You are on page 1of 12

International Journal of Electrical and

Electronics Engineering Research (IJEEER)


ISSN(P): 2250-155X; ISSN(E): 2278-943X
Vol. 4, Issue 6, Dec 2014, 53-64
TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

ABC ALGORITHM BASED COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF OPTIMAL SVC AND TCSC


PLACEMENT TO MAXIMIZE LOADABILITY
Y. V. BALARAMA KRISHNA RAO1, R. SRINIVASA RAO2 & V. V. K. REDDY3
1
2

Research Scholar, JNTU College of Engineering, Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh, India

Associate Professor, JNTU College of Engineering, Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh, India

Director, NBKR Institute of Science and Technology, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh, India

ABSTRACT
This paper presents a comparative analysis on optimal placement of SVC and TCSC devices to maximize the
transfer capacity of the power system. Ant Bee Colony (ABC) algorithm is applied to determine the optimal location and
sizing of these FACTS devices that maximizes system load ability, reduces real power loss, reduces voltage deviation,
with minimum cost of installation. Three case studies namely base case, only SVC, Only TCSC are considered. The
proposed method has been tested on IEEE 6 and 30 bus systems. The results indicate that the proposed method gives better
solution and will be useful in power system planning.

KEYWORDS: FACTS, TCSC, SVC, ABC, System Load Ability, Optimal Location
INTRODUCTION
The demand on the power system keep on increasing everyday in this globalized competitive world, so electric
power system utilities have to operate close to their operating limits to meet the uncertain maximum demand. With the use
of FACTS devices, the electric utilities are able to control the magnitude and direction of real and reactive power flow,
increase transmission line transfer capability, minimizing real power loss and hence enhance the better utilization of
existing power systems [1]. Available transfer capability (ATC) is a measure of the transfer capability remaining in a
physical transmission network for further commercial activity of committed uses. It is observed form the literature [2-20]
this is often modelled as a optimization problem with non-linear objectives and constraints and state of art traditional and
non-traditional optimization techniques are applied to tackle this problem. In [2] an evolutionary approach is presented to
solve the optimal placement of Multi type FACTS devices. In [3] Bifurcation analysis and Eigenvector analysis is applied
to determine the maximum loading point. FACTS devices are solid-state converters that have the capability of control of
various electrical parameters in transmission circuits. Modelling of FACTS devices for power flow studies and the
integration of those devices into power flow studies were reported [4, 5]. The application of FACTS technology offers an
effective and promising solution for enhancing the usable power transfer capability, and hence improves transmission
services of the competitive electricity market [6]. Population based, cooperative and competitive stochastic search
algorithm such Genetic Algorithm (GA) [7-10] is implemented to solve complex problems efficiently. Non-traditional
optimization technique, genetic algorithm is used to optimize the various process parameters involved in introduction of
FACTS devices such as the location of the device, their type, and their rated value of the devices in a power system.
Application of PSO [11, 12] for solving various optimization problems in electrical engineering is explained.
The optimal location of FACTS devices for reducing the production cost along with the devices cost using real
www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

54

Y. V. Balarama Krishna Rao, R. Srinivasa Rao & V. V. K. Reddy

power flow performance index was explained in [13]. A hybrid tabu search and simulated annealing was proposed to
minimize the generator fuel cost in optimal power flow control with multi-type FACTS devices [14].In some approaches
Power flow algorithm with the presence of TCSC and UPFC has been formulated and solved[15]. A hybrid GA approach
to solve optimal power flow in a power system incorporating FACTS devices has been reported [16, 17]. A Nondominated Sorting Particle Swarm Optimization (NSPSO) is used to solve a mixed continuous discreet Multi-objective
optimization problem which consist of optimal location and size of Static VAR Compensators (SVC) and Thyristor
Controlled Series Capacitors (TCSC) in order to maximize Static Voltage Stability Margin (SVSM), reduce power losses
(PL) and minimize load Voltage Deviations (VD)[23]. In [24] Optimal placement using the sensitivity of transmission loss
with respect to the control parameters of devices using the interior point method for the minimizing real power loss and
multiply with new equation of SVC and TCSC. The new equation of SVC is sum of reactive power flow at the bus and the
new equation of TCSC is sum of real power loss in transmission line.
In this paper, application of ABC algorithm for optimal placement of FACTS devices which has minimum cost of
installation, to maximize the system loadability (MSL), while satisfying the power system constraints, for SVC and TCSC
is presented.. The variables for the optimization for each device are its location in the network, its setting and the
installation cost, in the case of single-type devices. TCSC has been modelled as a variable line reactance inserted in the line
and SVC is modelled as a reactive source injected both ends of the line.
Computer simulations were done for IEEE 6 and 30 bus systems for the base case without FACTS device and
with the insertion of SVC and TCSC. In the test cases with SVC and TCSC it is observed that SL cannot be increased
beyond a limit after placing. The maximum value of SL that can be achieved without violating the constraints is known as
maximum system loadability (MSL). The MSL, minimum number of FACTS devices required to attain the MSL and the
optimal installation cost of FACTS devices are obtained for single type of FACTS devices SVC and TCSC using ABC
algorithm.

MODELLING OF FACTS DEVICES


The power system as well as the FACTS devices is modelled using power flow equations. The FACTS devices
considered in this paper are Static Var Compensators (SVC) and Thyristor Controlled Series Compensators (TCSC), since
these FACTS devices, besides Phase Angle Regulators, are used most frequently in power systems [21].
SVC Variable Susceptance Model
An SVC is shunt-connected device with the line at both ends and influences the voltage VSVC at the bus to which
it is connected by injecting or absorbing reactive power QSVC [1]. This characteristic is modelled by a shunt-connected
variable susceptance BSVC at both ends of the transmission line as shown in figure 1.This model represents the fundamental
frequency equivalent of all shunt modules making up the SVC. This model is an improved version of SVC models. In this
paper only this model is considered for case studies

Impact Factor (JCC): 5.9638

Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

55

ABC Algorithm Based Comparative Analysis of Optimal SVC and TCSC Placement to Maximize Load Ability

Figure 1: Model of SVC


QSVC = V2SVC * BSVC

(1)

As the size of the SVC is limited, a lower (BSVCmin) and an upper (BSVCmax,) bound exist for the effective
susceptance BSVC, thus,
BSVCmin BSVC BSVCmax.
TCSC Variable Reactance Model

Figure 2: Model of TCSC


A TCSC is connected in series with a transmission line and is able to influence the active power flow through the
line by adapting the reactance of the line [22]. Hence, the device is modelled as a variable reactance XTCSC connected in
series with the line, as shown in Figure 2. The total reactance Xline of the line including the TCSC is therefore given by
Xline new= Xold + XTCSC

(2)

Where Xold is the reactance of the line itself. The effective reactance XTCSC of the TCSC is limited to a range
between XTCSCmin and XTCSCmax determined by the size of the device.
XTCSCmin XTCSC XTCSCmax
SVC Load Flow Models
The circuit shown in Figure 1 is used to derive the SVC's nonlinear power equations required by Newton's load
flow method. The voltages and angles at the buses i and j are Vi, i and Vj, j respectively. The real and reactive power
flow between the buses i to bus j can be written as follows.
n

Pgi Pdi Pi VV
i j Gij cos( ij ) + Bij sin( ij ) = 0
j =1

(3)
n

Qgi Qdi Qi QSVC VV


i j
Gij sin(ij ) Bij cos(ij ) = 0
j =1

www.tjprc.org

(4)

editor@tjprc.org

56

Y. V. Balarama Krishna Rao, R. Srinivasa Rao & V. V. K. Reddy

Vgi = Const if Qgi min Qgi Qgi max

QSVC min QSVCi QSVC max


The effective reactive bus injection by SVC is determined and that buses are treated like voltage controlled bus[1].
TCSC Load Flow Models
n

'

Pgi Pdi Pi VV
i j Gij 'cos( ij ) + Bij sin( ij ) = 0
j =1

(5)

Qgi Qdi Qi VV
i j
Gij sin(ij ) Bij 'cos(ij ) = 0
j =1

(6)

V g i = C o n st if Q g i m in Q g i Q g i m ax
Gij1,Bij1 is the modified line conductance and susceptance due to TCSC reactance which is treated as a variable.
Facts Devices Constraints
The injected reactive power of SVC at the bus,QSVC is considered within the limits is given by

100MVAR QSVC 100MVAR


The reactance of TCSC inserted at in the transmission line XTCSC is considered within the limits is given by

0.8XL XTCSC 0.8 XL p.u

PROBLEM FORMULATION
Installation Cost
SVC Installation Cost
The implementation of the variable shunt susceptance models in a Newton-Raphson load flow algorithm requires
the incorporation of a non standard type of bus, namely PVB. This is a controlled bus where the nodal voltage magnitude
and active and reactive powers are specified while the SVCs total susceptance BSVC is handled as state variable. If BSVC
is within limits, the specified voltage magnitude is attained and the controlled bus remains PVB-type. However, if BSVC
goes out of limits, so the bus becomes PQ-type. In this situation, the SVC will act as an unregulated voltage compensator
whose production or absorption of reactive power capabilities will be a function of the nodal voltage at the SVC point of
connection to get the voltage 1.0 p. u. Cost of SVC. The cost of installation of SVC as taken from Siemens database and
reported in [19, 20] given by
CSVC = 0.0003S2 0.3051S + 127.38 in $/KVAR

(7)

IC=CSVC*S*1000 in $

(8)

where S is the operating range of the FACTS devices in MVAR given by S = |Q2| |Q1| where Q is the reactive
power flow in the line after installing FACTS device in MVAR and Q1 is the reactive power flow in the line before
installing FACTS device in MVAR

Impact Factor (JCC): 5.9638

Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

57

ABC Algorithm Based Comparative Analysis of Optimal SVC and TCSC Placement to Maximize Load Ability

TCSC Installation Cost


The cost of installation of TCSC taken from Siemens database and reported in [19, 20]. The costs of installation
of FACTS device TCSC is given by
CTCSC = 0.0015S2 0.7130S + 153.75

(9)

IC=CTCSC*S*1000 in $

(10)

Transmission Losses
The proposed algorithm also considers the transmission loss minimization for selecting optimal location of SVC.
Transmission loss minimization is responsible for the redistribution of the reactive power throughout the network, which in
turn induces changes in the active power generated by the slack bus. It has been observed that if the network losses were
reduced in only 0.15%, a more uniform voltage profile was observed at all the buses of a power system. The real power
losses can be calculated using (12)

TL =

igen

Pgi Pdi

i =1

(11)

Where n is the number of buses.


Voltage Deviations
In a power system, it is desirable to maintain the voltage deviations within 5%. In this paper, the optimal
location and size of SVC is determined by observing minimum value of VD. Voltage deviation is calculated as follows
n

VD = ( Vi ref Vi ) 2
i =1

(12)

Vi Voltage at ith b
Vi refReference Voltage at ith bus
Line Flow Limits Violation
It is important to maintain the line flow limits of the transmission lines within the limits. The line flow deviation
(LFD) is calculated by

LFD =

ijlines

( LFij ref LFiji ) 2


(13)

LFij Line flow of line ij


LFij ref Line flow limit of line ij
System Loadability
The system loadability (SL) is calculated by using the equation given by

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

58

Y. V. Balarama Krishna Rao, R. Srinivasa Rao & V. V. K. Reddy

Pd i = Pd 0

(14)

where is the loading parameter, Pd0 and Pdi are the


Intial system load and system load after installation of ith set of FACTS devices. Uniform loading of the load is
assumed in this paper. The optimal placement of FACT devices can be expressed mathematically as follows

Max
Subject to
f ( ,V , , P, Q, X svc , X TCSC ) = 0
P min gi Pgi P max gi
Q min gi Qg i Q max gi
V

min
i

ViV

max
i

X SVCi min X SVCi X SVCi max


X TCSCi min X TCSCi X TCSCi max
0 1

(15)

Where F=+W1*TL+W2*VD+W3*LFD+W4*SVC (cost) + W5*TCSC (cost).


W1-W5 are weightings for the multi objective functions.
f (V, , P, Q) is the power flow equations described by equations(3-6).

ARTIFICIAL BEE COLONY ALGORITHM


In the ABC model, the colony consists of three groups of bees: employed bees, onlookers and scouts. It is
assumed that there is only one artificial employed bee for each food source. In other words, the number of employed bees
in the colony is equal to the number of food sources around the hive. Employed bees go to their food source and come back
to hive and dance on this area.
The employed bee whose food source has been abandoned becomes a scout and starts to search for finding a new
food source. Onlookers watch the dances of employed bees and choose food sources depending on dances.
The main steps of the algorithm are given below: Initial food sources are produced for all employed bees Each
employed bee goes to a food source in her memory and determines a neighbour source, then evaluates its nectar amount
and dances in the hive Each onlooker watches the dance of employed bees and chooses one of their sources depending on
the dances, and then goes to that source. After choosing a neighbour around that, she evaluates its nectar amount.
Abandoned food sources are determined and are replaced with the new food sources discovered by scouts. The best food
source found so far is registered until requirements are met.
In ABC, a population based algorithm, the position of a food source represents a possible solution to the
optimization problem and the nectar amount of a food source corresponds to the quality (fitness) of the associated solution.
The number of the employed bees is equal to the number of solutions in the population. At the first step, a randomly
distributed initial population (food source positions) is generated. After initialization, the population is subjected to repeat
the cycles of the search processes of the employed, onlooker, and scout bees, respectively. An employed bee produces a

Impact Factor (JCC): 5.9638

Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

ABC Algorithm Based Comparative Analysis of Optimal SVC and TCSC Placement to Maximize Load Ability

59

modification on the source position in her memory and discovers a new food source position. Provided that the nectar
amount of the new one is higher than that of the previous source, the bee memorizes the new source position and forgets
the old one. Otherwise she keeps the position of the one in her memory. After all employed bees complete the search
process; they share the position information of the sources with the onlookers on the dance area.
Each onlooker evaluates the nectar information taken from all employed bees and then chooses a food source
depending on the nectar amounts of sources. As in the case of the employed bee, she produces a modification on the source
position in her memory and checks its nectar amount. Providing that its nectar is higher than that of the previous one,
the bee memorizes the new position and forgets the old one. The sources abandoned are determined and new sources are
randomly produced to be replaced with the abandoned ones by artificial scouts.
Procedures of ABC

Initialize (Move the scouts)

Move the onlookers

Move the scouts only if the counters of the employed bees hit the limit

Update the memory.

Check the termination condition

Probability of Selecting a Nectar Source

(16)
Where Pi is the probability of selecting the ith employed bee

S: The number of employed, i is The position of

th

the i employed bee and F( i ) is The fitness value.


Movement of the Onlookers:

Calculation of the new position is given by

(17)
where i is The position of the onlooker bee, t is The iteration number, k is The randomly chosen employed bee,
j is The dimension of the solution and is A series of random variable in the range[0, 1].
The Movement of the Scout Bees Follows Equation

(18)
where r is a random number in the range[0.1].

CASE STUDIES
The proposed algorithm for optimal placement of SVC and TCSC has been tested on IEEE 6 and 30 bus systems.

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

60

Y. V. Balarama Krishna Rao, R. Srinivasa Rao & V. V. K. Reddy

Pijb and Qijb are the real and reactive power flow in the line ij before placing FACTS device, respectively. Pija and Qija are
the real and reactive power flow in the line ij after placing FACTS device, respectively. TLb and TLa are the transmission
loss occurring in the system before and after installation of FACTS devices SVC and TCSC.
IEEE 6 Bus System
The bus data and line data of the six bus sample system are taken from [17] and it contains three generator and
three load buses with 11 transmission lines. The location, settings of FACTS devices and optimal installation cost are
obtained using the ABC algorithm for optimal placement of SVC and TCSC devices and it is given in Table 1. To prove
the effectiveness of optimally placing SVC and TCSC in a power network three case studies are considered. They are

Base case without any FACTS device

with SVC

With TCSC
Table 1: IEEE 6 Bus System

In the SVC placement it is placed in 4 lines where as it is placed in 3 lines in [12].The MSL as well as IC
determined in this paper is better that reported in [12].The transmission loss also minimized for increased demand is an
added advantage.
In the TCSC placement it placed only in two lines where as it placed in 5 lines in [12].The MSL is as good while
cost slightly higher as in the ref[12].It has been observed that the results in [12 for TCSC placement violate the line flow
limits of lines (1-2),(1-4),(1-5)and (2-6)
IEEE 30 Bus System
The bus data and line data of the 30 bus system are taken from Matpower3.0 and this system comprises of one
slack bus, 5 PV buses, 24 PQ buses and 41 lines. The location, settings of FACTS devices and optimal installation cost are
obtained using the ABC algorithm for optimal placement of SVC and TCSC devices and it is given in Table 2. To prove
the effectiveness of optimally placing SVC and TCSC in a power network three case studies are considered. They are

Base case without any FACTS device

with SVC

With TCSC

Impact Factor (JCC): 5.9638

Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

ABC Algorithm Based Comparative Analysis of Optimal SVC and TCSC Placement to Maximize Load Ability

61

Table 2: IEEE 30 Bus System

In the SVC placement it is placed in 3 lines where as it is placed in 8 lines in [12].The MSL is as good while IC
determined in this case higher than reported in [12].The transmission loss is slightly increased for increased demand. In [12]
the line flow limit is ignored so the result offered by this ABC is more applicable in real time.In the TCSC placement it
placed only in 4 lines where as it placed in 8 lines in [12]. The MSL as well as IC determined in this paper is better that
reported in [12].

CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, a method for optimal placement and sizing of SVC & TCSC is found to minimize the cost of
installation of SVC and TCSC and for improving the system load ability. Simulations are performed using ABC algorithm
on IEEE6 and 30 bus systems. The location of the devices, settings of FACTS devices and optimal installation cost are
obtained for optimal placement of FACTS devices SVC and TCSC. In the IEEE 6and 30 test systems TCSC gives
maximum system load ability at minimum cost of installation. It is also observed from test results that in IEEE 6 bus
system the transmission loss is decreased for increased system load ability and in IEEE 30 bus system the transmission loss
is slightly increased for increased system load ability.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors sincerely thank the management and authorities of Krishna Chaitanya Institute of Technology and
sciences for providing the facilities to carry out this research

REFERENCES
1.

Hingorani, N. G. and Gyugyi, L. 1999. Understanding FACTS: Concepts and Technology of Flexible AC
Transmission Systems. Wiley-IEEE Press.

2.

W. Ongskul, P. Jirapong, Optimal allocation of FACTS devices to enhance total transfer capability using
evolutionary programming, IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems, Vol..5, pp.4175-4178,
23-26 May. 2005

3.

A. Kazemi, and B. Badrzadeh, Modeling and Simulation of SVC and TCSC to Study Their Limits on Maximum
Loadability Point, Electrical Power and Energy systems, Vol. 26, pp. 619-626, Apr. 2004.

4.

J.G. Douglas, G.T. Heydt, Power flow control and power flow studies for systems with FACTS devices, IEEE
Trans. Power Syst. 13 (1) (1998) 6065.

5.

D. Povh, Modeling of FACTS in power system studies, in: IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting, vol.
2, January 2000, pp. 14351439.

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

62

Y. V. Balarama Krishna Rao, R. Srinivasa Rao & V. V. K. Reddy

6.

B.V. Manikandan, S. Charles Raja* and P. Venkatesh* Available Transfer Capability Enhancement with FACTS
Devices in the Deregulated Electricity Market Journal of Electrical Engineering & Technology Vol. 6, No. 1,
pp. 14~24, 2011

7.

Prakash G. Burade, Dr. J. B. Helonde: By Using Genetic Algorithm Method for Optimal Location of Facts
Devices in the Deregulated Power System, Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology p.f.64-71.

8.

L. J. Cai, I. Erlich, Optimal choice and allocation of FACTS devices using genetic algorithms, in: Proceedings on
Twelfth Intelligent Systems Application to Power Systems Conference, 2003, pp. 16.

9.

A. B. Bhattacharyya, B. S. K. Goswami Optimal Placement of FACTS devices by Genetic Algorithm for the
Increased Load Ability of a Power System World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology Vol: 51
2011-03-26,

10. L. J. Cai, I. Erlich, Optimal choice and allocation of FACTS devices in deregulated electricity market using
genetic algorithms, in: IEEE Conference (0-7803-8718-X/04), 2004.
11. H. Yoshida, K. Kawata, Y. Fukuyama, S. Takayama, Y. Nakanishi, A particle swarm optimization for reactive
power and voltage control considering voltage security assessment, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 15 (2000)
12321239.
12. M. Saravanan, S. Mary Raja Slochanal, P. Venkatesh, J. Prince Stephen Abraham, Application of particle swarm
optimization technique for optimal location of FACTS devices considering cost of installation and system
loadability, Electric Power Systems Research Volume 77, Issues 34, March 2007, Pages 276283
13. S.N. Singh, A. K. David, A new approach for placement of FACTS devices in open power markets, IEEE
Power Eng. Rev. 21 (9) (2001) 5860.
14. P. Bhasaputra,W. Ongsakul, Optimal power flow with multi-type of FACTS devices by hybrid TS/SA approach,
in: IEEE Proceedings on International Conference on Industrial Technology, vol. 1, December 2002, pp. 285290.
15. N. P. Padhy, M. A. Abdel Moamen, Power flow control and solutions with multiple and multi-type FACTS
devices, Electr. Power Syst. Res. (October) (2004).
16. T.S. Chung, Y. Z. Li, A hybrid GA approach for OPF with consideration of FACTS devices, IEEE Power Eng.
Rev. 21 (2) (2001) 4750.
17. A. J. Wood, B. F. Woolenberg, Power Generation, Operation and Control, Wiley, 1996, ISBN 0-471-58699-4.
18. S. Gerbex, R. Cherkaoui, A. J. Germond, Optimal location of multi-type FACTS devices by means of genetic
algorithm, IEEE Trans. Power Syst.16 (3) (2001) 537544.
19. S.N. Singh, A.K. David, A new approach for placement of FACTS devices in open power markets, IEEE Power
Eng. Rev. 21 (9) (2001) 5860.
20. P. Bhasaputra, W. Ongsakul, Optimal power flow with multi-type of FACTS devices by hybrid TS/SA
approach, in: IEEE Proceedings on International Conference on Industrial Technology, vol. 1, December 2002,
pp. 285290.

Impact Factor (JCC): 5.9638

Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

ABC Algorithm Based Comparative Analysis of Optimal SVC and TCSC Placement to Maximize Load Ability

63

21. A. Edris, R. Adapa, M. H. Baker, L. Bohmann, K. Clark, K. Habashi, L. Gyugyi, J. Lemay, A. S. Mehraban, A. K.
Meyers, J. Reeve, F. Sener, D. R. Torgerson, and R. R. Wood. Proposed terms and definitions for flexible ac
transmission system (FACTS). Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, 12(4):1848, 1997.
22. Gabriela Hug-Glanzmann, Goran Andersson, Coordinated Control of FACTS Devices in Power Systems for
Security Enhancement, Bulk Power System Dynamics and Control - Vii, August 19-24, 2007, Charleston, South
Carolina, Usa.
23. R. Benabid, M. Boudour, M. A. Abido, Optimal location and setting of SVC and TCSC devices using
non-dominated sorting particle swarm optimization,Electric Power Systems Research Volume 79, Issue 12,
December 2009, Pages 16681677.
24. Chusanapiputt, S.; Phoomvuthisarn, S Biansoongnern, S., Optimal SVC and TCSC Placement for Minimization
of Transmission Losses International Conference on Power System Technology, 2006, PowerCon 2006.22-26
Oct. 2006 Page(s):1 5

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org