Front.
Energy 2015, 9(4): 399–412
DOI 10.1007/s11708-015-0374-6
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Shagufta KHAN, Suman BHOWMICK
Impact of selection of DC base values and DC link control
strategies on sequential AC-DC power-flow convergence
© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Abstract This paper demonstrates the convergence of
the integrated AC-DC power-flow algorithm as affected by
the selection of different base values for the DC quantities
and adoption of different control strategies for the DC link.
For power-flow modeling of integrated AC-DC systems,
the base values of the various DC quantities can be defined
in several ways, giving rise to different sets of per-unit
system equations. It is observed that different per-unit
system models affect the convergence of the power-flow
algorithm differently. In a similar manner, the control
strategy adopted for the DC link also affects the power-
flow convergence. The sequential method is used to solve
the DC variables in the Newton Raphson (NR) power flow
model, where AC and DC systems are solved separately
and are coupled by injecting an equivalent amount of real
and reactive power at the terminal AC buses. Now, for a
majority of the possible control strategies, the equivalent
real and reactive power injections at the concerned buses
can be computed a-priori and are independent of the NR
iterative loop. However, for a few of the control strategies,
the equivalent reactive power injections cannot be
computed a-priori and need to be computed in every NR
iteration. This affects the performance of the iterative
process. Two different per-unit system models and six
typical control strategies are taken into consideration. This
is validated by numerous case studies conducted on the
IEEE 118-bus and 300-bus test systems.
Keywords AC-DC power-flow, Newton-Raphson
method, high voltage direct current (HVDC) control
strategy
Received December 13, 2014; accepted March 18, 2015
✉
Shagufta KHAN ( ), Suman BHOWMICK
Department of Electrical Engineering, Delhi Technological University,
Delhi 110042, India
E-mail: khan.shagufta7@gmail.com
1 Introduction
Ever since the first high voltage direct current (HVDC) link
was installed between the Swedish mainland and Gotland
in 1954, there has been an increasing interest in HVDC
transmission applications worldwide. With the ever-
increasing load demands, system stability issues and
different operating frequencies may render AC transmis-
sion infeasible. HVDC transmission allows power trans-
mission between unsynchronized AC transmission
systems, and can increase the system stability by
preventing cascading failures caused by phase instability
from propagating from one part of a wider power
transmission grid to another. For lengths exceeding
approximately 500 km, HVDC transmission is proving to
be more economical than AC [1–3].
For planning, operation and control of power systems
with HVDC links, the power-flow solution of power
systems incorporated with HVDC links is required. This
necessitates suitable power-flow models of integrated AC-
DC systems [4–6]. For power-flow modeling of such
systems, the base values of the various DC quantities can
be defined in several ways, giving rise to different per-unit
system models, each model comprising separate sets of
system equations in per-unit. It is observed that different
per-unit system models sets affect the convergence of the
AC-DC power-flow algorithm in different ways.
Now, to solve the power flow equations in hybrid AC-
DC systems, two different algorithms are generally
reported. These are known as the unified and the sequential
method, respectively. Some excellent research works on
the unified method are presented [7–11]. Unlike the unified
method, the sequential method is easier to implement and
poses lesser computational burden due to the smaller size
of the Jacobian matrix. Consequently, in this paper, only
the sequential AC-DC power-flow algorithm is considered.
In the sequential AC-DC power-flow algorithm, the AC
and DC systems are solved separately in each iteration and
are coupled by injecting an equivalent amount of real and
reactive power at the terminal AC buses. For a majority of
400 Front. Energy 2015, 9(4): 399–412
the possible HVDC control strategies, the equivalent real
and reactive power injections at the concerned buses can be
computed a-priori and are independent of the Newton
Raphson (NR) iterative loop. However, for a few of the
control strategies, the equivalent reactive power injections
cannot be computed a-priori and need to be computed in
every NR iteration. This too affects the convergence of the
algorithm. Some excellent research works on the AC-DC
sequential power flow method are presented [12–15].
Now, it is observed that the convergence of the AC-DC
sequential power-flow algorithm is affected by both the
HVDC per-unit system model chosen as well as the
particular control strategy adopted for the HVDC link.
However, to the best of our knowledge, none of the
research work in the published literature has addressed this
important issue. Therefore, a detailed investigation of this
aspect is conducted and numerous case studies are carried
out on the IEEE 118-bus and 300-bus test systems to
validate this.
2 System modeling
Figure 1 shows a typical AC-DC power system network in
which a HVDC link is connected in the branch “i-j”
between any two buses “i” and “j” of the network. The two
converters representing the rectifier and the inverter are
connected to the AC system at buses “i” and “j”,
Fig. 1 HVDC link between buses ‘i’ and ‘j’ of an existing power system network
Fig. 2 Equivalent circuit diagram for AC-DC interconnection
respectively, through their respective converter transfor-
mers. The HVDC link is accounted for as appropriate loads
at the buses “i” and “j”. Figure 2 depicts the equivalent
circuit for the network shown in Fig. 1.
Prior to the selection of variables and formulation of the
equations, several basic assumptions are required which
are generally accepted in the analysis of steady state DC
converter operation [1–3]. These are
1) Three AC voltages at the terminal bus bar are
balanced and sinusoidal.
2) The converter operation is perfectly balanced.
3) The direct current and voltage are smooth.
4) The converter transformer is lossless and the
magnetizing admittance is ignored.
Subsequently, for hybrid power flow calculations, the
DC and AC equations are combined together. This
necessitates the translation of the converter equations
into the per-unit system in order to use them with AC
system per-unit equations. The base values of the various
DC quantities can be defined in several ways, giving rise to
multiple per-unit HVDC system models, each comprising
a different set of equations. Although several choices are
feasible, in this paper, due to a shortage of space, only two
different ways of defining the DC quantities are presented.
These two different conventions are given in Appendix and
culminate in two different per-unit HVDC system models,
which are presented in Table 1.
From Table 1, it can be observed that six independent
 Shagufta KHAN et al. Impact of selection of DC base values and DC link control strategies 401

Table 1 Basic HVDC equations in different per-unit systems 3.2 Control strategy 2
Per- unit system 1 Per-unit system 2
pffiffiffi
VdR ¼ aR Vi cosαR – Xc Id 3 2 3X In this control strategy, the firing angles of both the
VdR ¼ a n V cosαR – c nb Id converters are computed while their transformer tap ratios
π R b i π
pffiffiffi are specified. As the injected reactive power representing
VdI ¼ aI Vj cosgI – Xc Id 3 2 3X
VdI ¼ a n V cosgI – c nb Id the converters gets updated in every iteration, this control
π R b j π
pffiffiffi strategy is slightly harder to implement than the others.
VdR ¼ aR Vi cosfR 3 2
VdR ¼ a n V cosfR
π R b i
pffiffiffi 3.3 Control strategy 3
VdI ¼ aI Vj cosfI 3 2
VdI ¼ a n V cosfI
π I b j
V –V This control strategy is also known as the constant current
Id ¼ dR dI and voltage controlled mode. As in mode 1, both the
Rd
PdR ¼ VdR Id
converter transformer tap ratios ‘aR ’ and ‘aI ’ can be
calculated subsequent to the AC load flow.

3.4 Control strategy 4

equations involving ten unknowns are present. Hence, for
a complete solution of the HVDC quantities, four variables
In this control strategy, the firing angle on the rectifier side
need to be specified. These are known as control variables.
is specified along with the tap ratio of the inverter side
Several combinations of control variables are possible and
transformer. The tap ratio on the rectifier side transformer
each combination comprises a control mode or strategy,
‘aR ’ along with the inverter side firing angle can be
which is elaborated in the next section.
calculated subsequent to the AC load flow.

3.5 Control strategy 5

3 HVDC control strategies
In this control strategy, the extinction angle of the inverter
As already discussed in the last section, several control
is specified along with the tap ratio of the rectifier side. On
modes or strategies are possible corresponding to different
the other hand, the firing angle of the rectifier and the
combinations of the four control variables. Some of these
inverter side transformer tap ratio are computed subsequent
control strategies [1,2] are listed in Table 2. Although
to the AC load flow.
several case studies were conducted with these control
strategies, due to lack of space, the results corresponding to
3.6 Control strategy 6
only six typical ones (Control strategies 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6)
are presented in this paper, which are detailed below.
In this control strategy, the firing angle and the DC voltage
Table 2 HVDC control strategies of the rectifier side are computed given the tap ratios of the
Control strategies Specified quantities Unknown quantities converter transformers along with the extinction angle of
1 αR ,PdR ,gI ,VdI aR ,aI ,VdR ,fR ,fI the inverter. The equivalent reactive power injections on
both the rectifier and inverter sides are updated in every
2 aR ,PdR ,aI ,VdI αR ,gI ,VdR ,fR ,fI
iteration.
3 αR ,Id ,gI ,VdI aR ,aI ,VdR ,fR ,fI
4 αR ,PdR ,aI ,VdI aR ,gI ,VdR ,fR ,fI 3.7 Control strategy 7
5 aR ,PdR ,gI ,VdI αR ,aI ,VdR ,fR ,fI
6 aR ,PdR ,gI ,aI αR ,VdR ,VdI ,fR ,fI In this control strategy, both the firing angle of the rectifier
and the extinction angle of the inverter are specified along
7 aR ,PdR ,αR ,gI aI ,VdR ,VdI ,fR ,fI
with the tap ratio of the rectifier transformer. Only the
8 αR ,VdR ,gI ,PdI aR ,aI ,VdI ,fR ,fI rectifier side equivalent reactive power gets updated in
every iteration.

3.1 Control strategy 1 3.8 Control strategy 8

In this control strategy, the firing angles of both the In this control strategy, both the firing angle of the rectifier
converters are specified. The tap ratios of both the and the extinction angle of the inverter are specified. Both
converter transformers ‘aR ’ and ‘aI ’ are calculated the converter transformer tap ratios ‘aR ’ and ‘aI ’ are
subsequent to the AC load flow. calculated subsequent to the AC load flow.
402 Front. Energy 2015, 9(4): 399–412
4 AC-DC power-flow equations
As discussed earlier, the effect of the DC link is included in
the power flow equations by injecting an equivalent
amount of real and reactive power at the terminal AC buses
connected to the converters. This results in appropriate
modifications of the mismatch equations at the converter
terminal AC buses. The DC power at the rectifier and
inverter side is a function of AC and DC values [1–3].
ΔPi ¼ Pisp – Pical – PdR ,
ΔPj ¼ Pjsp – Pjcal þ PdI ,
ΔQi ¼ Qsp
i – Qi – QdR ,
cal
ΔQj ¼ Qsp
j – Qj – QdI ,
cal
where ‘PdR’ and ‘PdI’ are the equivalent real power
injections at the AC terminal buses of the rectifier and
inverter respectively, accounting for the DC link. Similarly,
‘QdR’ and ‘QdI’ are the corresponding reactive power
injections. It is important to note the conventions of the
signs of the DC link are equivalent to real and reactive
power injections. This is because it is assumed that the
rectifier consumes both real and reactive power from the
AC grid while the inverter supplies real power and
consumes reactive power from it. Also, for a majority of
the possible HVDC control strategies, the equivalent real
and reactive power injections at the concerned buses can be
computed a-priori and are independent of the NR iterative
loop. However, for a few of the control strategies, the
equivalent reactive power injections cannot be computed
a-priori and need to be computed in every NR iteration.
This affects the performance of the iterative process.
5 Case studies and results
It is observed that the AC-DC power flow convergence is
affected by the selection of the base values chosen for the
various DC quantities. These base values can be defined in
several ways, giving rise to multiple per-unit HVDC
system models. In a similar manner, the control strategy
adopted for the HVDC is also observed to affect the AC-
DC power flow convergence. To validate this, several case
studies were carried out with multiple HVDC links
incorporated in the IEEE 118-bus and 300-bus test systems
[16]. Although several choices are feasible, due to a
shortage of space, only case studies pertaining to two
different per-unit system models and six typical control
strategies could be reported in this paper. Two compre-
hensive case studies on the IEEE 118-bus system and three
on the IEEE 300-bus test systems are reported. For all the
case studies, the commutating reactance and the DC link
resistance are chosen as 0.1 pu and 0.01 pu, respectively.
The number of bridges ‘nb’ for all the converters is taken to
be equal to 2 [7]. A convergence tolerance of 10–12 pu is
uniformly adopted for all the case studies. In each of the
case studies, ‘NI’ and ‘CT’ refer to the number of iterations
and the computational time in seconds (with a 2.4 GHz, 4
GB RAM, Intel Core i3-3110 Processor based machine),
respectively. All the case studies were carried out in
MATLAB software.
(1)
5.1 Case1: First study with IEEE 118-bus system
(2)
In this study, a single HVDC link was incorporated in the
transmission line between buses 6 and 7. The base case
(3) (without any HVDC link) active power flow in this line
was found to be 33.86 MW. Subsequently, applying
Control strategy 1 to the HVDC link, the active power
(4)
flow is set to 50 MW. The rectifier firing angle and the
inverter extinction angle are set to 5° and 18°, respectively.
The inverter side DC voltages pertaining to the HVDC per-
unit system models 1 and 2 are set to 1.0 pu and 2.3 pu,
respectively. It may be noted that these values are different
as two different formulations are used, which are detailed
in columns 1 to 4 in Table 3. The power-flow solution
corresponding to these specifications are also listed in
columns 5 to 10 in Table 3. The state variables pertaining
to the AC and DC systems are denoted as ACSV and
DCSV, respectively. Although both the models require
only six iterations to converge, Model 1 takes slightly more
computational time (5.15 s) than Model 2 (4.98 s). In a
similar manner, the HVDC link specifications correspond-
ing to five other control strategies and their power-flow
solution are also given in Table 3.
From Table 3, it is observed that similar to the case of
Control strategy 1, for Control strategies 3 to 6, both the
HVDC per-unit system models, namely Model 1 and
Model 2 exhibit almost similar convergence characteris-
tics, although Model 2 takes slightly less computational
time than Model 1. However, for Control strategy 2, Model
2 demonstrates better convergence.
The bus voltage profile for the power-flow solution
pertaining to the case with Control strategy 1 and Model 1
is illustrated in Fig. 3. It is observed that bus voltage profile
hardly changes except the AC terminal buses connected to
the rectifier and the inverter. Due to lack of space, the bus
voltage profiles of the other case studies of Table 3 could
not be accommodated.
5.2 Case 2: Second study of 118-bus system
In this study, a HVDC link is first incorporated in the
transmission line between buses 11 to 13. The base case
power flow in this line is 40.81 MW. The power-flow with
the HVDC link is set to 50 MW. For all the six control
 Shagufta KHAN et al. Impact of selection of DC base values and DC link control strategies 403

Table 3 First study of IEEE 118-bus system (HVDC link: From bus No. 6 to bus No. 7; Pbase= 0.3386 pu)
HVDC link specification Power flow solution
AC terminal buses HVDC variables
Spec. values Model 1 Model 2 ACSV Model 1 Model 2 DCSV Model 1 Model 2
Control strategy 1 PdR /pu 0.5 0.5 V6 /pu 0.99 0.99 VdR /pu 1.005 2.3022
IdR /pu 0.4975 0.2172
VdI /pu 1.0 2.3
6 =ð°Þ 11.037 11.058 aR 1.0695 0.8798
aI 1.1174 0.9223
αR =ð°Þ 5 5 V7 /pu 0.9878 0.988 cosfR 0.94 0.97
cosfI 0.90 0.93
gI /(°) 18 18
7 =ð°Þ 11.150 11.165 NI 6 6
CT 5.15 4.98
Control strategy 2 PdR /pu 0.5 0.5 V6 /pu 1.0 1.0 VdR /pu 1.005 2.3022
IdR /pu 0.4975 0.2172
VdI /pu 1 2.3
6 =ð°Þ 10.926 10.946 αR =ð°Þ 12.419 15.393
gI =ð°Þ 17.929 22.330

aR 1.08 0.9 V7 /pu 0.994 0.997 cosfR 0.93 0.94

cosfI 0.90 0.90
aI 1.1 0.94
7 =ð°Þ 11.079 11.060 NI 8 6
CT 6.66 5.11
Control strategy 3 IdR /pu 0.5 0.5 V6 /pu 0.99 0.99 VdR /pu 1.005 2.305
PdR /pu 0.5025 1.1525
VdI /pu 1 2.3
6 =ð°Þ 11.035 10.626 aR 1.0697 0.9012
aI 1.1147 0.9459
αR =ð°Þ 5 5 V7 /pu 0.9878 0.9859 cosfR 0.94 0.95
cosfI 0.90 0.91
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
7 =ð°Þ 11.151 11.481 NI 6 6
CT 5.16 5.15
Control strategy 4 PdR /pu 0.5 0.5 V6 /pu 1.00 1.00 VdR /pu 1.005 2.3022
IdR /pu 0.4975 0.2172
VdI /pu 1 2.3
6 =ð°Þ 10.92 10.946 aR 1.0588 0.871
gI =ð°Þ 12.862 20.779
αR =ð°Þ 5 5 V7 /pu 0.997 0.997 cosfR 0.94 0.97
cosfI 0.92 0.91
aI 1.08 0.93
7 =ð°Þ 11.038 11.067 NI 6 6
CT 5.25 5.08
Control strategy 5 PdR /pu 0.5 0.5 V6 /pu 0.99 0.99 VdR /pu 1.005 2.3022
IdR /pu 0.4975 0.2172
VdI /pu 1 2.3
6 =ð°Þ 11.036 11.057 αR =ð°Þ 12.200 13.127
aI 1.114 0.95
aR 1.09 0.9 V7 /pu 0.9908 0.9908 cosfR 0.93 0.97
cosfI 0.90 0.93
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
7 =ð°Þ 11.109 11.131 NI 6 6
CT 5.01 4.98
404 Front. Energy 2015, 9(4): 399–412

(Continued)
HVDC link specification Power flow solution
AC terminal buses HVDC variables
Spec. values Model 1 Model 2 ACSV Model 1 Model 2 DCSV Model 1 Model 2
Control strategy 6 PdR /pu 0.5 0.5 V6 /pu 1.00 1.00 VdR /pu 0.9946 2.5026
IdR /pu 0.5027 0.1998
aR 1.05 0.95
6 =ð°Þ 10.92 10.948 VdI /pu 0.9896 2.506
αR =ð°Þ 5.6583 8.0293
aI 1.1 1.0 V7 /pu 0.994 0.9945 cosfR 0.94 0.95
cosfI 0.90 0.93
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
7 =ð°Þ 11.079 11.096 NI 6 6
CT 5.17 5.16

Fig. 3 Bus voltage profile for the case study of Table 3 with Control strategy 1 and Model 1
(a) Bus voltage magnitude without HVDC link; (b) bus voltage magnitude with HVDC link; (c) bus voltage magnitude difference

strategies, the different HVDC link specifications along
with the corresponding power-flow solutions are tabulated
in Table 4.
From Table 4 it can again be observed that both Model 1
and Model 2 exhibit almost similar convergence char-
acteristics for all the control strategies except Control
strategy 2 and 6, where the number of iterations taken to
converge is more. This is due to the fact that with Control
strategies 2 and 6, the equivalent reactive power injections
(at the terminal buses connected to the rectifier and the
inverter) are updated in every iteration. On the other hand,
for Control strategies other than 2 and 6, the reactive power
injections can be computed a-priori and are independent of
the iterative loop. It is also observed from Table 4 that with
Control strategies 2 and 6, the convergence of Model 2 is
better than that of Model 1.
5.3 Case 3: First study of IEEE 300-bus system
In this study, a HVDC link is first incorporated in the
transmission line between buses 3 and 1. The base case
power flow in this line is 24.04 MW. The power-flow with
the HVDC link is set to 40 MW. For all the six control
strategies, the different HVDC link specifications along
with the corresponding power-flow solutions are presented
in Table 5.
From Tables 4 and 5, it can be observed that with the
HVDC link incorporated, the IEEE 300-bus system takes
more number of iterations to converge than the IEEE 118-
bus system. Besides, both Model 1 and Model 2 exhibit
almost identical convergence characteristics for all the
control strategies. In addition, for Control strategy 6, the
number of iterations to converge is more for both models,
 Shagufta KHAN et al. Impact of selection of DC base values and DC link control strategies 405

Table 4 Second study of IEEE 118-bus system (HVDC link: From bus No. 11 to bus No. 13; Pbase= 0.4081 pu)
HVDC link specification/pu Power flow solution
AC terminal buses HVDC variables
Spec. values Model 1 Model 2 ACSV Model 1 Model 2 DCSV Model 1 Model 2
Control strategy 1 PdR /pu 0.5 0.5 V11 /pu 0.9803 0.9815 VdR /pu 1.005 2.3022
IdR /pu 0.4975 0.2172
VdI /pu 1.0 2.3
11 =ð°Þ 10.739 10.749 aR 1.08 0.8875
aI 1.15 0.9463
αR =ð°Þ 5 5 V13 /pu 0.9598 0.9632 cosfR 0.94 0.97
cosfI 0.90 0.93
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
13 =ð°Þ 11.349 11.321 NI 6 6
CT 5.14 5.06
Control strategy 2 PdR /pu 0.5 0.5 V11 /pu 0.9801 1.00 VdR /pu 1.005 2.3022
IdR /pu 0.4975 0.2172
VdI /pu 1 2.3
11 =ð°Þ 10.741 10.946 αR =ð°Þ 9.1566 11.732
gI =ð°Þ 17.969 20.934
aR 1.09 0.9 V13 /pu 0.9596 0.997 cosfR 0.94 0.96
cosfI 0.90 0.91
aI 1.15 0.95
13 =ð°Þ 11.351 11.060 NI 13 6
CT 10.61 5.07
Control strategy 3 IdR /pu 0.5 0.5 V11 /pu 0.9803 0.9741 VdR /pu 1.005 2.305
PdR /pu 0.5025 1.1525
VdI /pu 1 2.3
11 =ð°Þ 10.737 10.179 aR 1.08 0.9159
aI 1.1504 0.9836
αR =ð°Þ 5 5 V13 /pu 0.9597 0.9481 cosfR 0.94 0.95
cosfI 0.90 0.91
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
13 =ð°Þ 11.358 13.521 NI 6 6
CT 5.09 5.06
Control strategy 4 PdR /pu 0.5 0.5 V11 /pu 0.9843 1.00 VdR /pu 1.005 2.3022
IdR /pu 0.4975 0.2172
VdI /pu 1 2.3
11 =ð°Þ 10.727 10.946 aR 1.0765 0.885
gI =ð°Þ 17.868 20.881

αR =ð°Þ 5 5 V13 /pu 0.9767 0.997 cosfR 0.94 0.97

cosfI 0.90 0.91
aI 1.13 0.95
13 =ð°Þ 11.099 11.067 NI 6 6
CT 5.15 5.14
Control strategy 5 PdR /pu 0.5 0.5 V11 /pu 0.9847 0.9847 VdR /pu 1.005 2.3022
IdR /pu 0.4975 0.2172
VdI /pu 1 2.3
11 =ð°Þ 10.702 11.721 αR =ð°Þ 10.678 11.732
aI 1.1298 0.933
aR 1.09 0.9 V13 /pu 0.977 0.977 cosfR 0.93 0.96
cosfI 0.90 0.93
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
13 =ð°Þ 11.069 11.094 NI 6 6
CT 5.16 5.09
406 Front. Energy 2015, 9(4): 399–412

(Continued)
HVDC link specification/pu Power flow solution
AC terminal buses HVDC variables
Spec. values Model 1 Model 2 ACSV Model 1 Model 2 DCSV Model 1 Model 2
Control strategy 6 PdR /pu 0.5 0.5 V11 /pu 0.9809 1.00 VdR /pu 0.9076 2.4183
IdR /pu 0.5509 0.2068
aR 1 0.95
11 =ð°Þ 10.755 10.948 VdI /pu 0.902 2.4162
αR =ð°Þ 10.707 12.451
aI 1.05 1 V13 /pu 0.9624 0.9945 cosfR 0.92 0.96
cosfI 0.89 0.92
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
13 =ð°Þ 11.335 11.096 NI 9 8
CT 7.55 6.53

Table 5 First study of IEEE 300-bus system (HVDC link: From bus No. 3 to bus No. 1; Pbase= 0.2404 pu)
HVDC link specification Power flow solution
AC terminal buses HVDC variables
Spec. values Model 1 Model 2 ACSV Model 1 Model 2 DCSV Model 1 Model 2
Control strategy 1 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V3 /pu 1.0187 1.0189 VdR /pu 1.004 2.3017
IdR /pu 0.3984 0.1738
VdI /pu 1.0 2.3
3 =ð°Þ 6.6208 6.6248 aR 1.0286 0.8517
aI 1.0776 0.8949
αR =ð°Þ 5 5 V1 /pu 1.0147 1.015 cosfR 0.95 0.98
cosfI 0.91 0.93
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
1 =ð°Þ 6.4066 6.4112 NI 7 7
CT 42.83 43.761
Control strategy 2 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V3 /pu 1.0186 1.0194 VdR /pu 1.004 2.3017
IdR /pu 0.3984 0.1738
VdI /pu 1 2.3
3 =ð°Þ 6.6218 6.6178 αR =ð°Þ 9.8257 12.905
gI =ð°Þ 19.893 17.310

aR 1.04 0.87 V1 /pu 1.0145 1.0167 cosfR 0.94 0.96

cosfI 0.90 0.94
aI 1.09 0.89
1 =ð°Þ 6.408 6.3986 NI 7 7
CT 45.35 45.4123
Control strategy 3 IdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V3 /pu 1.0187 1.0179 VdR /pu 1.004 2.304
PdR /pu 0.4016 0.9216
VdI /pu 1 2.3
3 =ð°Þ 6.6206 6.5818 aR 1.0288 0.8691
aI 1.0777 0.9138
αR =ð°Þ 5 5 V1 /pu 1.0147 1.0123 cosfR 0.95 0.96
cosfI 0.91 0.92
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
1 =ð°Þ 6.4083 6.9945 NI 7 7
CT 42.31 43.6478
 Shagufta KHAN et al. Impact of selection of DC base values and DC link control strategies 407

(Continued)
HVDC link specification Power flow solution
AC terminal buses HVDC variables
Spec. values Model 1 Model 2 ACSV Model 1 Model 2 DCSV Model 1 Model 2
Control strategy 4 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V3 /pu 1.017 1.0172 VdR /pu 1.004 2.3017
IdR /pu 0.3984 0.1738
VdI /pu 1 2.3
3 =ð°Þ 6.641 6.6457 aR 1.0303 0.8531
gI =ð°Þ 21.472 19.121

αR =ð°Þ 5 5 V1 /pu 1.0158 1.0159 cosfR 0.95 0.98

cosfI 0.89 0.93
aI 1.1 0.9
1 =ð°Þ 6.4176 6.4239 NI 7 7
CT 44.327 43.73
Control strategy 5 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V3 /pu 1.0194 1.0194 VdR /pu 1.004 2.3017
IdR /pu 0.3984 0.1738
VdI /pu 1 2.3
3 =ð°Þ 6.611 6.6178 αR =ð°Þ 6.2125 9.5726
aI 1.0754 0.9209
aR 1.03 0.86 V1 /pu 1.0167 1.0167 cosfR 0.95 0.97
cosfI 0.91 0.93
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
1 =ð°Þ 6.3904 6.3986 NI 7 7
CT 43.20 43.5601
Control strategy 6 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V3 /pu 1.0186 1.0187 VdR /pu 1.0264 2.8311
IdR /pu 0.3897 0.1413
aR 1.08 1.08
3 =ð°Þ 6.6228 6.6279 VdI /pu 1.0225 2.8297
αR =ð°Þ 14.424 15.884
aI 1.1 1.1 V1 /pu 1.0146 1.015 cosfR 0.93 0.95
cosfI 0.91 0.93
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
1 =ð°Þ 6.4085 6.414 NI 8 8
CT 44.706 50.267

as expected. It is also observed that unlike the previous
case studies, Model 1 fares better than Model 2 in respect
of computational time for all the control strategies except
Control strategy 4.
The bus voltage profile for the power-flow solution
pertaining to the case with Control strategy 1 and
Model 2 is displayed in Fig. 4. It is again observed
that the bus voltage profile undergoes a very slight change
at the AC terminal buses connected to the rectifier and the
inverter.
Model 2 exhibit almost similar convergence characteristics
for all the control strategies except Control strategies 2 and
6. For Control strategy 6, the number of iterations to
converge is more for both models, as is expected. It is also
observed that for Control strategy 2, Model 2 is faster
while for Control strategy 6, Model 1 is faster. For Control
strategies 1, 4 and 5, Model 2 takes lesser computational
time while for Control strategy 3, Model 1 is faster.
5.5 Case 5: Third study of IEEE 300-bus system

5.4 Case 4: Second study of IEEE 300-bus system
In this study, a HVDC link is first incorporated in the
transmission line between buses 270 to 292. The base case
power flow in this line is 36.52 MW. The power-flow with
the HVDC link is set to 40 MW. For all the six control
strategies, the different HVDC link specifications along with
the corresponding power-flow solutions are given in Table 4.
From Table 6, it can be observed that both Model 1 and
In this study, a HVDC link is first incorporated in the
transmission line between buses 199 and 197. The base
case power flow in this line is 32.13 MW. The power-flow
with the HVDC link is set to 40 MW. For all the six control
strategies, the different HVDC link specifications along
with the corresponding power-flow solutions are given in
Table 7.
From Table 7, it can be observed that both Model 1 and
Model 2 exhibit almost similar convergence characteristics
408 Front. Energy 2015, 9(4): 399–412

Fig. 4 Bus voltage profile for the case study of Table 5 with Control strategy 1 and Model 2
(a) Bus voltage magnitude without HVDC link; (b) bus voltage magnitude with HVDC link; (c) bus voltage magnitude difference

Table 6 Second study of IEEE 300-bus system (HVDC link: From bus No. 270 to bus No. 292; Pbase= 0.3652 pu)
HVDC link specification/pu Power flow solution
AC terminal buses HVDC variables
Spec. values Model 1 Model 2 ACSV Model 1 Model 2 DCSV Model 1 Model 2
Control strategy 1 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V270 /pu 1.008 1.0017 VdR /pu 1.004 2.4017
IdR /pu 0.3984 0.1666
VdI /pu 1.0 2.4
270 =ð°Þ – 11.41 – 11.41 aR 1.047 0.9029
aI 1.0934 0.9467
αR =ð°Þ 5 5 V292 /pu 1.00 1.00 cosfR 0.95 0.98
cosfI 0.91 0.93
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
292 =ð°Þ – 10.69 – 10.65 NI 7 7
CT 44.1922 42.0610
Control strategy 2 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V270 /pu 1.0005 1.0031 VdR /pu 1.004 2.4017
IdR /pu 0.3984 0.1666
VdI /pu 1 2.4
270 =ð°Þ – 11.41 – 11.66 αR =ð°Þ 10.174 12.514
gI =ð°Þ 15.673 21.844

aR 1.06 0.92 V292 /pu 1.00 1.00 cosfR 0.94 0.96

cosfI 0.92 0.91
aI 1.08 0.97
292 =ð°Þ – 10.68 – 10.66 NI 10 7
CT 62.7693 43.072
Control strategy 3 IdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V270 /pu 1.008 0.9963 VdR /pu 1.004 2.404
PdR /pu 0.4016 0.9616
VdI /pu 1 2.4
270 =ð°Þ – 11.41 – 11.42 aR 1.0935 0.9253
aI 1.004 0.964
αR =ð°Þ 5 5 V292 /pu 1.00 1.00 cosfR 0.95 0.96
cosfI 0.91 0.92
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
292 =ð°Þ – 10.65 – 10.54 NI 7 7
CT 43.486 43.934
 Shagufta KHAN et al. Impact of selection of DC base values and DC link control strategies 409

(Continued)
HVDC link specification/pu Power flow solution
AC terminal buses HVDC variables
Spec. values Model 1 Model 2 ACSV Model 1 Model 2 DCSV Model 1 Model 2
Control strategy 4 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V270 /pu 1.008 1.0017 VdR /pu 1.004 2.4017
IdR /pu 0.3984 0.1666
VdI /pu 1 2.4
270 =ð°Þ – 11.41 – 11.41 aR 1.047 0.9029
gI =ð°Þ 19.036 21.844

αR =ð°Þ 5 5 V292 /pu 1.00 1.00 cosfR 0.95 0.98

cosfI 0.90 0.91
aI 1.1 0.97
292 =ð°Þ – 10.69 – 10.65 NI 7 7
CT 43.6352 43.45
Control strategy 5 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V270 /pu 1.0031 1.003 VdR /pu 1.004 2.4071
IdR /pu 0.3984 0.1666
VdI /pu 1 2.3
270 =ð°Þ – 11.42 – 11.41 αR =ð°Þ 7.6894 9.0385
aI 1.0934 0.9436
aR 1.05 0.91 V292 /pu 1.00 1.00 cosfR 0.95 0.97
cosfI 0.91 0.93
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
292 =ð°Þ – 10.69 – 10.66 NI 7 7
CT 44.0450 43.015
Control strategy 6 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V270 /pu 1.002 1.0007 VdR /pu 1.0105 2.3446
IdR /pu 0.3958 0.1706
aR 1.08 0.91
270 =ð°Þ – 11.41 – 11.41 VdI /pu 1.0066 2.3429
αR =ð°Þ 13.551 19.868
aI 1.1 0.93 V292 /pu 1.00 1.00 cosfR 0.93 0.95
cosfI 0.91 0.93
gI =ð°Þ 18 18
292 =ð°Þ – 10.68 – 10.65 NI 10 11
CT 59.5337 70.0756

Table 7 Third study of IEEE 300-bus system (HVDC link: From bus No. 199 to bus No. 197; Pbase= 0.3213 pu)
HVDC link specification Power flow solution
AC terminal buses HVDC variables
Spec. values Model 1 Model 2 ACSV Model 1 Model 2 DCSV Model 1 Model 2
Control strategy 1 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V199 /pu 1.008 1.008 VdR /pu 0.9044 2.2018
IdR /pu 0.4423 0.1817
VdI /pu 0.9 2.2
199 =ð°Þ – 22.19 – 22.18 aR 0.9556 0.83
aI 1.0025 0.87
αR =ð°Þ 10 10 V197 /pu 1.0159 1.0164 cosfR 0.93 0.96
cosfI 0.88 0.91
gI =ð°Þ 22 22
197 =ð°Þ – 22.63 – 22.62 NI 7 8
CT 42.9965 49.7154
410 Front. Energy 2015, 9(4): 399–412

(Continued)
HVDC link specification Power flow solution
AC terminal buses HVDC variables
Spec. values Model 1 Model 2 ACSV Model 1 Model 2 DCSV Model 1 Model 2
Control strategy 2 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V199 /pu 1.00 1.00 VdR /pu 0.9044 2.2018
IdR /pu 0.4423 0.1817
VdI /pu 0.9 2.2
199 =ð°Þ – 22.15 – 22.13 αR =ð°Þ 8.819 9.6773
gI =ð°Þ 21.44 20.563

aR 0.96 0.84 V197 /pu 1.0124 1.0157 cosfR 0.94 0.97

cosfI 0.88 0.92
aI 1 0.87
197 =ð°Þ – 22.64 – 22.63 NI 9 7
CT 55.1537 42.9122
Control strategy 3 IdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V199 /pu 1.00 1.008 VdR /pu 0.9040 2.2043
PdR /pu 0.3616 0.8816
VdI /pu 0.9 2.2
199 =ð°Þ – 22.65 – 22.47 aR 0.9510 0.8505
aI 0.9976 0.8976
αR =ð°Þ 10 10 V197 /pu 1.0162 1.0127 cosfR 0.94 0.95
cosfI 0.88 0.89
gI =ð°Þ 22 22
197 =ð°Þ – 22.65 – 22.34 NI 7 7
CT 43.62 42.35
Control strategy 4 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V199 /pu 1.00 1.00 VdR /pu 0.9044 2.2018
IdR /pu 0.4423 0.1817
VdI /pu 0.9 2.2
199 =ð°Þ – 22.15 – 22.13 aR 0.9633 0.8408
gI =ð°Þ 21.625 20.653

αR =ð°Þ 10 10 V197 /pu 1.0157 1.0157 cosfR 0.93 0.96

cosfI 0.88 0.92
aI 1.0 0.87
197 =ð°Þ – 22.15 – 22.63 NI 7 7
CT 42.4364 41.94
Control strategy 5 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V199 /pu 1.008 1.008 VdR /pu 0.9044 2.2018
IdR /pu 0.4423 0.1817
VdI /pu 0.9 2.2
199 =ð°Þ – 22.18 – 22.17 αR =ð°Þ 7.839 8.218
aI 0.991 0.97
aR 0.95 0.83 V197 /pu 1.0193 1.0193 cosfR 0.94 0.91
cosfI 0.83 0.93
gI =ð°Þ 22 22
197 =ð°Þ – 22.63 – 22.62 NI 7 7
CT 38.5849 38.889
Control strategy 6 PdR /pu 0.4 0.4 V199 /pu 1.00 1.00 VdR /pu 0.8985 2.3137
IdR /pu 0.4452 0.1729
aR 0.95 0.89
199 =ð°Þ – 22.15 – 22.14 VdI /pu 0.8941 2.312
αR =ð°Þ 6.947 12.51
aI 1 0.93 V197 /pu 1.00123 1.0127 cosfR 0.94 0.96
cosfI 0.88 0.90
gI =ð°Þ 22 22
197 =ð°Þ – 22.64 – 22.63 NI 9 7
CT 52.7786 40.6926
 Shagufta KHAN et al. Impact of selection of DC base values and DC link control strategies 411

for all the control strategies except Control strategies 2 and Xc Commutating reactance
6. For Control strategies 2 and 6, the number of iterations Vd ,Id DC voltage and current
to converge is less for Model 2. Also, for Control strategy fR ,fI Power factor angles at the rectifier and inverter
1, Model 1 demonstrates better convergence than Model 2. ends (Transformer’s primary side)
In addition, for Control strategy 5, Model 1 is slightly αR ,gI Firing angle of the rectifier and extinction angle
faster while for Control strategies 3 and 4, Model 2 is of the inverter
slightly faster. VdR ,VdI DC voltages at the rectifier and inverter sides
To minimize the reactive power requirement at rectifier
aR ,aI Converter transformer tap ratios on the rectifier
and inverter terminals and overall system losses, the values and inverter sides
of firing angles are kept low. The firing angle for rectifier is
Rd Resistance of DC link
kept within 5° to 7° and the extinction angle for inverter is
kept within 15° to 22°. Vi :
i AC bus voltage magnitude (rms) and phase angle
at ith bus
Vj :
j AC bus voltage magnitude (rms) and phase angle
6 Conclusions at jth bus
VdoR ,VdoI No load direct voltages at the rectifier and
In integrated AC-DC systems, the selection of different inverter sides
base values for the DC quantities gives rise to different per- PdR ,QdR Active and reactive powers at the rectifier side
unit system models. Different per-unit system models PdI ,QdI Active and reactive powers at the inverter side
affect the convergence of the power-flow algorithm
differently. Likewise, the HVDC link control strategy
adopted is also observed to affect the convergence of the Appendix
power-flow algorithm. For a majority of the possible
control strategies, the equivalent real and reactive power
injections at the concerned buses can be computed a-priori Vac base ¼ V ðLine to line rms voltageÞ
and are independent of the NR iterative loop. However, for
a few of the control strategies, the equivalent reactive S
power injections cannot be computed a-priori and need to Iac base ¼ pffiffiffi base
3Vac base
be computed in every NR iteration. This affects the
performance of the iterative process. In this paper,
V
sequential method is used to solve the DC variables in Zac base ¼ pffiffiffiac base
the NR power flow model, where AC and DC systems are 3Iac base
solved separately and are coupled by injecting an
equivalent amount of real and reactive power at the
terminal AC buses. Two different per-unit system models Table A1 Different base values for DC system
and six typical control strategies have been taken into Convention 1 Convention 2
consideration. Numerous case studies carried out on the pffiffiffi
3 2 Vdc base ¼ Vac base
IEEE 118-bus and 300-bus test systems validate this. In Vdc base ¼ kVac base where k ¼ n
π b
general, Model 2 demonstrates better convergence char- pffiffiffi pffiffiffi
3 Idc base ¼ 3Iac base
acteristics than Model 1. In a similar manner, the power- Idc base ¼ I
k ac base
flow convergence is affected with Control strategies 2 and Zdc base ¼ k 2 Zac base Zdc base ¼ Zac base
6.
3 Rdc base ¼ Xc base
Rdc base ¼ nb Xc base
π
Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to the Department of
Electrical Engineering, Delhi Technological University, Delhi for the help
and the support received.
References

Notations 1. Arrillaga J, Watson N R. Computer Modelling of Electrical Power

Systems. 2nd ed. Sinapore: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2003
Sbase Base MVA
2. Kundur P. Power System Stability and Control. New York: Tata
Vac base, Iac base, Zac base AC base voltage, AC base current and AC base McGraw-Hill Publishing Co. Ltd., 2007
impedance
3. Wang X F, Song Y H, Irving M. Modern Power Systems Analysis.
Vdc base, Idc base, Zdc base DC base voltage, DC base current and DC base New York: Springer, 2008
impedance
4. Acha E, Kazemtabrizi B, Castro L M. A new VSC-HVDC model for
nb Number of bridges power flows using the Newton-Raphson method. IEEE Transactions
412 Front. Energy 2015, 9(4): 399–412
on Power Systems, 2013, 28(3): 2602–2612
5. Angeles-Camacho C, Tortelli O L, Acha E, Fuerte-Esquivel C R.
Inclusion of a high voltage DC-voltage source converter model in a
Newton-Raphson power flow algorithm. IEE Proceedings-Genera-
tion, Transmission and Distribution, 2003, 150(6): 691–696
6. Zhang X P. Multiterminal voltage-sourced converter-based HVDC
models for power flow analysis. IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, 2004, 19(4): 1877–1884
7. Braunagel D A, Kraft L A, Whysong J L. Inclusion of DC converter
and transmission equations directly in a Newton power flow. IEEE
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 1976, PAS-95(1):
76–88
8. Arritlaga J, Bodger P. AC-DC load flows with realistic representa-
tion of the converter plant. Proceedings of the Institution of
Electrical Engineers, 1978, 125(1): 41–46
9. El-marsafawy M M, Mathur R M. A new, fast technique for load
flow solution of integrated multi terminal DC/AC systems. IEEE
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 1980, PAS-99(1):
246–255
10. Arritlaga J, Harker B J, Turner K S. Clarifying an ambiguity in
recent AC-DC load flow formulations. IEE Proceedings C
Generation, Transmission and Distribution, 1980, 127(5): 324–325
11. Smed T, Andersson G, Sheble G B, Grigsby L L. A new approach to
AC/DC power flow. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 1991, 6
(3): 1238–1244
12. Reeve J, Fahny G, Stott B. Versatile load flow method for multi
terminal HVDC systems. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus
and Systems, 1977, PAS-96(3): 925–933
13. Fudeh H, Ong C M. A simple and efficient AC-DC load flow
method for multiterminal DC systems. IEEE Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems, 1981, PAS-100(11): 4389–4396
14. El-Hawary M E, Ibrahim S T. A new approach to AC-DC load flow
analysis. Electric Power Research, 1995, 33(3): 193–200
15. Beerten J, Cole S, Belmans R. Generalized steady-state VSC MTDC
model for sequential AC/DC power flow algorithms. IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, 2012, 27(2): 821–829
16. UW Electrical Engineering. Power systems test case archive. 2014-
10-02, http://www.ee.washington.edu/research/pstca/