[Downloaded from www.aece.ro on Sunday, January 16, 2011 at 06:14:46 (UTC) by 41.107.109.107. Restrictions apply.

Advances in Electrical and Computer Engineering Volume 10, Number 1, 2010

Improvement of Dynamical Stability Using

Interline Power Flow Controller
Mohamad Reza BANAEI, Abdel-Rahim KAMI
Electrical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Azarbaijan University of Tarbiat Moallem,
35 Km Tabriz-Marageh road, Tabriz, Iran
m.banaei@ azaruniv.edu

Abstract—This paper presents a novel linearized Phillips- an operating point is put and controller design is analyzed.
Heffron model of a power system installed with an Interline An obtained controller is investigated in the nonlinear
Power Flow Controller (IPFC) in order to studying power dynamic model for its accuracy and desirable operation at
system stability. In addition, a supplementary controller for a
damping of oscillation.
novel modeling IPFC to damp low frequency oscillations with
considering four alternative damping controllers is proposed. In [5], a linearized model of a system, with two IPFC
In this paper selection of effectiveness damping control signal lines installed, has worked, but a SSSC or STATCOM can
for the design of robust IPFC damping controller to variations be employed in the system with a single machine and two
in system loading and fault in the power system are discussed. lines, out of economic reasons. The active or reactive power
The presented control scheme not only performs damping of the lines is not controlled independently.
oscillations but also the independent interline power flow
control can be achieved. MATLAB simulation results verify the
In this paper, a connected single machine to infinite bus
effectiveness of the IPFC and its control strategy to enhance with three IPFC lines installed is used and a novel linearized
dynamical stability. Phillips-Heffron model for the mentioned power system is
derived for design of the IPFC damping controller.
Index Terms—Power system dynamic stability, Phillips- In order to enhance power system dynamical stability, a
Heffron model, Supplementary controller, IPFC supplementary signal which is the same as that applied for
other FACTS devices [6-9], is superimposed on the main
I. INTRODUCTION input control signals. Next, the effect of IPFC damping
The recent interconnection between power systems and controller on low frequency oscillations of power system is
expansion in transmission and generation meant to satisfy investigated. Four alternative IPFC based damping
the increasing power demand, thus, the dynamic stability of controllers are considered. Contribution of pure positive
power systems became an important object in the great damping torque of the damping controllers are used to
power systems stability. Power System Stabilizer (PSS) has choose the most effective control signal of the IPFC to damp
been used as a simple, effective, and economical method to low frequency oscillations, the same as TCSC and UPFC
increase power system oscillation stability. While PSS may [10, 12].
not be able to suppress oscillations resulting from severe
disturbances, such as three phase faults at generator II. PROPOSED POWER SYSTEM INSTALLED WITH IPFC FOR
terminals [1], Flexible AC Transmission System (FACTS) DYNAMIC STABILITY STUDY
controllers, such as Static Var Compensators (SVC), Static Figure 1 shows a single-machine infinite-bus power
Synchronous Compensators (STATCOM), and Unified system installed with a IPFC which consists of a Master
Power Flow Controller (UPFC), can be applied for damping voltage source converter (VSC-M), a Slave voltage source
oscillations and improve the small signal stability of power converter (VSC-S) and its two transformers and a DC link
systems by adding a supplementary signal for main control capacitor ( C dc ). V inj 1 ,V inj 2 are voltages of transformers of
loops [2-3].
Interline Power Flow Controller (IPFC) [4] is a new line 1 and line 2 respectively. The infinite bus is supplied in
concept of the FACTS controller for series compensation parallel by three lines. Because of the third line in the power
with the unique capability of controlling power flow among system and its free power flow, the active and reactive
multi-lines. power flow on other lines are controlled independent of
The IPFC employs two or more voltage source converters power flow of third line. While the system is utilized only
(VSCs) with a common dc-link. Each VSC can provide with two lines, SSSC or STATCOM is installed for the
series compensation for the selected line of the transmission purpose of power flow control and other control functions.
system (master or slave line) and it is capable of exchanging In Fig. 1, m 1 , m 2 , δ 1 , δ 2 are the amplitude modulation
reactive power with its own transmission system. ratio and phase angle of the control signal of each VSC
The damping controller of low frequency oscillations in respectively, which are the input control signals to the IPFC
the power system must be designed for a nonlinear dynamic and V b ,V s , v inj 1 , v inj 2 are the voltage of infinite bus,
model of power system. But, because of the difficulty of this terminal voltage of generator and the injective voltages of
process, generally the linear dynamic model of the system at the Master and slave voltage source converter respectively.

Digital Object Identifier 10.4316/AECE.2010.01007

42
 [Downloaded from www.aece.ro on Sunday, January 16, 2011 at 06:14:46 (UTC) by 41.107.109.107. Restrictions apply.]

Advances in Electrical and Computer Engineering Volume 10, Number 1, 2010

Vt Vb δ& = ω 0ω
I3
+ XL3 - ω& = (Pm − Pe − D ω ) / 2 H
E& q′ = (− E q + E fd ) / T do′
(4)
Vs Vst2 2
Vinj
Xs I2 + XL2 -
G 1 K
Is E& fd = − E fd + A (V s 0 − V s )
Vinj
Vst11 TA TA
I1 + XL1 -
VSC-S Where Vs ,Vso are the terminal voltage and the reference
C Vvinj
i2 2
of terminal voltage respectively and also,
Te = Pe = Vsq I q + Vsd I d , E q = E q′ + ( X d − X d′ )I d ,
dc

m2 δ 2
Vs = Vsd2 + Vsq2 ,Vsd = X q I q ,Vsq = E q′ − X d′ I d , (5)
VSC- M
I d = I1d + I 2 d + I 3d , I q = I1q + I 2 q + I 3q
Vvinj
i11
From Fig. 1 we can have,

m δ
IPFC V s = jX s I s + j ( X L 1 + X t 1 )I 1 − V i1 + V b (6)
1 1

j ( X L 1 + X t 1 )I 1 − V i1 = j ( X L 2 + X t 2 )I 2 − V i 2 (7)
Figure 1. A single-machine infinite-bus power system installed with an
IPFC.
j ( X L 3 )I 3 = j ( X L1 + X t 1 )I 1 − Vi1 (8)
III. POWER SYSTEM NON-LINEAR MODEL That is,
The general pulse width modulation (PWM) (or Vsd + jV sq = jX s (I 1d + jI 1q + I 2 d + jI 2 q + I 3 d + jI 3 q ) +
j ( X L1 + X t1 )(I 1d + jI 1q ) − Vi1d − jVi1q + Vb sin δ + jVb cos δ
optimized pulse patterns or space-vector modulation (9)
approach) is adopted for the IGBT-based VSC. By ignoring
the resistance of the transformers of the IPFC and by [ ]
= X q (I 1q + I 2 q + I 3 q ) + j E q′ − X d′ (I 1d + I 2 d + I 3 d )
applying Park’s transformation, the per unit of three-phase j ( X L1 + X t1 )(I 1d + jI 1q ) − Vi1d − jVi1q
(10)
= j ( X L 2 + X t 2 )(I 2 d + jI 2 q ) − Vi 2 d − jVi 2 q
dynamic differential equations of the IPFC as the three-
phase dynamic differential equations of the UPFC [11] are
obtained: j ( X L 3 )(I 3d + jI 3 q )
(11)
V inj 1 d   0 X t 1   I 1 d  V i1 d  , = j ( X L1 + X t1 )(I1d + jI1q ) − Vi1d − jVi1q
V  =   + 
 inj 1 q   − X t 1 0   I 1 q  V i1 q  From (1-11), we can obtain,
m V cos δ 1 (1)
V i 1 d = 1 dc , I 1 q = V i1 d X q11 + V i 2 d X q 21 + V b X qb 1 sin δ (12)
2
m V sin δ 1 I 1d = V i1q X d 11 + V i 2 d X d 21 + V b X db1 cos δ + E q′ X de1 (13)
V i 1 q = 1 dc
2
I 2 q = V i 1 d X q 12 + V i 2 d X q 22 + V b X qb 2 sin δ (14)
V inj 2 d   0 X t 2   I 2 d  V i 2 d 
V  =   +  , I 2 d = Vi1q X d 12 + Vi 2 d X d 22 + Vb X db 2 cos δ + E q′ X de 2
0   I 2 q  V i 2 q 
(15)
 inj 2 q   − X t 2
m V cos δ 2 (2) I 3 q = V i1d X q13 + V i 2 d X q 23 + V b X qb 3 sin δ (16)
V i 2 d = 2 dc ,
2
I 3 d = Vi1q X d 13 + Vi 2 d X d 23 + Vb X db 3 cos δ + E q′ X de 3 (17)
m V sin δ 2
V i 2 q = 2 dc
2 where the constants of (12-17), given in appendix B.
By linearizing the (4-17), we can obtain,
dv dc m1  I 1d 
= [cos δ 1 sin δ 1 ]  ∆ δ& = ω ∆ ω
dt 2 C dc  I 1q  (3) 0

∆ ω& = (− ∆ Pe − D ∆ ω ) / 2 H
m2  I 2d 
+ [cos δ 2 sin δ 2 ]  ∆ E& ′ = (− ∆ E + ∆ E ) / T ′
(18)
2 C dc  I 2q  q q fd do

1 K
where X t 1 , X t 2 are the reactance of master and slave ∆ E& fd = − ∆ E fd + A ∆ V s
TA TA
injection transformers and v dc is the DC link voltage and,
Where,
I 1 = I 1 d + jI 1 q , I 2 = I 2 d + jI 2 q .
∆ Pe = K 1 ∆ δ + K 2 ∆ E q′ + K pd ∆ V dc + K p1 ∆ m1
The complete dynamic model of a single-machine (19)
infinite-bus power system equipped with an IPFC can be + K pδ 1 ∆ δ 1 + K p 2 ∆ m 2 + K pδ 2 ∆ δ 2
developed by combining (1-3) with the machine dynamic ∆ E q′ = K 4 ∆ δ + K 3 ∆ E q′ + K qd ∆ V dc + K q1 ∆ m1
equations shown below: (20)
+ K qδ 1 ∆ δ 1 + K q 2 ∆ m 2 + K qδ 2 ∆ δ 2

43
 [Downloaded from www.aece.ro on Sunday, January 16, 2011 at 06:14:46 (UTC) by 41.107.109.107. Restrictions apply.]

Advances in Electrical and Computer Engineering Volume 10, Number 1, 2010

∆Vs = K 5 ∆δ + K 6 ∆E q′ + K vd ∆Vdc + K v1 ∆m1 in designing the damping controller of the IPFC, besides
(21) setting its parameters, the selection of the input control
+ K vδ 1 ∆ δ 1 + K v 2 ∆ m 2 + K vδ 2 ∆ δ 2
signal of the IPFC to superimpose on the damping function
∆Vdc = K 7 ∆δ + K 8 ∆E q′ − K 9 ∆Vdc + K c1∆m1 of the IPFC is also important.
(22)
+ K c δ 1 ∆ δ 1 + K c 2 ∆ m 2 + K cδ 2 ∆ δ 2
IV. DESIGN OF DAMPING CONTROLLERS
By substituting (19-22) with (18), we can obtain the state The Philips-Heffron model of power system installed with
variable equations of the power system installed with the IPFC (Fig. 2.) can be expressed with (24), that is obtained
IPFC: from (23), and shown in Figure 3, where H(s) and y are the
 0 ω0 0 0 0  transfer function of damping controller and feedback signal
 − K pd   ∆δ 
 ∆δ&   − K1 − D − K2
0 
respectively. The (24) and Fig. 3, are the same as Larsen in
   M M M M   ∆ω  [12] for TCSC and H. F. Wang in [10] for UPFC have
 ∆ω&   − K − K3 1 − K qd    expressed. The coefficients of (24), and transfer functions of
 ∆E& q′  =  4
0   ∆Eq′ 
 &   Td′0 Td′0 Td′0 Td′0 (25) have been mentioned in [12].
 
∆E fd   K A K 5 − K A K6 −1 − K A K vd  ∆E fd   ∆δ   0 ωb 0   ∆δ   0 
 ∆V&   0   (23)
 dc  TA   ∆Vdc   •   
− d A23  ∆ ω  +  B 2  ∆u s
TA TA TA
 K 0 K8 0 − K9   ∆•ω  =  − k
 7  x   A31
  A32 A33   x   B 3  (24)
 0 0 0 0 
 − K p1 − K pδ 1 − K p2 − K pδ 2   ∆δ 
   ∆m1 
 −M K −
M
K
M
− Kq2
M
− K qδ 2   ∆δ1 
[
y = C1 C2 ] 
C 3 ∆ ω 
+ 
qδ 1
q1
   x 
Td′0 Td′0 Td′0 Td′0  ∆m2   
− K K − K A K vδ 1 − K A Kv2 − K A K vδ 2   ∆δ 
 A v1
 2  And where,
 T TA TA TA 
−1  
A

d + A23T (sI − A33 )  A31 +

 K c1 K cδ 2  s s
K cδ 1 K c2 K (s ) = k + A32 
ωb  ωb 
Where ∆ m 1 , ∆ m 2 , ∆ δ 1 , ∆ δ 2 represent the linearization
ω  −1  ω 
K 0 (s ) =  b C1 + C 2  + C3T (sI − A33 )  b A31 + A32 
(25)
of the input control signals of the IPFC. The linearized
dynamic model of (23), can be shown by Figure 2, where  s   s 
K 0 (s ) = A23T (sI − A33 ) B3 + B2
−1
only one input control signal is demonstrated, with u begins
1 ( ∆ u = ∆ m 1 ) , 2 ( ∆ u = ∆ m 2 ) , δ 1 (∆ u = ∆ δ 1 ) or
K IL (s ) = C3T (sI − A33 ) B3
−1

[ ] [ ]
δ 2 (∆ u = ∆ δ 2 ) and k pu ,[k vu ] , k qu ,[k cu ] are the row
vectors as defined below,
[ ] [ ] ∆δ ω0
k pu = k p1 k pδ 1 k p 2 k pδ 2 , [k vu ] = [k v1 k vδ 1 k v 2 k vδ 2 ] , K (s )
s
[k ] = [k
qu q1 k qδ 1 k q 2 ]
k qδ 2 , [k cu ] = [k c1 k cδ 1 k c 2 k cδ 2 ].

1
s

Kc (s) K0 (s)
∆u K KIL (s )

H (s )
Figure 3. The closed loop system installed with IPFC damping controller.

We can obtain the electric torque provided by the IPFC

damping controller to the electromechanical oscillation loop
of the generator to be,
K c (λ 0 )K 0 (λ 0 )H (λ 0 )
∆ T IPFC = ∆ω (26)
Figure 2. Proposed Philips-Heffron model of power system installed with 1 − K IL (λ 0 )H (λ 0 )
IPFC.
where λ 0 is the angular frequency of system oscillation. A
From (23), it can be seen that there are four choices of
pure positive damping torque should be provided with an
input control signals of the IPFC to superimpose on the
ideal IPFC damping controller to the electromechanical
damping function of the IPFC, m 1 , m 2 , δ 1 , δ 2 . Therefore,
oscillation loop with ∆ T IPFC = D IPFC ∆ ω , that is,

44
 [Downloaded from www.aece.ro on Sunday, January 16, 2011 at 06:14:46 (UTC) by 41.107.109.107. Restrictions apply.]

Advances in Electrical and Computer Engineering Volume 10, Number 1, 2010

K c (λ 0 )K 0 (λ 0 )H (λ 0 ) m 1 shall henceforth be denoted as damping controller

D IPFC =
1 − K IL (λ 0 )H (λ 0 ) ( m 1 ), similarly damping controllers based on
= [K c (λ 0 )K 0 (λ 0 ) + D IPFC K IL (λ 0 )]H (λ 0 ) (27)
m 2 , δ 1 , δ 2 shall henceforth be denoted as damping
= F (λ 0 )H (λ 0 ) controller ( m 2 ), damping controller ( δ 1 ), and damping
F( λ 0 ) is named the forward path of the IPFC damping controller ( δ 2 ), respectively.
controller. Because of the variation of a F( λ 0 ) influence on The detailed step-by-step procedure for computing the
parameters of the damping controllers using phase
the effectiveness of the IPFC damping controller, the compensation technique is given below. In this paper a
magnitude of F( λ 0 ) can be used to analyze the structure of IPFC based damping controller is,
effectiveness of the IPFC damping controller, the selection
 s .Tω   1 + s .T1 
of power system operating condition at which the IPFC H (s ) = k dc     (30)
damping controller is designed and the choice of input  1 + s .Tω   1 + s .T 2 
control signals of the IPFC to be superimposed by the IPFC
1. Computation of natural frequency of oscillation ω n
damping function. The criterion of the selection can be [10],
from the mechanical loop.
µ selected = min F (λ 0 , µ , u k ), µ ∈ Ω (µ ) (28)
µ
K 1ω 0
ωn = (31)
u selected = max F (λ 0 , µ selected , u k ) M
uk
(29a)
K1: the constant of model computed for operating
u k ∈ {m1 , m 2 , δ 1 , δ 2 } condition and system parameters
ω : frequency of operating condition (rad/sec)
u selected = min  max F (λ0 , µ , u k ) − min F (λ0 , µ , u k )
0

uk 
 µ µ  (29b) ω n :natural frequency of oscillation (rad/sec)
u k ∈ {m1 , m 2 , δ 1 , δ 2 }, µ ∈ Ω (µ )
where Ω (µ ) is the set of the operating conditions of the
power system that F( λ 0 ) is the function of system operating
of the IPFC, µ and input control signal of the IPFC, u k ,
F (λ 0 , µ , u k ) .
Equation (28) represents the IPFC damping control at the Figure 4. Structure of IPFC based damping controller.
selected operating condition for design the damping
controller should be haven least effective because of the
2. Computation of ∠ GEPA (Phase lag between
robustness of the damping controller is achieved. To achieve
the efficient of the IPFC damping function at minimum ∆ u and ∆ Pe ) at s = j ω n . Let it be γ .
control cost the criterion of (29a), is applied. Equation (29b) 3. Design of phase lead/lag compensator G C :
is applied for a good design of damping controller to The phase lead/lag compensator G C is designed to
provide the steady damping overall the range of power
system operating conditions, because: provide the required degree of phase compensation. For
(1) greatly increasing the damping contribution from the 100% phase compensation,
controller, the damping function with the variations power ∠ G C ( j ω n ) + ∠ GEPA ( j ω n ) = 0 (32)
system operating conditions at some operating conditions
Assuming one lead-lag network, T1 = aT2 , the transfer
could be too strong and pose much unwanted influence on
other modes in the power system. function of the phase compensator becomes,
(2) a sharp drop on damping contribution from the 1 + saT 2 (33)
GC (s) =
controller with the variations power system operating 1 + sT 2
conditions results in poor robustness.
Also (29b), must be applied jointly with (29a), not to fail Since the phase angle compensated by the lead-lag
the requirement of effectiveness. network is equal to − γ , the parameters a and T 2 are
After the choice of the suitable input control signal of the computed as,
damping controller, we must design the controller function 1 + sin( γ )
in order to damp the oscillation. The damping controllers are a=
1 − sin( γ ) (34)
designed to produce an electrical torque in phase with the
1
speed deviation. The four control parameters of the IPFC T2 =
(i.e. m 1 , m 2 , δ 1 , δ 2 ) can be modulated in order to produce ωn a
the damping torque. The speed deviation ∆ ω is considered 4. Computation of optimum gain K dc
.
as the input to the damping controllers. The four alternative The value of gain K dc setting to achieve the required
IPFC based damping controllers are examined in the present
amount damping torque D IPFC can be provided by IPFC
work. Damping controller based on IPFC control parameter
damping controller.

45
 [Downloaded from www.aece.ro on Sunday, January 16, 2011 at 06:14:46 (UTC) by 41.107.109.107. Restrictions apply.]

Advances in Electrical and Computer Engineering Volume 10, Number 1, 2010

The signal washout is the high pass filter that prevents (a) With u k = m 1 , m 2 ,
steady changes in the speed from modifying the IPFC input max F (λ 0 , µ , u k ) − min F (λ 0 , µ , u k )
parameter. The value of the washout time constant µ µ
= 2 . 25
T w should be high enough to allow signals associated with min F (λ 0 , µ , u k )
µ

oscillations in rotor speed to pass unchanged. From the (b) With u k = δ 1 , δ 2 ,

viewpoint of the washout function, the value of T w is not max F (λ 0 , µ , u k ) − min F (λ 0 , µ , u k )
µ µ
critical and may be in the range of 1s to 20s. In this paper, = 6.37
min F (λ 0 , µ , u k )
Tw equal to 10s is chosen. µ

Applying the criteria of (29a), (29b) shows that the

V. SIMULATION RESULTS damping controller with u k = δ 1 , δ 2 has not suitable
Parameters of an example single-machine infinite-bus damping torque to the electromechanical oscillation loop.
power system have been shown by Fig. 1, and are given in Therefore, with u k = m 1 , m 2 , the IPFC damping
the appendix A. The set of system operating conditions is,
controller provides the smoothest and suitable damping to
Ω (µ ) = {µ: Vto = 1.0 p.u., Vbo = 1.0 p.u., Peo = 0.1 p.u. – the oscillation mode. Because once the IPFC damping
1.2 p.u.} controller is designed where providing a steady damping
As it can be seen in Figure 5, the damping of the overall the range of power system operating conditions is
responsible electromechanical oscillation mode is negative our purpose, and u k = m 1 , m 2 is selected for the design of
or very poor over the set of system operating conditions and
the controller.
at the operating condition, µ1 = {Vto = 1.0 p.u., Vbo = 1.0
The final result of the selection is:
p.u., Peo = 1.2 p.u. } the oscillation mode is of the poorest
µ2 = {Vto = 1.0 p.u., Vbo = 1.0 p.u., Peo = 0.1 p.u.}
damping.
In order to select the suitable damping signal, it has been u k = m 1 or m 2
used the result of calculation of the forward path over Then, the phase compensation method is used to set the
Ω (µ ) whose result to be superimposed to all the input parameters of the IPFC damping controller at µ2
control signals by the IPFC damping controller shown in with u k = m 1 or m 2 . The results are,
Figure 6. With u k = m 1 ,
Kdc= 19.55, Tw= 10 s, T1= 0.08756s, T2= 0.08763s.
With u k = m 2 ,
Kdc= -19.55, Tw= 10 s, T1= 0.08763s, T2= 0.08756s.
The oscillation mode is moved by the IPFC damping
controller with u k = m 1 or m 2 to λ 0 = -1.15 ± 11.3i
with a satisfactory damping around of 0.1.
It is used MATLAB/Simulnk software package for
simulation to confirm the simple analysis above and
demonstrate the damping controllers on power system
Figure 5. Damping of oscillation mode over Ω (µ ) . oscillation stability where the power system and the IPFC
are modeled by nonlinear differential equations of (1-4).
However, the lead-lag controller is designed for the
linearized system around the best operation condition. The
oscillation once started to carry out a step load perturbation
in mechanical power (i.e., ∆ Pm = 0 . 01 p.u. ) and once to
occur a three-phase to earth short circuit on the end of
transmission line in the example power system at 1.0 second
of the simulation and is cleared after 100 ms. For the
analysis the dynamic responses of the system, we assumed
that Master voltage source converter (VSC-M) injects active
Figure 6. Variation of magnitude of F ( λ 0 ) over Ω(µ ) . power to its line and Slave voltage source converter (VSC-
S) absorbs active power from its line in any operating
According to the criteria of (28), it can be seen that the condition.
operating condition to be selected for the design of the IPFC Because of similar operation of damping controllers based
damping controller is: u k = m 1 , m 2 and only two of controller based u k = m 1 is
µ2 = {Vto = 1.0 p.u., Vbo = 1.0 p.u., Peo = 0.1 p.u.} examined at operating condition µ2 = (Vto = 1.0 p.u., Vbo =
At µ2 , the most effective input control signals are 1.0 p.u., Peo = 0.1 p.u.), µ1 = (Vto = 1.0 p.u., Vbo = 1.0 p.u.,
u k = m 1 , m 2 , as indicated in Fig. 6. So the criteria of Peo = 1.2 p.u.) and (Vto = 1.0 p.u., Vbo = 1.0 p.u., Peo = 0.3
(29a), lead to the selection of the input control signal for the p.u.) and the phase compensation method is used to design
IPFC damping controller as u k = m 1 or m 2 . The results the damping controller with two selection as shown in Table
of applying the criteria of (29b) for input control signal are: (1), where at µ1 = {Vto = 1.0 p.u., Vbo = 1.0 p.u., Peo = 1.2
p.u.} at which the oscillation mode has the poorest damping

46
 [Downloaded from www.aece.ro on Sunday, January 16, 2011 at 06:14:46 (UTC) by 41.107.109.107. Restrictions apply.]

Advances in Electrical and Computer Engineering Volume 10, Number 1, 2010

when the power system installed no IPFC damping

controller and µ2 = {Vto = 1.0 p.u., Vbo = 1.0 p.u., Peo = 0.1
p.u.} which by the criterion of the selection analysis is
candid for design damping controller and u k = m 1 . Figures
(7-14) show numerical results of nonlinear simulation with
damping controller where 1: respective response at
operating condition without damping controller, 2:
respective response at operating condition with damping
controller that designed at µ1 with u k = m 1 , 3: respective
response at operating condition with damping controller that
designed at µ2 with u k = m 1 ,
Figure 9. Power flow response at operating condition µ2 = (Vto = 1.0 p.u.,
Vbo = 1.0 p.u., Peo = 0.1 p.u.) for ∆Pm = 0.01 p.u.
TABLE. 1. RESULTS OF THE IPFC DAMPING CONTROLLER
Input Parameters of the Electromechanical
Operating
control IPFC damping oscillation mode of the
condition
signal controller system

kdc = 12.25
µ1 u k = m1 T1 = 0.05101s λ 0 = -1.99 ± 19.5i
T2 = 0.05093s
kdc = 19.55
µ2 u k = m1 T1 = 0.08756s λ 0 = -1.15 ± 11.3i
T2 = 0.08763s

Figure 10. Rotor speed response at operating condition µ2 = (Vto = 1.0 p.u.,
Vbo = 1.0 p.u., Peo = 0.1 p.u.) for ∆ Pm = 0.01 p.u.

Figure 7. Power flow response at operating condition µ1 = (Vto = 1.0 p.u.,

Vbo = 1.0 p.u., Peo = 1.2 p.u.) for ∆Pm = 0.01 p.u

Figure 11. Power flow response at operating condition µ2 = (Vto = 1.0 p.u.,
Vbo = 1.0 p.u., Peo = 0.1 p.u.) for a three-phase to earth short circuit.

Figure 8. Rotor speed response at operating condition µ1 = (Vto = 1.0 p.u.,

Vbo = 1.0 p.u., Peo = 1.2 p.u.) for ∆Pm = 0.01 p.u.

Figure 12. Rotor speed response at operating condition µ2 = (Vto = 1.0 p.u.,
Vbo = 1.0 p.u., Peo = 0.1 p.u.) for a three-phase to earth short circuit.

47
 [Downloaded from www.aece.ro on Sunday, January 16, 2011 at 06:14:46 (UTC) by 41.107.109.107. Restrictions apply.]

Advances in Electrical and Computer Engineering Volume 10, Number 1, 2010

X d = 1.8 pu, X q = 1.77 pu , X d′ = 0.293 pu ,

H = 0.7988 MJ / MVA, D = 0.00059338 pu
, K a = 10 pu , Ta = 0.01 s, X s = 0.1 pu ,
X t 1 = X t 2 = 0.1 pu , X L 1 = X L 2 = 0.3 pu ,
X L 3 = 0.4 pu ,Vb = 1 pu ,Vs = 1 pu ,
Vdc = 2 pu , C dc = 1 pu , ω0 = 2 pi × 60

B. Appendix B

Xq1 = Xq + Xs + X L1 + Xt1 +
(X q + Xs )( X L1 + Xt1 )
X L2 + Xt 2
Figure 13. Power flow response at other operating condition (Vto = 1.0 p.u.,
Vbo = 1.0 p.u., Peo = 0.3 p.u.) for a three-phase to earth short circuit. +
(X q + Xs )( X L1 + Xt1 )
,
X L3

Xd1 = Xd′ + X s + X L1 + Xt1 +

( Xd′ + Xs )( XL1 + Xt1 )
X L 2 + Xt 2

+
( Xd′ + Xs )( XL1 + Xt1 ) ,
X L3
1  − (X q + X s ) ( X q + X s )  1  (X q + X s ) 
Xq11 =  − −1, Xq21 =  
Xq1  X L2 + Xt 2 X L3  Xq1  X L2 + Xt 2 

1 1  ( X d′ + X s ) ( X d′ + X s ) 
X qb1 = , X d 11 =  + + 1 ,
X q1 X d 1  X L 2 + X t 2 X L3 
1  − ( X d′ + X s )  −1 1
X d 21 =   , X db1 = , X de1 = ,
Figure 14. Rotor speed response at other operating condition (Vto = 1.0 X d 1  X L 2 + X t 2  X d1 X d1
 − (X q + X s ) (X q + X s ) 
p.u., Vbo = 1.0 p.u., Peo = 0.3 p.u.) for a three-phase to earth short circuit.
 X + X
 L1 t1  − − 1
It can be seen from Figures (7-14) that the IPFC damping
  ( X L 2 + X t 2 )X q1  X L 2 + X t 2 X L3  ,
controller set at µ2 with u k = m 1 is efficient and maintains X q12 = 
+ 1 
both effectiveness and robustness at all load conditions
 X L 2 + X t 2 
for ∆ Pm = 0 . 01 p.u.. But the IPFC damping controller set
 X + X  (X q + X s )  1 
at µ2 with u k = m 1 cannot suppress the oscillation when X q 22 =  L1 t1 
  − ,
 ( X L 2 + X t 2 ) X q1  X L 2 + X t 2  X L 2 + X t 2 
 
occurs a three-phase to earth short circuit only at higher
loading of the power system. The IPFC damping controller  X L1 + X t1  X d′ + X s X′ + Xs 
  + d + 1
set at µ2 with u k = m 1 is better than the IPFC damping ( X + X t 2 )X d1  X L 2 + X t 2 X L3
X d 12 =  L 2  ,
controller set at µ1 and provides a steady damping over the  −1 
+ 
power system conditions above.  X L 2 + X t 2 
 X L1 + X t1  − ( X d′ + X s )  1 
VI. CONCLUSION X d 22 =    + ,
 ( X L 2 + X t 2 ) X d 1  X L 2 + X t 2  X L 2 + X t 2 
In this paper the establishment of the linearized Phillips-
Heffron model of a power system installed with an Interline  X L1 + X t1   X L1 + X t1 
X db 2 = −  , X de 2 =  ,
 ( X L 2 + X t 2 )X d1 
Power Flow Controller (IPFC) has been presented. A  ( X + X )X 
 L2 t2 q1 
damping controller based on the Phillips-Heffron model has
 X + X  − (X q + X s ) (X q + X s )  1 
been designed for enhancing dynamic stability in a power X q13 =  L1 t1 
 − − 1 + 
system. It can be seen, by analyzing contribution of pure  X L 3 X q1  X L 2 + X t 2 X L3  X L 3 
positive damping torque of the damping controllers and the
selection of the power system suitable operating condition  X + X t 1  (X q + X s )   X + X t1 
X q 23 =  L1   , X =  L1 ,
for good design of the IPFC damping controller, signals m1 ,  X X  X + X  qb 3  X X 
 L 3 q 1  L 2 
t 2   L 3 q1 
m2 based controllers have more effect on damping of
oscillations and provide the almost steady damping over all  X + X t 1  X d′ + X s X′ + Xs  1 
X d 13 =  L1  + d + 1 − ,
power system conditions.  X L 3 X d 1  X L 2 + X t 2 X L3  X L3 
 X + X t 1  − ( X d′ + X s )   X + X t1 
APPENDIX X d 23 =  L1  , X db 3 = − L1 ,
X X
 L 3 d 1  L 2 X + X t 2   X L3 X d 1 
A. Appendix A
Example of single-machine infinite-bus power system:  X + X t1   X L1 + X t 1 
X de 3 =  L1 , X qb 2 =  ,
 ( X + X )X 
 X L3 X d 1   L 2 t 2 q 1 

48
 [Downloaded from www.aece.ro on Sunday, January 16, 2011 at 06:14:46 (UTC) by 41.107.109.107. Restrictions apply.]

Advances in Electrical and Computer Engineering Volume 10, Number 1, 2010

REFERENCES [6] L. Rouco, “Coordinated design of multiple controllers for damping

power system oscillations”, Elect. Power energy syst., Vol. 23, 2001,
[1] A. R. Mahran, B. W. Hogg, and M. L. El-Sayed, “Co-ordinated pp. 517-530.
control of synchronous generator excitation and static VAR [7] H.F. Wang, “Phillips-Heffron model of power systems installed with
compensator”, IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, Vol. 7, Issue 4, Dec. STATCOM and applications” IEE Proc. Generation, Transmission
1992, pp. 615-622. and Distribution, Vol. 149, Issue 6, pp. 659-666, Nov. 1999.
[2] Li-Jun Cai and István Erlich, “Simultaneous coordinated tuning of [8] H. F. Wang, “Unified model for the analysis of FACTS devices in
PSS and FACTS damping controllers in large power systems”, IEEE damping power system oscillations-part III: unified power flow
Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 20, No. 1, February 2005, pp. controller”, IEEE Transactions on power delivery, Vol. 15, No. 3,
294-300. July 2000, pp. 978-983.
[3] M. A. de Amorim, and F. D. Freitas, “Generator and FACTS devices [9] Ali T. Al-Awami, Y.L. Abdel-Magid, M.A. Abido, “A particle-
supplementary controller settings for damping electromechanical swarm-based approach of power system stability enhancement with
oscillation in a long radial power system”, IEEWPES Transmission & unified power flow controller”, Electrical power and energy systems.,
Distribution Conference & Exposition: Latin America, (2004), pp. Vol. 29, 2007, pp.251–259.
749-753. [10] H.F. Wang, “Damping function of unified power flow controller”,
[4] L. Gyugyi, K. K. Sen, C.D.Schauder, “The interline power flow IEE Proc.-Gener. transm. distrib. Vol. 146, No. 1, January 1999,
controller concept: a new approach to power flow management in pp.81-87.
transmission systems”, IEEE/PES Summer meeting, Paper No. [11] Nabavi-Niaki, A., and Iravam, M.R., “Steady-state and dynamic
PE316-PWRD-0-07-1998, San Diego, July 1998. models of unified power flow controller (UPFC) for power system
[5] Kazemi, A.; Karimi, E, “The effect of interline power flow controller studies”, IEEE Trans., 1996, PWRS-4, Vol. 11, pp. 1937-1943.
(IPFC) on damping inter-area oscillations in the interconnected power [12] Larsen, E.V., Sanchezgasca, J.J., and Chaw, J.H., “Concept for design
systems”, Industrial Electronics, 2006 IEEE International of FACTS controllers to damp power swings”, IEEE Trans., 1995,
Symposium, Vol. 3, July 2006, pp. 1911 – 1915. PWRS-2, Vol. 10, pp.948-956.

49