2006 International Conference on Power System Technology

Optimal Power Flow Control for Congestion

Management by Interline Power Flow
Controller (IPFC)
Jun Zhang, Student Member, IEEE, and Akihiko Yokoyama, Member, IEEE

given substation because its VSCs are connected in series with,

Abstract-- The interline power flow controller (IPFC) is the usually, different lines [2]. With the application of IPFC to
latest generation of flexible AC transmission systems (FACTS) power flow control and optimal power flow control, proper
devices which can be used to control power flows of multiple mathematical modelling of this FACTS device is required.
transmission lines. This paper presents an optimal power flow Just like that the injection models of UPFC are often used [3]-
(OPF) control in electric power systems incorporating IPFC. The
injection models of both the IPFC and the transmission lines [5], and exact pi-model of UPFC-inserted transmission lines
embedded with IPFC, which can be easily incorporated in load [6] can be derived, the injection models of IPFC and the
flow programs and optimal power flow programs, are developed. transmission lines embedded with the IPFC are developed in
Numerical examples demonstrated that IPFC can be used for section II in this paper based on the mathematical model
congestion management and total active power loss minimization presented by [7].
in electric power systems at the same time. The minimum The OPF program often optimizes a single objective. For
capacity of the IPFC converters is determined in the optimization
process simultaneously. example, the active power loss in a power network is a
common optimization goal because it is closely related with
Index Terms-Congestion management, Flexible AC the cost. However, sometimes multiple objectives should be
transmission systems (FACTS), Interline power flow controller considered at the same time as presented in [8] which
(IPFC), Optimal power flow (OPF), Power System. addresses the multi-objective OPF by weighting every
objective properly. In case the IPFC is incorporated in a
I. INTRODUCTION power network, its cost should also be taken into account,
N OWADAYS, due to the increase of electric power which is largely dependent on the capacities of its converters.
demand and other reasons, power flows in transmission Thus, section III outlines an OPF problem incorporating IPFC,
lines often exceed the limits of lines' thermal capacities, which coordinates the minimization of both the capacity of
which causes power network congestion. Construction of new IPFC and the total active power loss simultaneously.
transmission lines can resolve the congestion, but it may be In section IV, numerical simulation is carried out by
very expensive and sometimes even impossible due to the Matlab. Both of the models developed in section II are tested
environmental and social reasons, etc. Thus, FACTS devices in that example. The result shows that the congestion is
are preferred in the modem power systems based on their resolved and the total active power loss is decreased because
overall performance [1], which provide good solutions. of the application of IPFC with an optimal capacity, while the
Of all the FACTS devices, the combined compensators generations are not redispatched. And finally, conclusions are
such as unified power flow controller (UPFC) and IPFC are drawn in section V.
regarded as the most powerful and versatile ones. Facilitated
by its two self-commutated, voltage-sourced switching II. IPFC MODELS
converters (VSCs) with a common dc voltage link, UPFC is
capable of independently controlling both the active and A. Equivalent Circuit
reactive power flows in the line. IPFC also employs at least IPFC is a kind of VSC-based FACTS device. Just like
two VSCs; however, unlike the capability of UPFC to control UPFC, IPFC is also called combined compensator because it
power flow of only one transmission line, IPFC addresses the consists of at least two static synchronous series compensators
problem of compensating multiple transmission lines at a (SSSCs) which are connected via a common dc voltage link
that can be represented by a capacitor. For simplicity, this
paper deals with IPFC combining only two SSSCs, as shown
Jun Zhang is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, the
University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8656 Japan (e-mail: zhang osyl.t.u- in Fig. 1. However, following derivations can be applied to
tokyo.ac.jp). IPFCs consisting of more than two VSCs without much
difficulty. Usually, in the steady state analysis of power
Akihiko Yokoyama is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, the the VSC is represented as a synchronous voltage
University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8656 Japan (e-mail: Yokoyama osyl.t.u- systems,
tokyo.ac.jp). source injecting an almost sinusoidal voltage with controllable

1-4244-0111-9/06/$20.00c02006 IEEE.
 2

magnitude and angle [9]. As for IPFC, the two VSCs are Vse
connected in series with two lines as shown in Fig. 2. Vi, Vj
and Vk are complex voltages at buses i, j and k, respectively,
defined as Vb Z Ob (b=i, j). Vseij and Vseik are the controllable
complex voltages of the two synchronous voltage sources,
defined as Vsej,z.Osej, (n=j, k). zseij and zsejk are the series
transformer impedance. Pcal,i and Qcal,i are the transmitted
active and reactive powers through the two branches of IPFC
leaving bus i. PcalJi (Pcal,ki) and Qcal,ji (Qcalki) are the
transmitted active and reactive powers through one branch of Fig. 1. Schematic representation of a two-converter IPFC.
IPFC leaving bus j (k), respectively. Active power can be
transferred from one line to the other via the common dc link. Vse i
Based on the above equivalent circuit, the power flow
equations at each bus are [7]:
Pcli=Vi gii-
n=j,k
Oin[i CS0-n)+bin sin(O, -
On)] Re (VseijI-j' + Vsei*I,*i )=°
n=j,k
ViLVsein [gin cos (i- Osein )+ bin sin (0- Osein)]
(1) VsekVl*i+jclk
Qcaiii
=Vi b ViVn [gin sin (0- O)n bin cOs (Oi- On) Fig. 2. Equivalent circuit of IPFC [7].
n=j,k

- V, Vsen E[gin sin (O- Osein )bin cos (0- Osein) B. Injection Model of IPFC
n=j,k
(2) The first two parts of (1)-(4) are identical to the
conventional power flow equations of transmission lines. The
remaining parts can be regarded as the power injections of the
ani= Vn;2g~ffK[g
+al,ni Vnns-Vi [gin
Vn csO O)+1 sinsin (On O- )])] (3)
COS (osne#)+bi IPFC series sources, leading to the injection model of IPFC
+ nVSein[g,n C°S(#9n-0se,n )+ bi sin(#9n-Osein) shown in Fig. 3.

Qcalini =-Ljbn VLVK [gin sin (On - i ) -bin cos (on -o)i)( Vi
+ VnVsei, [g1n sin (O- OSein ) -bin cos (on - sein )]
where n=j, k inj,i + jQiin,
gin + jbn l/zsen = ysei, gnn + jbnn l/=ZSen Ysein
=

gii = E gin nbii = E bin

Fig. 3. Injection model of IPFC.
n=j,k n=j,k
In Fig. 3, power injections at each bus are as follows:
Assuming lossless converter valves, the active power
supplied to one converter equals the active power demanded P Vi Vsen, gin cos (0- Oseei) + bin sin (Oi- Osei)]
by the other, if there are no underlying storage systems; that is n=j,k
(7)
Re(Vse11Iji +±Vseiklki)= 0 (5)
or [10] Qinj,i = n=j,k V Vsein gin sin(O1 O-se)n bin cos (- Osein )]
(8)
E
n=j,k
{VSein gin-ViVSein [gin CS(os- Osein )-bin sin(O- Osein)]
+OVnsein [gin COS(on-Osein)-bin sin(O- Osein)]} 0 inj,n = -VnVSein I gin COS (O}n -Osein )+ bin sin (On -Os(ein9)
(6) (9)
where the superscript * denotes the conjugate of a complex
number. =,=-VnVsei, [gin sin (0, -Osein))-bin cos (0, -Osei, )]
(10)
where n=j, k
 3

So, the mismatch power equations considering generation where Yij (i, j=1, 2) are bus admittance matrix elements; that is
Pgm, Qgm, and load PIm, Qlm at each bus are as follows:
Y, I Yi + Y12 2 Y21 -YI2, Y22 Y2 +Y12
Pgm + P,,j,m iPm Pline,m 0 (1 1)
Vse,
Qgm + inm Qim Qine, m (12)
viV
where m=i,j, k
Here PineJm and Qline,m are conventional transmitted active
and reactive power only through transmission lines leaving
bus m.
Equation (6) still applies here. If the series transformers are
assumed to contain no resistance, the following equation can
be derived.
inj,m (13)
m=i, j,k
Fig. 4. Equivalent circuit of transmission lines embedded with IPFC.
C. Injection Model of Transmission Lines Embedded with
IPFC Vsei;
The application of the IPFC injection model provides
certain convenience. However, it still requires the increase of
bus number, and the buses and transmission lines have to be
renumbered. In very large power systems and power systems
with multiple IPFCs, it is not very convenient to do so.
Consequently, the following injection model of transmission
lines embedded with IPFC is developed. (a)
In power system analysis, the transmission line is usually
viewed as a pi-circuit that is shown in Fig. 4.
In order to eliminate the additional buses, following
transformations are adopted. For simplicity, only one branch
of IPFC is taken as an example, as shown in Fig. 5.
First, Y-A transformation [11] of the circuit in the dashed
line rectangle in Fig. 5 (a) is carried out, yielding the
equivalent circuit in Fig. 5 (b), where
Ivi
ys2ey Kyse+)y+j>J
y( (14)

Yihunt = bj yseij (ysei; + j bj

)+ (15) (c)
Fig. 5. Transformation process of the transmission line embedded with one
branch of IPFC.
Ybo = Kyseb+
y+12) (16)
I1 I2
12
Then, the circuit shown in Fig. 5 (c) can be easily obtained, 1 ~~~~~~~~~~~2
where
5Yi Y2j
shunt
Y. j +y~jIj ~,( bij ys +e1j +y1+J'7vj (17)

With the node-voltage equation (18) of a two-bus system Fig. 6. A two-bus system.
shown in Fig. 6 in mind, (19) can be easily derived.
[I Y YI 2 I] (18)
[Ii] [Y Y[j V -Vseu] (19)
=
 4

where V
Ii -1vi i i V_l Ij
Y Yshunt+ Y , Y =
_ r y y
yuJi =
yshunt + yr
yiJ
shunt shunt i
So Pinj,i + jQinj,i YS L. P', j + jQinj

(20)
-IJ JY'i Y.,--Vj YViVse.j, Fig. 7. Injection model of the transmission line embedded with one branch of
IPFC.
If the second part on the right side of (20) is regarded as
the contribution of power injections, the injection model of
this line is developed as shown in Fig. 7. The above approach
actually yields the injection pi-model of SSSC-embedded line
[12].
The power injections can be expressed as:

pi i, n
=Re (Sij,, ) = Re V,, (Yi Vseij )* (21)

Qinj,n = 'M (Sinj,n ) =

'MV. (Yni Vseij )* (22)
Fig. 8. Injection model of the transmission lines embedded with one IPFC.
where n=i,j
The combination of the two injection models of the The injection model of the transmission line embedded
transmission line embedded with one branch yields the with an IPFC can be easily incorporated in a load flow
injection model of the transmission lines with one IPFC program or an optimal power flow program. If an IPFC is
shown in Fig. 8. The power injections at each bus can be embedded in the transmission line connected with buses i and
written as follows: j and the transmission line connected with buses i and k as
shown in Fig. 4, the admittance matrix is modified by the
Pin; i = Re (Y1; +ylu ) Vse1 + (Yik +iy2 )Vseikj2] modification of the corresponding elements as given by
(23) (28)-(30). The superscript 0 denotes the original admittance
matrix elements without IPFC. No addition of the bus number
is needed. Accordingly, the Jacobian matrix in a Newton-
Qinii1= Im{J[(V1; +ysunt)Vse; +(Y:k ys2t)Vseik]j
0 + Raphson load flow program should be modified.
(24) 2

Yii = Yii -E
n=j,k
+. 2
2
ysein + Yin + j 2 bYin
(28)
-Pinj,n ,~Re{VJK [(- y1)Vsei,n]}
= R{"(Yl)Sin 2 (25)

Yn = Yn, y-Yin ysen+ yin+ j2) (29)

Qinj,n = IM V. [(-y ) Vsei,, }* (26)
where n=i,j Yin Yni Yin (30)
Here the mismatch power equations considering generation
Pgm, Qgm, and load PIm, Qlm at each bus take the same form as where
Yii and
n=j, k
Ynn are self-admittances of bus i and n, repectively;
(11) and (12), whereas the active power invariance equation
should be rewritten as the following form: Yin and Yni are mutual admittances between bus i and n.
E {VseinVn [cos(Osein-ngi
)gn + sin(Osein, )b,] + Vsein gn III. OPTIMAL POWER FLOW INCORPORATING IPFC
n=j,k In this section, optimal power flow incorporating IPFC
Vsen fLKIcos (Osein- O,)gn + sin (Osen- O,)b]} =0 with multiple objectives is developed. The optimal power flow
(27) problem is a kind of nonlinear optimization problem that can
be formulated as:
where n=j, k
minimize f (x)
g + jbi' =Y
subject to h (x) = 0 (31)
g1+jb1 yshUft + gk+jbk =shunt + Yik g(x) < 0
 5

In this formulation, three elements are to be determined: where k1u,..., Ng (Ng is the number of generators), Pgk,min
the objective functionj(x), the equality constraints h(x), and (Qgk,min) and Pgk,max (Qgk,max) are the minimum and maximum
the inequality constraints g(x). limits of active (reactive) power generation.
A. Objective Function Vsein, min < VSein < VSein,max (37)
The IPFC is planned for congestion management with the
minimum total capacity of the converters of IPFC and Osei, min < Osei, < Osei,,max (38)
minimizing the total active power loss of the system. Thus, the
complete objective function is the sum of the above two where n=j, k, Vsein,min (Osein,min) and Vsein,max (Osein,max) are the
objectives each appropriately weighted. minimum and maximum limits of Vsein (Osein).
The optimal power flow program defined by the above
f (x) = a(S±
+S2) + bPOss (32) three elements can be solved by sequential quadratic
objective 1 objective 2 programming. In the simulation discussed in section IV,
where Matlab function fmincon is used.
S1 and S2 capacity of each VSC of IPFC IV. NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
P/oss total active power loss of the system
a weight whose objective is the minimization of the In this section, the proposed OPF control and the two
total capacity of IPFC converters injection models developed in section II are tested on the
b weight whose objective is the minimization of the IEEE 3-machine 9-bus system shown in Fig. 9. Bus 1 is slack
total active power loss of the system bus, while both buses 2 and 3 are PV buses. The active power
The values of the weights are determined according to the generations of the two generators G2 and G3 are 163 MW and
importance of each objective. 85 MW, respectively. Originally, GI needs to supply 71.64
MW active power to the system. Congestion occurs on line 6
B. State Variables because the transmitted active power leaving bus 7 is 86.62
In this paper, the complete voltage profile is directly MW exceeding the thermal constraint which is assumed to be
integrated into the optimization task yielding a compact 85 MW per line.
formulation of the OPF. Underlying load flow calculations for
the determination of the voltage profile is not adopted. Thus, Load C
the oscillations between the load flow calculation and the
optimization can be avoided [4]. The state vector x can be
represented by the control variable vectors as follows:
x=[V, 0, Vse, Ose, Pg, Qg]T
where
V, 0 complex voltages of all buses Load 1B
Vse, Ose complex voltages of IPFC converters
Pg, Qg active and reactive power generations
C. Constraints
Equality constraints include the mismatch power equations
of every bus and the active power invariance of IPFC
represented by (6) or (27).
Inequality constraints consist of the following components:
V <V <V (33) Fig. 9. IEEE 3-machine 9-bus system incorporating one IPFC.

where i=1,..., Nb (Nb is the number of buses), Vimin and Vi,max In order to resolve the congestion, an IPFC is applied to the
are the minimum and maximum voltage magnitude limits at system. Its two converters are embedded in lines 4 and 5,
bus i, respectively; respectively, which are lightly loaded. As described by (32),
the total active power loss and IPFC capacity should be
i j,max (34) optimized. Here, a and b are assumed to be 3 and 1.
where j=l,..., N, (N, is the number of transmission lines), and In order to improve the power system performance,
PJ,max is the thermal capacity of transmission linej (Satisfying generation redispatching is not adopted [3]. So, buses 2 and 3
this constraint represents that the congestion is resolved.); remain to be PV buses whose active power generation and
voltage magnitudes remain unchanged. Bus 1 is still slack bus
-gkjmin -gk -Pgk,max (35) with the same complex voltage as that of the original case.
The active power limits of generator 1 are set at 10 MW and
Qgk,min <Qgk <Qgk,max
100 MW, whereas all the generator reactive power limits are
 6

set at -200 MVAR and 200 MVAR. The voltage magnitude loss and IPFC capacity is achieved.
limits at buses 4-9 are taken to be 0.95 p.u. and 1.05 p.u.,
respectively. The inductive reactance of the series VI. REFERENCES
transformers is 0.01 p.u., while the resistance is ignored. The [1] Abdel-Moamen M.A and Narayana Prasad Padhy, "Optimal power flow
voltage magnitudes and angles of the two IPFC synchronous incorporating FACTS devices-bibliography and survey," in Proc. 2003
IEEE PES Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exposition,
voltage sources vary in the range 0-0.1 p.u. and
pp. 669-676.
respectively. The simulation results are summarized in Tables [2] Narain G. Hingorani and Laszlo Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS:
I'III. Concepts and Technology of Flexible AC Transmission Systems. New
York: The Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Inc., 2000, p.
333.
TABLE I
[3] M. Noroozian, L. Angquist, M. Ghandhari, and G. Andersson, "Use of
COMPLEX Bus VOLTAGES
UPFC for optimal power flow control," IEEE Trans. Power Delivery,
vol. 12, pp. 1629-1634, Oct. 1997.
Mag. of Voltage (p.u.) Angle of Voltage (degree) [4] Carsten Lehmkoster, "Security constrained optimal power flow for an
Bus Without With IPFC Without With IPFC economical operation of FACTS-devices in liberalized energy markets,"
IPFC IPFC IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 17, pp. 603-608, Apr. 2002.
1 1.0400 1.0400 0 0 [5] T S Chung and Ge Shaoyun, "Optimal power flow incorporating FACTS
2 1.0250 1.0250 9.280 8.817 devices and power flow control constraints," in Proc. 1998 Int. Conf: on
3 1.0250 1.0250 4.665 4.043 Power System Technology, pp. 415-419.
4 1.0258 1.0259 -2.217 -2.217 [6] Muwaffaq I. Alomoush, "Derivation of UPFC DC load flow model with
5 0.9956 0.9942 -3.989 -4.306 examples of its use in restructured power systems," IEEE Trans. Power
6 1.0127 1.0120 -3.687 -4.464 Systems, vol. 18, pp. 1173-1180, Aug. 2003.
7 1.0258 1.0254 3.720 3.254 [7] X. -P. Zhang, "Modelling of the interline power flow controller and the
generalised unified power flow controller in Newton power flow," IEE
8 1.0159 1.0155 0.728 0.195 Proceedings-Generation, Transmission and Distribution, vol. 150, pp.
9 1.0324 1.0321 1.967 1.345 268-274, May 2003.
[8] G. Glanzmann and G. Andersson, "Coordinated control of FACTS
TABLE II devices based on optimal power flow," in Proc. the 37th Annual North
TRANsMITTED ACTIVE POWER THROUGH TRANsMIsSION LINES American Power Symposium, pp. 141-148.
[9] Enrique Acha, Claudio R. Fuerte-Esquivel, Hugo Ambriz-Perez, and
Active Cesar Angeles-Camacho, FACTS Modelling and Simulation in Power
Line (MW)
Networks. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2004, pp. 191-229.
Without IPFC With IPFC
4 40.94 42.49 [10] S. Teerathana, A. Yokoyama, Y. Nakachi, and M. Yasumatsu, "An
5 30.70 29.16 optimal power flow control method of power system by interline power
flow controller (IPFC)," in Proc. the 7th Int. Power Engineering Conf,
6 86.62 85.00
pp. 1-6.
7 60.82 62.42 [11] Yangzan He and Zengyin Wen, Power System Analysis, vol. I. (3rd
8 76.38 78.00 edition). Wuhan: Huazhong University of Science and Technology
9 24.18 22.58 Press, 2002, pp. 254-256.
[12] Muwaffaq I. Alomoush, "Static synchronous series compensator to help
TABLE III energy markets resolve congestion-caused problems," in Proc. 2004
TOTAL ACTIVE POWER Loss (KW) Large Engineering Systems Conf on Power Engineering, pp. 25-29.

Without IPFC With IPFC VII. BIOGRAPHIES

4641.021 4640.871

As shown in these tables, all the constraints are satisfied. Jun Zhang (S'06) was born in Xi'an, Shaanxi
The congestion is resolved and the total active power loss is Province in the People's Republic of China, on June

reduced, though slightly, while the optimal capacity of IPFC is 27, 1980. He received the BEng. degree in electrical

deternined to be 355.07 kVA. Both of the injection models engineering and automation and the MEng. degree in

electrical engineering in 2002 and 2005, respectively,

are tested and the same results are obtained because they are both from Tsinghua University, Beijing, P. R. China.
both precise models. He is currently a Ph.D. candidate at the University of
Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan, with the Japanese
Government's MEXT scholarship. His research
V. CONCLUSION interests include flexible AC transmission systems
Based on the voltage source model, the injection model of and optimal power flow control.

IPFC and the injection model of the transmission lines

Akihiko Yokoyama (Member) born in Osaka,
embedded with IPFC have been presented in this paper. Both Japan, on
was

October 9, 1956. He received B.S., M.S. and

the injection models are precise and can be easily incorporated Dr. Eng from The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
in a load flow program and an OPF program. Due to its in 1979, 1981 and 1984, respectively. He has been

capability to compensate multiple transmission lines at a given with Department

University of Tokyo
of Electrical
since 1984
Engineering,
and currently
The
a

substation, IPFC is a powerful tool for congestion professor in charge of Power System Engineering. He

management. It is shown that based on the multi-objective is a member of IEEJ, IEEE and CIGRE.

OPF control method, congestion can be resolved by the

application of IPFC without generation redispatching, while
the simultaneous optimization of both the total active power