IEEE T " S on Power Delivery. Vol. 11, No. 1.

January 1996
IMPROVEMENT OF TRANSIENT STABILITY USING UNIFIED POWER FLOW CONTROLLER
R. MihaliE and P. hnko, Member IEEE
Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science,
Tt2aSka 25, 61000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
ABSTRACT
The aim of the paper is to analyze the effect of an Unified
Power Flow Controller (UPFC) on transient stability margin
enhancement of a longitudinal system. To utilize the UPFC
possibilities fully, the three controllable UPFC parameters were
determined during the digital simulation process performed by
the NETOMAC simulation program. The basis for determination
of the suitable damping strategy and for determination of the
optimal UPFC parameters is a mathematical model, which
describes the interdependence between longitudinal transmission
system parameters, operating conditions and UPFC parameters in
the form of analytical equations. On the basis of the
mathematical model, the theoretical UPFC limits were also
detected, and their appearance explained.
Kevwords: FACTS, unified power flow controller, AC
transmission, transient stability,
1. INTRODUCTION
One direction of large AC system development is the
transmission of large amounts of power over long distances by
high voltage transmission lines from remote power sources to
load centers. Because of growing public impact on environmental
policy, the building of new transmission facilities, in general, lags
behind the increased needs of power transmission. As a
consequence, some transmission lines are more loaded than was
planned when they were built. With the increased loading of
long transmission lines, the problem of transient stability after a
major fault can become a transmission power limiting factor. In
some cases, this factor may be considerably lower compared to
other limiting factors. Power electronic equipment, including
appropriate control, offers effective solutions to this problem.
Such equipment, including advanced control centers and
communication links, is the basis of the so called Flexible AC
Transmission System (FACTS). Some FACTS devices controlled
by power thyristors such as, for example, Static Var
Compensator or Controlled Series Compensation, are already
widely used, or their prototypes have been put into operation.
The development of power semiconductor devices with turn-off
capability (GTO, MCT) opens up new perspectives in the
development of FACTS equipment. The universal and most
effective device is expected to be the Unified Power Flow
Controller (UPFC).
95 WM 269-1 PWRD A paper recommended and approved
by the IEEE Transmission and Di stri buti on Committee
of the IEEE Power Engineering Society f or presentat-
i on at the 1995 IEEE/PES Winter Meeting, J anuary 29,
t o February 2, 1995, New York, NP. Manuscript sub-
mitted J uly 19, 1994; made available f or pri nti ng
J anuary 9 , 1995.
D. Povh, Fellow IEEE
SIEMENS AG
Box 3220, 91050 Erlangen, Germany
485
This device can independently control more parameters, thus
combining the properties of a static condenser (STATCON),
controlled series compensation, and phase angle regulator.
The objective of this paper is to answer the question of how to
utilize the UPFC properties fully, or in other words: how should
the UPFC parameters be controlled in order to achieve maximal
desired effect when solving transient stability problems which
appear when bulk power is transmitted by long transmission
lines.
2. UPFC OPERATING PRINCIPLES
Basically, the UPFC structure is similar to that of the phase
shifting transformer. As shown in Fig. 1, it consists of a parallel
and series branch, each consisting of the transformer, the power
electronic converter with turn-off capable semiconductor devices
(GTOs for example) and the DC circuit. The parallel branch
transformer is connected parallel with relation to the transmission
line, while the series branch transformer is functionally a
boosting transformer. In order to make the explanation of the
basic operating principles easier, at first let it be assumed that
the parallel and series branches are not connected. The parallel
branch DC circuit consists of the capacitor Cp and the series
branch DC circuit of the capacitor Cs.
PARALLEL BRANCH
U A
TRANSMISSION LINE
CONTROL,
FIRING WLSES
I I
Fig. 1. General UPFC scheme
The parallel branch is in fact a static condenser (STATCON).
The operating principles are described in 111. At this stage the
most important fact is that the parallel branch can act (in the
greatest part of the operating area) as a reactive current source
(current b), because the maximal output reactive current is
independent of terminal voltage. The current phasor I (Fig. 1) is
perpendicular to the input terminal voltage phasorI A (in this
instance the losses - active and reactive - are neglected).
The series branch represents the so called advanced controllable
series compenaation (ACSC). The injected voltage of the
boosting transformer UT (Fig. 1) is perpendicular to the line
current 121. From this point of view, the series UPFC branch
0885-8977/96/$05.00 0 1995 IEEE
486
UT (UT and e) and the reactive parallel branch current 4, and
thus offers the possibility of independent control of the three
electrical system parameters.
acts as a series condenser. Nevertheless, from the system point
of view, ACSC differs considerably from the series capacitor. The
main difference between them lies in the operating characteristic.
While a series capacitor is a reactive impedance,' an ACSC acts
as a controllable voltage source whose voltage magnitude can
be controlled independently of line current (the voltage phase, of
course, being shifted by 90' with regard to the line current). By
changing the ACSC voltage polarity, the effect of a controlled
series reactor is achieved. Therefore an ACSC is superior to the
series capacitive compensation in the oscillation damping
efficiency. Additionally, an ACSC does not produce series
resonance with the line reactance and thus cannot cause
subsynchronous resonances; with suitable control they can be
even damped [2].
Each of the two just described UPFC branches can generate or
absorb the reactive power independent of each other. The
described properties do not change if the DC circuits of both
devices are connected and if the common DC circuit consists of
capacitor C (Fig. 1).
Additionally, the possibility of a controllable phase shift between
phasors UA and UB appears, due to the fact that between the
series and parallel branch real power can be exchanged. The
injected series branch voltage U, can theoretically be in any
phase with regard to UA and can have any magnitude ranging
from 0 to some maximal magnitude U,-. The operating area
becomes the region limited by a circle with the radius UT-.
The top of the phasor U, (and thus of the phasor UJ can take
any position inside that area (Fig. 2). The operating point can
be continuously changed (continuous change of U hase and
magnitude). The component of the voltage U, which IS in phase
with the current le represents the real part of the injected
power. This is provided by the UPFC parallel branch (current 1,).
The component of the voltage U, which is rectangular to the
current le represents the reactive power component. It is
generated internally (ACSC) and is independent of the real
component. The injection of real and reactive power by serial
branch of UPFC can be denoted as the result of voltage U,
injection.
T .p
Fig. 2. UPFC phasor diagram and its operating area
Assuming that UPFC is not connected directly to the stiff voltage
source, the voltage of the UPFC shunt transformer terminal can
further be controlled by regulating the reactive parallel branch
current 6. The actual UPFC operating area becomes the circle
denoting the series branch operating area, which can be shifted
in phase by the input terminal voltage phasor UA (by &AU -
Fig. 2).
From the above explanation of the UPFC operating principles it
is evident that, in contrast to other FACTS devices, UPFC has
three independently controllable parameters, which are the
magnitude and the phase of the series branch injected voltage
3. THE UPFC MATHEMATICAL MODEL
The mathematical UPFC model was developed with the aim of
being able to study the relations between the electrical
transmission system and UPFC in steady state conditions and
during the electromechanical transient conditions. The model
makes it possible to determine the three controllable UPFC
parameters in various operating conditions, so that the UPFC
impact on the state of the system is optimal according to the
defined requirements. The model should contain the UPFC
model included into the transmission system model. The basic
scheme of the proposed model is shown in Fig. 3, and in this
paper is referred to as the "basic model". ,
....................
Fig. 3.
The transmission system is represented by WO voltage sources
and two l3 sections. This can be a representation of a
longitudinal system consisting of generators, transformers, loads,
series and/or parallel reactive elements etc. The parameters of
the basic model can be achieved by the methods of "classic"
network impedance reduction or by parameter identifying
techniques. The UPFC model is positioned in the middle of the
transmission system model. It consists of a series voltage source
representing the UPFC series branch, the susceptance BT
representing the UPFC parallel branch reactive compensation
effect and of the current source !, representing the UPFC
parallel branch active current. The modeling of the parallel
branch reactive current by susceptance was performed in order
to make the analytical deduction possible. The voltage source
voltage UT magnitude and phase, and also the susceptance BT
magnitude, can thus be controlled. The phase and the
magnitude of the current source IT are determined by UPFC
physical properties explained in sec. 2, i.e. iT balances the real
UPFC power injected into the system by the series branch and
is thus in phase with the terminal voltage &, .
The relations between the electric quantities shown in Fig. 3 can
be written in complex form as follows:
_V, =G, +&; Y ' , =& +jB,; 41, =& +jB3; _V, =G, +jB,
z1 =R1 +jx, z, =R, +jx,
go =Uoe+=U0(cos(6) +jsin(6)); (1 )
U, =U,e'* =U,(cos(cp,) +jsin(cp,))
1, =4, +ill,
The phase of the voltage phasor U2 is the reference phase. The
aim of the mathematical deduction is to find the relations
between source powers % and S2, the basic model impedahces
and the UPFC controllable parameters U,, and BT' In order
to simplify the mathematical derivation, the powers are expressed
by the currents !, and &, as follows:
Scheme of the "basic model"
;
U, = U,
487
The following set of equations, which describes the basic model,
can be derived from the basic relations between electric
quantities by taking the already described electric UPFC
properties into consideration. The eq. (7) describes the fact that
1, balances the real power injection of the series branch.
U, - U2
!2s =___
R2 +i x 2
From the set of equations presented, it is possible to find
analytical solutions for the real and imaginary components of the
current I , in the form of the followinu euuations.
(9)
The factors A, to A, and DET are functions of the basic model
impedances, the generator voltage magnitudes, the transmission
angle S and the controllable UPFC parameters (UT (pT and ST).
They have no physical significance, and were introduced for
practical reasons because the expressions which are the result
of the mathematical deduction of the relation (9) from eq. (3) to
(8) are very comprehensive in the expanded form. The factors
mentioned are presented in 131. From (2) it is not difficult to
obtain the source powers Po, Q,, P, and Q, .
From the form of the solution (9), it is evident that in cases
when the factor DET is negative, the values of currents IIR and
11, are not real. This means that the system cannot be brought
into such operating conditions. In other words, if the terminal
voltages % and u2 of the transmission system are defined (Fig.
3), the voltage phasor UT can not be arbitrarily rotated and/or
"stretched". The areas where the factor DET is negative are
referred to in the paper as undefined areas. Physically the
appearance of the undefined areas can be explained by the fact
that arbitrary amounts of power cannot be transmitted between
sources and the UPFC terminals. It is not always possible to
take enough real power from the system by the parallel branch
in order to cover the real power injection of the series branch.
The numerical calculations in the mathematical model have
shown that on one of the boundaries of an undefined area the
transmission system between voltage source and UPFC reaches
its static stability limit of power transmission. On the other
boundary of the undefined area the voltage Ug collapses. From
the above explanation it is also evident, that there is no
appearance of undefined areas if UPFC is connected to the stiff
system, and that the undefined areas extend if connection
between UPFC and the sources is weak.
The problem of the undefined areas is demonstrated in the test
system shown in Fig. 5, UPFC being positioned in the middle
location. The aim of the demonstrating example is to answer the
following question: if the transmission angle 6 is for instance 90
(or 120), and if UPFC parameters UT and 'pT have certain
values, IS factor DT positive or negative? This calculation was
repeated for UT values reaching from 0 to 1.2 P.U. (1 P.U.
being phase-to-earth voltage of the test system) and (pT values
reaching from 0 to 360. The results are presented in Fig. 4.
The black painted areas represent the undefined areas. Of
course, undefined areas change with the system operating point
as well as with the UPFC location.
t 1.2
UT /P.U.
0 --i, pT/deg./ 360
t 1.2
l$ m.u./
Fig. 4. Undefined areas presented in the U, - 4 plane and
a) S =90 , b) 6 =120
4. TEST SYSTEM AND DIGITAL SIMULATION MODEL
The possibility of transient stability enhancement by UPFC was
studied on a longitudinal transmission system. The test system
and its parameters are shown in Fig. 6. The transmitted pre-fault
real power (Pgen - Fig. 6) is equal to 1350 MW (90% of
generator rated power). The generator can be a representation
of an electrically concentrated subsystem. The lines are modeled
as series-connected Il sections (1 section per 100 km). Both the
generator and the excitation control are modeled in detail. The
turbine and governor are modeled in simplified manner using
constant turbine power P, . The three possible UPFC locations
were studied (UPFC connected to generator, to stiff source and
between the lines).
UPFC
I
,l ocati on alternatives
, , :-
i UPFC
,. . . . . . . . . . . ,
GENERATOR xd"=.182 P.U. LINES: SYSTEM:
Pn=1500 MVA xd'=.270 P.U. r=0.03 Wkm Un=500 kV
Ta=8s xd=1.47 P.U. x=0.33 Wkm f=60 Hz
Td'=0.034 s xq"=.211 P.U. c=12 nF/km Pg=1350 MW
Td=2s xq'=.636 P.U.
Tq'=0.04ls xq=xd
Fig. 5. Test system
UPFC for dynamic simulation purposes is modeled as shown in
Fig. 6. Basically, the model is comparable to the one applied in
the mathematical model. The voltage source and the two current
sources are controllable. The UPFC coordinator controls the
sources, so that the model, shown from outside, acts as an
UPFC (the real powers of the voltage source UT and of the
current source lT are balanced, thus the current source IT is
held in phase with the terminal voltage 4, while the phase of
source 4 is shifted by 90').
The UPFC controls the three controllable UPFC parameters in
order to fulfill the required damping strategy explained later. The
current 4 can be freely selected; therefore let it be limited so
the power of the series branch defined by maximal U, and
current corresponding transmission of 1350 MVA power.
that the readbe power of the parallel branch dees net exceed
488
I I
I I
I I
UPFC Network Represerttstian
I UPFC MODU I
Fig. 6.
The disturbance in the test system represents a three phase
fault on BUS1 (Fig. 5), followed by disconnection of the line.
The maximal fault duration time at which the system maintains
synchronism is 75 ms. The aim of the study was to determine
minimal UPFC dimensions to assure synchronism after the faults-
duration of 100 and 150 ms respectively - that is for cases
when 25 and 75 ms margins are required. This is also an
equivalent to increased power transfer at the same fault duration.
5. DETERMINATION OF THE UPFC PARAMETERS AND
UPFC model for dynamic calculation
BASIC OUTLINES OF THE CONTROL STRATEGY
In order to achieve the maximal UPFC effect on the test system
transient stability margin enhancement, during the critical period
the UPFC parameters have to be controlled so as to achieve
maximal real power flowing from the generator (UPFC rating
being, of course, limited: the injected voltage magnitude U, and
parallel branch reactive current Iq should not exceed certain
values). These parameters are referred to in the paper as
"optimal UPFC parameters". The circumstances in the test system
were first studied with the mathematical model. Therefore, the
impedance scheme of the test system (Fig. 5) was transformed
into the form of the basic model (Fig. 3). For this purpose, the
generator impedances of the test system were taken into
consideration as the generator transient reactance, and the lines
were modeled as n sections. Naturaly, the parameters of the
basic model change if the UPFC location or orientation (the
positioning of UPFC as faced to the system) is changed. The
basic model transmission angle F and power Po correspond to
the angle between the generator main field voltage and stiff
system voltage and the generator real power P en of the test
system respectively. The "optimal UPFC paramepers' giving the
extreme (maximum or minimum) transmission power must satisfy
the following set of equations:
The numerical calculations, with the data of the test system,
have shown that a solution to the Set of equations (IO) does
not exist. If the first equation of the set is satisfied, then the
value of ap~/ au~ is always positive and the value of aP0/8& is
positive, if maximal source power is required and negative if
minimal source power is required. This means, if extreme source
powers are required, the parameters U, and BT should be set
to maximal values, defined by UPFC dimensions. BT should be
positive (capacitive character) if maximal source power is
required and negative (inductive character) if minimal source
power is required. Thus, two of the three UPFC controllable
parameters are determined. Although it may seem to be obvious,
that U, and BT are set to maximal values to achieve maximal
transmitted power, theoretical cases have been found in the
vicinity of undefined areas where this is not the case. The
analytical solution of the first equation (10) could not be found,
therefore for each operating condition it had to be found
numerically.
In order to illustrate the UPFC impact on the test system, the
system transmission characteristics (generator real power vs.
transmission angle 6) were calculated with optimal UPFC
parameters, UPFC being connected to the voltage source
terminal. For each 6, first the optimal 4 angle was calculated
from 1. eq. (lo), then the transmitted power was calculated
applying (2) and (9). The set of "optimized" transmission
characteristics (positive values) for various maximal U, values is
shown in Fig. 7a. In Fig. 7b the corresponding UPFC DC link
powers are plotted. In this special case (UPFC connected to the
stiff system - &=k',=&=O - c.f. Fig. 3) the optimal 6, if
maximal transmitted power is required, (e-) can be calculated
analytically and amounts to:
If minimal transmitted power is required, optimal q+ (I+,,,,,,)
amounts to:
' PTmn =' PTmax + (11)
'(MAX)'-maximal power required "(MIN)"-minimal power required
-2000 -7
Fig. 7. a) Transmission characteristics - different U,, 4 for
each 6 being determined so as to achieve maximal
"(MAX)" or minimal "(MIN)" transmitted real power.
b) corresponding UPFC DC link powers
If the UPFC is located at the voltage source terminal, the
undefined areas do not appear, because there is no impedance
489
From point F on, the operating point is held on characteristic
"Pomi; until back swing limit (point G) is reached. Because the
decelerating energy is reduced by the transition of the operating
point from the 'Pomm" to the "Pomi," Characteristic, the back
swing is relatively small, and goal 'II" is reached. From point G
on, the power swing damping strategy takes place (not shown
in the Figure). During this period, the UPFC injected voltage
magnitude UT is modified in proportion to the power swing
magnitude. Depending on the sign of the real power flow time
derivative, the parameter 4 is chosen so that the generator real
power flow is accelerated or decelerated in a proper manner by
the UPFC to damp oscillations.
6. SIMULATION
Modeling and digital simulation are carried out by the program
system for digital simulation. In order to achieve maximal UPFC
effect on lSt swing stability margin enhancement - i.e. to answer
the basic question: "what can be achieved by UPFC?" - the
three UPFC controllable parameter must be optimized on-line,
that is, during the calculation within each particular digital
simulation integration step. The parameters U, and Iq are known
from the preliminary static model study based on mathematical
model calculation (section 5), and only the optimal parameter q
must be determined on-line. This is realized in the UPFC control
module (Fig. 6).
between the UPFC and voltage source. If UPFC is shifted
"inside' the transmission corridor, the appearance of the
undefined areas is possible during dynamic conditions, especially
in the domain of large transmission angles.
With the UPFC, the problem of lst swing instability of the test
system (sec. 4) is one which should primarily be solved.
Additionally, the damping of the system should be improved.
The specific UPFC global control strategy was applied to achieve
the following goals:
I) to maintain the system in synchronism during the lSt swing,
11) to reduce the rotor back swing to small extent,
111) to prevent the system from persevering near the maximum
of lst swing and
IV) to damp as effectively as possible the following swings.
The problem of the generator rotor persevering near the
maximum of the lst swing is not problematic if only one
generator is present. If the generator of the test system is a
representation of a part of the system it may lead to local
oscillations between various generators and thus to instability,
therefore goal "111" was introduced.
Po/Pm*x
Fig. 8. Representation of the UPFC damping strategy
The UPFC lSt swing damping strategy is schematically presented
in fig 8. The fault occurs in point A. During the fault, the rotor
of the generator accelerates to point B. At that point, the fault is
cleared. The control acts so as to lead the operating point
from B to the characteristic of the maximal transmittable power -
point C (Pow - U, and I on their limits, 'pr is "optimal"). The
operating point is then held on this curve until point D (lSt
swing limit) is reached. Of course, the UPFC has to be rated
so, that the operating point does not exceed the limit of the lst
swing stability margin E (otherwise the system loses
synchronism). If this is valid, goal " I" is reached. Because of
goal "Ill", the control acts so that the UPFC does not change its
acting strategy until the chosen real power on the back swing is
reached, which exceeds the turbine power level PT by AP. At
this moment, the operating point is in position K and the
procedure for the transmission of the operating point from the
characteristic of the maximal transmittable power "Poms; to the
characteristic of the minimal transmittable power "Porn,;, i. e. to
point F, takes place. If the operating point is led from point D
to the characteristic "Pomi;, the decelerating energy will be small
and the rotor of the generator will persevere in the area of high
transmission angles. In tllis -se, goal "111" would not be
achieved.
q
The momentary system quantities, which are the result of the
digital simulation process in the present integration step, are
introduced into the UPFC control module. On the basis of a
known test system structure, the parameters of the basic model
are calculated, and are valid for the present state of the system
(impedances, transmission angle 8). On the basis of this
calculated data, 1. eq. (10) is solved to determine the optimal
parameter q (to achieve maximal or minimal real power flow).
According to the general damping strategy (Fig. 8), the suitable
UPFC parameters are selected depending on the position of the
system operating point (Fig. 8). As in the UPFC control module
this procedure is finished; the three UPFC control parameters
are sent to the UPFG coordinator (Fig. S), which calculates the
parameters of the controllable voltage and current sources of the
UPFC network representation so as to assure the proper (UPFC
- like) behavior. Then the simulation process can go one
integration step forward with new UPFC parameters. The whole
procedure is repeated in each integration step.
Additionally, the logic is integrated into the UPFC control
module, which perceives undefined areas and determines UPFC
parameters so as to achieve a certain safety margin between
them, and an actual operating point. In such situations the
UPFC parameters cannot, of course, allways be "optimal".
I GENERATOR
Fig. 9. Oscillograms and P(8) characteristic - fault duration 75
ms, without UPFC
490
The control procedures described could also be implemented in
real UPFC control, the system parameters needed for the
calculation of the "optimal UPFC parameters" being derived from
local electric quantities (the system structure of which is known).
The results of the digital simulation (oscillograms and dynamic
transmission characteristics) are shown in Fig. 9 and 10. In the
Fig. 9, the dynamic behavior of the test system quantities is
shown for the case of a 75 ms fault duration and without
UPFC. The system is at the limit of transient stability (fautt
duration of 76 ms causes loss of synchronism in lSt swing).
The system is also at the limit of oscillatory stability.
The circumstances in the case of a 100 ms fault duration and
UPFC being included between "BUSY and the stiff system - the
series UPFC branch being connected to the stiff system - are
presented in Fig. 10; the UPFC is dimensioned so that the
synchronism is just maintained. In the oscillograms and in the
dynamic transmission characteristic, the significant points related
to the control strategy are marked.
Fig. 10. Oscillograms and P(6) characteristic - fault duration 100
ms, UPFC located at "BUSS"
The simulation tests were made in all three location alternatives
and for both orientation alternatives (parallel branch on the 'left
sideM and parallel branch on the "right side" with relation to the
series branch"). The favorable location (the smallest UPFC
dimensions to assure stability) is location at 'BUS1" (Fig. 5), with
the series branch being connected to the generator terminal.
The minimum injected voltage magnitudes U,, which assure the
system stability in cases of fault durations of 100 and 150 ms,
are 0.075 P.U. and 0.507 P.U. respectively. The corresponding
UPFC series branch rated powers are 110 and 735 MVA. The
rated power is calculated according to the pre-fault
circumstances (the product between maximal injected voltage
and the pre-fault current). During the transients the powers can,
for a short period, be considerably higher. The MVA ratings of
other FACTS devices (SVC, STATCON, series compensation,
phase shifting transformer) should be considerably higher in
order to achieve the same transient stability margin enhancement
of the system studied [4]. This was expected because the
UPFC control 'searches" for the best combination between
parallel and series compensation effect and the angle shift effect
on-line, depending on momentary system conditions. The device
with the same MVA rating and one controllable parameter
cannot be as effective.
7. CONCLUSIONS
The UPFC can provide simultaneous, fast and independent
control of all three basic system parameters (terminal voltage,
transmission line impedance and phase angle) and thus acts as
a combination of STATCON, ACSC and controllable phase
shifting transformer. The smooth transition between various
operating modes is possible without any mechanic actions.
However by acting as one of the mentioned FACTS devices
(although it is the most appropriate one in certain conditions)
the UPFG possibilities are not fully utilized. To achieve optimal
UPFC behavior during the dynamic phenomena, the most
effective combination of the three operation modes must be
determined on-line. Only in this way is it possible to evaluate
UPFG efficiency and make comparisons with other devices.
The developed mathematical model describes the
interdependence between longitudinal transmission system
parameters, operating conditions and UPFC parameters in the
form of real analytical equations. The model reveals, among
other things, shows where theoretical UPFC limits are in the
form of nondefined areas. In the transient stability study of a
heavily loaded transmission system, the optimal UPFC parameters
can be determined on-line on the basis of the mathematical
model integrated into the UPFC control module. On the basis of
static calculations by the mathematical model, the determination
of an effective damping strategy is possible. With the inclusion
of an UPFC into a meshed system, the determination of the
optimal UPFC parameters is expected to become a crucial
question, especially when dynamic phenomena need to be
controlled.
8. REFERENCES
[l ]
L. Gyugyi et al.: Advanced Static Var Compensator Using
Gate Turn - Off Thyristors for Utility Applications, ClGRE
1990 Session 26th August - lSt September, Paris;
[2] L. Gyugyi: Dynamic Compensation of AC Transmission
Lines by Solid-state Svnchronous Voltaae Sources,
IEEUPES Summer Meeting, Vancouver, J uly 18-22, 1993;
[3]
R. MihaliE, P. iunko: Streckenmodell zur Einstelluna eines
univerasalen LastfluOrealers, Accepted for publication in
Archiv fijr Elektrotechnik;
R. MihaliE, I . PapiE, D. Povh, P. hnko: Improvement of
transient Stability by Insertion of FACTS Devices,
NTUNIEEE International Conf. on Modern Power.
Systems, Athens, Aug.-Sept. 1993;
[4]
Rafael MlhaliE - was born in Gornja Radgona, Slovenia on Dec.
25. 1961. He received the Diplhg. degree in 1986r MSc. in
1989, and Ph.D. degree in Power Engineering in 1993 from the
University of Ljubljana, Slovenia. After finishing his basic technical
education in 1986 he became a teaching assistant at the
491
Department of Power Systems and Devices of the Faculty for
Electrical and Computer Engineering in Ljubljana. Between 1988
and 1991 he was a member of the Siemens Power Transmission
and Distribution Group, Erlangen, Germany. His areas of interests
are system analysis and FACTS devices. Dr. MihaliE is a
member of the CIGRE Working Group 38-05-06.
DuHan Povh (M83, S88, F94) received his Diplhg. degree
from University Ljubljana/Slovenia in 1959, Dr.-lng. degree from
TH DarmstadVGermany in 1972. He is now professor at the
University in Ljubljana, and is active in a number of committees
and working groups of ClGRE and IEEE. His areas of interest
are system analysis, network planning, insulation coordination of
EHV and HVDC transmission systems and development of HVDC
and Static Var Compensators technique. Prof. Dr. DuSan Povh is
Head of Department on system planning and system analysis in
the Siemens Power Transmission and Distribution Group.
Peter h n k o received his MSc. degree in 1974, and D.Sc.
degree 1978, from the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia. From
1985 to 1990 he was Associate Professor. Now he is Professor
at the Faculty for Electrical and Computer Engineering - Dept.
for Electrical Energy Systems and Devices in Ljubljana. Presently
he is a chairman of this dept., member of an advisory group at
the Slovenian Board of Energy, and Research Fellow of the
Institute J oief Stefan in Ljubljana. His study and research areas
are Transformation and Transmission Equipment, Transients
Analysis and Switching Devices. Mr. P. tunko is a member of
IEEE
492
Discussion
D.N. Kosterev (Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR):
The paper presents a study of the transient stability en-
hancement using the Unified Powerflow Controllers (UP-
FCs). To represent the device adequately in transient
stability studies, its capability characteristics should be
considered. These capability characteristics determine the
maximum range of the UPFC controllable parameters (here
series voltage phase and magnitude, and shunt admittance)
depending on bus voltage and line current at the device
location. The capability characteristics should be estab-
lished based on the device ratings. However, there is no
discussion in the paper on the UPFC equipment ratings,
and on how to relate them to the device control capabili-
ties.
In the paper, the UPFC operating regions are derived
based on the device mathematical model. It will be im-
portant to show how the operatin2 regions depend on the
UPFC current and voltage ratings, and to demonstrate
that the selected device ratings provide adequate control
range for the system to meet transient stability and dis-
turbance performance requirements.
R. NlihaflE: I would like to thank to Mr. D.N.Kosterev for his
comments and interest in the paper.
I agree that the determination of the device bility
characteristics should be the basis of future work concerning
UPFC realization. In reality the UPFC operating area would
probably not be ideal (circle that can be shifted -
in the article). The circle represents only one o
limitations. Other limitations dependent on the system operating
point (terminal voltage, line current etc.) and the dynamic device
behavior (short - time overload capability e.g.) would deform this
circle.
Another interesting question is the one about the e
rating "needed" to achieve certain goal (system stabil
example). This goal can be achieved by various combin
series and parallel UPFC branch ratings. They are
independent. The final answer on the question of
rating may be derived from a cost analysis.
Manuscript received April 14, 1995.
Manuscript received February 24, 1995.