FACTS Performance in the Dynamic Voltage

Stability of an Electric Power System

R. M. Monteiro Pereira
IPC/ISEC, Instituto Superior
Engenharia de Coimbra,
Portugal
rmfm@isec.pt
Adelino J. C. Pereira
IPC/ISEC, Instituto Superior
Engenharia de Coimbra,
Portugal
ajcp@isec.pt
C. M. Machado Ferreira
IPC/ISEC, Instituto Superior
Engenharia de Coimbra and
INESC Coimbra, Portugal
cmacfer@isec.pt
F. P. Maciel Barbosa
INESC TEC, Faculdade
Engenharia da Universidade
do Porto, Portugal
fmb@fe.up.pt

AbstractʊThe application of technologies for the
improvement of voltage stability, particularly during
contingencies is a major concern in the field of power networks
operation and control. In this paper it is studied the FACTS
performance in the dynamic voltage stability of an electric
power system. It was considered the influence of two FACTS
controllers in parallel or shunt connection, the Static VAR
Compensators (SVC) and the Static Synchronous Compensators
(STATCOM) in the dynamic voltage stability during a
disturbance of the BPA test power network. The models of SVC
and STATCOM were developed in EUROSTAG. The Automatic
Voltage Regulators (AVR) of the generating units and the
turbine speed governors were modelled in detail. Different load
models were used and the Under Load Tap Changers (ULTC)
were also taken into account. Finally, some conclusions that
provide a better understanding of the dynamic voltage stability
using FACTS devices during a disturbance are pointed out.
Index Terms-- FACTS devices, STATCOM, SVC, Voltage
Stability.
I. INTRODUCTION
The development of the modern power networks led to an
increasing complexity in the study of electric power systems
and presents new challenges to systems stability analysis and,
in particular, to voltage stability assessment. A power
network is a very complex system including numerous
generators, electric transmission lines, transformers and a
diversity of loads [1].
Due to the remote locations of some generating stations
and the difficulties of obtaining transmission rights of way,
the resulting heavily-loaded long-distance transmission lines
impose increasing challenges for maintaining power system
stability [2].
As a consequence of increasing power demand, some
transmission lines are more stressed than was planned when
they were originally built. With the increased loading of long
transmission lines, the problem of voltage stability after a
disturbance can be a transmission limiting factor.
The maintenance of the voltage within tolerable levels is one
of the major responsibilities of a reliable power system
operation and control, so as to ensure the superlative quality
of customer service, which in turn, makes the system more
vulnerable to voltage instability [3].
Recently, power electronics-based control devices have
been the focus of research and development for the
improvement of the systems dynamic stability. Power
electronics control devices are utilized to control the active
and reactive power flow in a transmission line of an electric
power system.
As it is well known, voltage stability is affected by the
reactive power limits of the system. Improving the system’s
reactive power handling capacity via Flexible AC
Transmission System (FACTS) devices is an effective
solution to prevent blackouts [4].
To maintain the security of such systems, it is desirable to
plan suitable measures and increase voltage stability margins.
FACTS devices can regulate the reactive and active power as
well as control, simultaneously, the voltage-magnitude due to
their flexibility and fast control characteristics [5].
The paper organization is the following:
• Section II describes the models devices SVC and
STATCOM used in this research work.
• Section III presents the BPA test power network and
describes the three scenarios used in this study.
• Section IV shows the results obtained using the FACTS
devices.
• Section VI, some conclusions that provide a valuable
contribution to the understanding of the dynamic voltage
stability assessment of an electric power network are
pointed out.
II. DEVICES MODELS
In this section, the SVC and STATCOM models used in
this study are presented.
A. Static VAR Compensator (SVC)
SVC, which is one of the most installed FACTS systems in
the electric power networks, is able to deliver adaptable
reactive power in order to improve voltage stability. In case
of excess reactive energy, SVC absorbs the increased
quantity, which decreases the bus voltage where it is
connected. In other way, it performances is like a capacitor
and produces the reactive power required to increase voltage
magnitude [2].
Figures 1 and 2 show, respectively, the Model of SVC
scheme and the Static characteristic of the SVC model used in
this study. The model has been completely reproduced in the
EUROSTAG macroblocks language.
 In this study, it was assumed that the thyristor controlled
reactor are used with one or several thyristor switched
capacitor of equivalent rating, to provide a smoothing effect
to the step-wise variation of the capacitor banks. In this way,
the reactive power generation is continuously controlled [6].
The model is based on the functional description made in
two technical reports [7] and [8]. The main functions include:
• current and voltage measurement;
• regulator;
• blocking in case of low voltage conditions are detected
(short-circuit);
• delay in the thyristors firing instants and smoothing of
the control signal.

B. Static Synchronous Compensators (STATCOM)

Fig. 1. Model of SVC scheme - hybrid compensator (Thyristor controlled
reactor + thyristor switched capacitor + fixed capacitor) [6].
After a permanent fault occurred on a structure in the
network (power line or transformer) protective devices
disconnect the structure in question in order to eliminate
rapidly the fault.
The loss of the faulty structure leads to a weakening of the
network that, generally, results in a voltage drop at the load
terminals in the zone affected by the fault [6].
The phenomenon is particularly visible on networks with low
short-circuit power and a high proportion of industrial loads.
A risk of a localised drop in voltage then occurs. In this
situation the STATCOM must maintain the voltage level,
when the fault has been eliminated to reduce the risk and
enable the loads to be satisfactorily powered by injecting,
simultaneously, active and reactive energy [9].
In Figure 3, it is shown the STATCOM structure that was
used in this study.

GRID

Medium Voltage
or
Fig. 2. Static characteristic of the SVC model [6]. X - Leakage ractance
High Voltage
of the transformer
Table I presents the different parameters of the SVC model Capacitor
used in the system simulation with values of 100 Mvar and
145 Mvar.
Low Voltage
TABLE I. PARAMETERS OF THE SVC MODEL.
Values
Parameters 100 145
Mvar Mvar VOLTAGE CONVERTER
(INVERTER IGBT or IGCT)
TM1 Time constant (voltage measurement) 0.004 0.004

TM2 Time constant (current measurement) 0.004 0.004

T Limited constant integrator 0.7405 0.7405

K Regulator gain 20 20

TR Regulator time constant 0.03 0.03 Fig. 3. STATCOM structure [6].

TB Delay time for activation of thyristors 0.004 0.004
STATCOM measures the value of the voltage at the
Voltage limit below which no supply medium voltage (MV) or high voltage (HV) connection node
TRESHOL 0.7 0.7
of reactive power (p.u.)
and modifies the reactive power supply to maintain the
TSMOOT Time constant to delay activation of
0.002 0.002 voltage at a given set point. When the voltage is lower than
H thyristors
the rated voltage, STATCOM injects reactive power into the
QMIN Minimum reactive power limitations -0.4 -0.4 network. It absorbs reactive power, when the voltage at the
medium or high voltage connection node, is greater than the
QMAX Maximum reactive power limitations 1.00 1.45
rated voltage [6].
 The model has been completely reproduced in the At bus N11 the load was assumed as constant impedance,
EUROSTAG macroblocks language. In Table II, it is shown while at bus N8 the load was modelled as 50% constant
the different parameters of the STATCOM model used in this power and 50% of induction motors. The Under Load Tap
study with values of 100 Mvar and 145 Mvar. Changer (ULTC) actions of the power transformer between
bus N10 and bus N11 are represented considering a time
TABLE II. PARAMETERS OF THE STATCOM MODEL. delay and a dead band. Time delays for ULTC operations are
Values assumed to be 30 seconds for the first tap movement and
Parameters 100 145 5 seconds for subsequent tap movements. All the other
Mvar Mvar transformers are blocked during the simulation. Generator G1
is considered as an infinite bus, and generators G2 and G3 are
BNON Additional capacitor (p.u.) 1.00 1.45
modelled in detail. The automatic voltage regulators and
C Internal capacitor (p.u.) 0.000054 0.000054 OvereXcitation Limiter (OXL) of the generating units and the
Use of additional capacitor turbine speed governors were taken into account. The
CAPAD 1 1
(1: used; -1 out of order) maximum field current of OXL is 3.03 p.u. in the three
DECL Coefficient to determine whether fault 0.98 0.98 scenarios that were simulated.

IMAX Rated power of the STATCOM (p.u.) 1.00 1.45

IPMAX Maximum possible active power (p.u.) 0.037 0.037

ISMAX Maximum coil current (p.u.) 0.0125 0.0125

ISMIN Minimum coil current (p.u.) 0.00399 0.00399

ISREF Recommended coil current (p.u.) 0.010226 0.010226

K Inverter internal coefficient 0.225 0.225

Fig. 4. Single line diagram of the BPA test power network [8].
K2 Active power error integrator coefficient -200 -200

K3
Coefficient of the time constant on the DC
160 160
In this study three different case studies were simulated and
voltage error analysed. In the first one (case I) the BPA test power network
KOND Inverter overload coefficient 2.3 2.3 was not equipped with any Flexible AC transmission System
Coefficient of the error integrator on the devices at bus N7. In the second situation (case II) the BPA
KP 80 80
network voltage
test power network was studied with a SVC of 100 Mvar and,
L Coil inductance (p.u.) 347.22 347.22
in alternative, with a STATCOM of 100 Mvar. connected in
PINIT Initial active power set point (p.u) 0.037 0.037 the bus N7.
RMAX
Max. limit of the DC voltage regulation
1 1
The third study (case III) the BPA test power network
(p.u.) includes the connection of a SVC with a capacity of
RMIN
Min. limit of the DC voltage regulation
-1 -1 145 Mvar and, in alternative, with a STATCOM with the
(p.u.)
capacity of 145 Mvar at the bus N7.
Network voltage threshold under which
SEUILB
reactive power is not injected (p.u)
0.1 0.1 Several dynamic simulations were carried out in order to
VDCREF DC voltage set point (p.u.) 6.25 6.25
analyse the performance of SVC and STATCOM in dynamic
voltage stability of the system.
XIND Transformer short-circuit reactance (p.u.) 0.06 0.0414
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

III. APPLICATION EXAMPLE
Figure 4 represents the BPA Electric Power System
composed by 3 generators, 7 transformers, 7 transmission
lines, 10 bus and 6 capacitor banks that was used in this
study. The simulations were carried out considering the
network data presented in [10]. It was simulated the tripping
of one of the five 500 kV overhead transmission lines
between bus N6 and N7 with a tripping time equal to 20 s.
It was not considered the switch-on of the tripped overhead
transmission line. The operating point assumed in this study
corresponds to a 6855 MW and 1046 Mvar load level.
In figure 5 it is shown, for case I, the voltage variation at
bus N7 (figure 5.a) and the field currents of generators G2
and G3 (figure 5.b).
The BPA test power network is explored near its technical
limits. As it was expected, after the occurrence of the
contingency the power flow increases in the remaining
500 kV overhead transmission lines. So, the voltage in the
system buses decrease and, consequently, G2 and G3
increases the reactive power generation, and thus, its field
currents. As the generator G3 is closer to the loads centres, it
produces more Mvar. As it can be seen in figure 5.b, at
approximately 73 s the field current has a maximum of
3.03 p.u. (maximum field current of OXL). Generator G3 p.u.

operates now in its full reactive capacity. The OXL of the 1.0

generator G2 operates close to 190 s (figure 5.b) and the

electric power system collapses 14 s later.
0.8
p.u.

1.0

0.6

0.8
s
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325
a) VOLTAGE VARIATION IN BUS N7 WITH STATCOM Unité : p.u.
a) VOLTAGE VARIATION IN BUS N7 WITH SVC Unité : p.u.
0.6
200

150
s
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
a) VOLTAGE VARIATION IN BUS N7 Unité : p.u.
p.u. 100

3.2 50

3.0 -0

s
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325
2.8
b) REACTIVE POWER INJECTION OF THE STATCOM
b) REACTIVE POWER INJECTION OF THE SVC

2.6
Fig. 6.a) Voltage variation at bus N7 (case II), 6.b) Reactive power injection
s
of the SVC and of the STATCOM at bus N7 (case II).
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
b) FIELD CURRENTS OF G2 Unité : p.u.
b) FIELD CURRENTS OF G3 Unité : p.u. p.u.

Fig. 5.a) Voltage variation at bus N7 (case I), 5.b) Field currents of G2 and 3.2
G3 (case I).
3.0
Figure 6 presents, for case II, the voltage variation at bus
N7 (figure 6.a), the reactive power injection of SVC with a
2.8
capacity of 100 Mvar and the reactive power injection of
STATCOM with a capacity of 100 Mvar connected to bus N7
2.6
(figure 6.b).
When limited, the SVC behaves as a mere shunt capacitor, s
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325
with reactive power proportional to the square of the voltage. a) FIELD CURRENTS OF G2 WITH STATCOM Unité : p.u.
For this reason, when the voltage decreases (figure 6.a), the a) FIELD CURRENTS OF G2 WITH SVC Unité : p.u.
p.u.
production of reactive energy by the SVC decreases 3.4
(figure 6.b), which accelerates the voltage collapse when
compared to STATCOM. Comparatively, a better reactive 3.2
support is offered by a STATCOM. When the voltage
decreases (figure 6.a) the production of reactive energy by the 3.0
STATCOM increases (figure 6.b).
In figure 7 it is shown, for case II, the field currents of 2.8
generator G2 with the SVC and the STATCOM with a
capacity of 100 Mvar (figure 7.a) and the field currents of 2.6
generator G3 with the SVC and the STATCOM with a 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325
s

capacity of 100 Mvar (figure 7.b). In case II, the FACTS b) FIELD CURRENTS OF G3 WITH STATCOM Unité : p.u.
b) FIELD CURRENTS OF G3 WITH SVC Unité : p.u.
devices has a capacity of 100 Mvar, the electrical power
system collapses. The OXLs of generators G2 (figure 7.a) and Fig. 7.a) Field currents of G2 with SVC and STATCOM (case II), 7.b) Field
G3 (figure 7.b) exceed their maximum excitation current limit currents of G3 with SVC and STATCOM (case II).
value (3.03 p.u.) and operate. Comparing the two devices
studied, it was observed that, in the case of the STATCOM, Figure 8 presents, for case III, the voltage variation at bus
the collapse takes a further 75 s to occur. N7 (figure 8.a); the reactive power injection of SVC with a
capacity of 145 Mvar and the reactive power injection of In figure 9 it is shown, for case III, the field currents of
STATCOM with a capacity of 145 Mvar connected at bus N7 generator G2 with the SVC and the STATCOM with a
are represented in figure 8.b. capacity of 145 Mvar (figure 9.a) and the field currents of
generator G3 with the SVC and the STATCOM with a
p.u.
1.02
capacity of 145 Mvar (figure 9.b).
Case III, allowed to identify the minimum amount of
power for the FACTS, which guarantee the dynamic stability
1.00 of the system voltage. As shown in figures 8 and 9, in this
case, the dynamic behaviour of SVC and STATCOM are very
0.98
similar.
V. CONCLUSION
0.96 In this paper it was studied the importance of the FACTS
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325
s devices to control the voltage stability of a system. Different
a) VOLTAGE VARIATION IN BUS N7 WITH STATCOM Unité : p.u. dynamic simulations were carried out in order to analyse the
a) VOLTAGE VARIATION IN BUS N7 WITH SVC Unité : p.u.
performance of SVC and STATCOM technologies in the
300
dynamic voltage stability control of an electric power
network.
The STATCOM ability to provide reactive power
200
compensation is more effective than the SVC. Even at low
voltages levels the STATCOM can continue to supply the full
rated reactive current to the system, i.e., the output reactive
100
power is independent of the system voltage, whereas the
compensating current of the SVC decreases with the system
-0
voltage.
s
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 The studies conducted allow to state that the use of FACTS
b) REACTIVE POWER INJECTION OF THE STATCOM
b) REACTIVE POWER INJECTION OF THE SVC devices is a suitable and efficient preventive control measure
to avoid voltage instability, provided they are well
Fig. 8.a) Voltage variation in bus N7 (case III), 8.b) Reactive power injection dimensioned.
of the SVC and of the STATCOM in bus N7 (case III).
REFERENCES
p.u.
[1] MIREA, Constantin, and Claudia Elena BOAMBĂ, "Comparative
2.65 Analysis of a STATCOM with Additional Capacitor and a SVC for
Implementing in a Power System." U.P.B. Sci. Bull., Series C, Vol. 77,
Issues 2, 2015.
2.60
[2] A. Meddeb, H. Jmii and S. Chebbi, " Comparison of UPFC, TCSC and
SVC for Improving Voltage Stability", Proceedings of Engineering &
2.55 Technology (PET), pp. 227-281, 2016.
[3] Jmii, Hajer, Asma Meddeb, and Souad Chebbi, "Assessment of SVC in
Improving Power System Stability.", International Science Press,
2.50
Vol. 9, Issues 38, pp. 189-201, 2016.
[4] Barrios-Martínez, Esther, and Cesar Ángeles-Camacho, "Technical
s comparison of FACTS controllers in parallel connection."
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 Journal of Applied Research and Technology Vol. 15, Issues 1,
a) FIELD CURRENTS OF G2 WITH STATCOM Unité : p.u.
a) FIELD CURRENTS OF G2 WITH SVC Unité : p.u.
pp. 36-44, 2017.
p.u. [5] Pereira, RM Monteiro, Ferreira, CM Machado, and Barbosa, FP
Maciel.. "Comparative study of STATCOM and SVC performance on
3.0 dynamic voltage collapse of an electric power system with wind
generation". IEEE Latin America Transactions, 2014, Vol. 12, Issue 2,
2.9 pp. 138-145.
[6] Tractebel Energy Engineering and Réseau de Transport d´Electricité
2.8 (RTE), Eurostag Software user’s Manual and Release Notes, Eurostag
Package Release 4.5, Jun. 2010.
2.7
[7] Static Var Compensators. Prepared by CIGRE WG 38-01 - TF02.
Edited by I.A. ERINMEZ, CHAIRMAN, TF02.
[8] Hammad, A. E., and M. Z. El-Sadek. "Prevention of transient voltage
2.6
instabilities due to induction motor loads by static VAR compensators."
s IEEE Transactions on Power Systems Vol.4, Issue 3, pp 1182-1190,
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325
b) FIELD CURRENTS OF G3 WITH STATCOM Unité : p.u.
1989.
b) FIELD CURRENTS OF G3 WITH SVC Unité : p.u. [9] Tractebel Energy Engineering and Réseau de Transport d´Electricité
(RTE), “Eurostag Tutorial”, Eurostag Package Release 4.5,june 2010.
Fig. 9.a) Field currents of G2 with SVC and STATCOM (case III), 9.b) Field [10] Stubbe, M., et al., Tools for simulating long term dynamics,
currents of G3 with SVC and STATCOM (case III). ELECTRA, No. 163, pp. 150 166, Dec. 1995.