1.

INTRODUCTION
The increasing number of power system blackouts in many countries in recent years, is a major source of concern. Power engineers are very interested in preventing blackouts and ensuring that a constant and reliable electricity supply is available to all customers. Incipient voltage instability, which may result from continues load growth or system contingencies, is essentially a local phenomenon. However, sequences of events accompanying voltage instability may have disastrous effects, including a resultant low-voltage profile in a significant area of the power network, known as the voltage collapse phenomenon. Severe instances of voltage collapse, including the August 2003 blackout in North - Eastern U.S.A and Canada, have highlighted the importance of constantly maintaining an acceptable level of voltage stability. The design and analysis of accurate methods to evaluate the voltage stability of a power system and predict incipient voltage instability, are therefore of special interest in the field of power system protection and planning. In planning and operating power systems, the analysis of voltage stability for a given system state involves the examination of two aspects:

a) Proximity: how close is the system to voltage instability? b) Mechanism: when voltage instability occurs, what are the key contributing factors, what are the voltage-weak points, and what areas arc involved?

Proximity gives a measure of voltage security whereas mechanism provides information useful in determining system modifications or operating strategies which could be used to prevent voltage instability.

Page | 1

2. VOLTAGE STABILITY
The voltage stability of a power system refers to its ability to properly maintain steady, acceptable voltage levels at all buses in the network at all times, even after being subjected to a disturbance or contingency. A power system may enter a condition of voltage instability when the system is subjected to a steady increase in load demand or a change in operating conditions, or a disturbance (loss of generation in an area, loss of major transformer or major transmission line). This causes an increased demand in reactive power. Voltage instability is characterized by gradually decreasing voltage levels at one or more nodes in the power system. Both static and dynamic approaches are used to analyze the problem of voltage stability. Dynamic analysis provides the most accurate indication of the time responses of the system.

Voltage stability is indeed a dynamic phenomenon and can be studied using extended transient/midterm stability simulations. However, such simulations do not readily provide sensitivity information or the degree of stability. They are also time consuming in terms of CPU and engineering required for analysis of results. Therefore, the application of dynamic simulations is limited to investigation of specific voltage collapse situations, including fast or transient voltage collapse and for coordination of protection and controls. Voltage stability analysis often requires examination of a wide range of system conditions and a large number of contingency scenarios. For such applications, the approach based on steady state analysis is more attractive and if used properly, can provide much insight into the voltage/reactive power problem.

2.1 REASONS OF VOLTAGE COLLAPSE

Voltage collapse is a process in which, the appearance of sequential events together with the voltage instability in a large area of system can lead to the case of unacceptable low voltage condition in the network, if no preventive action is committed. Occurrence of a disturbance or load increasing can leads to excessive demand of reactive power. Therefore, system will show voltage instability. If additional resources provide sufficient reactive power support, the system will be established in a stable voltage level. However, sometimes there are not sufficient reactive power resources and the excessive demand of reactive power can leads to voltage collapse.

Page | 2

Voltage collapse can be initiated due to small changes of system conditions (e.g. load increasing) as well as large disturbances (e.g. line outage or generation unit outage). Under these conditions, shunt FACTS devices such as SVC and STATCOM can improve the system security with fast and controlled injection of reactive power to the system. However, when the voltage collapse is due to excessive load increasing, FACTS devices cannot prevent the voltage collapse and only postpone it until they reach to their maximum limits. Under these situations, the only way to prevent the voltage collapse is load curtailment or load shedding. So, reactive power control using FACTS devices is more effective in large disturbances and contingencies should be considered in voltage stability analysis.

2.2 ANALYSIS AND METHODS OF PREVENTION OF VOLTAGE INSTABILITY

A number of special algorithms have been proposed in the literature for voltage stability analysis using the static approach. In general, these have not found widespread practical application and utilities tend to depend largely on conventional power flow programs to determine voltage collapse levels of various points in a network. However, this approach is laborious and does not provide sensitivity information useful in making design decisions.

Some utilities use Q-V curves at a small number of load buses to determine the proximity to voltage collapse and to establish system design criteria based on Q and V margins determined from the curves. One problem with the Q-V curve method is that it is generally not known apriori at which buses the curves should be generated. In producing a Q-V curve, the system in the neighborhood of the bus is unduly stressed and results may be misleading. In addition, by focusing on a small number of buses, system-wide problems may not be readily recognized.

An approach using V-Q sensitivity and piecewise linear power flow analysis to find the margin, measured in terms of total load growth, between a given operating condition and the voltage collapse point is already described. There has been some indication that the linear power flow solution may not be sufficiently accurate as the collapse point is approached. Also, V-Q sensitivity information could be misleading when applied to a large system having more than one area with voltage stability problems.

Page | 3

Most of the approaches proposed to date use conventional power flow models to represent the system steady state. This may not always be appropriate, especially as the system approaches critical condition. There is a need to consider more detailed steady state models for key system components such as generators, SVCs, induction motors and voltage dependent static loads. Load characteristics in particular could be critical and expanded sub-transmission representation in the voltage collapse areas may be necessary.

There is a need for analytical tools capable of predicting voltage collapse in complex networks, accurately quantifying stability margins and power transfer limits, identifying voltage-weak points and areas susceptible to voltage instability, and identifying key contributing factors and sensitivities that provide insight into system characteristics to assist in developing remedial actions.

Modal analysis approach with the objective of meeting the above requirements is used instead of the conventional methods. It involves the computation of a small number of eigenvalues and the associated eigenvectors of a reduced Jacobian matrix which retains the Q-V relationships in the network. However, by using the reduced Jacobian instead of the system state matrix, the focus is on voltage and reactive power characteristics. The eigenvalues of the Jacobian identify different modes through which the system could become voltage unstable. The magnitude of the eigenvalues provides a relative measure of proximity to instability. The eigenvectors, on the other hand, provide information related to the mechanism of loss of voltage stability. Fast analytical algorithms for selective computation of a specified number of the smallest eigenvalues make the approach suitable for the analysis of large complex power systems.

Page | 4

3. DEFINING FACTS DEVICES

FACTS, an acronym which stands for Flexible AC Transmission System, is an evolving technology-based solution envisioned to help the utility industry to deal with changes in the power delivery business. The term FACTS refers to alternating current transmission systems incorporating power electronic-based and other static controllers to enhance controllability and increase power transfer capability. Technology concepts were conceived in the 1980s and projects sponsored by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) demonstrated many of these concepts with laboratory scale circuits. The concept of Flexible AC Transmission Systems (FACTS) was first defined by Hingorani, N.G. in 1988. Up to now, lots of advanced FACTS devices have been put forward due to the rapid development of the modem power electronics technology. These FACTS devices have a large potential ability to make power systems operate in a more flexible, secure and economic way. Moreover, these FACTS devices can also make the power systems operate in a more sophisticated way. A good coordination and adaptation is needed to fully exploit the new characteristics of FACTS. Presently, the studies on FACTS are mainly focused on FACTS devices developments and their impacts on the power system, such as power flow modulation and control, transient stability enhancement, small-disturbance stability improvement and oscillation damping. It is also significant to study the impact of the FACTS devices on improving performance of power systems such as optimization related software algorithms in modem Energy Management System (EMS).

3.1 FACTS CONTROLLER APPLICATIONS The simplest way to identify the potential roles to be played by FACTS Controllers is to examine their functions as they relate to conventional equipment. The definition of FACTS systems incorporates both power electronic-based and other static controllers to enhance controllability and increase power transfer capability. One of the system planners tasks is to determine which combinations of controllers provide both the capacity to supply the reactive power, dynamic reserve and continuous regulation needed for the application. Table 1 lists the main functions that can be performed by FACTS Controllers and show both FACTS and other conventional equipment that performs these functions.

Page | 5

Table 1- System Control Functions Function Voltage Control Non FACTS Control Methods Electric generators Synchronous Condensers Conventional Transformer tapchanger Conventional Shunt Capacitor/Reactor Conventional Series Capacitor/Reactor Generator schedules Transmission line switching Phase Angle Regulator (PAR) Series Capacitor (switched or fixed) High Voltage Direct Current Transmission (HVDC) FACTS Controllers Static Var Compensator (SVC) Static Synchronous Compensator (STATCOM) Unified Power Flow Controller (UPFC) Superconducting Energy Storage (SMES) Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) Convertible Static Compensator (CSC) Interphase Power Controller (IPC) Thyristor controlled Series Capacitor (TCSC) Thyristor Controlled Series Reactor (TCSR) Thyristor Controlled Phase Shifting Transformer (TCPST) UPFC Static Synchronous Series Compensator (SSSC) Interline Power Flow Controller (IPFC) Thyristor Controlled Braking Resistor (TCBR) SVC, STATCOM, TCSC, TCPST, UPFC BESS, SMES, SSSC, CSC, IPFC

Active and Reactive Power Flow Control

Transient Stability

Dynamic Stability Short Circuit Current Limiting

Braking Resistor Excitation Enhancement Special Protection Systems Independent Pole Tripping Fast Relay Schemes Fast Valving Line Sectioning HVDC Power System Stabilizer HVDC Switched series reactors Open circuit breaker arrangements

TCSC, SVC, STATCOM, UPFC, SSSC, TCPST, BESS, SMES, SSSC,CSC, IPFC Thyristor switched series reactor, TCSC, IPC, SSSC, UPFC; These are secondary functions of these controllers and their effectiveness may be limited.

3.2 OVERVIEW OF FACTS CONTROLLERS

The value of FACTS applications lies in the ability of the transmission system to reliably transmit more power or to transmit power under more severe contingency conditions with the control equipment in operation. If the value of the added power transfer over time is compared to

Page | 6

the purchase and operational costs of the control equipment, relatively complex and expensive applications may be justified. Other economic considerations include the market structure, transmission tariff and identification of winners and losers. Realization of the value added by a proposed transmission project often requires a coordinated implementation of conventional transmission equipment, possibly including transmission line segments, FACTS Controllers, coordinated control algorithms and special operating procedures. Commonly used FACTS controllers are: 1. Static Var Compensator (SVC) 2. Static Synchronous Compensator (STATCOM) 3. Superconducting Magnetic Energy Storage (SMES) 4. Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) 5. Thyristor Controlled Series Capacitor (TCSC) 6. Static Synchronous Series Compensator (SSSC) 7. Unified Power Flow Controller (UPFC) 8. Interphase Power Controller (IPC)

3.3 Static Var Compensator (SVC)

The Static Var Compensator used for transmission system applications is a dynamic source of leading or lagging reactive power. It is comprised of a combination of reactive branches connected in shunt to the transmission network through a step up transformer. The SVC is configured with the number of branches required to meet a utility specification as indicated in Figure 1. This specification includes required inductive compensation and required capacitive compensation. The sum of inductive and capacitive compensation is the dynamic range of the SVC. One or more thyristor-controlled reactors may continuously vary reactive absorption to regulate voltage at the high voltage bus. This variation is accomplished by phase control of the thyristors, which results in the reactor current waveform containing harmonic components that vary with control phase angle. A filter branch containing a power capacitor and one or more tuning reactors or capacitors is included to absorb enough of the harmonic currents to meet harmonic specifications and provide capacitive compensation. The thyristor switched capacitor is switched on or off with precise timing to avoid transient inrush currents.

Page | 7

Figure 1 Circuit diagram of a SVC containing a thyristor controlled reactor, a thyristor switched capacitor and a double tuned filter

3.4 Static Synchronous Compensator (STATCOM)

The STATCOM shown in Figure 2 performs the same voltage regulation and dynamic control functions as the SVC. However, its hardware configuration and principle of operation are different. It uses voltage source converter technology that utilizes power electronic devices (presently gate turn-off thyristors (GTO), GCTs or insulated gate bi-polar transistors (IGBT)) that have the capability to interrupt current flow in response to a gating command. Analogous to an ideal electromagnetic generator, the STATCOM can produce a set of three alternating, almost sinusoidal voltages at the desired fundamental frequency with controllable magnitude. The angle of the voltage injected by the STATCOM is constrained to be very nearly in-phase with the transmission network at the point of connection of the coupling transformer.

When the voltage is higher in magnitude than the system voltage, reactive current with a phase angle 90 degrees ahead of the voltage phase angle flows through the coupling transformer. This is analogous to the operation of a shunt capacitor. When the generated voltage is lower than system voltage, the current phase angle is 90 degrees behind the voltage phase angle that is analogous to the operation of a shunt reactor. The slight deviation in voltage phase angle absorbs power needed for the losses in the circuit. For high power applications a number of six or twelve pulse converters are operated in parallel to meet both the current rating requirement and the harmonic requirement of the network. Two different switching patterns, phase displaced

Page | 8

converters with electronic devices switched once per cycle and pulse width modulation, have been used to form the sinusoidal waveform.

Figure 2: STATCOM circuit diagram

3.5 Thyristor controlled series capacitor (TCSC)

The thyristor controlled series capacitor (TCSC) is placed in series with a transmission line and is comprised of three parallel branches: a capacitor, a thyristor pair in series with a reactor (TCR), and a metal oxide varistor (MOV) that is required to protect against overvoltage conditions (see Figure 3). The TCSC can function as a series capacitor if the thyristors are blocked or as variable impedance when the duty cycle of the thyristors is varied. Applications of TCSCs currently in service provide impedance variations to damp inter-area system oscillations. The most economical installations often contain one segment of thyristor-controlled capacitors in series with one or more segments of conventionally switched series capacitors.

Page | 9

Figure 3: One Line Diagram of the TCSC

3.6 Static synchronous series compensator (SSSC)

A static synchronous series compensator (SSSC) is connected in series with a transmission line and is comprised of a voltage source converter operated without an external electric energy source. (See Figure 4) This configuration serves as a series compensator whose output voltage is in quadrature with, and controlled, independently of the transmission line current.

Figure 4: Circuit diagram for a Static Synchronous Series Compensator

The purpose of the SSSC is to increase or decrease the overall reactive voltage drop across the line and thereby control the transmitted real electric power. The SSSC may include transiently rated energy storage or energy absorbing equipment to enhance the dynamic behaviour of the power system by additional temporary real power compensation, to increase or decrease momentarily, the overall real (resistive) voltage drop across the line. This action controls the reactive power flow on the line.

3.7 Unified Power Flow Controller (UPFC)

The Unified Power Flow Controller (UPFC) provides voltage, and power flow control by using two high power voltage source converters (VSC) coupled via a dc capacitor link. Figure 5 shows the two interconnected converters. VSC 1 is connected like a STATCOM and VSC 2 is connected as a SSSC in series with the line. With the dc bus link closed, the UPFC can simultaneously control both real and reactive power flow in the transmission line by injecting

Page | 10

voltage in any phase angle with respect to the bus voltage with the series converter. The shuntconnected converter supplies real power required by the series connected converter. With its remaining capacity the shunt converter can regulate bus voltage. The UPFC circuit can be reconfigured by use of external switches and possibly additional transformers to form STATCOM, SSSC, or coupled SSSC circuits.

Figure 5: Circuit Diagram of a Unified Power Flow Controller

Today, most power systems are operating near their steady-state stability limits, which may result in voltage instability. Flexible ac transmission system (FACTS) devices are good choices to improve the stability of power systems. Many studies have been carried out on the use of FACTS devices for voltage and angle stability problems. Taking advantages of the FACTS devices depends largely on how these devices are placed in the power system, namely, on their location and size. In a practical power system, allocation of these devices depends on a comprehensive analysis of steady-state stability, transient stability, small signal stability, and voltage stability. Moreover, other practical factors such as cost and installation conditions also need to be considered. In the literature, a tool has been reported based on the determination of critical modes, which is known as modal analysis. Modal analysis has been used to locate static Var compensator (SVC) and other shunt compensators to avoid voltage instability. The setting of many controllable power system devices, such as HVDC Links and FACTS devices, are based on the issues unrelated to the damping of oscillations in the system. For instance, an SVC improves transmission system voltage, thereby enhancing the maximum power transfer limit; static synchronous series compensator (SSSC) control reduces the transfer impedance of a long transmission line,

Page | 11

enhancing the maximum power transfer limit. In addition to the primary function, the supplementary damping control is also added, and how to utilize their control capabilities effectively as stabilizing aids is becoming very important.

Over the last decades, there has been a growing interest in algorithms inspired by observing natural phenomenon. It has been shown that these algorithms are good alternatives as tools in solving complex computational problems. Various heuristic approaches have been adopted in research, including genetic algorithm, tabu search, simulated annealing etc. Some used a genetic algorithm to determine the best location of a given set of FACTS devices in a deregulated electricity market. The optimal locations of FACTS devices are obtained for Var planning. A methodology is carried out using a genetic algorithm to find the optimal number and location of thyristor-controlled phase shifters in a power system. In this paper, power system stability is used as an index for optimal allocation of SVCs. For this, several SVCs are placed in a power system based on their primary function, which is the voltage stability. To locate SVCs based on the voltage stability, two methods are used: modal analysis and genetic algorithm.

Page | 12

4. MODAL ANALYSIS FOR VOLTAGE STABILITY EVALUATION

A system is voltage stable at a given operating condition if for every bus in the system, bus voltage magnitude increases as reactive power injection at the same bus is increased. A system is voltage unstable if for at least one bus in the system bus voltage magnitude decreases as the reactive power injection at the same bus is increased. In other words, a system is voltage stable if V-Q sensitivity is positive for every bus and unstable if V-Q sensitivity is negative for at least one bus.

Modal analysis is a method for voltage stability evaluation. In this method, stability analysis is done by computing eigen values and right and left eigenvectors of a Jacobian matrix which obtained from the power flow equations. Assume that a power system is located at a primary operating point. In this operating point, the relations between main power system quantities (voltage magnitude, voltage angle, injected active power and injected reactive power) can be expressed by power flow equations as follows:

4.1 REDUCED JACOBIAN MATRIX

The linearized steady state system power voltage equations are given by.

Where, P = incremental change in bus real power. Q= incremental change in bus reactive power injection. = incremental change in bus voltage angle. V = incremental change in bus voltage magnitude. If the conventional power flow model is used for voltage stability analysis, the Jacobian matrix in (1) is the same as the Jacobian matrix used when the power flow equations are solved using the Newton-Raphson technique.

System voltage stability is affected by both P and Q. However, at each operating point we keep P constant and evaluate voltage stability by considering the incremental relationship between Q and V. This is analogous to the Q-V curve approach. Although incremental changes in P are

Page | 13

neglected in the formulation, the effects of changes in system load or power transfer levels are taken into account by studying the incremental relationship between Q and V at different operating conditions. To reduce (1), let P =0, then.

JR is called the reduced Jacobian matrix of the system. JR is the matrix which directly relates the bus voltage magnitude and bus reactive power injection. Eliminating the real power and angle part from the system steady state equations allows us to focus on the study of the reactive demand and supply problem of the system as well as minimize computational effort.

The program developed also provides the option of performing eigen-analysis of the full Jacobian matrix. If the full Jacobian is used, however, the results represent the relationship between (, V) and (P, Q). Since is included in the formulation, it is difficult to discern the relationship between V and (P, Q) which is of primary importance for voltage stability analysis. Also modal analysis using the full Jacobian matrix is computationally more expensive than using the reduced Jacobian. For these reasons, the reduced Jacobian approach was considered.

4.2 MODES OF VOLTAGE INSTABILITY

Let

where, = right eigenvector matrix of JR = left eigenvector matrix of JR = diagonal eigenvalue matrix of JR

Page | 14

From (3) and (5)

And Where V = V = the vector of modal voltage variations q= Q = vector of modal reactive power variations and

Equation (7) represents uncoupled first order equations. Thus for the ith mode:

The eigenvalue of the reduced Jacobian matrix identify different modes through which the voltage of system could become unstable. The magnitude of the eigenvalues provides a relative measure of the proximity to instability. If i > 0, the ith modal voltage and ith modal reactive power variation are along with the same direction, indicating that the system is voltage stable. If i < 0, the ith modal voltage and ith modal reactive power variation are along with the opposite direction, indicating that the system is voltage unstable. In this sense, the magnitude of i determines the degree of stability of the ith modal voltage. The smaller the magnitude of positive i , the closer ith modal voltage is to being unstable. Using modal analysis, the effect or participation of system buses in voltage instability and critical modes near the point of collapse can be determined. Relative participation of kth bus to ith mode is expressed by bus participation factor as follows:

(10)
where ki and ik are kth element of the right and left eigenvectors corresponding to ith eigenvalue of JR respectively. Bus participation factors represent the area corresponding to each mode. The larger the magnitude of Pki, the kth bus is more effective corrective controls to improve voltage stability.

Page | 15

5. PROPOSED METHOD FOR LOCATING FACTS DEVICES

Voltage collapse normally occurs when sources producing reactive power reach their limits i.e. generators, SVCs or shunt capacitors, and there is not much reactive power supply to support the load. Therefore, the reactive reserve margin is used as a voltage stability indicator.

The most advanced solution to compensate reactive power is the use of a Voltage Source Converter (VSC) incorporated as a variable source of reactive power. These systems offer several advantages compared to standard reactive power compensation solutions. Reactive power control generated by generators or capacitor banks alone normally is too slow for sudden load changes and demanding applications, such as wind farms or arc furnaces. Compared to other solutions a voltage source converter is able to provide continuous control, very dynamic behavior due to fast response times and with single phase control also compensation of unbalanced loads. The ultimate aim is to stabilize the grid voltage and minimize any transient disturbances.

Voltage collapse is usually initiated by disturbances in a system vulnerable to voltage instability. Voltage stability could be recognized by modal analysis of power system steady state Jacobian matrix under contingency condition. If the smallest eigen values of reduced Jacobian matrix are negative or very close to zero, the voltage instability is possible. Under these conditions, it is necessary to increase the magnitude of critical modes until the system security is ensured and voltage stability is achieved. This can be done via corrective operations such as providing reactive power support with FACTS devices.

Voltage instability is due to the critical modes of reduced Jacobian matrix. Therefore, in the given proposed method the objective is to determine system buses that have the most effect on the critical modes. Critical modes are determined based on modal analysis of system reduced Jacobian matrix under contingency conditions and the effectiveness of buses on these critical modes is recognized by their participation factors.

Page | 16

In the proposed method, for each contingency a probabilistic index is defined which evaluates the relative participation of each bus in voltage instability caused by all of the critical eigenvalues corresponding to that contingency:

(11)
where PCMi = contribution of bus I to voltage instability caused by critical modes under kth contingency state Poutage = likelihood of kth contingency occurring corresponding to outage of line k m = number of critical eigenvalues in kth contingency Pij = participation factor of bus i to critical eigenvalue j j = critical eigenvalue j The convention taken is that the term critical mode is used to identify all eigenvalue whose magnitudes are smaller than a prescribed critical value (critical). The critical value is determined based on the bus voltage magnitude profile in the system.

The probabilistic index defined above represents the relative contribution of each bus to critical modes of kth contingency condition. Then, the total participation in all critical modes (TPCM) for each bus was calculated considering all possible contingencies by following equation:

(12)

where TPCMi = the total participation of bus i in all critical modes under all possible contingencies and L is the number of possible contingencies

For calculation of TPCM the outage of all lines is considered. If system has critical modes in normal state (i.e. without any outage) due to special operating conditions, then this conditions could be included in above relation with consideration of corresponding probability.

Page | 17

TPCM demonstrates the relative contribution of each bus to system voltage instability under all possible system states. According to the relation above, the larger the magnitude of bus participation factor in critical modes, that bus is more effective in voltage instability. On the other hand, the smaller the magnitude of positive j, that mode is more critical. In addition, bus contributions to voltage instability under contingencies are weighted by the likelihood of contingencies occurring. Consequently, contingencies with higher probability will be more important in locating FACTS devices.

TPCM values are calculated for every bus using above equation. Buses are then ranked by their corresponding TPCM values. In general, the larger value a bus has the more effective it will be. The bus with the largest TPCM is considered as the best location for one shunt FACTS device, because according to definition of TPCM, that bus is more effective in more probable contingencies (i.e. larger Poutage (k)) or is more effective in more critical modes (i.e. smaller j). For a large- scale power system, more than one FACTS device may have to be installed in order to achieve the desired performance. However, budgetary constraints force the utilities to limit the number of FACTS devices to be placed in a given system. Given such a limit on the total number of FACTS devices to be installed in a power system, the location of the next controllers can be determined according to the ranking of buses in an iterative approach. At each step, one FACTS device is installed at the bus with the largest TPCM value. Installation of a controller in the determined location mitigates the critical modes caused by that bus and other buses close to it. Therefore, the ranking of buses after the next iteration does not necessarily match the previous one. The flowchart shown below demonstrates the proposed strategy of FACTS devices locating.

Page | 18

5.1. FLOW CHART OF PROPOSED METHOD

System data K=1 Outage of line k Load flow Modal analysis and determination of eigenvalues No

j < critical

Calculation of bus participation factor (Pij) for all critical modes

k=k +1

No

All contingencies are considered?

TPCMi

Ranking of buses based on associated TPCM values Installation of FACTS at the top bus

Need to install another FACTS device? No End

Yes

Page | 19

Page | 20

6. CASE STUDY
A simple case has been taken in which IEEE 14 bus is considered. Given flowchart shown in figure shows the proposed approach of placing FACTS in a power system. The load and generation of the system is scaled by the factor of 0.95 Performing load flow for the normal state of the system, the smallest eigen value of the reduced Jacobian matrix is determined as min= 2.71. With the assumption of critical=1, the calculated eigen value is not critical. Then, contingency analyses corresponding to line outages are performed. Here it has been assumed that the failure probability of all lines is assumed to be 0.02. The eigenvalue of reduced Jacobian matrix is calculated in each step. In the table 2 three smallest eigenvalues of each state are show and the corresponding critical eigen values are specified by coloured cell from the table it is clear that critical eigen values exist only in two contingencies corresponding to the outage of line 1 and line 10. Using modal analysis, bus participation factors associated with the critical eigenvalues are calculated. The TPCM value of buses shown in table 3 is calculated using the formula given above. From table 3 we can infer that bus 12 has the largest TPCM. So it is chosen as the best location to place first FACTS device. Table 2- smallest eigen values for The three different contingencies
Contingency 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 line(1-2) line(1-5) line(2-3) line(2-4) line(2-5) line(3-4) line(4-5) line(4-7) line(4-9) line(5-6) line(6-11) line(6-12) line(6-13) line(7-8) line(7-9) line(9-10) line(9-14) line(10-11) line(12-13) line(13-14)

min1
0.1202 2.6334 2.5139 2.6389 2.6766 2.6501 2.6193 2.4671 2.4350 0.4627 1.3764 2.2747 1.6374 2.0172 1.7331 1.9465 1.9693 2.1765 2.6711 1.7820

min2
2.5076 5.5253 4.1422 5.5318 5.5468 5.5453 5.5263 5.5083 5.5267 4.000 4.5484 3.4231 3.7727 6.5611 5.4479 3.0652 3.0471 5.3288 4.1235 5.4382

min3
3.350 7.6623 5.5968 7.6599 7.6689 7.6784 7.6513 7.6689 7.6689 6.2199 7.0003 6.8293 7.3455 14.3417 7.6090 9.3284 6.8017 5.5991 5.9822 5.6578

Page | 21

Table 3- TPCM values of buses Bus no. TPCM Bus No. 1 0 8 2 0.0090 9 3 0.0096 10 4 0.0101 11 5 0.0092 12 6 0.0216 13 7 0.0134 14

TPCM 0.0119 0.0166 0.0183 0.0207 0.0242 0.0235 0.0212

After installing the shunt FACTS controller which may be a STATCOM at bus 12, it is now changed into PV bus. The voltage of this bus is constant until the shunt FACTS device reaches its reactive power limit. The voltage of the bus 12 is set at 1.05 pu. The sufficient capacity to keep the voltage of bus 12 constant under all contingencies is 8 MVAr. After installing STATCOM at bus 12, the contingency analysis was performed again. The result is shown in table 4 and 5. According to table 4, it is clear that the smallest eigen value in each contingency condition is increased considerably. However, the outage of line 1 still causes an eigen value smaller than the critical value, because FACTS controller at a bus is installed which is far from this line. When this line is out of circuit, injection of reactive power to bus 12 cannot influence considerably the reactive losses caused by the overload of line 2.

Table 4- The smallest eigen value associated with contingency after installation of STATCOM at Bus 12 Contingency Contingency min min Normal state 1 line(1-2) 2 line(1-5) 3 line(2-3) 4 line(2-4) 5 line(2-5) 6 line(3-4) 7 line(4-5) 8 line(4-7) 9 line(4-9) 10 line(5-6) 2.7971 0.5987 2.7109 2.5755 2.7171 2.7576 2.7290 2.6970 2.5354 2.5044 1.8798 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 line(6-11) line(6-12) line(6-13) line(7-8) line(7-9) line(9-10) line(9-14) line(10-11) line(12-13) line(13-14) 1.3906 2.8101 2.4062 2.0626 1.7806 1.9465 2.1623 2.2324 2.6712 1.7820

Page | 22

Table 5- TPCM values of buses Bus no. TPCM Bus No. 1 0 8 2 0.0026 9 3 0.0029 10 4 0.0027 11 5 0.0022 12 6 0.0010 13 7 0.0040 14

TPCM 0.0043 0.0039 0.0037 0.0025 0 0.0008 0.0028

Depending on the available budget, the placement of FACTS devices can proceed by following the new ranked list of table 5, where bus 8 as a PV bus will be the second choice. This means that reactive power generation capacity at this bus is need to be increased. However, reactive power capacity of this bus can be kept constant and install the FACTS device in next top bus which is bus 7. To keep the voltage of bus 7 and 12 constant under all contingencies, FACTS devices of capacities 200MVAr and 11MVAr respectively need to be installed at these buses. After installing the second FACTS device, all eigenvalues are increased and the critical eigenvalues are disappeared. Table 6 represents the smallest eigenvalue in each system state. Now, there is no critical eigenvalue and therefore, TPCM value for all buses is zero. Table 6- The smallest eigen value associated with contingency after installation of STATCOM at Bus 7 Contingency Contingency min min Normal state 3.8519 1 line(1-2) 2.0977 11 line(6-11) 1.9540 2 line(1-5) 2.7668 12 line(6-12) 3.8724 3 line(2-3) 3.7513 13 line(6-13) 3.1345 4 line(2-4) 3.8393 14 line(7-8) 3.8520 5 line(2-5) 3.8466 15 line(7-9) 1.7835 6 line(3-4) 3.8452 16 line(9-10) 1.9465 7 line(4-5) 3.8348 17 line(9-14) 2.1620 8 line(4-7) 3.8352 18 line(10-11) 3.5056 9 line(4-9) 3.5957 19 line(12-13) 3.6140 10 line(5-6) 2.5203 20 line(13-14) 2.4246

Page | 23

Table 7- Bus participation factors in critical contingency conditions Contingency 1 line (1-2) 10 line(5-6) Bus 2 0.0544 0 3 0.0577 0 4 0.0603 0.0017 5 0.0550 0.0008 6 0.0816 0.1867 7 0.0773 0.0133 8 0.0716 0 9 0.0874 0.0486 10 0.0905 0.0757 11 0.0890 0.1373 12 0.0893 0.2172 13 0.0900 0.1971 14 0.0961 0.1217

Page | 24

7. CONCLUSION
In earlier methods number of SVC installed is more in number which is considerably reduced. Also there is improvement in system voltage in contingency conditions as well as normal state. In addition, the proposed method has less time consuming calculations. When SVC was used, the optimal allocations are 0.19, 0.25 and 0.25 pu at buses 10, 13 and 14 respectively and these reactive power are fully used for the outage of line 1. On the other hand, the optimal FACTS devices allocations obtained by the proposed method are 0.2 and 0.11 pu at buses 7 and 12 respectively. Therefore, the number of STATCOMs to be installed is decreased as well as their reactive power capacity. The reason is that the allocated FACTS devices proposed earlier are applied only in one area of the network (i.e. at three close buses). This causes a non-uniform reactive power supply in the network. However, the method proposed in this paper, allocates FACTS devices in two separated areas of the network that leads to a more uniform reactive power supply in the system. Consequently, it will be effective in more contingency conditions correspond to the outage of lines.

Application of FACTS devices can improve considerably the system voltage stability and prevent voltage collapse. Nevertheless, location of FACTS devices strongly influences their damping effect. Therefore, optimal location of FACTS is a very important issue. In this paper, the application of FACTS devices to extend voltage stability margin in contingency conditions is investigated. A probabilistic index based on modal analysis and calculation of bus participation factors was defined which can be used to rank of system buses based on their effect on system voltage stability enhancement under all possible contingencies. The proposed method selects the most effective bus to voltage instability as the best place for installing FACTS. Results obtained from simulations show that the proposed method could allocate FACTS devices with a simple and straightforward approach in order to improve system voltage stability with consideration of contingency conditions.

Page | 25

REFERENCES
1. D. G. Ramey, Fellow, IEEE, M. Henderson, Sr. Member, IEEE Overview of a Special Publication on Transmission System Application Requirements for FACTS Controllers 2. B. Gao, Student Member IEEE G.K. Morison P. Kundur. Fellow IEEE VOLTAGE STABILITY EVALUATION USING MODAL ANALYSIS 3. P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, McGraw-Hill 4. N.G. Hingorani, L. Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS, IEEE Press

Page | 26