation and control of power flow for power systems embedded with UPFC appear to be fundamental for power system analysis and planning purposes. A mathematical model is required for investigating the effects of UPFC on power system operation. From a summarized literature search, [8] introduces a steady-state UPFC model based on a single, ideal, and series voltage source. Reference [9] utilizes two ideal voltage sources, one in series and one in parallel, to develop a UPFC steady- state model. The steady-state model suggested in [10] is based upon one ideal series voltage source and one ideal shunt current source. Reference [11] provides an injected power model concept for UPFC. In this model, UPFC is represented by two ideal voltage sources with series source impedances, connected in series and parallel with the transmission line, respectively, representing the output voltages of series and shunt branches of UPFC. However this model is highly suitable for steady-state representation of UPFC in power flow studies, it does not take the operational losses into account in which the proposed method accepts. 2. MODELING APPROACH A UPFC can be represented in the steady-state by two voltage sources representing fundamental components of output voltage waveforms of the two converters and impedances being leakage reactances of the two coupling transformers. Figure 1 depicts a two voltage-source model of UPFC. Voltage of bus i is taken as reference vector, V i =V i 0D and
V i = V se +V i . The voltage sources, V se and V sh , are controllable in both their magnitudes and phase angles. The values of r and are defined within specified limits given by Equation (1). 0 r rmax and

0 2 .

(1)

V se should be defined as: V se = rV i e j

(2)

The steady-state UPFC mathematical model is developed by replacing voltage source V se by a current source I se parallel with the transmission line, where bse = 1 / X se .
I se = jbseV se

(3)

busi Vi

I ij V se X sh V i'

X se

IL

busj Vj

V sh

Figure 1. Two voltage-source model of UPFC.

October 2004

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

137

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

The current source I se can be modeled by injection powers at the two auxiliary buses i and j as shown in Figure 2

busi Vi

b se =1/X se

busj Vj

I se
Figure 2. Replacement of series voltage source by a current source.

S is = V i (I se )

(4) (5)

S js = V j (I se ) .

The injected powers S is and S js can be simplified according to the following operations, by substituting Equation (2) and (3) into Equation (4).
S is = V i ( jbse rV i e j )

(6)

By using the Euler Identity, ( e j = cos + j sin ), Equation (6) takes the form:
S is = V i (e j ( + 90)bse rV i ) S is = V i 2bse r [ cos( 90) + j sin( 90) ] .

(7) (8)

By using trigonometric identities, Equation (8) reduces to:

S is = rbseV i 2 sin jrbseV i 2 cos .

(9)

Equation (9) can be decomposed into its real and imaginary components,
S is = Pis + jQ is , where Pis = rbseV i 2 sin Q is = rbseV i 2 cos .

(10) (11)

Similar modifications can be applied to Equation (5); the final equation takes the form:
S js = V iV j bse r sin(i j + ) + jV iV j bse r cos( i j + ) .

(12)

Equation (12) can also be decomposed into its real and imaginary parts,
S js = P js + jQ js , where P js = V iV j bse r sin(i j + ) Q js = V iV j bse r cos(i j + ) .

(13) (14)

Based on Equations (10), (11), (13), and (14), the power injection model of the series connected voltage source can be seen as two dependent power injections at auxiliary buses i and j, as shown in Figure 3.

138

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

October 2004

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

busi Vi

X se

busj Vj

Pis + jQ is
Equivalent power injection of shunt branch at bus i

P js + jQ js

Equivalent power injection of series branch at bus j

Figure 3. Equivalent power injections of series branch.

In UPFC, the shunt branch is used mainly to provide both the real power, Pseries , which is injected to the system through the series branch, and the total losses within the UPFC. The total switching losses of the two converters is estimated to be about 2 % of the power transferred, for thyristor based PWM converters [12]. If the losses are to be included in the real power injection of the shunt connected voltage source at bus i, Pshunt is equal to 1.02 times the injected series real power Pseries through the series connected voltage source to the system.
Pshunt = 1.02Pseries .

(15)

The apparent power supplied by the series converter is calculated as.

S series = V se I ij

V i V j = re V i jX se
j

(16)

Active and reactive power supplied by the series converter can be calculated from Equation (16):
S series = re j V i

( ( re

V i +V i V j / jX se
i j (i + )

(17)
j j

S series = rV i e j (i + )

( ( rV e

+V i e j i V j e

) / jX )
se

(18) (19)

S series = jbse r 2V i 2 + jbse rV i 2e j jbseV iV j e

j (i j + )

S series = jbse r 2V i 2 + jbse rV i 2 (cos + j sin ) jbse rV iV j (cos(i j + )

+ j sin(i j + ) .

(20)

The final form of Equation (20) can be written as

S series = Pseries + jQ series , where Pseries = rbseV iV j sin(i j + ) rbseV i 2 sin Q series = rbseV iV j cos(i j + ) + rbseV i 2 cos + r 2bseV i 2

(21) (22)

The reactive power delivered or absorbed by converter 1 is not considered in this model, but its effect can be modeled as a separate controllable shunt reactive source. In this case the main function of reactive power is to maintain the voltage level at bus i within acceptable limits. In view of the above explanations, Q shunt can be assumed to be 0. Consequently, steady-state UPFC mathematical model is constructed from the series connected voltage source model with the addition of a power injection equivalent to Pshunt + j 0 to bus i, as depicted in Figure 4.

October 2004

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

139

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

busi Vi

X se

busj Vj

Pshunt + j 0 Equivalent power injection of shunt branch at bus i

Figure 4. Equivalent power injection of shunt branch.

Finally, steady-state UPFC mathematical model can be constructed by combining the series and shunt power injections at both bus i and bus j as shown in Figure 5.

busi Vi P i,upfc +jQ i,upfc

X se

busj Vj

P j,upfc +jQ j,upfc

Figure 5. Steady-state UPFC mathematical model.

The elements of the equivalent power injections in Figure 5 are,

Pi ,upfc = 0.02rbseV i 2Sin 1.02rbseV iV j Sin (i j + ) P j ,upfc = rbseV iV j Sin (i j + ) Q i ,upfc = rbseV i Cos Q j ,upfc = rbseV iV j Cos (i j + )
2

(23) (24) (25) (26)

General nodal power flow equations and the linearized power system model can be expressed in rectangular form by the following equations:
P = f 1 (V , , G , B ) Q = f 2 (V , , G , B )

(27) (28)

P H Q = J

N , L V / V
n n

(29)

where P and Q are vectors of real and reactive nodal power injections, which are function of nodal voltages, (V ), and network conductances and susceptances, (G and B), respectively. ( P = Pspe Pcal ) is the real power mismatch vector and ( Q = Q spe Qcal ) is the reactive power mismatch vector. ( V and ) are vectors of

140

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

October 2004

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

incremental changes in nodal voltages. H, N, J, and L denote the basic elements in the Jacobian matrix. They correspond to partial derivatives of the real and the reactive powers, with respect to the phase angles and the magnitudes of the nodal voltages; n is iteration number. The derived injected power model can be incorporated into a general NR power flow algorithm by modifying the related elements in the normal Jacobian matrix and the corresponding power mismatch equations as well. Since injected powers vary with busbar voltage amplitudes and phases, the relevant elements of Jacobian matrix will be modified at each iteration. Based on Equation (2326), the following additional elements of Jacobian matrix (( H = H org + H upfc ) and for N, J, and L elements) owing to the injections of the UPFC at the buses i and j can be derived. For bus i, when i=j,
Pi ,upfc i

H ii upfc =

(30)

N ii upfc =V i

Pi ,upfc V i

(31)

J ii upfc =

Q i ,upfc i Q i ,upfc V i

(32)

Lii upfc = V i

(33)

When ij,
Pi ,upfc j

H ij upfc =

(34)

N ij upfc = V j

Pi ,upfc V j

(35)

J ij upfc =

Q i ,upfc j

(36)

Lij upfc =V j

Q i ,upfc V j

(37)

For bus j, when i=j,

H jj upfc = P j ,upfc j

(38)

October 2004

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

141

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

upfc jj

=V j

P j ,upfc V j

(39)

J jj upfc =

Q j ,upfc j Q j ,upfc V j

(40)

L jj upfc = V j

(41)

When ij,
Pj ,upfc i Pj ,upfc V i

H ji upfc =

(42)

upfc ji

=V i

(43)

J ji upfc =

Q j ,upfc i

(44)

L ji upfc =

Q j ,upfc V i

(45)

The related power mismatch equations at bus i and bus j must also be modified as:
Pi = Pi ,G Pi , L + Pi ,upfc Pi ,Cal

(46) (47) (48) (49)

P j = P j ,G P j , L + P j ,upfc P j ,Cal Q i = Q i ,G Q i , L + Q i ,upfc Q i ,Cal

Q j = Q j ,G Q j , L + Q j ,upfc Q j ,Cal .

3. IMPLEMENTATION

The proposed algorithm for solving a power flow problem embedded with UPFC is implemented by using the Fortran-77 language. The program is referred to as unified power flow controller load flow (UPFCLF). Figure 6 depicts the flow diagram of the programming process. The overall procedure of the proposed algorithm can be summarized as follows the input system data includes the basic system data needed for conventional power flow calculation, i.e., the number and types of buses, transmission line data, generation and load data, the location of UPFC, and the values of UPFC control parameters (r and ).

142

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

October 2004

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

START

INPUT SYSTEM DATA FORM SYSTEM ADM ITTANCE M ATRIX FORM CONVENTIONAL JACOBIAN M ATRIX

M ODIFY JACOBIAN M ATRIX AND M ISM ATCH POW ER EQUATIONS

UPDATE SYSTEM BUSBAR VOLTAGES

NO

IS THE CONVERGENCE ACHIEVED? YES OUTPUT LOAD FLOW INFORM ATION. BUSBAR VOLTAGES. GENERATIONS. LINE FLOW S. TRANSM ISSION LOSSES.

STOP

Figure 6. Flow chart for UPFCLF.

The system admittance matrix and the conventional jacobian matrix are formed due to incoming of UPFC. At the next step, the jacobian matrix is modified and power equations (Equations (46-49)) are mismatched. Then busbar voltages are updated at each iteration. Convergence is checked, whether achieved or not. If no, the jacobian matrix is modified and the power equations are mismatched until convergence is achieved. If yes, the power flow results are displayed.

October 2004

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

143

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

Y=A

TM1

b se

Y=A

TM2

g am m a

Y=A

TM3

p i/180

Y=A

TM8

TM1 TM2

AX1*X2

TM4

VT 1 VT 1

AX1*X2 TM4

AX1*X2

TM5

AN G B 1 AN G B 2

SIN AX1+B X2 TM3 AX1+B X2 TM8 AX1*X2 COS

TM6

TM7

TM6

AX1*X2

P j,up fc

TM7 VT 1 VT 2 TM1 AX1*X2 TM4 AX1*X2 TM6

AX1*X2

Q j,u p fc

AX1*X2 AX1+B X2

P i,u p fc

TM3 TM8

AX1*X2

SIN TM5 COS TM5

AX1*X2

AX1*X2

Q i,u p fc

Figure 7. Block diagram representation of user-defined model of UPFC in PSASP.

Power System Analysis Software Package (PSASP) [13] is commercial software, allowing users to create self-defined models of advanced devices such as UPFC. In order to verify the results of UPFCLF, PSASP has been utilized for power flow studies on a PC with a IntelTM Pentium III microprocessor at 650 MHz. UPFC involving power flow studies in PSASP require the following criteria. user-defined model of UPFC, schematically drawn in Figure 7, is developed from UPFC mathematical model given by Equations (2326). Operator blocks constitute a user-defined model and their functions are listed in Table 1. By referring to Figure 5, UPFC is seen between two auxiliary PQ buses i and j, so these buses are created on the line where UPFC is considered to be positioned. Series reactance X se must be positioned between auxiliary buses. Transmission line data must also be modified, depending on the position of UPFC on the line; sending-end side, receiving-end side; or middle-line position.

144

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

October 2004

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

Table 1. Blocks Building User-Defined Model and their Functions.

Name of Block Y=A AX1*X2 AX1+BX2 SIN COS

4. CASE STUDIES

Function Constant parameter block; input is equal to pre-defined constant A Multiplication block; multiplies the two inputs and outputs the result Summing block; sums the two inputs and outputs the result Sine block; takes the sine of input and outputs the result Cosine block; takes the cosine of input and outputs the result

In order to investigate the feasibility of the proposed techniques, UPFC embedded power flow studies on a IEEE 14bus test system [14], shown in Figure 8, and a IEEE 30-bus test system [15], shown in Figure 9, are carried out. It should be pointed out that the results are taken by the choice of UPFC parameters, i.e., the control parameters of UPFC (r, ) are given and UPFC is operated in an open-loop form. All the results indicate that good convergence and high accuracy are achieved by the proposed methods. Simulation examples have shown that UPFC is also a powerful FACTS device in controlling the flow of real power, as well as the flow of reactive power. The advent of UPFC has also changed the overall total transmission losses (real and reactive) of the studied systems.
4.1 IEEE 14-Bus Test System

Four different case studies on IEEE 14-bus test system with added-on UPFC are performed, using UPFCLF and PSASP. Flat voltage start and a tolerance of accuracy less than 10-5 (pu) of the maximum absolute mismatch of nodal power injection are used in all analyses. First of all and without any compensation, the electrical system is studied in order to determine the power flow in each of the transmission lines. This provides a general idea about system steadystate operation. Then, UPFC is allocated on line L-5, close to bus 2, thought to be near the power generation sections. Different UPFC parameters are set to activate UPFC, the transmitted active and reactive power of all of the lines has remarkably changed. Table 2 shows the selected results of power flow studies comparatively carried out by UPFCLF and PSASP.
B12
L16

B13
L17

B14 L11

L9

L10 B11
L10

L8
L15

L14

G en.

B1

Syn. C. L9

B6 L5

B10
L13

B9 B8 L6
Tr. L12 L11 Syn. C.

Slack Bus L1 B2 L1

L2 Tr.

L7 B5

UPFC
G en.

L7 L5 L4

B4
Tr.

B7

L4 L3

L3

L6

B3
Syn. C.

L2
Figure 8. IEEE 14-bus test system including UPFC.

October 2004

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

145

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

Comparing power flow solutions of the system without and with UPFC, it can be concluded that the proposed two methods developed in this study are efficient in the analysis of both power flow and control parameters of UPFC. Table 3 gives sample results of UPFCLF and PSASP on the iteration number and maximum mismatches in case of different UPFC parameters. Voltage profile of the system under different UPFC schemes can be observed in Figure 10. Incoming of UPFC has not changed the voltage profile of the system significantly except at buses 4 and 5. The reason is that during UPFC operation a series voltage is injected on line L-5 via the UPFC series branch, causing a change in voltage magnitudes at the neighboring buses of the UPFC. Although bus 1 and 6 are neighboring to bus 5, their voltage magnitudes are not effected by UPFC, since buses 1 is actually a PV bus and a synchronous condenser is employed at bus 6 providing voltage regulation support. The results taken with UPFCLF indicate no evidence of impaired merits of the conventional NR algorithm and its quadratic convergence characteristic maintains.
G3 L-5 G2 L1

B5
L-8 L4

UPFC

L-6
L-1

B2
G1

B8
G4 L6 G5 L5 L-10

B7
L-3 L-9 L-4 L-2

B1

B6
L-11 L-11 L-12

L-7

B4
L-15 L3 L8 L2

B3
G6 L-13

B11

B9 L7
L-12 C

B12
L-16 L-14 L-18

B13

B10
L-23 L-22 L-24

B17
L12 L11

B16

L-25

B20
L15 L-21

L-15

L-36

L-37

B21
L-26 L16

L-20

B19
L14 L-29 L13

B18

L-19 L-17

B22
L-28

L18

L-27

B24
L19 L-31

B15
L10

B14
L9

B23
L-30 L17 L-32

B28 B26

B27 B25
L-34

L-36

L-33

L-35

B29
L20 L21

B30

Figure 9. IEEE 30-bus test system including UPFC.

146

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

October 2004

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

Table 2. Power Flow Results of IEEE 14-Bus Test System without and with UPFC

Case 1: without UPFC UPFC Parameters (r = 0.0, = 0.0) Line power flow in pu from bus i to bus j, (Pij + jQij) (I j) (1 2) (1 5) (2 3) (2 4) (2 5) (4 5) Case 3 UPFC Parameters (r = 0.1, = 90.0) Line power flow in pu from bus i to bus j, (Pij + jQij) (I j) (1 2) (1 5) (2 3) (2 4) (2 5) (4 5) By UPFCLF 0.6593 + j0.0051 0.5228 j0.1309 0.7131 + j0.0138 0.5502 j0.1894 0.4285 j0.1914 0.6233 j0.0946 By PSASP 0.6586 + j0.0045 0.5223 j0.1303 0.7129 + j0.0136 0.5496 j0.1791 0.4284 j0.1910 0.6234 j0.0944 By UPFCLF 1.5523 j0.2301 0.7780 j0.1352 0.7152 + j0.0140 0.5555 j0.1653 0.4187 j0.1930 0.6114 j0.0556 By PSASP 1.5512 j0.2296 0.7774 j0.1363 0.7176 + j0.0132 0.5564 j0.1648 0.4183 j0.1927 0.6114 j0.0556

Case 2 UPFC Parameters (r = 0.05, = 45.0) Line power flow in pu from bus i to bus j, (Pij + jQij) (I j) (1 2) (1 5) (2 3) (2 4) (2 5) (4 5) Case 4 UPFC Parameters (r = 0.12, = 15.0) Line power flow in pu from bus i to bus j, (Pij + jQij) (I j) (1 2) (1 5) (2 3) (2 4) (2 5) (4 5) By UPFCLF 1.2377 j0.1534 0.6897 j0.2462 0.6999 + j0.0152 0.5383 j0.2507 0.1549 + j0.0228 0.6543 j0.2909 By PSASP 1.2375 j0.1529 0.6898 j0.2461 0.7009 + j0.0149 0.5383 j0.2507 0.1548 + j0.0226 0.6533 j0.2907 By UPFCLF 1.2034 j0.1467 0.6992 j0.1767 0.7201 + j0.0156 0.5643 j0.2029 0.0780 j0.0432 0.6047 j0.1593 By PSASP 1.2055 j0.1448 0.7002 j0.1770 0.7190 + j0.0130 0.5665 j0.2031 0.0777 j0.0415 0.6052 j0.1587

Table 3. Calculation Performance of UPFCLF and PSASP for IEEE 14-Bus Test System.

Iteration number UPFCL F 6 8 10 11 PSASP 4 6 7 8

Maximum mismatch UPFCLF 5.0154489E 06 6.3553298E 06 8.0433486E 06 9.9920534E 06 PSASP 3.0435816E 06 5.0017492E 06 7.0298664E 06 8.7021639E 06

UPFC parameters
r (pu) (degrees)

0.0 0.05 0.1 0.12

0.0 45.0 90.0 15.0

October 2004

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

147

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

Figure 10. Voltage profile of IEEE 14-bus test system under investigation.

4.2 IEEE 30-Bus Test System

From the results of a power flow study performed by PSASP on a IEEE 30-bus test system without UPFC, uncompensated real and reactive power flows on line L-6 are 0.5555 pu and 0.0155 pu, respectively, while the total real and reactive transmission losses are 0.1560 pu and -0.0164 pu, respectively. PSASP with a UPFC user-defined model is employed to evaluate the effects of UPFC allocation on the steady-state operational characteristics of the IEEE 30-bus test system. Allowed iteration tolerance is taken as 106 in all tasks. Two different scenarios are considered in simulation studies.
Scenario A

The UPFC device is positioned on line L-6 close to bus 6. Line L-6 is the controlled line. Effects of UPFC on system parameters such as; real and reactive power flows on line L-6, overall total real and reactive transmission losses of the system are investigated. During simulations, when a UPFC parameter is controlled, another is kept constant. Namely, while r is controlled, is kept constant, and vice versa. The constant values of r and are 0.1 pu and 90.0, respectively. Power flow results of each simulation task are graphically presented in Figure 11.
Scenario B

A comparative study regarding the effects of UPFC location on important power system parameters is carried out for two different UPFC location. First position named as Position A refers to UPFC location near bus 6 on line L-6, while second position named as Position B refers to UPFC location at the middle of line L-6. Comparable simulation results are graphically represented in Figure 12. There were no significant changes in either real power flow or overall transmission real losses when the UPFC position is changed on the line. The UPFC parameter (r) is more effective than () on the change of reactive power flow. Furthermore, Table 4 summarizes the percentage changes in parameters when the UPFC location is changed from position A to B.
Table 4. Percentage Changes as UPFC is Moved from Position A to B.

Active power flow change (%) increase

r fixed fixed

Reactive power flow change (%) increase

r fixed fixed

Total transmission real loss change (%) increase

r fixed fixed

Total transmission reactive loss change (%) increase

r fixed fixed

6.33

2.4

120.81

30.91

1.94

0.72

30.22

30.72

148

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

October 2004

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

Pflow (pu)

Magnitude of Series Inserted Voltage (pu)

Phase Angle of the Series Voltage (Degrees)

Qflow (pu)

Magnitude of Series Inserted Voltage (pu)

Phase Angle of the Series Voltage (Degrees)

Magnitude of Series Inserted Voltage (pu)

Phase Angle of the Series Voltage (Degrees)

Total Transmission Real Losses (pu)

Magnitude of Series Inserted Voltage (pu)

Phase Angle of the Series Voltage (Degrees)

Total Transmission Reactive Losses (pu) Figure 11. Comparative graphical results related with simulation scenario A.

October 2004

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

149

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

Figure 12. Comparative graphical results related with simulation scenario B.

150

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

October 2004

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

5. CONCLUSIONS

In this study, an improved UPFC steady-state mathematical model for the implementation of the device in the conventional NR power flow algorithm and even in commercial software for power system analysis has been developed from a two-voltage source equivalent of UPFC. The model shows a clear representation of UPFC for power system analysis purposes. An advantage of the model is that the model is capable of taking the losses of UPFC into account and it is highly suitable for adaptation into the conventional NR algorithm and for the user-defined model approach with-in commercial software. Numerical computations confirm that the results obtained by UPFCLF are matched with those of PSASP in an acceptable tolerance. The user-defined model approach for UPFC is effective and reliable in terms of computational speed, accuracy, and computing resources requirement in commercial software. A UPFC can be theoretically located anywhere along a transmission line in a power system. In this respect, the effects of UPFC allocation on power flow solution have been thoroughly investigated. The studies on the IEEE 14-bus test system also show that the introduction of UPFC can disturb the system voltage profile at the neighboring buses significantly unless a voltage regulation support at those buses is not provided.
REFERENCES
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] FACTS Overview, IEEE Power Engineering Society/Cigre, IEEE Service Center, Piscataway, N.J., 1995, Special Issue, 95TP108. A. Edris, FACTS Technology Development: An Update, IEEE Power Engineering Review, March 2000, p. 4. L. Gyugyi, C.D. Schauer, S.L. Williams, T.R. Rietman, D.R. Torgerson, and A. Edris, The Unified Power Flow Controller: A New Approach to Power Transmission Control, IEEE Trans. On Power Delivery, 2 (1995), p. 1085. A. Edris, A.S. Mehraban, M. Rahman, L. Gyugyi, S. Arabi, and T. Reitman, Controlling The Flow Of Real And Reactive Power, IEEE Computer Applications In Power, January 1998, p. 20. R. J. Nelson, J. Bian, and S. L. Williams, Transmission Series Power Flow Control, IEEE Trans. On Power Delivery, 10 (1) (1995), p. 504. Laszlo Gyugyi, Solid-State Synchronous Voltage Sources For Dynamic Compensation And Real-Time Control of AC Transmission Lines, in Emerging Practices In Technology, New York: IEEE Standards Press, 1993, p. 1. Naihu Li, Yan Xu, and Heng Chen, FACTS-Based Power Flow Control In Interconnected Power Systems, IEEE Trans. On Power Systems, 15, (1), (2000), p. 257. R. Mihalic, P. Zunko, and D. Povh, Improvement Of Transient Stability Using Unified Power Flow Controller, IEEE Trans. On Power Delivery, 11 (1) (1996), p. 485. H. Ambriz-Perez, E. Acha, C. R. Fuerte-Esquivel, and A. De la Torre, Incorporation Of A UPFC Model In An Optimal Power Flow Using Newtons Method, IEE Proc.- Gener. Trans. Distrib., 145, (3), (1998), p. 336. Kalyan K. Sen, and Eric J. Stacey, UPFC Unified Power Flow Controller: Theory, Modeling And Applications, IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, 13 (4) (1998), p. 1453. M. Noroozian, L. Angquist, M. Ghandhari, and G. Anderson, Use Of UPFC For Optimal Flow Control, Stockholm Power Tech Conference, Stockholm, Sweden, June 18-22, 1995, p. 506. Ned Mohan, Power Electronics: Converters, Applications and Design. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1992. Power System Analysis Software Package (PSASP) User Manual. Electric Power Research Institute (China), 1993. IEEE 14-bus test system data [Online]. Available: http://www.ee.washington.edu/research/pstca/pf14/pg_tca14bus.htm IEEE 30-bus test system data [Online]. Available: http://www.ee.washington.edu/research/pstca/pf30/pg_tca30bus.htm

October 2004

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

151

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

NOMENCLATURE

*
Vi Vj Vi i j Vse Vsh V IL Ise Iij r Xse Xsh bse G B Sis Sjs Pis Pjs Qis Qjs Pshunt Pseries Sseries Qseries Qshunt Pi,upfc Pj,upfc Qi,upfc Qj,upfc P

Complex conjugate Voltage magnitude of bus i Voltage magnitude of bus j Imaginary voltage behind the series reactance Xse Phase angle of voltage of bus i Phase angle of voltage of bus j Vector of incremental change in phase angle of nodal voltages The output voltage of series branch of UPFC The output voltage of shunt branch of UPFC Vector of incremental change in magnitude of nodal voltages Transmission line current flowing through series branch of UPFC Current source in parallel with transmission line Current flowing from bus i to bus j Per unit value of output voltage of series branch of UPFC Phase angle difference between Vi and Vse Leakage reactance of series coupling transformer of UPFC Leakage reactance of shunt coupling transformer of UPFC Susceptance of series coupling transformer Network conductance Network susceptance Equivalent complex power injected into bus i by the series branch of UPFC Equivalent complex power injected into bus j by the series branch of UPFC Equivalent real power injected into bus i by the series branch of UPFC Equivalent real power injected into bus j by the series branch of UPFC Equivalent reactive power injected into bus i by the series branch of UPFC Equivalent reactive power injected into bus j by the series branch of UPFC Real power delivered absorbed by the shunt branch of UPFC Injected real power by the series branch of UPFC Injected complex power by the series branch of UPFC Injected reactive power by the series branch of UPFC Reactive power delivered or absorbed by the shunt branch of UPFC Equivalent total real power injected into bus i by UPFC Equivalent total real power injected into bus j by UPFC Equivalent total reactive power injected into bus i by UPFC Equivalent total reactive power injected into bus j by UPFC Real power mismatch vector
October 2004

152

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

M. Tumay and A. M. Vural

Q n H, N, J, L

Reactive power mismatch vector Iteration number Basic elements in the jacobian matrix
org upfc

(H, N, J, L) (H, N, J, L)

Elements of the jacobian matrix not modified by the incoming of UPFC Elements of the jacobian matrix modified by the incoming of UPFC

Paper Received 22 February 2003; Revised 9 June 2003; Accepted 26 October 2003.

October 2004

The Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Volume 29, Number 2B

153