This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2017.2690681, IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid
Optimal Sizing, Siting and Operation of Custom Power Devices with STATCOM and APLC
Functions for Real-Time Reactive Power and Network Voltage Quality Control of Smart Grid
Moayed Moghbel, Student Member, IEEE, Mohammad A.S. Masoum, Senior Member, IEEE,
Alireza Fereidouni, Member, IEEE, Sara Deilami, Member, IEEE
Abstract- A new custom power device (CPD) is introduced for
real-time control of reactive power and improving the overall
network voltage quality of smart grid (SG) at fundamental and
harmonic frequencies, respectively. The idea is to take advantage
of the online smart meter data transmitted from each bus to the
SG central control (SGCC) to concurrently perform the static
synchronous compensator (STATCOM) and the active power line
conditioner (APLC) operations by optimal compensations of
fundamental reactive power and harmonic currents at selected
optimal buses. The proposed strategy involves two PSO
algorithms. The first algorithm is implemented for the worse
operating condition to determine the optimal locations and sizes
of CPDs while the second algorithm relies on smart meter
information to continuously compute fundamental and harmonic
reference currents for real-time operation and control of the
allocated CPDs. The objective functions are cost minimizations
associated with bus voltage regulations, network THDv and
custom device sizing while the constraints include upper limits for
CPD sizes, fundamental and harmonic bus voltages. Detailed
simulations are performed in Matlab/Simulink to evaluate the
performances of allocated CPDs in controlling the reactive power
and voltage quality of a distorted 15-bus distorted SG with six
nonlinear loads according to the IEEE-519 standard.
Index Term- Active power line conditioner (APLC), custom
power device, smart grid, STATCOM, power quality.
I. INTRODUCTION
Smart grids (SGs) are gaining worldwide courtesy among
consumers and utilities due to their inherent abilities in
increasing demand-size management and enabling real-time
control of assets as well as improving network efficiency and
reliability by using smart meters and sensors [1-3]. Electric
utilities are facing many new challenges due to the increased
complexity of their networks and the growing integration of
nonlinear loads and renewable energy resources such as poor
voltage profiles and high losses at fundamental and harmonic
frequencies.
The most frequently experienced power quality issue is the
voltage instability problem [4]. For example, voltage sags are
reported to be responsible for over 80% of the power quality
troubles in power systems [5]. The extreme consequence of a
voltage collapse can be a full power interruption [6]. The
commonly practiced solution for protecting the system from
voltage collapse is to inject/absorb reactive power before
reaching the point of voltage collapse by installing shunt (fixed
and switched) capacitor banks, static var compensators (SVCs)
[7] or flexible AC transmission systems (FACTS) such as static
synchronous compensator (STATCOM) [8] at suitable
locations of the system. Switched capacitors need to be
scheduled based on the forecasting of DG generations and
loads while SVC uses thyristor switched capacitors (TSC) or
thyristor controlled reactors (TCR) for capacitive/inductive
M. Moghbel, M.A.S. Masoum, A. Fereidouni and S. Deilami are with the
Centre for Smart Grid and Sustainable Power Systems, Department of
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia
(E-mails: moayed.moghbel@postgrad.curtin.edu.au, m.masoum@curtin.edu.
au, alirezafereidouni@curtin.edu.au, s.deilami@curtin.edu.au).
1949-3053 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
reactive power compensation [7]. In general STATCOM has
some benefits over SVC such as faster response and smaller
size due to the elimination of capacitors and reactors.
Moreover, due to high dependency of SVC on the supply
voltage, its reactive power compensation is reduced with a
decrease in supply voltage, while the STATCOM can supply
the required reactive power even at low supply voltage.
However, these devices are mainly designed to perform voltage
regulation and optimal reactive power flow at the fundamental
frequency without considering harmonic current injections of
nonlinear loads.
Propagation of the injected current harmonics creates harmonic
voltage drops and voltage harmonic distortions throughout the
network [9]. These distortions need to be controlled according
to the upper limits for the total harmonic distortions of current
(THDi) and voltage (THDv) as well as the individual current
and voltage harmonic magnitudes as recommended by power
quality standards such as the IEEE-519 [10]. The usual
approaches are insulations of passive, active or hybrid power
filters. However, these technologies are designed to limit
harmonic currents at the point of common coupling (PCC)
without considering the THDv of other buses and the entire
network [9]. This issue can be resolved by connecting active
power filters (APFs) at all buses with nonlinear loads which is
not a practical solution [11]. A feasible approach may be to
utilize a custom power device (CPD) with combined FACTS
and APF functions.
According to the draft IEEE P1409 Guideline [12], CPDs are
active power electronic devices with ability to perform current
interruption and/or voltage regulation in distribution systems to
improve power quality with the following two classifications:
1) CPDs protecting the source (network) from the load by
injecting reactive power and compensating harmonics.
Examples include SVC, D-STATCOM, unified power
quality conditioner (UPQC) and active power line
conditioner (APLC). The research on APLCs is very limited
[13-18] mainly due to unavailability of online network data
which is being resolved with the wide spread installations of
smart meters in SGs.
2) CPDs protecting the load from the source by mitigating
voltage interruptions such as voltage sags and swells.
Examples include static transfer switch (STS), static series
compensator (SSC) and static voltage regulator (SVR) as
well as DSTATCOM and dynamic voltage restorer (DVR)
with energy storages.
DVR connected in series with the network can regulate and
balance the three phase voltages of the connected bus while
also eliminating voltage harmonics. It injects voltage
components in series with the main voltage and consequently
compensates voltage sag and swell on the load side. Also,
harmonic voltages are added to maintain almost pure
sinusoidal voltages across the load.
There are limited number of resources on simultaneous
compensation of both reactive power and voltage harmonics
[19-24]. In [19] the APF is designed to provide reactive power
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2017.2690681, IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid

and harmonics compensation for linear and non-linear single- the fundamental output phase voltage of STATCOM,
phase loads while [20] proposes a universal active filter with respectively; while X L =2πfL is the leakage reactance, f system
parallel and series components for single-phase applications frequency and α the phase angle between V S and V C . To
without a transformer. In [21] an enhanced STATCOM with achieve optimal reactive power control, STATCOM injects a
harmonic elimination capability is implemented and [22-24] lagging or leading current in quadrature with the network
propose UPQCs with series and shunt converters for voltage. A line diagram of a STATCOM power circuit is
compensating the line current distortion and also maintaining shown in Fig.1.
the bus voltage.
Most of the documented researches [8-9,11-23] either consider VSa VCa
Voltage
fundamental reactive power control at PCC to minimize the
PCC voltage fluctuations (STATCOM action), compensate VSb VCb Source
harmonic currents of nonlinear loads at PCC to minimize THDi
Converter
(APF action) or compensate harmonic currents at selected VSc VCc
buses to improve the overall network THDv (APLC action).
Only [24] considers the power quality of the entire network Figure 1. Equivalent circuit of STATCOM [26].
and discusses the allocations of UPQCs in the radial
distribution network. However, this reference only considers B. Active Power Line Conditioner (APLC)
the reactive power compensation of a distribution network and APLCs are enhanced shunt APFs that are only installed at few
allocates the UPQC based on three objectives functions of selected buses. Instead of injecting equal-but-opposite
UPQC ratings, network power losses and the number of buses harmonic currents to fully compensate the nonlinear load
with undervoltage issues. distortions; APLC reference currents are optimized to control
The aim of this paper is to perform reactive power control and the overall network and individual bus THDv values within
harmonic compensation for the entire SG by optimal siting, permissible limits according to the power quality standards.
sizing and online control of CPDs that simultaneously execute The research on APLCs has been mainly focused on their
STATCOM and APLC functions. First, a particle swarm optimal sizing and siting as well as their steady-state operation
optimization (PSO) algorithm is implemented for optimal and control by modeling them with harmonic current sources
siting (placement) and sizing (rating) of multiple CPDs in injecting harmonic currents at specific frequencies [13-18].
distorted SGs with nonlinear loads. The objective function
consists of minimization of the overall network THDv and total C. Proposed CPD with STATCOM and APLC Functions
CPD injected currents while the constraints include limits for Most of the documented researches are based on compensating
individual bus fundamental voltages, overall network THDv of either reactive power flow or harmonic distortions of the
and individual bus voltage harmonics. Then, the approach is network. The proposed CPD is an enhanced APLC
extended to develop a second PSO algorithm for optimal online configuration that can also perform reactive power
control (operation) of the selected CPDs in distorted SGs that compensation (STATCOM function) in addition to controlling
rely on smart meter recorded and transmitted data. Detailed the voltage quality of each bus and the entire network by
simulations are presented and analyzed for the 15-bus distorted injecting optimal compensation active and reactive currents at
network of [25] with six nonlinear loads. both fundamental and harmonic frequencies. Fig.2 shows the
schematic diagram where detailed nonlinear models are used
II. MODELING AND CONTROL OF THE PROPOSED CUSTOM for the CPD controller and inverter [27].
POWER DEVICE (CPD) . .
This section starts with brief discussions on the conventional
. .
. .
STATCOM and APLC devices and then provides detailed
formulation and modeling of the proposed CPD. Va
CPD Fundamental ICPD-Ref-a ICPD-a
Ica .
CPD CPD
Vb and Harmonic ICPD-Ref-b
Vc Current Calculations ICPD-Ref-c
Controller
ICPD-b
Inverter
Icb
.
A. Static Synchronous Compensator (STATCOM) (Eqs.2-7) ICPD-c (Fig.3)

The main objective of STATCOM is to improve network

(Fig.6b) Icc .
+ -
reactive power flow by injecting or absorbing a specified Icb
Ica
Vdc
amount of reactive power at PCC. It is a FACTS device Icc

capable of improving the power quality of the distribution

networks by performing several functions such as voltage
flicker, sag/swell control, dynamic voltage control, damping
the oscillations of power lines, and reactive power control.
STATCOM in general consists of voltage source converter
(VSC), dc bus with capacitor or energy storage device,
controller and coupling interface transformer. The relation of
active and reactive power injected at the PCC is based on Eq.1:
VV V V V2 
S = P − jQ = 3 S C sin α − j 3 S C cos α − S  (1)
XL  XL XL 
where S, P, Q, V S and V C are the apparent power, active
power, reactive power, phase voltage of the connected bus and
Figure 2. Schematic of the proposed CPD.
CPD Five-Level Neutral-Point Clamped Inverter
The CPD inverters are designed with the five-level neutral-
point clamped (FL-NPC) configuration. The implemented
three-phase inverter topology supplying a series RL impedance
(filter 𝑅𝑅𝑓𝑓 and 𝐿𝐿𝑓𝑓 impedances) and an ac back EMF (𝑣𝑣𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 ) is
shown in Fig.3. Five output voltage levels can be integrated by
this structure including 0, ±𝑉𝑉𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 /4 and ±𝑉𝑉𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 /2.
CPD Adaptive Hysteresis Current Control Design
For the CPD inverter, an adaptive hysteresis current control
(AHCC) approach is used. Assuming that the grounded neutral

1949-3053 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2017.2690681, IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid

point of the system is connected to the midpoint of the FL-NPC
inverter and applying KVL for phase-a:
d transition between the two band shapes:
u a = R f iCPDa + L f iCPDa + va (2)
dt
where 𝑣𝑣𝑎𝑎 , 𝑖𝑖𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 , 𝑢𝑢𝑎𝑎 are the phase-a PCC voltage (ac side), the
phase-a inverter output current (or CPD output current) and the
phase-a inverter output voltage (dc side), respectively.
To maintain the switching frequency constant, the fundamental
components of the inverter output voltages is used to adjust the
hysteresis bands instead of using the system parameters. If the
phase-a leg of the FL-NPC inverter (shown in Fig.3) is
assigned to generate and inject 𝑖𝑖𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 at PCC, then the inverter
must generate a voltage greater than the PCC voltage. For an
ideal case, the inverter creates a sinusoidal voltage waveform;
however in reality, a non-sinusoidal waveform is produced
specifies the beginning and the end of utilizing hysteresis
shapes. Hence, the following equation is derived for the
Ttrans = videal − a − Vdc / 4 (7)
where 𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 is the transition time between ℎ𝑎𝑎13 and ℎ𝑎𝑎24 .
Fig.5 shows the hysteresis band shapes obtained from Eq.6
which are controlled and selected by Eq.7. The switching
between the two shapes to construct the whole hysteresis band
ℎ𝑎𝑎 is organized by 𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡. During time intervals corresponding
to 𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 < 0, the ℎ𝑎𝑎13 activation pulse is changed from zero to
one (red pulse in Fig.5) and the control system designates ℎ𝑎𝑎13
for the hysteresis band, otherwise ℎ𝑎𝑎24 is used.
Sa1 Sb1 Sc1

since the inverter utilizes a modulation technique. As a result, Vdc1 C1

Sa2 Sb2 Sc2
the actual modulated current will include two components

iCPD(abc)
related to the created realistic voltage consisting of the Sa3 Sb3 Sc3

fundamental (𝑖𝑖𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶−𝐹𝐹 ) and the switching ripple (𝑖𝑖𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶−𝑅𝑅 ) Vdc2 C2

Sa4 Sb4 Sc4 Lf Rf vabc
components: n ua
ub
iCPD = iCPD − F + iCPD − R (3) uc
C3 Sa1 Sb1 Sc1 Filter PCC
Assuming the voltage drop caused by the switching ripple Vdc3

Measurements
CPD Current
across 𝑅𝑅𝑓𝑓 is considerably less than of across 𝐿𝐿𝑓𝑓 and substituting Sa2 Sb2 Sc2

Eq.3 into Eq.2, the following equation is realized: Sa3 Sb3 Sc3
diCPD−R ua − L f dt iCPDa − F + va ua − videal − a
d Vdc4 C4
= = (4)

Measurements
Sa4 Sb4 Sc4

PCC Voltage
dt Lf Lf DC−Bus Voltage Switching Signals
Measurements Switching Signals Delay Adaptive Hysteresis Modulation
where 𝑣𝑣𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖−𝑎𝑎 is the fundamental component of the inverter
output voltage for phase-a. Vdc1 + DC−Bus Voltage Control
Reference Current Phase−Locked
Vdc2 + × 0.25 − + PI
Phase & Loop
Generation
As comprehended in Fig.4, there are four different areas (Areas Vdc3 + Controller In−phase Current
Component
Frequency
Vdc4 + 0.25 × Vdc
*
1-4) depending on the ideal voltage value. Based on this figure, Proposed Harmonic and
Harmonic and Reactive Components Reactive Power Algorithm
the following switching periods are obtained:
Figure 3. Detailed FL-NPC inverter structure of the proposed CPD.
 Vdc 1 2ha1L f
T1a = ( ) Area 1 Area 2 Area 1 Area 3 Area 4 Area 3

 4 videal − a Vdc / 4 − videal − a 1

 Vdc 2ha 2 L f 0 Stot
 T2 a = 4 ( (V / 2 − v ) (5) 1
Sa1
ideal − a )(videal − a − Vdc / 4
0

dc 1
0 Sa2
2ha 3 L f
T3a = Vdc 1
( ) 1
Sa3
 4 − videal − a Vdc / 4 + videal − a
0
Switching Signals Sa4
 V − 2ha 4 L f
 T4 a = dc ( ). Vmax
 4 (Vdc / 2 + videal − a )(videal − a + Vdc / 4 Absolute of Ideal Voltage
0
Since the switching periods for Areas 1-2 and Areas 2-4 are 0.5Vdc
similar, we need 𝑇𝑇1 = 𝑇𝑇3 = 1/𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 and 𝑇𝑇2 = 𝑇𝑇4 = 1/𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 in 0 Ttrans.
Average of Ideal Voltage
order to maintain a constant switching frequency. Using Eq.5: Estimated Ideal Voltage ( ton-a / Ta )
t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t6 t7
 videal −a v
ha1 = ha 3 = ha13 = hmax (1 − ideal −a ) Figure 4. The CPD generated FL-NPC inverter voltage using HCC;
 Vdc / 4 Vdc / 4 (6) with waveforms for Areas 1 to 4.

v
 h = h = h = h (2 − ideal −a )( ideal −a − 1) v Area 1 Area 2 Area 1 Area 3 Area 4 Area 3

 a 2 a4 a 24 max
Vdc / 4 Vdc / 4 hmax
ha
where ℎ𝑎𝑎13𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 𝑉𝑉𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 /(8𝐿𝐿𝑓𝑓 𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 ). Complete
0
Hysteresis Band
Selection of Hysteresis Band Shape 1
0
h24a
Based on Eq.6, depending on the amplitude of the fundamental 1
0
Activation Pulses
h13a
component of the inverter output voltage and the absolute hmax
h24a
value of the ideal voltage, there are two hysteresis band shapes h13a Hysteresis Bands
Ttrans.
that must be properly selected for the correct AHCC operation 0

with a constant switching frequency. The key for the selection

t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t6 t7
between the hysteresis shapes is the margin voltage level of
Figure 5. Hysteresis-shape selection according to Eqs.6-7.
𝑉𝑉𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 /4. The difference between ideal and margin voltages

1949-3053 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2017.2690681, IEEE
III. PROBLEM FORMULATION FOR OPTIMAL SITING AND
SIZING OF MULTIPLE CPDS
The three-phase CPDs are accurately modeled with five-level
neutral-point clamped inverters (Figs.2-5) while the nonlinear
loads are modeled as harmonic current sources [9] injecting
harmonic currents at their points of connection to the SG. This
section develops the first PSO algorithm for optimal siting
(allocation) and sizing (rating) of multiple CPDs. The size of
CPD connected to bus k can be expressed as [13-18]:
H 2
I k ,CPD size = ∑ I k ,CPD , k = 1, ..., K
h
h =1
where k and h are the bus number and the harmonic order
(including fundamental frequency) while K and H represent
their maximum values, respectively. Note that I kh,CPD is the
injected hth harmonic current by the CPD located at bus k.
The objective function for the optimal siting and sizing
problem is minimization of the overall network THDv and the
total CPD sizes (e.g., their injected currents at fundamental and
harmonic frequencies):
min F1 = Wsize I CPD sizes + WTHD THDv , network
K K H 2
= Wsize ∑ I k , CPD size + WTHD ∑ ∑ Vkh / V fund
k =1 k =1 h = 2
where 𝑊𝑊𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 and 𝑊𝑊𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 are the weighting factors for CPD size
and network THDv while V fund and 𝑉𝑉𝑘𝑘ℎ represent the
fundamental and harmonic voltages at bus k, respectively.
The selected constraints associated with Eq.9 are upper
(𝑉𝑉𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 ) and lower (𝑉𝑉𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 ) limits for the fundamental
bus voltages [28], upper limit for the THDv (𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑣𝑣,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 ) and
upper limit for individual bus voltage harmonics (𝑉𝑉ℎ,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 )
according to the IEEE-519 [10] as well as an upper limit for
the maximum size of each CPD (𝐼𝐼𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 ):
V fund ,max ≥ V fund ,k ≥ V fund ,min (10)
H 2
THDv , k = ∑ Vkh / V fund ≤ THDv, max
h=2
Vkh / V fund ≤ Vh, max
I m ,CPD ≤ I CPD size ,max for m = 1,...., M ∈ MC
where V fund,k is the fundamental voltage of bus k while M and
MC are the bus number and the set of candidate buses for CPD
placement suggested by the utility, respectively.
A PSO algorithm is developed and coded to solve Eqs.9-13. It
starts with an initial population/swarm consisting of a number
of random individuals/particles (e.g., random locations and
sizes of CPDs). An iterative procedure is used to move each
particle toward the best position (e.g., the best locations of
CPDs along with the best corresponding device sizes) within
the swarm resulting in the optimal solution [29].
At each iteration, the quality of the solution is evaluated using
Eq.9. The best objective value for each particle is represented
by pbest while the global (best) position among all particles is
indicated by gbest. The velocity of the particle is determined
based on its relative location from pbest and gbest [29]:
V jn +1 = ωV jn + C1j1( pbest nj − X nj ) + C2j2 ( gbest n − X nj ) (14)
1949-3053 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Transactions on Smart Grid
n n
where V j and X j are the velocity and the location of particle
j at iteration n, respectively, ω is the inertia weight factor, ϕ1
and ϕ2 are random numbers between 0 and 1 while C1 and
C2 are the acceleration factors.
The first PSO algorithm for siting and sizing of CPDs is
demonstrated in the flowchart of Fig.6a. The idea is to:
1) Temporarily install CPDs at the utility selected candidate
buses (𝑛𝑛𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 1 to 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ∈ 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ). In
this paper, the selected 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 is all buses except the
(8) swing bus.
2) Define PSO particles for each CPD fundamental and
harmonic current magnitude at each candidate bus. For
example, to solve the CPD optimal sizing/siting problem
of Eq.9 for the 15 bus network of Fig.7, we need to define
168 particles since we required 14 particles for the number
of candidate CPDs, 2 particles for magnitude and phase
angle of each CPD, 6 particles for fundamental, 5th, 7th,
11th, 13th and 17th harmonic orders (14x2x6=168 particles).
3) Perform PSO based on Eqs.9-13 to find the optimal sizes
of the candidate CPDs (𝐼𝐼𝑛𝑛,𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 ) that are
(9) connected at buses 𝑛𝑛𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 1 to 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 .
4) Only select CPDs with sizes larger than the selected lower
limit of 𝐼𝐼𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 0.01pu.
5) Finally, connect the optimally selected CPDs with their
optimal sizes (𝐼𝐼𝑛𝑛,𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 ) at their optimal locations
(𝑛𝑛𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 ) and save the solution (e.g., Table 4 for the
15 bus network of Figs.7-8).
This first PSO algorithm is performed for the worst operating
condition (e.g., maximum linear and nonlinear loadings):
• The inputs of the first PSO algorithm are fundamental
V fund and harmonic voltages 𝑉𝑉𝑘𝑘ℎ of each bus, weighting
factors for CPD size and network THDv (𝑊𝑊𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = 0.5,
𝑊𝑊𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 = 0.5), upper (𝑉𝑉𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 1.1𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝) and lower
(𝑉𝑉𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 0.9pu) limits for the bus fundamental
voltages, upper limit for THDv (𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑣𝑣,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 0.05pu),
(11)
upper limit for bus voltage harmonics (𝑉𝑉ℎ,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 0.03𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝),
the utility selected maximum CPD size (𝐼𝐼𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 =
(12) 0.152pu), the selected minimum CPD size (𝐼𝐼𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 =
(13) 0.01𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝), the utility suggested set of candidate/feasible buses
for the CPD placements (𝑛𝑛𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 1 to 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ∈
𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ; e.g., all buses except the swing bus).
• The outputs of the first PSO algorithm are the optimal CPD
locations 𝑛𝑛𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 = 1 to 𝑁𝑁𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 ∈ 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 and
the corresponding optimal CPD sizes 𝐼𝐼𝑛𝑛,𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 that are
among candidate buses 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 and within the limits of Eq.13.
IV. OPTIMAL ONLINE OPERATION OF THE ALLOCATED CPDS
The problem formulation for online control of the allocated
CPDs is based on the availability of the transmitted smart
meter data from each bus to the SG central control (SGCC).
The flowchart of the second PSO algorithm (based on Eqs.15-
16 and 10-12) is shown in Fig.6b. It is similar to the first PSO
algorithm (Eqs.9-13) with the following differences:
1) CPDs are only installed at the optimal locations (buses
𝑛𝑛𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 ) determined by the first PSO algorithm.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2017.2690681, IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid

Input line and load data, PSO parameters (Eqs.9, 14), limits for K H 2
constraints (Eqs.10-13), the selected candidate buses for CPD min F2 (t ) = ∑ ∑ Vkh (t ) / V fund (t ) ; for t = ∆t , 2∆t ,... (15)
placement (ncandidate∈ MCcandidate), maximum and minimum CPD sizes k =1 h = 2
(ICPD size, max = 0.15pu and ICPD size, min = 0.01pu) 3) The limits and bus numbers of Eq.13 are modified:

connection
Temporary connected candidate CPDs Selection of optimal
I n ,CPD ( t ) ≤ I n ,CPD optimal ; for nCPD optimal ∈ MCoptimal

of CPDs
Connect a CPD at each candidate bus
ncandidate = 1 to Ncandidate∈MCcandidate
(16)
Define PSO particles for each CPD fundamental and where nCPD optimal and In,CPD optimal are the optimal

Optimal sizing of all temporary

harmonic current magnitude and phase angle (e.g.,
14x2x6=168 particles for the15-bus network of Figs.7-8)
locations and ratings of the allocated CPDs as determined
by the first PSO algorithm.
Perform PSO of Eq.9 with the constraints of Eqs.10-13 4) The inputs of the second PSO algorithm (Fig.6b) are the
Next to calculate the optimal sizes (In,candidate CPD optimal) of the same as those for the first PSO algorithm (Fig.6a) with the
iteration candidate CPDs temporary connected at buses exceptions of: i) the bus fundamental and harmonic
ncandidate = 1 to Ncandidate∈ MCcandidate
no
voltages ( V fund and 𝑉𝑉𝑘𝑘ℎ ) are transmitted online by the
Iteration = Maximum number of iterations ?
yes smart meters and updated at each time step ∆𝑡𝑡, ii) the
Set ncandidate = 1 maximum CPD sizes are the computed ratings of the

CPD locations with

selected CPDs (𝐼𝐼𝑛𝑛,𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 ), iii) the candidate buses are
acceptable sizes
no Only select CPDs with sizes larger
than the selected minimum value 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 .
In,candidate CPD optimal > ICPD size, min = 0.01pu?
yes 5) The outputs of the second PSO algorithm are the optimal
Connect a CPD at bus number nCPD optimal = ncandidate reference currents (𝐼𝐼𝑛𝑛,𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 ) for the CPD inverters
with optimal size of In,CPD optimal = In,candidate CPD optimal connected at buses 𝑛𝑛𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 = 1 to 𝑁𝑁𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 for
ncandidate=ncandidate+1 no
ncandidate=Ncandidate ?
time steps of ∆𝑡𝑡 such that the overall network THDv and
yes the individual bus voltage harmonics are within the limits
Save optimal locations (nCPD optimal) and sizes (In,CPD optimal) of the IEEE-519 [10].
Stop
of CPDs (e.g., Table 4 for the15 bus network of Figs.7-8)
The second PSO algorithm starts by connecting the CPDs
(a) (determined by Fig.6a) with their optimal sizes (𝐼𝐼𝑛𝑛,𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 )
Input line and load data, PSO parameters (Eqs.14-15), limits
at their optimal locations (𝑛𝑛𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 ). At each time step Dt,
for constraints (Eqs.10-12, 16), the optimal CPD locations the following main steps are executed (Fig.6b):
(nCPD optimal = 1 to NCPD optimal ∈ MCoptimal) and optimal CPD sizes • Step 1- The transmitted data from smart meters to SGCC are
(In,CPD optimal) determined by the first PSO of Fig.6(a)
used to update network information including fundamental
optimally sited/
Connection of
sized CPDs

Connect the allocated CPDs with their optimal and harmonic bus voltages, linear and nonlinear loads etc.
(Fig.6a)

sizes In,CPD optimal at their optimal locations on • Step 2- PSO particles are defined for each CPD fundamental
buses nCPD optimal = 1 to NCPD optimal
and harmonic current magnitude at each of the 𝑁𝑁𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜
Use transmitted data from smart meters to SGCC to update buses. For example, to solve the CPD optimal operation/
system information including fundamental and harmonic bus control problem of Eq.15 for the 15 bus network of Figs.7-8
voltages, linear and nonlinear load levels, etc.
assuming 3 CPDs are allocated by the first PSO of Fig.6a,
PSO calculation of optimal
CPD reference currents

Define PSO particles for each CPD fundamental and harmonic we need to define only 36 particles since we required 3
current magnitude and phase angle (e.g., 3x2x6=36 particles particles for the number of candidate CPDs, 2 particles for
for the15-bus network of Fig.7 assuming NCPD optimal = 3)
magnitude and phase angle of each CPD, 6 particles for
Solve PSO of Eq.15 with the associated constraints
fundamental and 5th, 7th, 11th and 13th harmonic orders
Next (3x2x6=36 particles).
of Eqs.10-12, 16 to calculate optimal reference
iteration
current values of CPD inverters (In,CPD reference ) • Step 3- The PSO problem of Eq.15 (with the constraints of
no
Iteration = Maximum number of iterations ?
Eqs.10-12, 16) is solved to calculate the optimal reference
yes current values (𝐼𝐼𝑛𝑛,𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 ) of CPDs.
Control and

Use the calculated optimal reference currents to control

• Step 4- The calculated 𝐼𝐼𝑛𝑛,𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 values are used to
operation
of CPDs

CPD inverters (Section II, Part C, Figs.2-5, Eqs.2-7)

control the CPD inverters as outlined in Section II, Part C
no
t = t +Dt t = 24 hours ? (Figs.2-5 and Eqs.2-7).
yes
Finally, the solutions and waveforms are saved (e.g., Table 8
Save solutions and print waveforms (e.g., Table 8
Stop and Fig.9 for the 15 bus network of Figs.7-8).
and Fig.9 for the15 bus network of Figs.7-8)

(b) V. SIMULATIONS FOR OPTIMAL SITING/SIZING AND REAL-

Figure 6. Flowcharts of; (a) the first PSO algorithm for optimal siting TIME CONTROL OF CPDS
and sizing of CPDs based on Eqs.9-13, (b) the second PSO algorithm
for optimal online control and operation of CPDs based on Eqs.15-16,
The 15-bus, 60 Hz radial distribution network of Fig.7 [25]
and 10-12. with six nonlinear loads at buses 5, 7, 8, 10, 13, and 15 is used
to assess the performance of the proposed approaches for
2) Network status and optimization of the objective function optimal siting, sizing (Fig.6a) and real-time operation (Fig.6b)
are updated at time steps ∆t. The objective function is of multiple CPDs. The network line and linear load parameters
minimization of network THDv: are available in [25]. The selected base values for power and
voltage are 2.5MVA and 11kV, respectively. For the nonlinear

1949-3053 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2017.2690681, IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid

loads, the conventional approach of modeling them with and 13 are mostly compensating at the fundamental frequency
harmonic current sources is used [9]. Table 1 presents the (e.g., mainly performing voltage regulations) while the second
selected parameters for the nonlinear loads (three-phase diode CPD at bus 6 is equally contributing to both voltage regulation
rectifiers with a resistive load of 6Ω). The harmonic and harmonic compensation. Note that unlike Case 1, all bus
magnitudes and phase angles are equal to current distortions of harmonic voltage magnitudes, all bus THDv values and all bus
the exact nonlinear model in Matlab/Simulink with a rated fundamental voltages are now controlled within the permissible
sinusoidal terminal voltage. Detailed simulations are performed limits.
for the six case studies of Table 2. Table 3. Case 1: Network operation (Fig.7) without any CPDs.
Table 1. Nonlinear load parameters for the network of Fig.7. Voltage Harmonics [%] THDv V fund
Bus [pu]
Harmonic Order 5 7 11 13 17 5 7 11 13 17 [%]
Harmonic Magnitude [%]* 22.60 11.34 9.02 6.49 5.63 2 5.35 3.70 4.50 3.77 4.13 9.69 0.925
Harmonic Phase Angle [degree] 180 180 0 0 180 3 7.94 5.48 6.66 5.58 6.11 14.34 0.891
*) In percentage of the fundamental component. 4 9.23 6.38 7.75 6.49 7.10 16.69 0.877
5 10.07 6.95 8.44 7.07 7.74 18.19 0.869
Table 2. Nonlinear load parameters for the network of Fig.2. 6 8.13 5.60 6.80 5.70 6.26 14.67 0.883
Case Description Approach Results
7 8.72 6.00 7.30 6.11 6.71 15.74 0.875
1 Network operation without any CPDs - Table 3
8 8.88 6.12 7.43 6.23 6.84 16.03 0.873
Optimal siting/sizing of CPDs at fundamental and First PSO
2 Table 4 9 6.40 4.42 5.37 4.50 4.94 11.58 0.911
harmonic frequencies (STATCOM & APLC operations) of Fig.6a
Optimal siting/sizing of CPDs at fundamental frequency First PSO 10 7.31 5.04 6.13 5.14 5.64 13.21 0.901
3 Table 5
(only STATCOM operation) of Fig.6a 11 8.96 6.18 7.50 6.28 6.87 16.17 0.874
Optimal siting/sizing of CPDs at harmonic frequencies First PSO 12 10.42 7.17 8.71 7.29 7.97 18.77 0.854
4 Table 6
(only APLC operation) of Fig.6a 13 11.66 8.02 9.73 8.15 8.91 20.99 0.842
Impacts of weighting factors (Eq.9) on the optimal First PSO 14 9.23 6.38 7.75 6.49 7.10 16.69 0.875
5 Table 7
siting/sizing solutions of Fig.6a
15 9.96 6.88 8.35 7.00 7.66 18.00 0.868
Optimal real-time operation and control of the allocated Second Table 8, Ave. 0.880
8.73 6.02 7.32 6.13 6.71 15.77
6 CPDs (Case 2, Table 4, Fig.8) with number of nonlinear PSO of Figs.9-
loads decreasing from 6 (Case 6a) to two (Case 6e). Fig.6b 10 Note: Shaded cells represent unacceptable operating conditions.

Nonlinear Load 3 Nonlinear Load 2 Table 4. Case 2 (CPD with both STATCOM and APLC Functions):
8 7 Optimal siting and sizing of multiple CPDs for fundamental and
Nonlinear Load 6
harmonic compensations (Fig.8).
6 15
1 2 3 4 5 Voltage Harmonics [%] THDv V fund I CPD I CPD Components [pu]
Bus
[%] [pu] [pu]
5 7 11 13 17 I StatCom I APLC
9 11 14 2 0.71 0.64 0.69 0.04 0.07 2.23 0.945 0 0 0
10 12 Nonlinear Load 1 3 0.69 0.26 0.49 0.44 0.20 3.04 0.923 0.152 0.119 0.093
Nonlinear Load 4 13 4 1.87 1.07 1.49 0.44 0.78 3.88 0.909 0 0 0
Nonlinear Load 5 5 2.61 1.58 2.12 0.97 1.38 4.91 0.900 0 0 0
Figure 7. Single-line diagram of the 15-bus distorted SG [25] with 6 6 0.53 1.34 0.97 0.21 0.43 4.57 0.910 0.120 0.078 0.090
nonlinear loads (Table 1). 7 1.06 1.71 1.41 0.18 0.03 4.87 0.902 0 0 0
8 1.20 1.81 1.54 0.28 0.12 4.98 0.900 0 0 0
A. System Operation without CPDs (Case 1)
9 1.68 1.32 1.52 0.71 0.86 3.42 0.930 0 0 0
This case illustrates the worse operating condition of Fig.7 10 2.52 1.89 2.23 1.30 1.54 4.75 0.920 0 0 0
with simultaneous activation of all nonlinear loads. Simulation 11 0.71 0.18 0.17 1.09 0.73 3.03 0.913 0 0 0
results are presented in Table 3 for individual voltage 12 0.74 0.10 0.56 1.99 1.46 3.75 0.905 0 0 0
harmonics (columns 2-6), THDv (column 7) and fundamental 13 0.76 0.13 1.03 2.74 2.07 4.99 0.902 0.121 0.107 0.055
voltage magnitudes V fund (column 8) of all buses. 14 1.87 1.07 1.49 0.44 0.78 3.87 0.907 0 0 0
Clearly, the entire network is highly distorted with harmonic 15 2.52 1.51 2.04 0.90 1.30 4.76 0.900 0 0 0
voltages, THDv and fundamental voltages of all buses (except Ave. 1.39 1.04 1.27 0.84 0.84 4.07 0.912 - - -
bus 2) being significantly larger than the acceptable limits of Total - - - - - - - 0.393 0.304 0.238
5%, 3% while V fund of most buses is less than the selected Note: No shaded cells (all values are within the acceptable limits).
standard limit of 0.9pu [28]. Note that bus 13 is the worst
distorted point of the network due to its remote location from C. Optimal Siting and Sizing of CPDs Only Considering
the swing bus (bus 1) with THDv and V fund values of 20.99% STATCOM Operation (Case 3)
and 0.84pu, respectively. Case 2 is repeated with the first PSO algorithm executed only
at the fundamental frequency. Therefore, the proposed CPDs
B. Optimal Siting and Sizing of Multiple CPDs (Case 2) are operating as conventional STATCOM units and only
The first PSO algorithm of Fig.6a is used to find the optimal perform voltage regulation without considering harmonic
locations and sizes of the required CPDs to control the voltage distortions. Simulation results are presented in Table 5. Note
quality of the entire network (Fig.7). Simulation results are that compared with the results of Table 4, the location of one
summarized in Table 4. The PSO solution requires three CPDs CPD has changed while the total sizes are decreased by
at buses 3, 6 and 13 with sizes of 0.152pu, 0.120pu and 27.13%. As expected, while all fundamental bus voltages are
0.121pu, respectively (Table 4). This table also provides the regulated above the selected value of 0.9pu, all bus voltage
fundamental and harmonic components (compensations) of harmonics and THDv values are larger than the permissible
each CPD. For example, the first and the third CPDs at buses 3 limits (except for the swing bus).

1949-3053 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2017.2690681, IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid

Table 5. Case 3 (only STATCOM Operation): Optimal siting and conventional APLC units. Simulation results are presented in
sizing of multiple CPDs for only fundamental compensation. Table 6. Compared with the results of Table 4, note that while
Voltage Harmonics [%] THDv V fund I CPD I CPD Components [pu] the locations of the three CPDs are not changed, their total
Bus
5 7 11 13 17 [%] [pu] [pu] I StatCom I APLC sizes are now significantly decreased by 40.6%. All bus
2 5.26 3.62 4.41 3.69 4.05 9.74 0.943 0 0 0 voltage harmonics and THDv values are within the permissible
3 7.71 5.30 6.44 5.40 5.91 14.17 0.920 0 0 0 limits, but most fundamental bus voltages are not regulated.
4 8.93 6.14 7.46 6.25 6.85 16.49 0.909 0. 0869 0. 087 0
5 9.73 6.69 8.13 6.81 7.46 17.91 0.901 0 0 0
E. Impacts of Weighting Factors (Case 5)
6 7.90 5.43 6.59 5.53 6.07 14.90 0.910 0. 0884 0. 088 0 Table 7 represents an investigation on the significant impacts
7 8.48 5.82 7.07 5.93 6.51 15.89 0.902 0 0 0 of the objective function weighting factors (Eq.9) on the CPD
8 8.63 5.93 7.20 6.04 6.63 16.16 0.900 0 0 0 siting/sizing solutions. As expected, large values of 𝑊𝑊𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 (e.g.,
9 6.29 4.33 5.26 4.41 4.84 11.55 0.929 0 0 0 1.0 and 0.8) result in more CPD units with smaller sizes while
10 7.18 4.94 6.00 5.03 5.53 13.13 0.919 0 0 0 the network THDv values are approaching the maximum limit
11 8.62 5.92 7.19 6.02 6.59 15.73 0.911 0 0 0 of 5%. On the other hand, larger values of 𝑊𝑊𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 (e.g., the last
12 9.89 6.79 8.23 6.89 7.54 17.96 0.903 0 0 0 two rows) result in smaller THDv levels. However, both
13 10.94 7.51 9.09 7.62 8.34 19.93 0.900 0. 111 0. 111 0 options require many CPD units similar to the conventional
14 8.93 6.14 7.46 6.25 6.85 16.49 0.907 0 0 0 approach of connecting APFs at all nonlinear buses which is
15 9.63 6.62 8.04 6.74 7.38 17.72 0.900 0 0 0 not a practical solution. Therefore, in this paper equal
Ave. 8.44 5.80 7.04 5.90 6.47 15.55 0.911 - - - weighting factors are used (𝑊𝑊𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = 𝑊𝑊𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 = 0.5).
Total - - - - - - - 0. 286 0.286 0 Not that if the costs of CPDs are taken into account then 𝑊𝑊𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠
Note: Shaded cells represent unacceptable operating conditions. will be increased and PSO will try to reduce the overall cost by
Table 6. Case 4 (only APLC Operation): Optimal siting and sizing of
installing less overall CPD capacity. For example, for 𝑊𝑊𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠
multiple CPDs for only harmonic compensation. values of 0.8 and 1.0, the total size of CPDs is reduced by 6.1%
Voltage Harmonics [%] THDv V I CPD Components [pu] from 0.361pu to 0.339pu (Table 7, column 4, rows 4-5).
fund I CPD
Bus
5 7 11 13 17 [%] [pu] [pu] I StatCom I APLC F. Optimal Real-Time Operation of Allocated CPDs (Case 6)
2 0.98 0.41 0.47 0.17 0.07 1.86 0.925 0 0 0
For the optimal online operation of SG of Fig.7 with the
3 0.73 0.38 0.18 0.65 0.41 2.82 0.891 0.1244 0 0.124
minimum number of CPDs, the following steps are executed:
4 1.95 0.48 1.15 0.28 0.62 3.41 0.877 0 0 0
• Step 1- The first PSO algorithm of Fig.6a is implemented to
5 2.72 1.00 1.80 0.81 1.24 4.45 0.869 0 0 0
find the optimal number, locations and sizes of the required
6 1.58 1.34 0.65 0.59 0.20 4.46 0.883 0.0719 0 0.072
CPDs. This is done in Case 2 (Table 4; column 9).
7 2.13 1.72 1.11 0.22 0.25 4.86 0.875 0 0 0
Therefore, three CPDs with sizes of 0.152pu, 0.120pu and
8 2.28 1.82 1.23 0.14 0.37 5.00 0.873 0 0 0
0.121pu are installed at buses 3, 6 and 13, respectively.
9 1.98 1.09 1.31 0.56 0.87 3.16 0.911 0 0 0
10 2.84 1.68 2.03 1.17 1.56 4.57 0.901 0 0 0
• Step 2- At each time step (Dt), the SGCC receives the bus
11 1.05 0.26 0.18 0.89 0.52 2.79 0.874 0 0 0
information from smart meters, calculates the optimal CPD
12 1.50 0.10 0.17 1.22 0.69 3.18 0.854 0 0 0 reference currents by running the second PSO algorithm of
13 1.88 0.10 0.16 1.51 0.83 4.13 0.842 0.0370 0 0.037 Fig.6b and transmits them to the three CPDs.
14 1.95 0.48 1.15 0.28 0.62 3.40 0.875 0 0 0 • Step 3- Each of the three CPDs uses the transmitted currents
15 2.62 0.94 1.71 0.74 1.16 4.29 0.868 0 0 0 as the reference signal for its own inverter and inject the
Ave. 1.87 0.84 0.95 0.66 0.67 3.74 - 0.880 - - optimal fundamental and harmonic currents to SG network.
Total - - - - - - 0.2333 - 0 0.233 Figure 8 shows the Matlab\Simulink model for the 15-bus SG
Note: Shaded cells represent unacceptable operating conditions. network of Fig.7 with the three selected optimal CPDs (Table
4) connected at buses 3, 6 and 13. Simulations are performed
D. Optimal Siting and Sizing of CPDs Only Considering for different numbers of simultaneously activated nonlinear
APLC Operation (Case 4) loads and the results are presented in Table 8 and Figs.9-10.
This case is intended to demonstrate the capability of the For each case (Cases 6a to 6e), detailed information including
proposed CPDs to improve the voltage quality of the entire THDv and V fund without and with the CPDs are presented.
network. Therefore, the proposed CPDs are operating as the
Table 7. Case 5: Impacts of weighting factors (Eq.9) on optimal CPD siting/sizing solutions without the maximum CPD size constraint (Eq.13).
Weighting Optimal Solutions of the First PSO (Fig.6a) without the constraint of Eq.13
Factors (Eq.9) Objective Function Optimal CPD Locations/Sizes
𝑾𝑾𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻 𝑾𝑾𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑵𝑵𝑵𝑵𝑵𝑵 𝑰𝑰𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪 min F CPD 1 CPD 2 CPD 3 CPD 4 CPD 5 CPD 6
0 1.0 4.53 0.339 0.339 Bus 5/0.043 Bus 7/0.036 Bus 8/0.062 Bus 10/0.018 Bus 13/0.126 Bus 15/0.054
0.2 0.8 4.13 0.361 1.115 Bus 5/0.039 Bus 8/0.103 Bus 9/0.041 Bus 13/0.1256 Bus 15/0.0507
0.4 0.6 3.76 0.367 1.724 Bus 4/0.114 Bus 8/0.103 Bus 9/0.031 Bus 13/0.121
0.5* 0.5* 3.14 0.379 1.760 Bus 3/0.162 Bus 6/0.101 Bus 13/0.116
0.6 0.4 2.77 0.387 1.817 Bus 4/0.119 Bus 8/0.107 Bus 9/0.039 Bus 13/0.122
0.8 0.2 1.50 0.394 1.279 Bus 5/0.055 Bus 8/0.100 Bus 9/0.047 Bus 13/0.129 Bus 15/0.063
1.0 0 0.120 0.406 0.120 Bus 5/0.052 Bus 7/0.049 Bus 8/0.071 Bus 10/0.045 Bus 13/0.129 Bus 15/0.061
*) Weighting factors (resulting in the lowest number of CPDs) selected for the simulations and analyses of this paper (Tables 4-6, 8 and Figs.9-10).

1949-3053 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2017.2690681, IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid

Table 8. Case 6: Real-time system operation with the optimal number of CPDs as determined in Case 2 (Table 4; three CPDs allocated at buses
3, 6 and 13 with sizes of 0.152pu, 0.120pu and 0.121pu, respectively) with different penetrations of nonlinear loads.
Bus Number Ave./
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Total
Case 6a: The 15-bus distorted system (Fig.1) with six nonlinear loads at buses 5, 7, 8, 10, 13 and 15
THD [%] 9.69 14.34 16.69 18.19 14.67 15.74 16.03 11.58 13.21 16.17 18.77 20.99 16.69 18.00 15.77
Without CPDs
V fund [pu] 0.925 0.891 0.877 0.869 0.883 0.875 0.873 0.911 0.901 0.874 0.854 0.842 0.875 0.868 0.880
THD [%] 2.23 3.04 3.88 4.91 4.57 4.87 4.98 3.42 4.75 3.03 3.75 4.99 3.87 4.76 4.07
With CPDs
V fund [pu] 0.945 0.923 0.909 0.900 0.910 0.902 0.900 0.930 0.920 0.913 0.905 0.902 0.907 0.900 0.912
Injected CPD currents [pu] - 0.152 - - 0.120 - - - - - - 0.121 - - 0.393
Case 6b: The 15-bus distorted system (Fig.1) with five nonlinear loads at buses 5, 7, 8, 10 and 15
THD [%] 8.02 11.03 13.32 14.78 12.93 13.98 14.27 9.88 11.49 11.02 11.01 11.01 13.32 14.59 12.19
Without CPDs
V fund [pu] 0.932 0.904 0.890 0.881 0.889 0.882 0.880 0.918 0.908 0.896 0.890 0.889 0.888 0.881 0.895
THD [%] 2.21 2.87 3.70 4.74 4.53 4.87 5.00 3.41 4.76 2.70 3.21 4.40 3.69 4.59 3.91
With CPDs
V fund [pu] 0.945 0.924 0.909 0.900 0.910 0.902 0.900 0.931 0.920 0.915 0.909 0.908 0.907 0.900 0.913
Injected CPD currents [pu] - 0.152 - - 0.113 - - - - - - 0.017 - - 0.282
Case 6c: The 15-bus distorted system (Fig.1) with four nonlinear loads at buses 8, 10, 13 and 15
THD [%] 6.53 9.61 10.79 10.79 9.02 9.02 10.29 8.36 9.94 11.36 13.84 15.97 10.79 12.02 10.60
Without CPDs
V fund [pu] 0.939 0.910 0.900 0.899 0.909 0.907 0.899 0.924 0.914 0.892 0.872 0.860 0.898 0.891 0.901
THD [%] 2.07 2.84 3.23 3.23 4.12 4.10 4.92 3.55 5.00 2.83 3.44 4.61 3.22 4.04 3.66
With CPDs
V fund [pu] 0.945 0.923 0.912 0.911 0.915 0.913 0.905 0.931 0.921 0.912 0.903 0.900 0.910 0.903 0.915
Injected CPD currents [pu] - 0.040 - - 0.030 - - - - - - 0.124 - - 0.194
Case 6d: The 15-bus distorted system (Fig.1) with three nonlinear loads at buses 5, 7 and 13.
THD [%] 4.57 7.45 8.49 9.87 6.76 7.74 6.76 4.57 4.57 9.16 11.59 13.68 8.49 8.49 8.01
Without CPDs
V fund [pu] 0.947 0.919 0.909 0.900 0.918 0.910 0.916 0.944 0.943 0.901 0.881 0.868 0.907 0.907 0.912
THD [%] 2.06 3.13 3.72 4.83 4.45 4.99 4.43 2.04 2.04 3.37 4.00 4.97 3.71 3.71 3.68
With CPDs
V fund [pu] 0.952 0.929 0.919 0.910 0.924 0.916 0.921 0.949 0.948 0.917 0.905 0.900 0.917 0.917 0.923
Injected CPD currents [pu] - 0.034 - - 0.025 - - - - - - 0.089 - - 0.148
Case 6e: The 15-bus distorted system (Fig.1) with two nonlinear loads at buses 10 and 15
THD [%] 3.20 4.72 5.86 5.86 3.20 3.20 3.20 4.98 6.52 4.72 4.71 4.71 5.86 7.04 4.84
Without CPDs
V fund [pu] 0.953 0.931 0.920 0.919 0.938 0.936 0.935 0.939 0.928 0.923 0.916 0.915 0.918 0.911 0.927
THD [%] 2.14 3.08 3.61 3.61 3.89 3.86 3.86 3.58 5.00 2.90 2.93 3.61 3.60 4.48 3.58
With CPDs
V fund [pu] 0.953 0.931 0.920 0.919 0.938 0.936 0.935 0.939 0.928 0.923 0.916 0.915 0.918 0.911 0.927
Injected CPD currents [pu] - 0.046 - - 0 - - - - - - 0 - - 0.046

LOAD 8 LOAD 7 LOAD 1

NONLINE NONLINE
LOAD 3 LOAD 2
Bus 14
aA
aA
aA

Bus 8 Bus 7
aA
aA
aA

aA
aA
aA

LINE
LINE LINE 4-14
7-8 6-7
Discrete,
Ts = 1e-05 s
Bus 4
Bus 6 Bus 5
A

C
B
b

b
a

a
c

Bus 3 a
bA
c aA
a
LINE a LINE NONLINE
A
CPD 2 LOAD 6 b bB aA
3-4 c 4-5 LOAD 1
c aA
a
B
a bC
c
b
LINE C LOAD
c
LINE
2-6 LINE LOAD
4-15
Bus 1 Bus 2 CPD 1 3-11
a
bA
aA
Bus 15
aA
aA
aA

c
LINE a LINE
Sourc bB bB LOAD 11
1-2 c 2-3 NONLINEA
cC a LOAD 6
bC
Bus 11
aA
aA
aA

c
LOAD LOAD
LINE LINE
2-9 LOAD
11-12

Bus 9
aA
aA
aA

LOAD 1
LOAD 9
aA
aA
aA

Bus 12
LINE LINE
9-10 12-13

Bus 10 Bus 13
aA
aA
aA

aA
aA
aA

NONLINE NONLINE
LOAD 4 CPD 3
LOAD 5

LOAD 1 LOAD 1

Figure 8. Single-line diagram of the 15-bus distorted SG network of Fig.7 modeled in Matlab/Simulink with 6 nonlinear loads (Table 1) and the
three allocated optimal CPDs (Table 4) installed at buses 3, 6 and 13 with ratings of 0.152pu, 0.120pu and 0.121pu, respectively.

1949-3053 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2017.2690681, IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid

In Table 8, note that for a small number of nonlinear loads, Voltage Waveform at Bus 13 [pu]
some of the CPDs are not injecting currents since most bus Without CPD
0.8
voltages are regulated with insignificant harmonic distortions. With CPD
0.4
For example, only the third CPD is activated for Case 6e with a
small current injection of only 0.046pu (Table 8, last row). On 0
the other hand, the results of Case 6a with all six nonlinear -0.4
loads being simultaneously activated is similar to Case 2 -0.8
(Table 4) indicating all three CPDs are operating at their
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
maximum ratings. Figure 9 illustrates the voltage waveform of Time [s]
bus 13 (the worst distorted bus before any compensation) Figure 9. Voltage waveform of bus 13 in Fig.8 before (THDv=
without and with the three allocated optimal CPDs. 20.99%) and after (THDv=4.99%) operations of CPDs.

Case 6d Case 6c Case 6b Case 6a No CPDs

Bus 13
(6 NLs & Bus 12
20 (3 NLs & (4 NLs & 3 CPDs) (5 NLs & 3 CPDs) (6 NLs & 3 CPDs) Bus 5
3 CPDs) 0 CPDs) Bus 15
16 Buses 4&14
of all Buses [%]

Bus 11
Voltage THDv

Bus 8
12 Bus 7
Bus 6
8 Bus 3

4 Bus 10
Bus 9
Bus 2
0
Transients due to the CPD switching operations, connections and disconnections of nonlinear loads
(a)
Phase-a
Magnitude of CPD Currents

Phase-a
0.12 Phase-b
Phase-c
Phase-c
0.10
at Bus 13 [pu]

Phase-b
0.8
0.6

0.4
0.2
0
(b)
Phase-a Phase-b
Waveform of CPD Currents

Phase-a
0.2 Phase-b
Phase-c
at Bus 13 [pu]

0.1

-0.1

-0.2
Phase-c

(c)
Bus 2
Bus 9
Fundamental Component

0.98 Bus 10
of Bus Voltages [pu]

Bus 3
0.94 Bus 6
Bus 4
Bus 7
0.90 Bus 14
Bus 11
0.86 Bus 8
Bus 5
0.82 Bus 15
Bus 12
Bus 13
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14
Time [s]
(d)
Figure 10. Optimal online operation of the 15-bus network (Fig.8) for Cases 6d, 6c, 6b and 6a (Table 8) with three CPDs installed at optimal
locations on buses 3, 6 and 13 with optimal ratings of 0.152pu, 0.120pu and 0.121pu, respectively; (a) THDv of all buses, (b) magnitudes of
CPD injected currents at the worst node (bus 13), (c) CPD injected currents waveform at bus 13, (d) V fund of all buses.

1949-3053 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2017.2690681, IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid
Note that unlike APFs that try to completely eliminate
harmonic distortions at PCC, the aim of proposed CPDs is not
to fully compensate current and voltage harmonic distortions
but to control the bus and network THDv values within the
permissible limits as suggested by the power quality standards
such as the IEEE-519. Therefore, the voltage waveform of bus
13 after the compensations of the three CPDs is not purely
sinusoidal; however, the THDv is improved from 20.99% to
4.99% as shown in Fig.9 and Table 8 (column 14, rows 4, 6).
Figure10 shows real-time optimal operation of the 15-bus SG
(Fig.8) with (t=0.02-0.12sec) and without (t=0.12-0.14sec) the
three allocated optimal CPDs. The number of nonlinear loads
is gradually increased from 3 to 6 units (Cases 6d to 6a).
Simulations are initially started with three nonlinear loads (at
buses 5, 7 and 13) and three CPDs (at buses 3, 6 and 13)
followed by four switching actions: i) at t=0.03sec, nonlinear
loads at buses 5 and 7 are switched off and nonlinear loads at
buses 8, 10 and 15 are switched on, ii) at t=0.06sec, nonlinear
loads at buses 5 and 7 are switched back in operation and the
nonlinear load at bus 13 is switched off while nonlinear loads
at buses 8, 10 and 15 are still in operation, iii) at t=0.09sec, the
only nonlinear load at bus 13 which was switched off is
switched back again and all nonlinear loads are in operation,
and iv) at t=0.12sec, all CPDs are switched off while all
nonlinear loads are still in operation.
Analyses of the waveforms in Figs.10a-10d include:
• The transient network conditions are due to the switching
actions and changes in the number of nonlinear loads.
• According to Fig.10a, the three CPDs have effectively
reduced THDv of all buses to less than 5% after a short
transient time which is required for the CPD inverters to
generate and inject their compensation currents. For
example, for Case 6c the maximum THDv of 16% (bus 10 at
t=0.03sec) is compensated within about 0.017sec to 5%.
Note that, the location of the worst bus (with the highest
THDv) changes depending on the number and locations of
the activated nonlinear loads and may not be the same during
transient and steady-state periods.
• Figs.10b and 10c show magnitudes and waveforms of the
three-phase CPD currents at bus 13. According to Table 8,
the magnitudes of CPD currents at bus 13 are 0.089pu,
0.124pu, 0.017pu and 0.121pu for Cases 6d, 6c, 6b and 4a,
respectively. Note that at t=0.06sec (Case 6b), the nonlinear
load at bus 13 is switched off; therefore as confirmed by
Table 8 (row 14, column 13) and Figs.10b-10c, the CPD
injected current at bus 13 is considerably reduced.
• Without the CPDs in operation (t>0.12sec), the V fund values
of most buses are below the recommended limit of 0.9pu
while with the CPDs all bus voltages are fully regulated
(Fig.10d).
VI. CONCLUSIONS
This paper performs real-time coordination and control of
multiple CPDs with STATCOM and APLC functions to
simultaneously improve the voltage regulation and power
quality of the entire SG network. Two PSO algorithms for
optimal siting/sizing and online control of multiple CPDs are
proposed and implemented.
1949-3053 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
1) The first PSO algorithm (Fig.6a) finds the optimal locations
and sizes of multiple CPDs for the worst scenario with all
linear and nonlinear loads simultaneously activated at
maximum levels. The objective function (Eq.9) is
minimization of network THDv and CPD sizes while the
constraints (Eqs.10-13) are an upper limit for individual bus
THDv (5%), an upper limit for bus voltage harmonics (3%),
and a lower limit for fundamental bus voltage (0.9pu).
2) The second PSO algorithm (Fig.6b) relies on the smart
meter transmitted data from the buses to the SGCC and
continuously calculates the optimal CPD inverter reference
current signals for online control of the allocated CPDs. The
objective function is THDv minimization (Eq.15) with
similar constraints but also considering the calculated rating
of each CPD (Eqs.10-12, 16).
The main conclusions based on detailed simulations for a 15-
bus distorted SG with six nonlinear loads (Figs.7-8) are:
• Application of multiple CPDs (with the proposed
STATCOM and APLC functions) can effectively control the
THDv of all buses within the permissible limit of 5% while
also regulating the fundamental bus voltages above the
selected limit of 0.9pu (Tables 3-4, Fig.10).
• The number, sizes and locations of the required CPDs
depend on SG configuration, the designated limits for
constraints, numbers, locations and types of nonlinear loads.
The objective function weighting factors (Eq.9) also have
significant impacts on CPD siting/sizing solutions (Table 7).
Large values of 𝑊𝑊𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 result in more CPD units with smaller
total rating and THDv values approaching upper limit of 5%
while larger values of 𝑊𝑊𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 result in smaller THDv levels.
However, both options require many CPD units that may
increase the installation and maintenance costs. Therefore,
equal values of 𝑊𝑊𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = 𝑊𝑊𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 = 0.5 are suggested.
• The optimal allocated CPDs are capable of improving SG
performance and performing real-time control of network
THDv and bus V fund under various operating conditions
(Table 8, Figs.9-10).
• The allocated CPDs may also be used for real-time
coordinated STATCOM or APLC operations to either
control network reactive power (bus voltage deviations) at
fundamental frequency or to control the overall network
THDv as demonstrated in Tables 5 and 6, respectively.
Note that:
• The capacitor banks are not included in the case studies since
they will not change the proposed solution procedure;
however, their presence will change the sizes and locations
of the required CPDs.
• Islanding operations are not considered since the 11 kV
smart grid network is not expected to be separated from the
main grid.
• Line thermal capacities are not considered; however, the
maximum reliable capacity of each line is conventionally
considered to be less than the thermal capacity and most of
the lines in high-voltage transmission network have a line
loading far below their thermal rating [7].
• Although the analyses and formulations of this paper are on
the minimization of network THDv, CPD sizes and voltage
deviations, they can be easily extended to also include the
costs related to minimization of fundamental and harmonic
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2017.2690681, IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid
transmission line loss (TLL), motor load loss (MLL) and
telephone influence factor (TIF) [14-18].
VII. REFERENCES
[1] F. Rahimi, A. Ipakchi, “Demand response as a market resource
under the smart grid paradigm,” IEEE Trans. on Smart Grid, vol.
1, pp. 82-88, 2010.
[2] B.D. Russell, C.L. Benner, “Intelligent systems for improved
reliability and failure diagnosis in distribution systems,” IEEE
Trans. on Smart Grid, vol. 1, pp. 48-56, 2010.
[3] K. Moslehi, R. Kumar, “A reliability perspective of the smart
grid,” IEEE Trans. on Smart Grid, vol. 1, pp. 57-64, 2010.
[4] C.A. Cañizares, F.L. Alvarado, “point of collapse and continuation
methods for large AC/DC systems,” IEEE Trans. on Power
Systems, pp. 1–8, 1993.
[5] C. Roger, F. Mark, H. Beaty, “Electrical Power Systems Quality,”
McGraw Hill Companies, Inc. 1996.
[6] O. Anaya-Lara, E. Acha, “Modeling and analysis of custom power
systems by PSCAD/EMTDC,” IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery,
vol. 17, no. I, pp. 266-272, 2002.
[7] L. Gyugyi N. G. Hingorani, and M. E. El-Hawary, “Understanding
FACTS: concepts and technology of flexible AC transmission
systems,” IEEE Press, 2000.
[8] P.H. Mohammadi, M.T. Bina, “A transformerless medium-voltage
STATCOM topology based on extended modular multilevel
converters,” IEEE Trans. on Power Electronics, vol. 26, no. 5, pp.
1534-1545, 2011.
[9] E.F. Fuchs, M.A.S. Masoum, “Power Quality in Electrical
Machines and Power Systems”, Elsevier, Academic Press, USA,
Second Edition, SSN: 978-0-12-800782-2, 2015.
[10] Recommended practices and requirements for harmonic control
in electrical power systems, IEEE Standard 519-1992; 1993.
[11] B. Singh, K. Al-Haddad, and A. Chandra, “A review of active
filters for power quality improvement,” IEEE Trans. on Industrial
Electronics, vol.46, no.5, pp.960-971, 1999.
[12] D.D. Sabin and A. Sannino, “A summary of the draft IEEE
P1409 custom power application guide,” IEEE PES Transmission
and Distribution Conference and Exp., vol. 3, pp. 931-936, 2003.
Also: http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1409/0309_sannino.pdf
[13] Y.Y. Hong, Y.K. Chang, “Determination of locations and sizes
for active power line conditioners to reduce harmonics in power
system,” IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, vol.11, no.3, pp.1610–
1617, 1996.
[14] W.K. Chang, and W.M. Grady, “Minimizing harmonic voltage
distortion with multiple current-constrained active power line
conditioners,” IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, vol.12, no.2,
pp.837-843, 1997.
[15] I. Ziari, A. Jalilian, “A new approach for allocation and sizing of
multiple active power-line conditioners,” IEEE Trans. on Power
Delivery, vol.25, no.2, pp.1026-1035, 2010.
[16] K. Kennedy, G. Lightbody, R. Yacamini, M. Murray, J.
Kennedy, “Online control of an APLC for network-wide harmonic
reduction,” IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, vol.21, no.1, pp.432-
439, 2006.
[17] K. Kennedy, G. Lightbody, R. Yacamini, M. Murray, J.
Kennedy, “Development of a network-wide harmonic control
scheme using an active filter,” IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery,
vol.22, no.3, pp.1847-1856, 2007.
[18] H.A. Ramos-Carranza, A. Medina, “Single-harmonic active
power line conditioner for harmonic distortion control in power
network,” IET Power Elect., vol.7, no.9, pp.2218-2226, 2014.
[19] B. Singh, K. Al-Haddad, A. Chandra, “A universal active power
filter for single-phase reactive power and harmonic
compensation,” Power Quality '98, Hyderabad, pp. 81-87, 1998.
[20] W.R.N. Santos, E.M. Fernandes, R.C. Silva, C.B. Jacobina, A.C.
Oliverira, P.M. Santos, “The transformerless single-phase
1949-3053 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
universal active power filter for harmonic and reactive power
compensation, ” IEEE Trans. on Power Electronics, vol. 29, no. 7,
pp. 3563-3572, 2014.
[21] T.B. Kumar, M.V.G. Rao, “Mitigation of harmonics and power
quality enhancement for SEIG based wind farm using ANFIS
based STATCOM,” International Conference on Smart Electric
Grid (ISEG), Guntur, pp. 1-7, 2014.
[22] B.B. Ambati, V. Khadkikar, “Optimal sizing of UPQC
considering VA loading and maximum utilization of power-
electronic converters,” IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, vol. 29,
no. 3, pp. 1490-1498, 2014.
[23] V. Khadkikar, A. Chandra, “UPQC-S: A novel concept of
simultaneous voltage sag/swell and load reactive power
compensations utilizing series inverter of UPQC,” IEEE Trans. on
Power Electronics, vol. 26, no. 9, pp. 2414-2425, 2011.
[24] S. Ganguly, “Multi-Objective Planning for reactive power
compensation of radial distribution networks with unified power
quality conditioner allocation using particle swarm optimization,”
IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 1801-1810,
2014.
[25] D. Das, D.P. Kothari, A. Kalam, “Simple and efficient method
for load flow solution of radial distribution
networks,” International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy
Systems, vol.17, no.5, pp.335-346, 1995.
[26] M. Moghbel and M. A. S. Masoum, “D-STATCOM based on
hysteresis current control to improve voltage profile of
distribution systems with PV solar power,” Australasian
Universities Power Engineering Conference (AUPEC), Brisbane,
QLD, pp. 1-5, 2016.
[27] A. Fereidouni, “Shunt active power filter enhancement using
advanced control and modulation techniques,” Doctoral Thesis,
Curtin University, Perth, Australia, 2016.
[28] Australian Standard Voltage, AS60038-2012.
http://infostore.saiglobal.com.au (2012).
[29] Y. del Valle, G.K. Venayagamoorthy, S. Mohagheghi, J.C.
Hernandez, R.G. Harley, “Particle swarm optimization: basic
concepts, variants and applications in power systems,” IEEE
Trans. on Evolutionary Comp., vol.12, no.2, pp.171-195, 2008.
Moayed Moghbel received his B.S. and M.S. degrees in Electrical
Engineering from Islamic Azad University, Khomeinishahr, Esfahan,
Iran and Curtin University in 2003 and 2013, respectively. He is
presently working towards a Ph.D. degree in Electrical Engineering at
Curtin University. He is a student member of IEEE.
Mohammad A.S. Masoum (S’88–M’91–SM’05) received the B.S.
M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical and computer engineering from
the University of Colorado, Boulder, USA, in 1991. Currently, he is a
Professor in the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department,
Curtin University, Perth, Australia. He is an Editor of the IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid, an Editor of the IEEE Power Engineering
Letters and a Guest Editor of IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Informatics for the Special Section on Cloud Computing in Smart
Grid Operation and Management.
Alireza Fereidouni received his B.S., M.S. and PhD degrees in
Electrical Engineering from University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
in 2009, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran in 2012
and Curtin University, Perth, Australia in 2016, respectively. He was
awarded a Curtin International Postgraduate Research Scholarship
(CIPRS) in 2013. His research interests include power quality, power
electronics, smart grid, active power filters, and energy storage
system. He is a member of IEEE.
Sara Deilami received the B.S. degree in Electrical Engineering from
Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran in 2000 and the M.S. and Ph.D.
degrees in Electrical and Computer engineering from Curtin
University, Perth, Australia, in 2011 and 2014, respectively.
Currently, she is a Lecturer (Assistant Professor) at the Electrical and
Computer Engineering Department, Curtin University.