1

Study on the Influence of TCSC Structure and

Control on SSR Damping Using an Improved s-
Domain Model
Fernando Cattan Jusan, Member, IEEE, Sergio Gomes Jr., Senior Member, IEEE, and Glauco Nery
Taranto, Senior Member, IEEE

of series compensated systems due to fast and flexible

Abstract— This paper investigates the influence of basic
TCSC main circuit structure and control on subsynchronous
torsional damping of a nearby turbine-generator. An improved
s-domain model based on dynamic phasor approach was used
to obtain the results presented in the paper. The study is
conducted on the System-1 of the IEEE Second Benchmark
Model. Detailed eigenvalue analyses are carried out in order to
evaluate the effect of the proportion of TCSC to FSC, Boost
Factor and size of TCSC reactor on subsynchronous damping.
The influence of constant current controller and
synchronization system (PLL) parameters is also investigated.
Finally, a simple Subsynchronous Damping Controller (SSDC)
is added to the TCSC main control in order to demonstrate
that the SSR damping capability of TCSC may be enhanced by
proper modulation of firing angle. The results obtained in the
time domain simulations are validated through
PSCAD/EMTDC simulations.
Index Terms—FACTS, TCSC, Subsynchronous Oscillations
(SSO), Dynamic Phasors, Modal Analysis, s-Domain, Control
System Design.
I. INTRODUCTION
S eries capacitor compensation is a very efficient and
economic means to enhance steady-state power transfer
capability of long transmission lines and to improve
transient stability of interconnected systems. However, this
technique may inadvertently cause growing torsional
oscillations at subsynchronous frequencies due to
Subsynchronous Resonance (SSR) phenomenon [1]. SSR
problems occur when there is adverse interaction between
the electrical network subsynchronous modes and the
poorly-damped torsional modes of turbo-generators. When
the series-compensation ratio is increased to a certain level,
an electrical resonance involving the generators,
transformers, transmission lines and series capacitors will
usually appear at the subsynchronous frequency range.
When the electrical resonant frequency becomes
complementary to one of the torsional frequencies of the
turbine-generator mechanical system, some of these
torsional modes may become undamped or unstable which
can lead to shaft damage.
The advent of Thyristor Controlled Series Capacitors
(TCSC) made it possible to improve the overall performance
Fernando Cattan Jusan is with Furnas Centrais Eletricas, Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil (e-mail: cattan@furnas.com.br).
Sergio Gomes Jr. is with CEPEL and UFF, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (e-
mail: sgomes@cepel.br).
control of the effective transmission line reactance [2][3]. In
addition the TCSC has a great ability on damping power
system oscillations [4][5]. These features have been
demonstrated in several practical installations worldwide
[6]-[9].
The characteristics of TCSC at steady-state and low
frequencies (below 5 Hz) can be studied using fundamental
frequency models [10]. These models represent the TCSC as
a variable reactance whose value is given by the relationship
among fundamental components of variables at steady-state.
The delays introduced by the dynamics of the firing system
are represented by lag blocks and transport delays. For SSR
studies, the use of such simplified models may lead to
erroneous results unless the torsional oscillations occur at
frequencies substantially lower than the synchronous
frequency [11].
Conventionally, EMTP-type programs are used for SSR
studies with systems containing FACTS devices [12]. These
simulation tools are highly accurate but they need numerous
nonlinear time domain simulations and experienced
engineers to analyze the results and infer system
characteristics. Besides, they are too time-consuming for
optimization of controller parameters. On the other hand,
linear analysis techniques provide a large set of structural
information on the system in a direct and effective way,
being complementary to nonlinear time domain simulations.
Some analytical models of FACTS devices suitable for
modal analysis have been proposed [13][14], but simple and
reliable high-frequency models were still needed. In [15], a
new accurate and modular model for thyristor-based FACTS
devices was proposed. The models were developed in a
form suitable for control theory applications and, following
the model linearization, suitable for modal analysis. This is
not a trivial task, since thyristor firing is a time-variant
function, which involves continuous and discrete variables,
thus requiring the use of sophisticated techniques to deal
with it. This objective was achieved by using the Dynamic
Phasor approach [14]-[16], which allows transforming the
non-linear time varying system of equations into an
autonomous non-linear system. The Phase-Locked Loop
(PLL) module for the TCSC control was properly
considered in the model.
This paper is intended to investigate the influence of
basic TCSC structure and control on subsynchronous
Glauco Nery Taranto is with COPPE/UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (e-
mail: tarang@coep.ufrj.br).
 2

torsional damping of a nearby turbine-generator. Detailed X TCSC

eigenvalue analyses were carried out in order to evaluate the
effect of the proportion of TCSC to Fixed Series Capacitor
(FSC), Boost Factor (KB) and size of TCSC reactor on
subsynchronous damping. The influence of constant current
controller and synchronization system (PLL) parameters
was also investigated. Finally, a simple Subsynchronous
Damping Controller (SSDC) is added to the TCSC main
control in order to demonstrate that the SSR damping
capability of TCSC may be enhanced by proper modulation
of firing angle.
The results obtained in the time domain simulations are
validated through PSCAD/EMTDC [17] simulations.
II. BASIC TCSC STRUCTURE AND OPERATION
A. Basic TCSC Structure
The main circuit of the TCSC device is shown in Fig. 1.
It basically consists of a fixed series capacitor (FSC)
connected in parallel with a thyristor-controlled reactor
(TCR). When operating in blocked mode, i.e. without
thyristor conduction, the TCSC can is equivalent to a fixed
series capacitor bank with the same ratings. A suitable
control of the TCR firing angle and consequent partial
thyristor conduction allows the TCSC to behave either as a
continuously controllable capacitive reactance or as a
continuously controllable inductive reactance. This is
referred to as vernier-control mode. Fig. 2 shows a typical
steady-state impedance characteristic curve of the TCSC. It
is apparent from the figure that a smooth transition from the
capacitive to inductive mode is not permitted because of the
resonant region between the two modes. The effective
TCSC reactance with respect to α is given by the following
equation [11]:
2 (π − α ) + si n 2 (π − α )
X C2
X T C S C (α ) = X C −
XC − X L π
4 X C2 cos (π − α ) ⎡⎣λ tan λ (π − α ) − tan (π − α )⎤⎦
2
KB = (2)
XC
The maximum TCSC reactance permissible (achieved
when α =αMIN) is typically 2.5 to 3 times XC to prevent
operation near the resonant region [11].
For proper functioning of the TCSC, it is also necessary
that ω0 > ω N , where ω0 = 1 LC is the resonant frequency
of the TCSC circuit and ω N is the network frequency. The
quotient between ω0 and ω N is a design parameter, which
will be denoted here as λ. It determines the relative size of
the TCSC reactor and its definition is given in (3), where XL
is the fundamental reactance of the reactor.
ω0 −XC
λ= = (3)
ωN XL
An appropriate choice of λ will ensure just one resonant
point in the range from 90º to 180º, as in Fig. 2. In practical
TCSC implementations λ parameter generally fall in the
range between 2 and 4 [11].
Although the TCSC behaves as a capacitive reactance at
fundamental frequency, it is inductive/resistive at
subsynchronous frequencies and thus detunes and damps
SSR oscillations [18]. Sometimes it may be the main reason
for installing a TCSC [9].
Fig. 1. Main circuit of TCSC
X TCSC (α )
X L (α r ) = X C
+ 90 ° < α < α Lli m
(1) α L < α < αC
lim lim

+
π
Inductive

XC − X L λ 2 −1
where λ is a design parameter which will be described later. 180º
A variant of the vernier-control mode is the capacitive- αL αr αC
α
90º
Capacitive

li m lim
vernier-control mode, in which the TCSC is restricted to
operate in the capacitive region by constraining the firing
angle in the range αMIN≤α≤180º. In this operating mode, the
effective capacitive reactance of the TCSC can be boosted
substantially, as shown in Fig. 2. The boost effect is a α C < α < 1 80 °
lim

consequence of the TCR current injection during
conduction, which circulates in the TCSC loop in addition
to the line current, thus creating an additional voltage across
the series capacitor. From the system viewpoint the
increased capacitor voltage appears like an additional
voltage source connected in series with the transmission line
(boost effect). This additional voltage can be controlled
once per half cycle through firing angle control, allowing a
controllable series reactance.
The Boost factor (KB) is defined as the quotient of
fundamental effective reactance (XTCSC) and capacitive
reactance of TCSC without thyristors conduction (XC):
Fig. 2. TCSC steady-state reactance characteristic
B. Basic TCSC Control
The following basic control methodologies were
considered in the study:
• Open-loop reactance control (fixed firing angle)
• Closed-loop current control
The simplest form of controlling the TCSC is by setting
the reference of series compensation level to a fixed value.
This is referred to as open-loop reactance control. The
controller outputs a reactance-order signal that is linearized
to obtain the necessary firing angle; then, the firing-angle
signal is transmitted to the firing control system, which
 3

issues the equidistant gating pulses for the TCSC thyristors

to implement the desired reactance. The firing pulses are
1 vtcr Switching
Function
normally synchronized to the line current zero crossings,
since this signal is almost free of harmonics. In order to itcr
inhibit the effect of fast acting closed-loop controls on the
results, this approach was chosen to study the influence of 0
the structural characteristics (such as KB and λ) and θ pll α σ
synchronization system (PLL) parameters of the TCSC on
subsynchronous damping. il
In a closed-loop current control, the desired line-current
Fig. 4. Switching Function
magnitude is fed as a reference signal to the TCSC
controller, which strives to maintain the actual line current The Fourier series of the switching function can be written
at this value [19]. A typical block diagram of TCSC as:
constant current control is depicted in Fig. 3. The 3-phase
current is measured and rectified in the measurement unit.
∑
q = q0 + cos ⎡⎣2k (ωt − β )⎤⎦
k
Then, the rectified signal is filtered and normalized to (7
Qm e jmωt + Qm* e − jmωt )
ensure per-unit consistency with the reference-current
signal. The error signal is input to a proportional-integral
= ∑
m
2
(PI) type controller, which outputs a reactance order to the where k = 1, 2,3,... and m = 2k .
firing control system. The effect of the main parameters of The coefficients of the complex form of the switching
constant current controller on subsynchronous damping is function are given by:
also shown on the paper.
σ (8
Q0 = q0 =
π )
4 ⎛ mσ ⎞ − jmβ (9
Qm = Q2 k = qk e − jmβ =
sin ⎜ ⎟e
mπ ⎝ 2 ⎠ )
The fundamental phasor of TCR voltage multiplied by
KP the harmonics of q will produce harmonic phasors in the
−ω LTCR TCR current. The harmonic phasors of the TCR current will
KI in turn produce harmonics on the line current, which is
s injected into the power system, thus producing harmonics
Fig. 3. TCSC constant current controller on the TCR voltage. Finally, the harmonic phasors of the
voltage will interact with the existing harmonic phasors of
III. DYNAMIC PHASOR MODEL OF TCSC the TCR current. As a consequence, all system variables
Using the notation of Fig. 1, the following set of may be written as a sum of dynamic phasors. The final
differential equations applies to each phase of the TCSC: equations for the harmonic phasors of the TCSC are
presented in (10)-(13):
dv (4
Ctcr tcr a = il a − itcr a dVtcr ak Re
dt ) Ctcr − kωCtcrVtcr ak Im = I l ak Re − I tcr ak Re (10)
dt
ditcr a (5
Ltcr = q (α , θ pll , σ ) ⋅ vtcr a Ctcr
dVtcr ak Im
+ kωCtcrVtcr ak Re = I l ak Im − I tcr ak Im (11)
dt ) dt
where q is the switching function [20], α is the firing angle, dI
Ltcr tcr ak Re − kω Ltcr I tcr ak Im =
σ is the conduction angle and θpll is the reference angle for dt
the thyristor firing control, given by the PLL. In the case of ⎛Q Q ⎞
TCSC, θpll is obtained from the phase angle of the line = ∑ ⎜ m Re Vtcr an Re − m Im Vtcr an Im ⎟ +
m+ n=k ⎝ 2 2 ⎠
current. The switching function may be 1 or 0, depending on (12)
⎛ Qm Re Q ⎞
the state of the thyristors (conducting or not) at that time, as + ∑ ⎜ Vtcr an Re + m Im Vtcr an Im ⎟ +
−m+n=k ⎝ 2 2 ⎠
illustrated in Fig. 4. The equations (4) and (5) may be put in
a form of time invariant system using dynamic phasors [15]. ⎛Q Q ⎞
+ ∑ ⎜ m Re Vtcr an Re + m Im Vtcr an Im ⎟
The angles α, θpll and σ are included as variables of the m−n=k ⎝ 2 2 ⎠
problem. dI tcr ak Im
Ltcr + kω Ltcr I tcr ak Re =
The switching function has cosine symmetry around the dt
zero crossing of the voltage. If the angle β is defined by: ⎛Q Q ⎞
= ∑ ⎜ m Im Vtcr an Re + m Re Vtcr an Im ⎟ +
σ (6 m+ n=k ⎝ 2 2 ⎠
β = α − θ pll + (13)
2 ) ⎛ Qm Im Q ⎞
+ ∑ ⎜− Vtcr an Re + m Re Vtcr an Im ⎟ +
−m+n=k ⎝ 2 2 ⎠
⎛Q Q ⎞
+ ∑ ⎜ m Im Vtcr an Re − m Re Vtcr an Im ⎟
m−n=k ⎝ 2 2 ⎠
In this paper, time domain variables are denoted by lower

case letters and their associated phasors are denoted by
capital letters. The subscripts Re and Im refer respectively to
the real and imaginary part of the phasors, while the
subscript a is associated with phase a voltages and currents.
When operating in open-loop reactance control, α is
calculated directly from equation (1) or using a look-up
table, which provides the required firing angle to implement
the desired level of series compensation. If a current or
power controller is used, the reactance order is provided by
the PI controller and then linearized to obtain α.
The reference angle θpll is the output of the PLL module,
which is used for detecting the line current angle. The PLL
model used in PSCAD/EMTDC is referred to as d-q-z or
Transvektor type. This model could be implemented in
terms of the harmonic phasors of the line current. However,
due to the low-pass frequency response of the PLL, a much
simpler model could be used in the phasor model with
practically coincident results, as shown in [15]. The PLL
was defined by the unitary feedback of the filter given in
(14), yielding the closed-loop transfer function in (15):
⎛ K I pl l ⎞ 1
G ( s) = ⎜ K Ppl l + ⎟⋅ (14)
⎜ s ⎟⎠ s
⎝ θ f = α (t − σ d ω ) − θ p l l (t − σ d ω ) + σ d
G ( s)
θ pll = ⋅θ I (15)
1 + G ( s)
where θI is the angle of the fundamental phasor of the line
current, given by:
⎛I ⎞ and sine functions because this amount does not alter the
θ I = ar ct g ⎜ l1Im ⎟ (16)
⎝ I l1R e ⎠
The last variable to be calculated is the conduction angle
σ. One approximation for this angle is to consider that the
switching function multiplied by the voltage is always in
phase with the fundamental phasor of the current. This
representation yields a linearized model comprising both
algebraic and differential equations, which can be modeled
by a descriptor system [21][22][23], although this model
usually yields an undesired spurious dynamic instability.
A second approach to calculate the conduction angle,
which does not present the mentioned instability problem,
proposed in [15], is based on the numerical integration of
the voltage in the time domain. This approach considers the
fact that the instant where a thyristor blocks the current in a
certain branch of the TCR (instant when the conduction
current reaches zero) defines the conduction angle σd. This
angle is given by the difference of time between the instant
that the current reaches zero and the instant that the thyristor
begins conduction multiplied by ω, as given by:
σ d = ω (toff − ton ) (17)
As σd is defined only at the instants of current blocking in
any branch, it is a discrete variable and, therefore, it is not
well defined in any other time instant. However, it is
possible to create a continuous variable σd that will have the
correct value of the conduction angle for all this instants of
current blocking, but will also have a smooth variation
between these intervals.
If t is the instant of current blocking in some TCR branch
(Fig. 4), the following equation is attended:
4
0
∫ σω v
− d tcr x (t + t0 ) d t0 =0 (18)
where:
vt c r x (t ) = ∑V t cr a k R e (t ) ⋅ co s ⎡
⎣k (ωt + θ x )⎤⎦ −
k
(19)
− ∑V
k
tcra k Im (t ) ⋅ s i n ⎡
⎣k (ωt + θ x )⎤⎦
where θx is equal to 0, -2π/3 and +2π/3 for the TCR
branches a, b and c, respectively. In this case where t is an
instant of current blocking, the angle of the instant of firing
is defined by:
ωt + θ x − σ d = α (t − σ d ω ) − θ p l l (t − σ d ω ) + 2 ⋅π ⋅ z (20)
where z is an integer. So, it is possible to define a generic
voltage that continuously varies the phase and, during the
instant of current blocking, has the same phase of the branch
of the TCR where the current blocking is occuring. The
phase of voltage should comply with (20), which is now
shown with a translation in time by t0:
ω (t + t0 ) t + θ x = ω ⋅ t0 + θ f + 2 ⋅ π ⋅ z (21)
where:
(22)
The translated generic voltage is given by:
0
∫ σω v
−
t cr x (t + t0 ) d t0 =0 (23)
Note that the term 2 ⋅ π ⋅ z was removed from the cosine
values these functions (it produces coterminal angles).
When t0 is equal to zero, vtcr x (t + t0 ) has a phase θ f and
when t0 is equal to −σ ω , vtcr x (t + t0 ) has a phase:
θ0 = α (t − σ d ω ) − θ pl l (t − σ d ω ) (24)
Note that when t is an instant of current blocking in some
phase, the conduction angle will be the difference between
the current blocking instant and the firing angle instant,
multiplied by ω, as defined before. During the integration,
the changing of the shape of the voltage is taken into
account by considering the variation of the phasors as a
function of t0.
The conduction angle of the switching function should be
corrected to consider the variation of α and θpll during the
period of conduction by the following equation:
σ = σ d − α (t ) + α (t − σ d ω ) + θ p ll (t ) − θ p ll (t − σ d ω )
(25)
This conduction angle is used in (8) and (9).
This approach is a more precise procedure and yields a
model defined by equations that are non-linear function of
the Laplace complex frequency s, thus requiring an s-
domain representation [24]. The results presented in this
paper were obtained using this approach.
IV. SYSTEM MODEL
System-1 of the IEEE Second Benchmark Model was
used in the simulations [25]. The system consists of a 600
MVA steam turbine-generator set connected to an infinite
bus via a step-up transformer and two parallel transmission
lines, where one of them is series-compensated. Data of

electrical network, generator electrical parameters and
spring-mass system are found in [25]. The IEEE(2.2) model
is used to represent the generator electrical system. The
generator is further equipped with a DC rotating exciter
(IEEE type DC1A), with the following parameters:
K a = 46 pu/pu, Ta = 0.06 s, Tb = Tc = 0 s, Te = 0.46 s
K f = 0.1 pu/pu, T f = 1.0 s, Aex = 0.014 , Bex = 1.55
Tr = 0.55 s, VR MIN
= −0.9 pu, VR
MAX
= 1.0 pu
A TCSC comprising a fixed capacitor and a TCR is
incorporated in the system as part of the total series
compensation. All system components were implemented in
PacDyn [26] that allows small-signal stability analysis
regarding electromechanical oscillations and
subsynchronous resonance using descriptor systems and s-
domain modeling of network dynamics.
V. STUDY RESULTS
A. SSR Results with Fixed Series Capacitor (FSC)
In order to identify the critical levels of series
compensation of the benchmark system, a root locus plot is
generated varying the series compensation ratio XFSC/XL
from 10% (XFSC=0.008 pu) to 90% (XFSC=0.072 pu), as
shown in Fig. 5. The full eigensolution of the linearized
system was obtained by using the QZ method.
It is assumed a light load condition of the system in
steady-state. The following initial operating point is
considered in the analysis:
PG=60 MW, QG=-3.1 Mvar, Vt=1.0 pu, V∞=1.0 pu
As the reactance XFSC is increased, the frequency of the
subsynchronous network mode is reduced, while the
frequency of the supersynchronous network mode is
increased. Whenever the frequency of the network
subsynchronous mode approaches the frequency of a
torsional mode, they strongly interact. The net effect is that
the subsynchronous pole shifts to the left while the torsional
pole shifts to the right and some of them may become
unstable. This adverse interaction is result of SSR from
torsional interaction (TI) mechanism. Only torsional mode 1
shifts to the right side of the s-plane as XFSC is increased,
while the other torsional modes are stable for the whole
series compensation range.
Fig. 5. Root-Locus of XFSC
Fig. 6 shows the time domain simulation results for a
0.02 pu step disturbance applied to the synchronous
machine mechanical power (ΔPmec) for a capacitive
reactance of XFSC=0.0417 pu (XFSC/XL=52.1%), which
represents the most critical value of XFSC for the first
torsional mode. The monitored variable is the generator
rotor speed deviation (ΔωGEN). The system is unstable and
5
unbounded torsional oscillations are observed. The result
obtained with the electromagnetic transient program
PSCAD/EMTDC is shown in the same figure. The plots are
visually coincident.
B. Influence of Proportion of FSC and TCSC (KTCSC)
In practical TCSC applications the total series
compensation level (XCT) is usually obtained by combining
the controllable compensation with fixed series
compensation due to economical and reliability
requirements. In this paper, the proportion of TCSC
compensation in relation to the total series compensation
will be denoted by KTCSC=XTCSC/XCT. The proportion of
TCSC and FSC together with the operation characteristics
of the TCSC are the main factors which influences the
subsynchronous behavior of the total series compensation
equipment.
Fig. 6. Time domain result for series compensation level of 52.1%
(FSC=100%)
The choice of TCSC main circuit parameters is based on
the following procedure:
- Select a total series compensation level (XCT).
- Chose the percentage of fixed and controllable
compensation, obtaining the effective reactances of
FSC (XFSC) and TCSC (XTCSC).
- Chose the value of KB. Using equation (2), determine
the TCSC capacitor (XC).
- Chose the value of λ. Using equation (3), calculate the
TCSC reactor (XL).
For the computation of the system poles and their
respective modal dampings using the TCSC model
described in item III, it is necessary the determination of the
system reduced order model. The transfer function between
the generator speed and the mechanical power, that is
H ( s ) = ω ( s ) Pmec ( s ) , was used as a basis for the reduced
order model determination. The dominant poles are
calculated using a specific dominant pole algorithmic for
Y(s) [24].
Fig. 7 shows the effect of KTCSC on the subsynchronous
damping of torsional mode 1 (24.6 Hz) for the benchmark
system. The total series compensation degree was chosen to
be 52.1% with TCSC designed with KB=1.5 and λ=2.5 for
all cases. Fig. 8 shows the frequency of the network
subsynchronous mode for each case. It is shown that the
TCSC detunes the frequency of the subsynchronous mode
from that of the torsional mode 1 of the turbine-generator
(24.6 Hz) thus minimizing SSR effects.
The time domain results for a step disturbance at
mechanical power are shown in Fig. 9 (KTCSC=10%) and
 6

Fig. 19 (KTCSC=50%). As anticipated by the eigenvalue

evaluation, the system is unstable for KTCSC=10% and stable
for KTCSC=50%. For both conditions the linear s-domain
model presented coincident results when compared to
PSCAD/EMTDC. Enlarged views of Fig. 9 are shown in
Fig. 11 (from 0 to 2 seconds) and in Fig. 12 (from 4 to 6
seconds) to reveal the accuracy of the model.
0,05%

0,00%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Modal Damping (%)

-0,05%
Fig. 10. Time domain result for series compensation level of 52.1%
-0,10% (FSC=50%, TCSC=50%, KB=1.5 and λ=2.5) – Stable
-0,15%

-0,20%

-0,25%

-0,30%
TCSC Compensation (% )
Fig. 7. Effect of the proportion of TCSC to FSC on the damping of
torsional mode 1 (KB=1.5 and λ=2.5)

60
55
52,1
50
Frequency (Hz)

Fig. 11. Enlarged view of time domain result for series compensation level
45 43,0 of 52.1% (FSC=90%, TCSC=10%, KB=1.5 and λ=2.5) – 0 to 2 seconds
40
36,9
35
31,6
30
26,8
25 24,6

20
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
TCSC Compensation (% )

Fig. 8. Effect of the proportion of TCSC to FSC on the frequency of the

network subsynchronous mode (KB=1.5 and λ=2.5)

Fig. 12. Enlarged view of time domain result for series compensation level
of 52.1% (FSC=50%, TCSC=50%, KB=1.5 and λ=2.5) – 4 to 6 seconds

C. Influence of Boost Factor (KB)

Fig. 9. Time domain result for series compensation level of 52.1%
(FSC=90%, TCSC=10%, KB=1.5 and λ=2.5) - Unstable
Different Boost Factors can be implemented by a suitable
selection of the TCR firing angle. A Boost Factor of 1.0
corresponds to a TCR operating with α=180º and thus it is
equivalent to a FSC with the same ratings. Fig. 13 shows the
effect of KB on the subsynchronous damping of torsional
mode 1 for three different reactor sizes (λ=1.5, λ=2.5 and
λ=4.0). The TCSC capacitor and reactor sizes were chosen
so that XCT corresponds to 52.1% for all cases.
It is seen that even a small KB improves the
subsynchronous electrical damping at the frequency of the
torsional mode. For higher values of KB (above 2.0), the
effect of increasing KB on the improvement of SSR damping
is not substantial. Moreover, KB should be limited to avoid
operation near the resonant region.
 7

Modal Damping (%) 0,04% 0,015%

0,02%

Modal Damping (%)

0,010%
0,00%
0,005%
-0,02%
0,000%
-0,04%
-0,06% -0,005%

-0,08% -0,010%
-0,10% -0,015%
1,00 1,25 1,50 1,75 2,00 2,25 2,50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Boost Factor (Kb) PLL Proportional Gain (Kp_PLL)

Lambda=1.5 Lambda=2.5 Lambda=4.0 Ki_PLL=500 Ki_PLL=1000 Ki_PLL=100

Fig. 13. Effect of Boost Factor parameter on the damping of torsional mode Fig. 15. Effect of PLL parameters on the damping of torsional mode 1
1 (FSC=50% and TCSC=50%) (FSC=50%, TCSC=50%, λ=1.5 and KB=2.5)

D. Influence of λ Parameter F. Influence of TCSC Current Controller Parameters

The desired TCSC compensation degree can be
implemented with different reactor sizes for the same TCSC
capacitor. The eventual choice is based on an economic
analysis of each individual case. The reactor size is also
chosen so that the resonance of the TCSC circuit is below
the 3rd harmonic [11]. Fig. 14 shows the effect of λ
parameter on subsynchronous damping of torsional mode 1.
In all cases the reactor size and firing angle were altered
based on the studied λ parameter to achieve the desired KB.
It can be concluded that the λ parameter has some effect on
SSR damping, although it can be considered relatively
small.
0,02%
Modal Damping (%)
A parametric analysis was carried out to determine the
influence of current controller parameter settings on SSR
damping. A model similar to that shown in Fig. 3 was
considered in the analysis. Fig. 16 shows the effect of
increasing the proportional gain (KP) on the damping of the
first torsional mode for three different integral gains (KI).
For all cases, KTCSC=50%, KB=1.5 and λ=2.5. As shown in
Fig. 7, this represents a stable condition when open-loop
reactance control is considered. It is seen that the current
controller can adversely interact with the torsional mode, as
its damping reduces as KP is increased. One possible way to
minimize the interaction is to limit the bandwidth of the
controller by using a torsional filter in the main path of the
current controller. The influence of the integral gain of the

0,01% controller proves to be not significant.

0,010%
0,00%
Modal Damping (%)

0,005%
-0,01% 0,000%
-0,005%
-0,02% -0,010%
-0,015%
-0,03% -0,020%
1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 -0,025%
Lambda
-0,030%
Kb=1.2 Kb=1.5 Kb=2.0 0,00 0,05 0,10 0,15 0,20 0,25 0,30

Fig. 14. Effect of λ parameter on the damping of torsional mode 1 Current Controller Proportional Gain (Kp)
(FSC=50%, TCSC=50%) Ki=0.5 Ki=1.0 Ki=1.5

E. Influence of Phase-Locked Loop Parameters Fig. 16. Effect of Current Controller parameters on the damping of
torsional mode 1 (FSC=50%, TCSC=50%, λ=1.5 and KB=2.5)
The thyristor firing pulse generation method has a strong
effect on subsynchronous behaviour of TCSC [2]. In this G. Subsynchronous Damping Controller (SSDC)
paper, a very simple PLL model was used. Although more
In the previous sections, it was shown that the TCSC can
sophisticated firing pulse generation methods are available
damp SSR without specific controller depending on main
[27], this exercise is done to demonstrate that the
circuit design and basic controller settings. However, it
synchronization circuit can cause growing oscillations even
would be better if a TCSC with smaller ratings could
without any closed-loop control systems. The PLL transfer
stabilize the system, resulting in a lower cost solution.
function is defined by equations (14) and (15).
Therefore, a simple Subsynchronous Damping Controller
Fig. 15 shows the effect of PLL parameters on the modal
(SSDC) was added to the reactance-order signal to try to
damping of the first torsional mode. For all cases,
stabilize torsional mode 1 for lower levels of controllable
KTCSC=50%, KB=1.5 and λ=2.5. In the previous sections,
series compensation using open-loop reactance control.
PLL circuit used a PI controller with KP_PLL=50 and
Fig. 17 shows the block diagram of the simple SSDC
KI_PLL=500. It is shown that the synchronization system
proposed in this work to damp SSR. The controller uses
response affects the subsynchronous behavior of TCSC.
generator speed as input signal. The input signal is filtered
and subtracted from the non-filtered signal to prevent
 8

against undesirable adverse interaction with the other Enhancing Power System Dynamics: An analog Simulator Study",
IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 9, pp. 1018-1027, Apr. 1994.
modes. The filter is tuned to the frequency of the first [5] N. Kakimoto and A. Phongphanphanee, “Subsynchronous Resonance
torsional mode. Damping Control of Thyristor-Controlled Series Capacitor”, IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 1051–1059, Jul. 2003.
[6] C. Gama, L. Ängquist, G. Ingeström, and M. Noroozian,
Vin
1 s 2 + 2ζ nωn s + ωn2 “Commissioning and Operative Experience of TCSC for Damping
KS Vs
1 + s0.02 s 2 + 2ζ d ωn s + ωn2 Power Oscillation in the Brazilian North-South Interconnection”, in
Proc. CIGRÉ Session, No. 38, Paper 14-104, Paris, 2000.
[7] G. S. Luz, N. J. P. de Macedo, V. R. de Oliveira, “FURNAS TCSC –
An Example of Using Different Simulation Tools for Performance
Fig. 17. SSDC block diagram Analysis”, in Proc. International Conference on Power System
Transients, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 2001.
Fig. 18 shows the effect of SSDC gain on the [8] R. J. Piwko, C. A Wegner, S. J. Kinney, J. D. Eden, “Subsynchronous
subsynchronous damping of torsional mode 1 for three Resonance Performance Tests of the Slatt Thyristor-Controlled series
different values of ξn (keeping ξd=1). For all cases, Capacitor”, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 1112-1119,
April 1996.
KTCSC=10%, KB=1.5 and λ=2.5. It is seen that by a proper [9] D. Holmberg, M. Danielsson, P. Halvarsson, L. Ängquist, “The Stöde
selection of controller parameters is possible to damp the Thyristor-Controlled Series Capacitor”, in CIGRÉ Session, Paper14-
first torsional mode. The other torsional modes barely move 105, Paris, 1998.
with the increasing of SSDC gain. [10] J. J. Paserba, N. W. Miller, E. V. Larsen, R. J. Piwko, "A Thyristor-
Controlled Series Compensation Model for Power System Stability
0,100% Analysis", IEEE Trans. on Power Del., vol. 10 , no. 3, pp. 1471 -
1478, July 1995.
Modal Damping (%)

0,050%
0,000%
-0,050%
-0,100%
-0,150%
0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0
Supplementary Control Gain (Ks)
Psin=0.1 Psin=0.5 Psin=0.9
Fig. 18. Effect of Supplementary Controller parameters on the damping of
torsional mode 1 (FSC=90%, TCSC=10%, λ=1.5 and KB=2.5)
VI. CONCLUSIONS
The paper presented a comprehensive SSR study to
determine the effect of TCSC main circuit structure and
control on subsynchronous damping. The study was
conducted in a benchmark system using a complex s-domain
model based on dynamic phasor approach. The results
obtained with the analytical model closely matched those
achieved through PSCAD/EMTDC simulations. The
influence of the proportion of controllable and fixed series
compensation, Boost Factor and relative size of TCSC
reactor on subsynchronous damping was evaluated in open-
loop reactance control, so as the effect of constant current
control and PLL parameter settings. It was shown that the
TCSC has an inherent SSR damping capability when proper
design parameters are chosen. The paper showed also that
this damping capability can be enhanced by using a simple
Subsynchronous Damping Controller (SSDC).
VII. REFERENCES
[1] P.M. Anderson, B.L. Agrawal, J.E. Van Ness, Subsynchronous
Resonance in Power Systems, New York: IEEE Press, 1988.
[2] N. G. Hingorani, L. Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS – Concepts and
Technology of Flexible AC Transmission Systems, New York: IEEE
Press, 2000.
[3] E. V. Larsen, C. E. J. Bowler, B. L. Damsky, S. L. Nilsson, "Benefits
of Thyristor Controlled Series Compensation", in Proc. CIGRÉ
Session, 14/37/38-04, Paris, 1992.
[4] S. Nyati, C. A. Wegner, R. W. Delmerico, R. J. Piwko, D. H. Baker,
A. Edris, "Effectiveness of Thyristor Controlled Series Capacitor in
[11] R.M. Mathur, R.K. Varma, Thyristor-Based FACTS Controllers for
Electrical Transmission Systems, IEEE Press, 2002.
[12] P. Vuorenpää, T. Rauhala, P. Järventausta, T. Känsälä, “On Effect of
TCSC Structure and Synchronization Response on Subsynchronous
Damping”, in Proc. International Conference on Power system
Transients, Lyon, France, June, 2007.
[13] H.A. Othman, L. Angquist, "Analytical Modeling of Thyristor-
Controlled Series Capacitors for SSR Studies", IEEE Trans. on Power
Systems, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 119-127, Feb. 1996.
4,0 [14] P. Mattavelli, A. M. Stankovic, G. C. Verghese, "SSR Analysis with
Dynamic Phasor Model of Thyristor-Controlled Series Capacitor",
IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 200-208, Feb.
1999.
[15] S. Gomes Jr., A. Stankovic, “Modeling of SVC and TCSC Using
Dynamic Phasors”, DSE-CEPEL, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Tech. Rep.
DP/DSE-32962/04, 2004.
[16] A. M. Stankovic, P. Mattavelli, V. Caliskan, G. C. Verghese,
"Modeling and Analysis of FACTS Devices with Dynamic Phasors",
in Proc. IEEE PES Winter Meeting, Jan. 2000.
[17] PSCAD/EMTDC User’s Manual, Manitoba HVDC Research Center,
Canada, 1994.
[18] W. Zhu et al, “An EMTP Study of SSR Mitigation Using the
Thyristor-Controlled Series Capacitor", IEEE Trans. on Power Del.,
vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 1479-1485, July 1995.
[19] L. A. S. Pilotto, A. Bianco, F. W. Long, and A. A. Edris, “Impact of
TCSC control methodologies on subsynchronous oscillations”, IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 243–252, Jan. 2003.
[20] L. A. S. Pilotto, J. E. R. Alves, E. H. Watanabe, "High Frequency
Eigenanalysis of HVDC and FACTS Assisted Power Systems", in
Proc. IEEE PES Summer Meeting, vol. 2, pp. 823-829, 16-20 July
2000.
[21] S. Gomes Jr., N. Martins, A. Stankovic, “Improved Controller Design
Using New Dynamic Phasor Models of SVC’s Suitable For High
Frequency Analysis”, in Proc. Transmission and Distribution
Conference and Exposition, Dallas, 21-24 May 2006.
[22] F. C. Jusan, S. Gomes Jr., G. N. Taranto, “SSR Results Obtained with
a Dynamic Phasor Model of SVC Using Modal Analysis”,
International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol.
32, Issue 6, pp. 571-582, July 2010.
[23] F. L. Lirio, S. Gomes Jr., E. H. Watanabe, “Coordinated Controller
Design of Multiples SVCs Using Detailed s-Domain Modeling”, in
Proc. IEEE PES General Meeting, Tampa, FL, 24-28 June 2007.
[24] S. Gomes Jr., N. Martins, C. Portela, "Modal Analysis Applied to s-
Domain Models of ac Networks", in Proc. IEEE PES Winter Meeting,
Columbus, Ohio, Jan. 2000.
[25] IEEE SSR Working Group, “Second Benchmark Model for Computer
Simulation of Subsynchronous Resonance”, IEEE Trans. on Power
Apparatus and Systems, vol. 104, pp. 1057-1066, May 1985.
[26] PacDyn User’s Manual, CEPEL, Brazil, 2010.
[27] L. Angquist, “Synchronous Voltage Reversal Control of Thyristor
Controlled Series Capacitor”, Doctoral Dissertation, Dept. Elect. Eng.,
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, 2002.
 9

VIII. BIOGRAPHIES

Fernando Cattan Jusan (M’08) was born in Rio

de Janeiro in Brazil, on February 9, 1979. He
received the B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering
from CEFET-RJ, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 2003,
and the M.Sc. degree in electrical engineering
from Federal University of Rio de
Janeiro/COPPE, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 2007.
Since 2004, he has been with Furnas Centrais
Elétricas S.A., Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. He is
currently a power system engineer of the
Department of Electric Studies and Operations Planning. His main research
interests are in power system stability and control, small-signal analysis,
HVDC, FACTS and subsynchronous oscillations.

Sergio Gomes Jr. (M'99, SM’06) received the

B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering from
Fluminense Federal University, Niteroi, Brazil, the
M.Sc. and D.Sc. degrees in electrical engineering
from Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ),
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992, 1995 and 2002,
respectively. During 2004, he spent six months on
post-doctorate working on FACTS modeling using
dynamic phasors at Northeastern University,
Boston, MA, USA. Since 1994, he has been with
CEPEL, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, developing
methods and computer tools for power system analysis. Since 2010 he has
also been a part-time professor at Fluminense Federal University. His
research interests include power system dynamics and control, power
electronics, harmonics and electromagnetic transients.

Glauco Nery Taranto (SM'04) received the B.Sc.

degree from UERJ, Brazil in 1988, the M.Sc.
degree from PUC-RJ, Brazil in 1991 and the
Ph.D. degree from Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute, Troy, NY, USA, all in Electrical
Engineering. In 2006, he was a Visiting Fellow at
CESI, Milan, Italy. Since 1995, he has been with
the Electrical Engineering Department at the
Federal University of Rio de Janeiro/COPPE,
Brazil, where he is presently an Associate
Professor. His research interests include power system dynamics and
controls, computational models for EPS control, protection and
optimization, intelligent control, and robust control design. Dr. Taranto is a
member of the IEEE PES and CSS, Power System Dynamic Performance
Committee, CIGRE. He has been the President of the IEEE Rio de Janeiro
Section during the biennium 2008-2009.