www.ietdl.

org
Published in IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution
Received on 12th January 2011
Revised on 22nd June 2011
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2011.0031

ISSN 1751-8687

Modelling and simulation of voltage source

converter-based interphase power controller as
fault-current limiter and power flow controller
M. Farmad1 S. Farhangi1 S. Afsharnia1 G.B. Gharehpetian2
1
School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, PO Box 11365-4563, Iran
2
Electrical Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), no. 424, Hafez Avenue,
15914 Tehran, Iran
E-mail: mfarmad@tavanir.org.ir

Abstract: In this study, a new FACTS device is proposed, which is based on the topology of the conventional interphase power
controller (IPC). The proposed topology replaces the conventional phase-shifting transformers (PSTs) with the static synchronous
series compensator. The equivalent circuit model for this new voltage source converter-based IPC (VSC-based IPC) is developed.
Although the injected voltages of SSSCs are almost perpendicular to the branch currents and cannot maintain a constant
amplitude line voltage as PSTs, it is shown that the VSC-based IPC can effectively control the line power flow, without
exceeding the line voltage regulation limits. Based on the simulations, the abilities of the device for the short-circuit current
mitigation and power flow control are presented for the Iran electric network.

1 Introduction
Interconnected power systems are subjected to overrating of
circuit breakers and substation equipments because of
increasing short-circuit level. Utilising the series reactors in
the transmission lines, splitting the existing bus into sub-
sections, using high-impedance transformers and replacing
under-rated circuit breakers and equipments are conventional
solutions to overcome high-short-circuit level problem.
Series reactors cannot eliminate the fault-current
contributions completely and cannot reduce the transmission
constraints efficiently. In normal conditions, they absorb
reactive power and during heavy loading circumstances, they
may result in voltage regulation problems.
Splitting an existing bus into several sections reduces the
substation fault level in a relatively cost-effective way, but
it reduces the operational flexibility and reliability of the
substation due to the limitation on operational maneuvers,
too. However, it may be difficult to get permission from
power system (substation) authorities for modifying the
existing substation configuration.
Replacing the under-rated circuit breakers and the associated
substation equipments with the higher interruption facilities
may be expensive, depending on the voltage levels, the
number of associated circuit breakers and rating of new
breakers. In addition, planning and engineering challenges
may occur for the replacement of large number of circuit
breakers.
However, none of above-mentioned solutions provides extra
transmission capability or ability to control or redirect the
power flow. The new solutions for the fault-current limitation
such as using superconductor technology [1], resonant-type
fault limiter [2], solid-state fault-current limiting and
interrupting device (FCLID) can be used for low-voltage
distribution networks [3]. The series compensation, phase
shifting transformer (PST), interphase power controller (IPC)
and other flexible alternative current transmission systems
(FACTS) are devices that can be utilised in the existing
network at transmission voltage levels to achieve more
flexibility in power flow control and can help fault-current
mitigation, too [4, 5].
The IPC working mechanisms, flexibility and the speed of the
response put this technology in the category of FACTS devices
[6]. It can limit the fault current and control the power flow. A
comprehensive review of this device and its applications can
be found in [7]. It is a series connected device, constituting of
reactor and capacitor branches subjected to individually phase
shifted voltages provided by two PSTs [8]. An IPC, which is
equipped with the conventional PST, can potentially control
the power flow and mitigate the fault current [9], but the cost
is relatively high because of using two PSTs. The application
of the unified power flow controller (UPFC) in the
configuration of IPC has been recently reported [10]. This
scheme consists of a PST, conjugated susceptances and two
back-to-back connected inverters. But, this configuration is
not attractive because of the economic considerations and the
topology complexity.
In this paper, utilising the SSSC instead of the PST in the
IPC is proposed in order to increase precision, flexibility,
response promptness of power flow control and limit the

1132 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 11, pp. 1132–1140
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011 doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2011.0031
 www.ietdl.org
short-circuit current. The replacement of the PSTs with
SSSCs is a novel configuration named as VSC-based IPC.
The fundamental equations and equivalent circuit model
for the VSC-based IPC are derived. Then, as a case
study, the forthcoming problem of Iran grid because of
increasing short-circuit level of some of 230 kV
substations is studied by using PSS/E and PSCAD/
EMTDC softwares in detail. Finally, the ability of VSC-
based IPC to control the power flow and mitigate the
short circuit problem is presented.

2 Component modelling
2.1 IPC

An IPC is a series-connected active and reactive power

controller, consisting of inductive and capacitive branches
subjected to separately phase-shifted voltages, which are
made by PSTs [11].
For the short-circuit current mitigation, the reactances of Fig. 1 Tuned IPC in series with a transmission line connecting two
the reactor and capacitor branches should be equal and power systems and its phasor diagram
tuned at the fundamental frequency to present infinite
impedance against the short-circuit currents.
Each terminal of IPC acts as a ‘voltage dependent current
source’. Thus, the short circuits on the one side of IPC will The parameters of Fig. 1 are defined, as follows:
not be transferred to the other side and moreover, the power VS magnitude of the sending bus voltage
flow control under normal and post-contingency conditions VR magnitude of the receiving bus voltage
is guaranteed [12]. Therefore IPC is well adapted for
the system interconnections, which require new power Vm magnitude of the transmission line input voltage
transmission corridors without any additional synchronising IS sending end current
power. Furthermore, the additional interconnections can be IR receiving end current
performed even in the strongly meshed power networks
aA phase shift of the inductive branch of PST
with the high-short-circuit levels without exceeding the
given breaking capacities in the neighbouring substations. aB phase shift of the capacitive branch of PST
This offers the opportunity to interconnect systems even, d angle of the sending bus voltage
when the short-circuit levels are already in a range, which dm angle of the transmission line input voltage
could not allow new interconnections to be developed,
without replacing some circuit breakers and/or other system X reactance of the transmission line
elements. XA reactance of the reactor and capacitor branches
The reactive power can also be injected to or absorbed from (the absolute value)
the interconnected systems. Therefore the amount of the According to Fig. 1, the equations expressing the behaviour
reactive power injected into or taken from the system is the of the IPC are, as follows
same at both input and output terminals of IPC.
The IPC can be used for power flow control, especially for VS VR cos(d + aIPC )
increasing transfer capability with the existing transmission PR = (1)
facilities. It can hold the transmitted active power almost XIPC
constant for a large range of phase difference across the
VS VR sin(d + aIPC )
device. The control variables of the IPC are the phase shift QR = (2)
angles of the PSTs and the branch impedances. However, XIPC
the phase-shifting devices can be conventional or aA + aB
electronically switched. aIPC = (3)
An IPC-equipped static phase-shifting devices may add 2
dynamic regulation capabilities to the power system [13]. As a XA
consequence, the steady state and transient stability XIPC = (4)
2 sin((aA − aB )/2)
performances of the power system can be improved
significantly. After occurrence disturbances, such as line
outages, VSC-based IPC can rapidly set the power flow to a where, PR and QR are the active and reactive
predetermined operating condition. Therefore IPC can transmitted powers, respectively. In case of aA ¼ 2aB ¼ a,
increase the system security and avoid the overload of the active transmitted power of the transmission line is
transmission corridors. So, the power flow control can be expressed by (5)
performed with fast response. The maintenance-free operation
is another advantage of the static PSTs. 2VS VR sin a cos d
PR = (5)
Fig. 1 shows the simplified schematic diagram of a tuned XA
conventional IPC in series with a transmission line
connecting two power systems. According to this equation, since d is a relatively small angle,

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 11, pp. 1132–1140 1133
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2011.0031 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011
www.ietdl.org

Fig. 2 Active power variations in a transmission line equipped with IPC against d
a For aA ¼ 0 and 2208 ≤ aB ≤ 208
b For aB ¼ 0 and 2208 ≤ aA ≤ 208

In steady-state condition, the static synchronous series

compensator (SSSC) has the same function as PST [14]. In
the following sub-sections, the application of SSSC in IPC
configuration is investigated.

2.2 SSSC

SSSC injects a nearly sinusoidal and controllable voltage

in series with the transmission line. The main part of
the SSSC is a voltage source converter (VSC) connected to
a DC-link capacitor. The injected voltage is almost
perpendicular to the line current and behaves like an
inductive or a capacitive reactance in series with the
transmission line. Thus, it influences the power flow in
the line as illustrated in Fig. 3. According to the amount of
the injected voltage, the midpoint magnitude voltage, that
is, the voltage of the right-side connection point of VSC-
based IPC to the transmission line, may be different from
sending magnitude voltage.
Fig. 3 SSSC in series with a transmission line According to Fig. 3, the transmitted active power of the line
is defined, as follows

the active power is almost constant and independent of V

network characteristics. Meanwhile, the system operator can
control the active power of the transmission line by
adjusting a in IPC.
If only one PST is installed in one of the branches, then aA
or aB will be zero. Based on equations (1) to (4), we can
consider the normalised active power as follows
PR  a + aB 
PR normalised = = 2 cos d + A
VS VR /XA 2 presented in [15]. As shown in Fig. 4, Xqref builds Vdcref
a − a 
× sin A B
(6)
2 SSSC. Consequently, the injected voltage of SSSC will be
The variations of PR normalised against d for different amounts
of aB (or aA) are shown in Fig. 2a for (aA ¼ 0) and Fig. 2b
for (aB ¼ 0), respectively. They demonstrate the negligible
deviation of the active power with respect to d, and the
controllability of the active power by a. Hence, one of the
important characteristics of an IPC is that the active power
can be nearly set to a constant value for a large range of d
[13].
PR = [V sin d − Vq cos(d/2)] (7)
X
where V is the magnitude of the sending and receiving bus
voltages and Vq is the injected voltage of the SSSC.
The injected voltage, Vq , can control the active power.
There are many control methods for SSSC in the
literature. In this paper, the control viewpoint of [15, 16]
are used. The block diagram of SSSC is illustrated in
Fig. 4. The detailed description of its function is
to control VDC by affecting the switching of VSC in
controlled, to adjust the active power transmitted through
the transmission line.
2.3 VSC-based IPC
The single-line diagram of this new FACTS device in series
with a transmission line is presented in Fig. 5.
In Fig. 5, Vq1 and Vq2 are adjusted to be almost
perpendicular to IL (inductive branch current) and Ic

1134 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 11, pp. 1132–1140
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011 doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2011.0031
 www.ietdl.org

Fig. 4 Control block diagram of SSSC

injected voltages. It should be noticed that, if one of VSCs

is omitted from the VSC-based IPC, the other VSC can
control the line current. The voltage, Vm and the transmitted
active power of the line, PR , are presented in (11) and (14).

Vq1 − Vq2
Iq = = −IS (10)
jXA
X
Vm kdm = VR + (V − Vq2 ) (11)
XA q1
Vq1 = Vq1 ka1 (12)
Fig. 5 Single-line diagram of VSC-based IPC
Vq2 = Vq2 ka1 (13)

VS
PR = [V sin(d − a1 ) − Vq2 sin(d − a2 )] (14)
XA q1

where IQ is the phasor of the equivalent current source, Vq1 is

the phasor of the upper injected voltage and Vq2 is the phasor
of the lower injected voltage.
Fig. 6 Simplified equivalent model of VSC-based IPC

3 Case study and simulations

(capacitive branch current), respectively. These currents are
presented in (8) and (9). (see (8) and (9))
Since the internal impedance of the Norton equivalent of
VSC-based IPC is infinite, so that the total current Iq can be
explicitly defined by the inserted voltages. Consequently,
the VSC-based IPC can be modelled as shown in Fig. 6.
The line current, IQ , depends on Vq1 and Vq2 as it can be
seen in (10). Hence, this current can be controlled by the
3.1 Problem description
The short-circuit analysis of Iran electric network shows that
in some of 230 kV substations, short-circuit currents will be
near or exceed the capability of the existing circuit breakers.
Some of these substations are listed in Table 1.
As presented in Table 1, the three-phase short-circuit
currents for ten cases have been investigated. The total

X [VS kd − Vq1 ka1 − VR ] − (X + XA )[VS kd − Vq2 ka2 − VR ]

IL = (8)
jXA2

(XA − X )[VS kd − Vq1 ka1 − VR ] + X [VS kd − Vq2 ka2 − VR ]

IC = (9)
jXA2

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 11, pp. 1132–1140 1135
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2011.0031 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011
www.ietdl.org
Table 1 Some of 230 kV substations in Iran grid short-circuit levels according to PSS/E software output

Case no. Code and name Total fault Existing short-circuit Most contribution Contribution
of faulted bus current, kA breaking current, kA from (bus code and name)
kA %

1 4780 (N-PRN2) 54.74 50 3160 (FIBAH2) 23.43 43

2 3120 (AZADG2) 53.50 50 4780 (N-PRN2) 12.25 23
3 3360 (MONTG2) 52.30 40 3450 (PARKJ2) 10.05 19
4 3450 (PARKJ2) 51.17 40 3300 (KAN1) 10.41 20
5 3300 (KAN1 2) 45.85 40 3450 (PARKJ2) 12.46 27
6 3580 (SHUSH2) 44.41 40 3230 (GHORK2) 24.44 55
7 3400 (NAMAS2) 44.07 40 3450 (PARKJ2) 30.54 69
8 3540 (SADAT2) 43.16 40 3320 (KAN2) 34.55 80
9 3430 (PARDI2) 39.19 40 3400 (NAMAS2) 21.93 56
10 3150 (ESLSH2) 37.21 40 3160 (FIBAH2) 16.82 45

fault current and the highest contribution in the fault
current from the neighbouring buses have been
demonstrated.
As mentioned in [9], the conventional IPC can be utilised
to mitigate the short-circuit level for all of the above-
mentioned cases effectively, while maintaining the
acceptable load flow conditions.
In the present work, VSC-based IPC has been employed to
reduce the short-circuit level and control the power flow.
Some of the advantages of using VSC-based IPC instead of
conventional IPC are as follows:
3.2 Simulation results
In order to present the ability of VSC-based IPC for power
flow control and short-circuit level mitigation, simulations
have been carried out by PSS/E and PSCAD/EMTDC
softwares for cases given in Table 1. It is necessary to
mention that the model for VSC-based IPC is not just in
steady-state form and the dynamic switching of the
proposed device has been considered in details including
the gate turn-off (GTO) thyristors. Figs. 7a and b show the

(a) The replacement of the conventional PST by VSC

decreases the capital investment and the operating cost
because of elimination of shunt transformers, which are
needed in conventional IPC.
(b) Power flow control is more flexible and faster, because of
the application of power electronics switches (the time delay
of the mechanical tap changer of the PSTs in the conventional
IPC is usually more than 10 s).
(c) By the control of VSC-based IPC, the dynamic and
transient stability can be improved because of fast response
of power electronics switches. Fig. 8 VSC-based IPC added to the network in line 3400–3450

Fig. 7 Short-circuit currents in cases 7 and 6 of Table 1 and their contributions from their neighbouring buses (fault currents in A are
mentioned above the lines and their phase angles in degrees are stated below the lines according to PSS/E software output)
a Case 7 – faulted bus code:3400
b Case 6 – faulted bus code:3580

1136 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 11, pp. 1132–1140
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011 doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2011.0031
 www.ietdl.org

Fig. 9 Graphical representations of:

a Power flow variations of two lines connected to bus 3400, as a result of Xqref variations according to PSCAD/EMTDC software output
b DC bus voltage variation in VSC-based IPC added to line 3400– 3450 as a result of Xqref variations
c Three-phase short-circuit current (rms values) at bus 3400, with and without VSC-based IPC
d Currents of capacitive and inductive branches of IPC (rms values) during simulation
e DC bus voltage variation in VSC-based IPC during simulation

short-circuit levels and the current contributions from the

neighbouring buses for the cases 7 and 6 of Table 1,
respectively. The number above of each line in Fig. 7,
is the magnitude of three-phase short-circuit current
contributed from the neighbouring buses (in A) and the
number below of each line is the phase angle of this current
(in degrees).
The load flow studies show that in case no. 7 of Table 1
for supplying 320 MW load connected to the bus 3400,
220 MW from the bus 3450 and 100 MW from the bus
3430 should be supplied. The three-phase short-circuit
current is 44 kA at the bus 3400 (10% more than the short-
circuit breaking capacity) and approximately 69% of this Fig. 10 VSC-based IPC added to network in line 3580 –3230

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 11, pp. 1132–1140 1137
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2011.0031 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011
www.ietdl.org
current is supplied from the bus 3450. In Fig. 8, VSC-based
IPC including only one VSC in the reactor branch to reduce
the overall cost of the device is added to the line
3400 – 3450. The parameters of the power system including
Thévenin equivalent sources and p-equivalent circuits for
the transmission lines of Fig. 8 are given in the Appendix.
In order to study the ability of VSC-based IPC for power
flow control, the following scenarios are carried out. During
the first second of the simulation, by closing BRK1 and
opening BRK2 in Fig. 8, the VSC-based IPC is inactive and
the network is in its initial condition. Then, by changing
over the switches, the VSC-based IPC is activated. By
adjusting X to 0, 220, 230, 240, 250 and 260 V, the
transmitted active power through the transmission line
becomes 0, 20, 42, 94, 234 and 380 MW, respectively, and
the remaining power, P2 , for the bus 3400 is supplied by

Fig. 11 Graphical representations of:

a Power flow variations of three lines connected to bus 3580 as a result of Xqref variations according to PSCAD/EMTDC software output
b DC bus voltage variation in VSC-based IPC added to line 3580– 3230 as a result of Xqref variations
c Three-phase short-circuit current (rms values) at bus 3580 with and without VSC-based IPC
d Currents of capacitive and inductive branches of IPC (rms values) during simulation
e DC bus voltage variation in VSC-based IPC during simulation

1138 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 11, pp. 1132–1140
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011 doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2011.0031

the bus 3430. In other words, the active power of the line is
completely under control by the system operator. Figs. 9a
and b show the amount of active and reactive powers in the
lines connected to the bus 3400 and the DC bus voltage
variations during the simulation, respectively, which are
under control perfectly.
The other consequence of using VSC-based IPC in that
network is the short-circuit level mitigation. Adding this
device to the network reduces the short-circuit current at the
bus 3400 effectively. As indicated in Fig. 9c, the first three-
phase short circuit is applied at t ¼ 1 s. The fault duration
is 20 ms. Since the VSC-based IPC is by-passed, the rms of
the short-circuit current is less than 50 kA. After activating
the VSC-based IPC at t ¼ 2 s and applying the same three-
phase short circuit at t ¼ 3 s, the short-circuit current
decreases to less than 20 kA (more than 60% decrease). The
amounts of current in capacitive and inductive branches
during fault are presented in Fig. 9d and they are
acceptable. The DC bus capacitance is considered 1000 mF
and the DC bus voltage, which is depicted in Fig. 9e, is
zero before activating the VSC-based IPC. Then, it is near
15 kV and during the second fault at t ¼ 3 s, it will increase
to 30 kV. It is necessary to mention that the network is
equipped with appropriate surge arresters for voltage rise
limitation.
As another case for applying VSC-based IPC into the
network, case no. 6 of Table 1 is considered and shown in
Fig. 10. In this case, there are three 230 kV transmission
lines connected to bus 3580. The appropriate candidate for
VSC-based IPC installation is the line 3580 – 3230 because
of the short-circuit current contribution from this line. By
adjusting X to 0, 210, 215, 225, 227 and 230 V, the
transmitted active power through the transmission line
becomes 0, 9, 18, 70, 97 and 185 MW, respectively, and
the remaining powers (P2 and P3) for the bus 3580 are
supplied by the other buses (3510 and 3600).
Figs. 11a and b show the amount of active and reactive
powers in the lines connected to the bus 3580 and the DC
bus voltage variations of VSC, respectively. Similarly,
VSC-based IPC can reduce the fault current in the bus
3580 effectively as shown in Fig. 11c. The amounts of
current in capacitive and inductive branches during fault
are presented in Fig. 11d and they are acceptable. The
DC bus voltage which is depicted in Fig. 11c, is zero
before activating the VSC-based IPC. Then, it is near
10 kV and during the second fault at t ¼ 3 s, it will
increase to 40 kV.
So the performance of VSC-based IPC for power flow
control and short circuit limiting is satisfactory and it is not
necessary to substitute under-rated substation circuit
breakers and associated equipments with the new and
higher capacity components.
4 Conclusion
In this paper, the aggregation of SSSCs to the conventional
IPC has been discussed as a new FACTS device. According
to the presented analysis, this new device, known as VSC-
based IPC, can be utilised for the interconnected power
systems to control the active power flow and mitigate the
short-circuit current level. As a case study, the application
of VSC-based IPC to Iran electric network has been
investigated. The simulation results show the effectiveness
of this new topology of IPC for power flow control and
short-circuit mitigation.
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 11, pp. 1132–1140
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2011.0031
www.ietdl.org
5 References
1 Thuries, E., Pham, V.D., Laumond, Y., et al.: ‘Towards the
superconducting fault current limiter’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv.,
1991, 6, (2), pp. 801 –808
2 Xiaoqing, Z., Li, M.: ‘Using the fault current limiter with spark gap to
reduce short-circuit currents’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2008, 23,
(1), pp. 506– 507
3 Ahmed, M.M.R., Putrus, G., Li, R., Penlington, R.: ‘Development of a
prototype solid-state fault-current limiting and interrupting device for
low-voltage distribution networks’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2006,
21, (4), pp. 1997–2005
4 Habashi, K., Lombard, J.-J., Mourad, S., et al.: ‘The design of a
200 MW interphase power controller prototype’, IEEE Trans. Power
Deliv., 1994, 9, (2), pp. 1041– 1048
5 Subramanian, S., Chao, X.Y., Mandal, S., et al.: ‘Effective short circuit
mitigation using interphase power controller technology: system
planning and engineering considerations’. Power Engineering Society
General Meeting, IEEE, July 2003, vol. 1, pp. 324–329
6 Fuerte-Esquivel, C.R., Acha, E., Ambriz-Pérez, H.: ‘A modular
approach to IPC modelling for Newton– Raphson power flow studies’,
Int. J. Electr. Energy Syst., 2004, 26, pp. 553– 561
7 Padiyar, K.R.: ‘Facts controllers in power transmission and distribution’
(New Age International (P) Ltd., 2007), pp. 273– 286
8 Lemay, J., Berube, P., Brault, M.M., et al.: ‘The Plattsburgh interphase
power controller’. IEEE Transmission and Distribution Conf., New
Orleans, USA, April 1999, vol. 2, pp. 648– 653
9 Farmad, M., Farhangi, S., Afsharnia, S., Gharehpetian, G.B.: ‘An
efficient algorithm for determining the values of elements of
interphase power controller as a fault limiter’. Power Systems Conf.
and Exposition, IEEE PES, Atlanta, USA, October 2006,
pp. 1493– 1497
10 Kalinin, L., Zaitcev, D., Tirsu, M.: ‘Steady state operation of Interphase
Power Controller (IPC) using power electronic converter’. PowerTech
2009 IEEE, Bucharest, Romania, June 2009, pp. 1– 6
11 Hingorani, N.G., Gyugui, L.: ‘Understanding FACTS: concepts and
technology of flexible AC transmission systems’ (IEEE Press,
2000)
12 Brochu, J., Pelletier, P., Beauregard, F., Morin, G.: ‘The Interphase
Power Controller, a new concept for managing power flow within AC
networks’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1994, 9, pp. 833–841
13 Wirth, E., Kara, A.: ‘IPCs with conventional or electronically switched
phase-shifting devices-new power system components’, Power Eng. J.,
2000, 14, (2), pp. 77–80
14 Acha, E., Fuerte-Eaquivel, C.R., Ambriz-Perez, H., Angeles-Camacho,
C.: ‘FACTS, modeling and simulation in power networks’ (John
Wiley and Sons, England, 2004)
15 Sen, K.K.: ‘SSSC-static synchronous series compensator: theory, modeling,
and application’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1998, 13, (1), pp. 241–246
16 Pradhan, A.C., Lehn, P.W.: ‘Frequency-domain analysis of the static
synchronous series compensator’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2006,
21, (1), pp. 440–449
6 Appendix
The parameters of the system represented in Fig. 8 are, as
follows:
Network voltage ¼ 230 kV,
Rated frequency ¼ 50 Hz,
Base MVA ¼ 100,
Zth1 ¼ 0.62422 + j * 3.14755 V,
Zth2 ¼ 0.87285 + j * 6.95635 V,
XA ¼ 81.68 V,
Load ¼ 320 MW + 110 MVAR,
Transmission line 1 (pu): R ¼ 0.00012, X ¼ 0.00173,
B ¼ 0.05932,
Transmission line 2 (pu): R ¼ 0.00019, X ¼ 0.00280,
B ¼ 0.09614.
The parameters of the system represented in Fig. 10 are, as
follows:
Network voltage ¼ 230 kV,
Rated frequency ¼ 50 Hz,
Base MVA ¼ 100,
1139
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011
www.ietdl.org
Zth1 ¼ 0.64009 + j * 3.23748 V, Transmission line 3 (pu): R ¼ 0.00387, X ¼ 0.02455, B ¼
Zth2 ¼ 0.96807 + j * 4.35896 V, 0.08437.
Zth3 ¼ 0.60835 + j * 2.95182 V, The calculation of XA in each case is according to the
XA ¼ 47.52 V, method which is mentioned in [9]. The minimum value
Load ¼ 250 MW + 82.2 MVAR, of XA is determined from the inequality XA . 10 * Zs to
Transmission line 1 (pu): R ¼ 0.00017, X ¼ 0.00168, B ¼ prevent a series resonance phenomenon [12] where Zs is
0.36562, the maximum network equivalent impedance seen
Transmission line 2 (pu): R ¼ 0.0001, X ¼ 0.001, B ¼ from the both sides of the candidate location for IPC
0.21937. installation.

1140 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 11, pp. 1132–1140
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011 doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2011.0031