Flexible Methodology Based in Fuzzy Logic Rules for Reactive Power Planning of

Multiple Shunt FACTS Devices to Enhance System Loadability

Belkacem Mahdad Tarek Bouktir Kamel Srairi
Department of Electrical Department of Electrical Laboratory of Energy Systems
Engineering Engineering Modeling (LESM)
University of Biskra, BP 145 University of Oum El Bouaghi University of Biskra, BP 145
Biskra 07000 Oum El Bouaghi,04000 Biskra 07000
ALGERIA ALGERIA ALGERIA
bemahdad@yahoo.fr tbouktir@lycos.com ksrairi@yahoo.fr

Abstract –The problem of finding out which positions are the
most effective and how many Flexible AC Transmission System
(FACTS) devices have to be installed and controlled in a
deregulated environment on economic basis is a question of
great significance for the Dispatcher.This paper presents a
flexible approach based in practical reasoning rules from fuzzy
logic theory capable of governing multiple Static Var
Compensator (SVC) and a group of Static Compensator
integrated power systems but little attention has been devoted
to the coordination between multiple FACTS device for
optimal reactive power planning.
The problem of finding out which positions are the most
effective and how many devices have to be installed on
economic basis is a question of great significance.
G2

(STATCOM) by a flexible adjustment of reactive power G3

G1
injected or absorbed from the network. The main purpose of
the presented coordinated strategy is the improvement of index
power quality. Reactive index sensitivity coordinated with an Practical Network
expert rules to form a global database as a flexible tool to make Bus i
an efficient decision about reactive power dispatch and to
choose the size of the shunt FACTS Controllers. Simulation
results show clearly the advantage of this approach to enhance V1 V2 V3
the reactive power planning. SVC1 SVC2 SVC3

Key words—Power flow, FACTS, SVC, STATCOM, Fuzzy

Logic, Optimal reactive power, heuristic rules.
Power Flow

I. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the transmission network is to pool power -Loss reduction
plants and load centers in order to minimize the total power -Improve voltage regulation

generation capacity and fuel cost [1]. The cost of

transmission lines and losses, as well as difficulties
encountered in building new transmission lines, would often
limit the available transmission capacity, on the other hand,
as power transfers grow, the power system become
increasingly more complex to operate and the system can
become less secure for riding through the major outages [2].
It may lead to large power flows with inadequate control,
excessive reactive power in various parts of the system, large
dynamic swings between different parts of the system and
bottlenecks, and thus the full potential of transmission
interconnections cannot be utilized.
FACTS devices, which enable many objectives to be
achieved in an electric power system, can be used to reduce
the flow on the overloaded line and to increase the use of
alternative paths to excess capacity [3]. This allows for
increased transfer capability in existing transmission and
distribution systems under normal conditions, allowing the
possibility to load lines much closer to their thermal limits.
Several methods have been proposed for finding optimal
locations or optimal number of FACTS devices in vertically
Figure 1 Global control of reactive power exchanged between a group of
shunt compensator and the network.
How an experienced planning engineer can choose
locations and coordination of multiple FACTS devices which
are probably high suitable. It is intuitive that a section in a
distribution system with high losses and low voltage is ideal
for placement of facts devices, whereas a low loss section
with good voltage is not. Note that the terms, high and low
are linguistic.
In this paper, a simple and dynamic methodology, based on
a reasoning rules from Fuzzy logic theory, is used for finding
out the optimal planning of reactive power of a particular
type of FACTS device, known as Static Var Compensator
(SVCs) and Static Compensator (STATCOM).
II. A BRIEF REVIEW OF FUZZY SETS THEORY AND SHUNT
COMPENSATOR INSTALLATION

1-4244-1298-6/07/$25.00 ©2007 IEEE.

 Vr
A. Why using fuzzy logic in Reactive Power Planning and
coordination of multiple shunt FACTS devices. Vi XTH Vk
QSVC
- Fuzzy logic is based on natural language.
- Fuzzy logic is conceptually easy to understand.
- Fuzzy logic is flexible. Be,

- Fuzzy logic can model nonlinear functions of arbitrary +Q -Q

complexity.
- Fuzzy logic can be blended with conventional control
Figure 2 SVC steady-state circuit representation
techniques.
Fuzzy logic is a mathematical theory [4], which V = Vref + Xsl I (2)
encompasses the idea of vagueness when defining a concept
or a meaning. For example, there is uncertainty or ‘fuzzines’ X sl are in the range of 0.02 to 0.05 p.u. with respect to the
in expressions like ‘Large’ or ‘Small’, since these SVC base. The slope is needed to avoid hitting limits. At the
expressions are imprecise or relative variables considered voltage limits the SVC is transformed into a fixed reactance.
thus are termed ‘fuzzy’. Such ideas are readily applicable to The total equivalent impedance Xe of SVC may be
Reactive Power planning and allocation. represented by
A review of the literature on reactive power compensation
π / kX
in distribution feeders indicates that the problem of Xe =XC (3)
sin 2 α − 2 α + π ( 2 −1 / k X )
capacitors Allocation has been extensively researched over
the past several decades [5][6][7]. The solution techniques where k X = X C / X L
for the capacitor allocation problem can be classified into The SVC is usually connected to the transmission system
four categories: Analytical, numerical programming, through a step-down transformer, which is treated in a
heuristics, and artificial intelligence based. The choice of similar manner as other transformers in the system.
which method to use depends on: the problem to be solved, Vref − X sl Vk B e + Vi = 0 (4)
the complexity of the problem, the accuracy of desired
Q svc − V k2 B e = 0 (5)
results. Once these criteria are determined, the appropriate
capacitor Allocation techniques can be chosen. π X C X L B e + sin 2 α + π ( 2 − X L / X C ) = 0 (6)
The use of fuzzy logic has received increased attention in where Be = 1 / X e .
recent years because of it‘s usefulness in reducing the need
Steady-state limits of the firing angle are 90 0 < α < 1800
for complex mathematical models in problem solving.
Fuzzy logic employs linguistic terms, which deal with the Where partial conduction is obtained. Firing angles less than
causal relationship between input and output variables. For 900 are not allowed, as they produce unsymmetrical current
this reason the approach makes it easier to manipulate and with a high dc component.
solve problems.
V
XL
III. FACTS MODELIZATION
max Xsl

A. Static VAR Compensator (SVC) Vref
min

The steady-state model proposed in [8] is used here to

XC
incorporate the SVC on power flow problems. This model is
based on representing the controller as a variable impedance,
assuming an SVC configuration with a fixed capacitor (FC)
IC IC IL max IL
and Thyristor-controlled reactor (TCR) as depicted in Figure
max

2. Applying simultaneously a gate pulse to all thyristor of a

thyristor valve brings the valve into conduction. The valve
will block approximately at the zero crossing of the ac
current, in the absence of firing signals. Thus, the controlling
element is the Thyristor valve. The thyristors are fired
symmetrically, in an angle control range of 90 to 180 with
respect to the capacitor (inductor) voltage. The steady-state
control law for the SVC is the typical current-voltage
characteristic, illustrated in Figure. 3.
Figure 3 Typical steady state V-I Characteristics of SVC
B. Static Compensator (STATCOM)
The STATCOM consists of one Voltage Source Converter
(VSC) and its associated shunt-connected transformer. It is
the static counterpart of the rotating synchronous condenser
but it generates or absorbs reactive power at a faster rate
because no moving parts are involved. In principle, it
performs the same regulation function as the SVC but in a
more robust manner because, unlike the SVC, its operation is
not impaired by the presence of low voltages [9].
A schematic representation of the STATCOM and its
equivalent circuit are shown in Figure 4 respectively.
In steady-state fundamental frequency studies, the
STATCOM may be represented in the same way as a
synchronous condenser, which in most cases is the model of
a synchronous generator with zero active power generation.
A more flexible model may be realized by representing the
STATCOM as a variable source E vR ∠0 o , for which the
magnitude and phase may be adjusted, using a suitable
iteration algorithm, to satisfy a specified voltage magnitude
at the point of connection with the AC network. The shunt
voltage source of the three-phase STATCOM may be
represented by:
E vRρ = V vRρ (cos δ vRρ + j sin δ vRρ ),
Where ρ indicates phase quantities, a, b and c.
ρ
The voltage magnitude, VvR , is given maximum and
minimum limits, which are a function of the STATCOM
capacitor rating. However, δ ρvR may take any value between 0
and 2 π radians.
Bus K
profiles by regulating bus voltage controlled by different
shunt compensator. In practical installation of FACTS in the
power system, there are three common requirements as
follows:
-What Kinds of FACTS devices should be installed?
-Where in the system should be placed?
-How much capacity should it have?
The basic idea focus on the third of these requirements.
The idea is simple based in control of voltage for a group of
SVC installed in the network, based in results given by load-
flow. The technical idea consists in controlling the amount of
reactive power injected by the SVC with The network.
Results show that by controlling the amount of reactive
power exchanged between the SVC and the network enhance
the index power quality. Figure 6 shows clearly the global
strategy proposed of reactive power planning of a dynamic
shunt compensator.
System Data

Bus K
Vkθk
Tr Power Flow
-Q YvR Calculation

+
VvR ∠δ vR SVC &
+Q ~ STATCOM Model
-
(a) - + (b) Dynamic shunt
VDC compensator
Figure 4 (a) Static Compensator System; (b) STATCOM steady-state circuit
representation. Practical
Network
G2
The corresponding V-I characteristics shown in Figure 4, G1

Global Data Base

that the STATCOM can be operated over its full output
current range even at very low. In other words, the maximum PD

capacitive of inductive output current of the STATCOM can

be maintained independently of the ac system voltage, and G3

the maximum var generation or absorption changes linearly Final Decision Improve Voltage
Based on the Power losses reduction
with the ac system voltage. In contrast to the STATCOM, the objective function
SVC, being composed of (thyristor-switched capacitors and
reactors), become a fixed capacitance admittance at full
output. Figure 6 Global strategy for reactive power planning of a dynamic shunt
compensator.
V
XL

max
The fuzzy variables associated with Reactive Power Planning
Problem ’RPP’ of a multiple dynamic shunt compensator are
Vref
stated below.

min

XC A. Fuzzy Input Variables

-Bus voltage
-Active Power loss.
IC IC max IL max IL
B. Fuzzy Output Variables
Figure 5 Typical steady state V-I Characteristics of STATCOM
-Voltage regulation for the shunt compensator.
C. Fuzzy sets Associated with ‘RPP’
IV. COORDINATED STRATEGY OF A MULTIPLE SHUNT After identifying the fuzzy variables associated with the
COMPENSATOR Reactive Power Planning, the fuzzy sets defining these
variables are selected and normalized. This normalized value
The purpose of reactive power planning ‘RPP’ is to
can be multiplied by selected scale factor to accommodate
minimize the network real power loss and improve voltage
any desired variable.
The sets defining the voltage of buses are as follows.
-VBUS, KV= {Low (Lo), Below Average (ba)
Average (av), Above Average (aa), High (hi)}
The Active Power loss (APL) is stated by the following sets.
-APL (MW)= {Low, Medium, High}.
D. Fuzzy Rules
Following the idea of the below example showed in
Figure.7, a part of set of fuzzy rules have been created to
determine suitable reactive power of a dynamic shunt
compensator to improve the static voltage stability and
reduce power losses.
The solution procedures start with performing a load flow
study to calculate bus voltage, the membership functions of
bus voltage and power loss are specified subsequently.
candidate location is then identified and voltage regulation
for each shunt compensator is determined, without violating
the voltage limits. Finally, a load flow is performed again to
find the new bus voltage. The relation between the fuzzy
input and output variables are given by means of the fuzzy
rules. Since there are 5 subsets for voltage Buses, 3 subsets
for active power losses.

control voltage of the SVC in normal condition and with load
A
SA1 SA 2
V1 V2
S12
S1= p + jq S2 = 2p + j2q
(a)
Voltage Level
load, therefore, a maximum value of this factor yields the
optimal SVC and STATCOM rating, as this point correspond
to the maximum load increase at the minimum Mvar level.
This index is defined as:
LoadFactor (KLd )
RIS = .
N sht
∑ QShunt
i =1
where: Nsht is the number of shunt compensator
Kld: Loading Factor.
QShunt : Reactive power exchanged (absorbed or injected)
with the network.
V. RESULTS
30-bus systems are used to study a methodology for the
planning and control of multiple shunt FACTS devices to
enhance the index of power quality. The behaviour of the
system is investigated with shunt FACTS devices under
different loading conditions.
Table. I shows the initial SVC data used to control the
reactive power in the balanced network, the efficient reactive
power planning can be appreciated by comparing the results
shown in Figures and Tables. (II. III). Figures (8-9-10) show
clearly the global database of reactive power exchanged with
the network for a different step control that represent the
incrementation. Figures (13-14) presents various results of
minimal voltage and power losses generated, SVCs located at
different positions, a good compromise of loss reduction and
voltage profile improvement is achieved. Figures (15-16)
show the reactive index sensitivity with different load
incrementation at different placement of the SVC.

A A' TABLE I. SVCS DATA

2 1
Bmin (p.u) Bmax (p.u) Binit (p.u)
SVC1-SVC2- SVC3 -0.35 0.35 0.025
−Q −Q +Q
(b) S2 + Q S1

0.3
Figure 7: a) sample network, b) Radial representation
0.2

if V2 < V1, V2 very low, and Ploss High then Q inj very high
ReactivePower Variation

0.1

if V2 < V1, V2 low, and Ploss High then Q inj high.

0

if V2 < V1, V2 medium, and Ploss High then Q inj medium.

if V2 < V1, V2 medium, and Ploss medium then Q inj low
-0.1

….. if V2 < V1, V2 high, and Ploss low then Q inj very low -0.2
qsvc1
qsvc2
qvsc3
-0.3

-0.4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

E. Reactive Index Sensitivity Figure 8. Global reactive power exchanged with the network- normal
One might think that the larger the SVC or STATCOM, the Condition. SVC at Bus, 10-30-25
greater increase in the maximum load, there is a maximum
increase on load margin with respect to the compensation
level. In order to better, evaluate the optimal utilisation of
SVC and STATCOM we introduce a supplementary rating
level, this technical ratio shows the effect of the shunt
dynamic compensator Mvar rating in the maximum system
 0.1 0.99

Load Cofficient Kl=1

VoltageVariation
0.98
SVC at Bus 25, 30, 19
0.05 0.97

0.96
SVCReactivePower

0
0.95
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Step Control

0.186
-0.05

0.184

Power Losses
0.182

-0.1
0.18

0.178

-0.15 0.176
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Step Control Step Control

Figure 9. Global reactive power exchanged with the network- normal Figure 13. Minimal voltage and power losses- normal condition (Kld=1)
Condition. SVC at Bus, 25-30-19. SVC at Bus, 10-30-25.

0.05

VoltageVariation
SVC at Bus 25,30,19 0.98

0 SVC at Bus 25,30,19

0.975

0.97
SVCReactivePower

-0.05
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Step Control

-0.1 0.18
SVC at Bus 25,30,19

Power Losses
0.179
Load factor Kl=1.10
-0.15
0.178

-0.2 0.177
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Step Control Step Control

Figure 10. Global reactive power exchanged with the network with load Figure 14. Minimal voltage and power losses in normal condition (Kld=1)
incrementation, SVC at Bus, 25-30-19. SVC at Bus, 25-30-19.

9
kld=1
kld=1.02 SVC at Bus 10,25,30
1.1
kld=1.04
8 kld=1.06
Load coeficient K=1: kld=1.08
1.08 SVC at Bus 10, 25, 30 kld=1.1

7
ReactiveIndexSensitivity

1.06
6
VoltageMagnitude

1.04
5
1.02
4
1
3
0.98
2
0.96
1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
0.94
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Bus N°
Figure 15. Reactive index sensitivity with different load incrementation.
SVC at Bus, 10-30-25
Figure 11. Global voltage profile of the network- normal condition(Kld=1).
SVC at Bus, 10-30-25
7
1.1 The best Value; Kl=1

6.5
1.08 SVc at Bus, 25,30,19

Load Factor Kl=1.10 6

ReactivePower sensitivity

1.06
VoltageMagnitude

1.04 5.5

1.02 5

1 4.5

0.98 SVC at Bus, 25,30,19

4

0.96
3.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Bus N°

Figure 16. Reactive index sensitivity with different load incrementation.

Figure 12. Global voltage profile of the network with load incrementation
SVC at Bus 25-30-19.
(Kld=1.1). SVC at Bus, 25-30-19
 -0.01
global database incorporated makes it flexible to evaluate
and calculate efficiently compensators sizes.
Kld=1
SVC at Bus 10,30,25 Kld=1.02
-0.02 Kld=1.04
Kld=1.06
Kld=1.08

VI. CONCLUSION
-0.03
Kld=1.10
Kld=1.15
Effecient ReactivePower

-0.04

-0.05

-0.06
A simple and dynamic methodology based in practical
-0.07
reasoning rules from fuzzy logic theory capable of governing
-0.08
multiple Static Var Compensator (SVC) and Static
-0.09
Compensator (STATCOM) by a flexible adjustment of
-0.1
reactive power injected or absorbed from the network. The
case studies demonstrate that the approach proposed provides
1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3
N° SVC

Figure 17. Efficient reactive power exchanged with different load a useful tool for the Dispatcher to enhance the system
incrementation. SVC at Bus 25-30-25. loadability in the presence of a group of dynamic shunt
compensators.
TABLE II. VOLTAGE AND REACTIVE POWER CONTROL
The objective of the approach proposed is to find the
SVC at Bus, 10,30,25 optimal reactive power exchanged between the dynamic
Loading Factor Kld shunt compensator and the network in normal and load
1 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.10
Qsvc1 -0.0150 -0.0260 0.0085 -0.0026 -0.0137 -0.0249 incrementation, the method is applicable to many types of
Qsvc2 -0.0530 -0.0546 -0.0426 -0.0442 -0.0459 -0.0475 balanced network configuration.
Qsvc3 -0.0478 -0.0498 -0.0818 -0.0839 -0.0860 -0.0882
As for the future work along this line, the author will strive
Vmin 0.9797 0.9792 0.9776 0.9770 0.9763 0.9757
Ploss 0.1776 0.1857 0.1944 0.2029 0.2116 0.2205 to develop an adaptive and a flexible algorithm to control the
Max RIS 8.6356 7.6687 7.5245 7.6511 6.8681 6.2267 reactive power exchanged between multiple shunt FACTS
Min RIS 1.5382 1.5131 1.4888 1.4879 1.4883 1.4892
devices in the unbalanced network to regulate dynamically
Qsvc1 -0.3441 -0.3552 0.1517 -0.3670 -0.3670 -0.3670
Qsvc2 -0.1523 -0.1540 -0.1557 -0.1574 -0.1592 -0.1609 and with efficiency the voltage at a specified bus to enhance
Qsvc3 0.1537 0.1517 0.1497 0.1477 -0.1592 0.1436 the system loadability.
Vmin 0.9514 0.9510 0.9507 0.9503 0.9499 0.9495
Ploss 0.1835 0.1916 0.1999 0.2067 0.2172 0.2262
VII. REFERENCES
TABLE III. VOLTAGE AND REACTIVE POWER CONTROL [1] W. D. Rosehart, Claudio A, Canizares, and Victor H. Quintana.
“Effect of detailed power system models in traditional and voltage-
SVC at Bus, 25,30,19 stability-constrained optimal power-flow problems,”
Loading Factor Kld IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 18, no. 1,
1 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.10 February 2003.
Qsvc1 -0.0725 -0.0899 -0.0929 -0.0959 -0.1135 -0.1166 [2] T.V Trujillo, C.R. Fuerte-Esquivel, and J.H. Tovar Hernandez,
Qsvc2 -0.0629 -0.0670 -0.0686 -0.0703 -0.0744 -0.0761 “Advanced three-phase static VAR compensator models for power
Qsvc3 -0.0159 -0.0025 -0.0087 -0.0148 -0.0016 -0.0079 flow analysis,” IEE Proc-Gener. Transm. Distrib. vol. 150, n°. 1,
Vmin 0.9841 0.9820 0.9820 0.9820 0.9780 0.9780
January 2003.
Ploss 0.1775 0.1861 0.1944 0.2029 0.2123 0.2213
Max RIS 6.6094 6.2735 5.8754 5.5249 5.2770 4.9850 [3] C. R. Feurt-Esquivel, E. Acha, Tan SG, JJ. Rico, “Efficient object
Min RIS 3.7764 3.7965 3.8168 3.8402 3.8595 3.8805 oriented power systems software for the analysis of large-scale
Qsvc1 -0.1310 -0.1340 -0.1370 -0.1400 -0.1431 -0.1462 networks containing FACTS controlled branches,” IEEE Trans. Power
Qsvc2 -0.0727 -0.0743 -0.0760 -0.0776 -0.0793 -0.0810 Systems, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 464-472, May 1998.
Qsvc3 0.0611 0.0551 0.0490 0.0428 0.0367 0.0305 [4] H. Mori, Y. Goto, “A parallel tabu search based method for
Vmin 0.9700 0.9700 0.9700 0.9700 0.9700 0.9700 determining optimal allocation of FACTS in power systems,”
Ploss 0.1801 0.1882 0.1965 0.2050 0.2138 0.2228 2000IEEE.
[5] P. Bhasaputra and W. Ongsakul, “Optimal placement of multi-type
The following conclusions are drawn from the results FACTS devices by hybrid TS/SA approach,”2003IEEE.
reported in Table II and III. [6] C. A. Canizares, “Power flow and transient stability
-The reactive index sensitivity ‘RIS’, can be considered as a models of FACTS controllers for voltage and angle stability studies, ”
2000IEEE.
complementary and efficient index for the distribution
[7] S. Gerbex, R. Cherkaoui, and Alain J. Germond, “Optimal
engineer to find the most suitable sizes of available dynamic location of multi–type FACTS devices in a power system by means of
shunt compensators. In principle, the larger the degree of the genetic algorithms,” IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 16, no. 3,
reactive index sensitivity ‘RIS’ is the higher degree of August 2001.
economic choice of the compensators. [8] H. N. Ng, M. M. A. Salama, and A.Y. Chikhani, “Capacitor allocation
-A good compromise of loss reduction and voltage by approximate reasoning: fuzzy capacitor placament,” IEEE Trans.
Power Delivery, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 393-398, January 2000.
improvement can be achieved using the value of the ‘RIS’. In
[9] H. N. Ng, M. M. A. Salama and A.Y. Chikhani, “Classification of
Table I with load incrementation to 10%, and for a ‘RIS’ capacitor allocation techniques,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 15,
equal 6.2267, the minimal voltage regulated to 0.9780 with a no. 1, pp. 387-392, January 2000.
reduced reactive power exchanged with the network [10] M. Chis, M. M. A. Salama, and S. Jayaram, “Capacitor placement in
(2.49MVar for the SVC located at bus 10, 4.75MVar for the distribution systems using heuristic search strategies, ” IEE
Proceedings Generation, Transmission and Distribution, vo.144, n° 2,
SVC located at bus 30, and 8.82Mvar for the SVC located at pp. 225-230, May 1997.
bus 25) compared to the low value of ‘RIS’.
-In addition to the simplicity of this approach proposed, the