2330

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 23, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2008

Power-Flow Model and Steady-State Analysis of the Hybrid Flow Controller

S. Ali Nabavi Niaki, Senior Member, IEEE, Reza Iravani, Fellow, IEEE, and Mojtaba Noroozian, Senior Member, IEEE

AbstractThis paper introduces a hybrid ow controller (HFC) as a new member of exible ac transmission system (FACTS) controllers for steady-state and power-ow control of power transmission lines. HFC is a hybrid compensator (i.e., provides series and/or shunt compensation). Structurally, an HFC unit is composed of a mechanically switched phase-shifting transformer, a mechanically switched shunt capacitor, and multimodule, series-connected, thyristor-switched capacitors and inductors. This paper describes the steady-state operation, single-phase equivalent circuit, power-ow model, and - and - characteristics of the HFC. This paper highlights the steady-state technical features of the HFC for power-ow control of a study system and also provides a quantitative comparison of the HFC, UPFC, and PST. Index TermsFlexible ac transmission system (FACTS), power ow, thyristor-switched series capacitor (TSSC), thyristor-switched series reactor (TSSR), unied power-ow controller (UPFC).

I. INTRODUCTION

TEADY-STATE and dynamic power-ow control, particularly under heavily loaded system conditions, is an indispensable operational requirement for an interconnected power system [1]. Applications of exible ac transmission (FACTS) controllers (e.g., various congurations of shunt compensators, series compensators, static voltage and phase-angle regulators, and hybrid compensators) for steady-state and dynamic power-ow control have been extensively investigated in the technical literature [2][4], and their steady-state models and operational characteristics well established [2][7]. This paper introduces a hybrid ow controller (HFC) as a new FACTS controller and: 1) describes its steady-state principles of operations; 2) develops its single-line equivalent circuit and power-ow model; and 3) investigates its steady-state power-ow control characteristics. Conceptually, HFC is not a new circuit conguration and rather an amalgamation of existing and well established power-ow controllers, that is, conventional mechanically switched phase-shifting transformer (PST) [8][10];

a conventional mechanically switched shunt capacitor (MSC) [11]; a multimodule thyristor-switched series capacitor (TSSC) [12]; a multimodule thyristor-switched series reactors (TSSR) [12]. TSSC and TSSR subsystems of an HFC are electronically switched, and thus are adequately fast to 1) respond to system dynamics and 2) provide dynamic power-ow control. However, this paper investigates only steady-state behavior and characteristics of an HFC. Due to the inherent discrete operational nature of the HFC, its dynamic control and behavior are best investigated based on a discrete-event supervisory control strategy and will be the subject of a separate article. HFC belongs to the family of hybrid compensators since it provides power-ow control through series and/or shunt compensation, analogous to the unied power-ow controller (UPFC) [13]. Although HFC does not offer all versatility and technical features of the UPFC, its salient features make it an alternative to the UPFC. These features are: cost effectiveness; simplicity of concept, control, and operational strategies; maturity and ruggedness of the technologies of its various subsystems; lower losses and, thus, higher efciency. HFC provides economical incentive in a scenario that an existing PST is augmented with TSSC and/or TSSR modules to form an HFC. Furthermore, since TSSC and TSSR modules are not phase-controlled and only switched in and out by thyristor switches, HFC does not generate harmonics and has no adverse impact on power quality. This paper: 1) develops a steady-state single-phase equivalent model for an HFC; 2) describes the - characteristic of the HFC based on the developed model; 3) deduces a power-ow model for the HFC; and 4) investigates technical features of the HFC for power-ow control of a test system. This paper also provides a comparison of the HFC power-ow control characteristics with those of a UPFC and a conventional PST, and highlights its main features and limitations.

Manuscript received July 26, 2006; revised January 21, 2008. Current version published September 24, 2008. Paper no. TPWRD-00420-2006. S. A. N. Niaki and R. Iravani are with the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3G4, Canada (e-mail: nabavi.niaki@utoronto.ca; iravani@ecf.utoronto. ca). M. Noroozian is with the ABB Utilities AB, FACTS Division, Vsters, Sweden (e-mail: motjab.noroozian@se.abb.com). Color versions of one or more of the gures in this paper are available online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TPWRS.2008.923815

II. PRINCIPLES OF OPERATIONS OF HFC Fig. 1 shows a schematic diagram of an HFC that is connected between buses and within a transmission line and is comprised of: a PST which can inject a lead/lag, quadrature-phase voltage;

0885-8977/$25.00 2008 IEEE

NIAKI et al.: POWER-FLOW MODEL AND STEADY-STATE ANALYSIS OF THE HFC

2331

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of an HFC.

Fig. 2. Per-phase schematic representation of HFC.

multimodule TSSC system that can insert a variable series capacitive reactance, in discrete steps, to adjust the line series reactance; multimodule TSSR system that can insert a variable series inductive reactance, in discrete steps, to prevent overow; an MSC for reactive power compensation. Due to their inherent large time-constants, PST and MSC can only impact steady-state power ow, while the TSSC and the TSSR modules can provide both dynamic and steady-state power-ow control. By replacing one TSSC module with a thyristor-controlled series capacitor (TCSC) module, continuous control of series reactance also can be achieved. However, this option is not considered in this paper. Based on the conguration of Fig. 1, a per-phase schematic representation of the HFC is given in Fig. 2. The details to reduce the single-phase PST of Fig. 2 from that of Fig. 1, under balanced conditions, are given in [7]. The extraction of perphase representations of the TSSC, TSSR, and MSC of Fig. 2 from those of Fig. 1, under a balanced condition, is given in [2]. A steady-state - characteristic of the HFC of Fig. 2 is shown in Fig. 3. and are voltage phasors of buses and , respectively. The PST injects quadrature-phase voltage , and is the voltage of the HFC internal bus (i.e., bus ) (Fig. 2). is lagging by angle In Fig. 3(a), the phasor of line current . Fig. 3(a) also shows the TSSC voltage for and , and the corresponding voltage at bus (i.e., ), corresponding to a prespecied reactance of MSC. Magnitude of depends on 1) the magnitude of line current and 2) the number of TSSC modules in service. It should be noted that the TSSC is less effective to control real power ow when the line current is small. However the magnitude of the injected voltage by the PST is almost independent of the line current and can be controlled only by the . As a result, for those conPST voltage ratio, from 0 to ditions where the HFC operates under a lightly loaded line, the PST subsystem of HFC can effectively control real power ow,

Fig. 3. Steady-state V -I characteristic of HFC, (a) TSSC in service. (b) TSSR in service.

and the TSSC modules can be used to adjust the power ow only in small steps. Under heavy power-ow conditions, TSSC can effectively control the power ow and also reduce adverse impact of high current switching on the PST mechanical taps. Fig. 3(b) shows a - characteristic of the HFC when the TSSC modules are shorted and the TSSR is operational. for and Fig. 3(b) shows TSSR voltage phasor , and the corresponding at bus . A combination of shaded areas A and D of Fig. 3 species the - area that the HFC can control the line power ow. If the PST is capable of injecting lagging quadrature voltage, the corresponding characteristics regions are added to regions A and B of Fig. 3 to determine the overall - area. III. HFC STEADY-STATE MODEL A. HFC Mathematical Model With reference to Fig. 2, the series injected voltage of the PST unit can be expressed as [7] (1) . applies where is the PST voltage ratio for overload relief and to increase power ow. Since the ideal transformers of the PST of Fig. 2 do not exchange any real and reactive power with the system (2) From (1) and (2), we deduce (3)

2332

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 23, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2008

Excitation voltage

is also given by (4)

is the leakage reactance of the excitation transformer where from (3) in (4) and then substituting (Fig. 2). Substituting for for in (1) (5) Voltage is given by
Fig. 4. Single-line equivalent model of HFC.

(6) is the series transformer leakage reactance. Voltage where at terminal can be calculated from the voltage at bus by subtracting the voltage drops of the TSSC and the TSSR modules (7) where coefcients and determine the amount of and in service (ohmic losses are ignored). The line current is from (6) in (7) calculated by substituting for (8) where . At bus (9) Substituting for from (3) and from (8) in (9), we deduced (10) where . At bus , we have where (11) is the capacitive current of MSC (12) Current (Fig. 2) is obtained by substituting for from (8) and (11), respectively, in (10) and Based upon (16)(18), a single-phase equivalent model of the HFC is shown in Fig. 4 which has three independent control parameters: 1) voltage ratio of PST (i.e., ); 2) level of series impedance compensation (i.e., ) (or ); and 3) shunt reac). It should be noted that in Fig. 4, tance of MSC (i.e., is a resistive element and can be either capacitive or inductive based on the number of TSSC and/or TSSR modules that are in service. A steady-state model of a conventional stand-alone PST also , can be deduced form the model of Fig. 4 by eliminating and MSC, as shown in Fig. 5, where and C. HFC Power-Flow Model Conceptually, there are three approaches to develop an HFC model for power-ow analysis. The rst one is the classical approach [8] which is based on augmenting the system matrix to include the HFC model given by (14). The drawback of this becomes asymmetrical, and approach is that the augmented (19) (18) where and Thus, (16) can be rewritten as
Fig. 5. Single-line equivalent model of a quadrature-angle PST.

can be decomposed into two components

and (16) .

(17)

(13) From (10) and (13), the ABCD parameters of the HFC, as a two-port system, are deduced (14) where .

B. Single-Phase Equivalent Model of HFC By substituting for from (8) in (3), current of the excitation transformer of Fig. 2 can be expressed by (15)

NIAKI et al.: POWER-FLOW MODEL AND STEADY-STATE ANALYSIS OF THE HFC

2333

Similarly, for

, we have (22)

Fig. 6. Power-ow model of HFC.

thus can be used neither in a decoupled power-ow analysis, nor for efcient storage. The second approach is based on the so-called injection model [10], [12]. This approach replaces the injected voltage of the PST by an equivalent current source. Consequently, an ideal phase shifter is represented by current injections at buses and , Fig. 2. The phase-shifter angle appears in the power equations at buses and and also in the partial derivatives in the Jacobian Matrix. For a typical phase-shift introduced by a to ), and phase-angle differences between PST (i.e., to ), the partial derivaphase-shifter terminals (e.g., tives with respect to the magnitudes and phase angles at buses and are small compared to the other elements of the Jacobian Matrix. Thus, sensitivities of injected P and Q at nodes and with respect to the magnitudes and angles of voltages are small. This concludes that in the power-ow equations, the PST unit can be represented as a load in each iteration. Based on this approximation, the phase-shifter angle does not appear [12] and as a result its symmetry and compatibility in for fast decoupled power ow are maintained. However, when the voltage phase-angle between the PST terminals exceeds typical values, or for applications which require more than phase-shift, this method can lead to inaccurate or even erroneous results. The third approach [7] assumes that HFC actively controls , series compensaits parameters (i.e., voltage ratio of PST or ), and the parallel compention impedance) ( sation level . Therefore HFC controls real power ow , reactive power ow and voltage mag. As a result, HFC can maintain a prespecied nitude power ow from bus to bus , and regulate voltage at bus , Fig. 6. Since HFC does not inject any real power and also its losses are neglected, - is equal to - . In the model of Fig. 6, power ow is analyzed based on the preset values of power and voltage magnitude that the HFC is expected to impose. Based on the power-ow solution, parameand at buses and are determined. Thus, the inters , , , ternal control parameters of the HFC (i.e., , ), can be calculated as follows. At bus , we have and (20) Substituting for from (10) in (20), we deduce (21)

are calculated from (21), and then is determined from (22). change in discrete steps, a set of Since , , , and solutions from (21) and (22) may not exactly match the actual . As the number of steps desired values of , , , and increases and consequently the step magnitudes decrease, the mismatch error is reduced. However, if the calculated values of internal parameters correspond to a point located between two steps, the parameters are rounded up to those of the closest step values. Due to the discrete nature of the HFC, convergence of the power-ow algorithm depends on the sizes of discrete steps of the PST, TSSC, and TSSR. Generally a large discrete step increases the number of iterations. IV. APPLICATION EXAMPLE In this section, we investigate power-ow characteristics of an HFC in a study system. The main objective of the HFC in the study system is either to increase or regulate power ow. A. Study System The 230400 kV network of a power system which is located south of the Caspian Sea, in the northern part of Iran, was selected as the study system. Fig. 7 shows the main power corridors of the study system. The system is characterized by fast growing power demand and strict limitations on transmission line expansion. It is predicted that the system will experience unacceptable undervoltage scenarios due to increase in load demand, and also some of the existing transformers will be overloaded. One proposed solution to the problem is to connect 230-kV Bus-11 to 400-kV Bus-12, through a set of transformers, as shown in Fig. 7 (dashed lined transformers). The power-ow results shown on Fig. 7 are based on the presence of the hypothetical transformers. Connecting Bus-11 and Bus-12 provides voltage support at Bus-11, and creates a new path in parallel with the existing 230-kV line to supply future load growth. Power-ow studies show that the proposed connection effectively improves voltage prole of the system at 230-kV buses. The drawback of the proposed connection is that it reduces loadings of the 230-kV lines and results in their permanent and uncontrolled underutilization. For example, loading of the 230-kV line between Bus-10 and Bus-11 is reduced from 382-MW to 53-MW, and most power demand at Bus-11 is provided through the 400-kV path. We investigate installation of an HFC, in the path between Bus-10 and Bus-11 of Fig. 7, to increase the 230-kV line power transfer from 53-MW to about 440-MW. Fig. 8 shows the study system which is equipped by the HFC. The HFC of Fig. 8 is composed of: a 115-MVA PST that can inject a quadrature voltage up (36-kV), with 18 steps of 2-kV, and to phase-shift; consequently can introduce up to

and

2334

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 23, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2008

Fig. 8. Power-ow results for the system equipped with HFC. Fig. 7. Power-ow results of the study system with transformers between Bus-11 and Bus-12.

a three-module TSSC, with reactances of , and , which provides seven discrete reactance steps of , 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 ; an MSC system (2 25-MVAr at Bus-10 to supply the required reactive power. Since the main objective of the HFC is to increase the power transfer between Bus-10 and Bus-11, TSSR modules are not considered in the HFC conguration. A power-ow solution of the system, including the HFC, is also shown in Fig. 8. The power-ow results show that the HFC can effectively increase the power ow between Bus-10 and Bus-11 from 53 MW to 439.8-MW. V. STUDY RESULTS To quantify and further highlight impacts of the HFC parameters, the system of Fig. 8 is approximated and reduced to that of Fig. 9. The HFC is connected between Bus-10 and Bus-11, and is the corresponding line reactance. The rest of the system of Fig. 8 is represented by Thevenin equivalents and with respect to Bus-10 and Bus-11, respectively, Fig. 9. Parameters of the system of Fig. 9 are given in Appendix A. A. Receiving-End Power Characteristics Fig. 10 shows the receiving-end power of the system of Fig. 9 when the HFC is in service (MSC is disconnected). The phase shifter of the HFC can increase real power transfer from 71-MW to 276-MW through 18 tap steps of 2-kV from to in Fig. 10. The series capacitor modules can be controlled to increase real

Fig. 9. Simplied study system.

Fig. 10. Impact of HFC on the receiving-end power.

power transfer up to 440-MW, by seven steps, from to in Fig. 10. The series capacitor modules can be switched in/out at any tap position. Thus, the system operating points cover the area in the - plane in Fig. 11. This area includes discrete operating points corresponding to 18 tap positions of the TSSC. The of the PST and seven discrete values of for a given dotted lines on Fig. 11 correspond to a change of tap position. Fig. 11 concludes that at low tap positions (close

NIAKI et al.: POWER-FLOW MODEL AND STEADY-STATE ANALYSIS OF THE HFC

2335

Fig. 11. Receiving-end P -Q area covering all operating points of the HFC.

Fig. 13. Impact of the MSC on the receiving-end power.

Time-constants associated with the tap changer of the PST and ON-OFF states of the TSSC modules are signicantly different. Therefore, provisions must be made for the HFC unit to assume an operating point such that it is ready to react to a new command for real power change. Appendix B provides a strategy to maintain such an operating point under a steady-state condition. C. Impact of MSC on Power Flow Fig. 13 depicts impacts of the 25-MVAr and 50-MVAr MSC on the receiving-end power of the system of Fig. 9. The regions 1 to 3 in Fig. 13 cover all operating steps of the PST (18 steps), the TSSC (seven steps), and the MSC (three steps) discrete operating of the HFC unit (i.e., points). Fig. 13 shows that the MSC does not noticeably affect real power ow of the system but can considerably increase reactive power exchange. VI. COMPARISON OF HFC, PST, AND UPFC This section provides a comparison of the HFC of Fig. 4, with a conventional stand-alone PST as shown in Fig. 5, and a UPFC with respect to their power-ow control performances. The PST can provide 33 steps of quadrature-angle voltage injection with steps of 2-kV. The UPFC can inject series voltage of 0.445 p.u., and power ratings of its series transformer and converter are 196-MVA. The system of Fig. 9 is used to compare steady-state performances of the three power-ow controllers. The three controller are required to increase power ow between Bus-10 and Bus-11 of Fig. 9 from 71-MW to 440-MW. A. Comparison of HFC and PST Fig. 14 shows the sending-end and the receiving-end characteristics of the study system of Fig. 9 for cases where either the HFC or the stand-alone PST is in service. Fig. 14 shows that for the same range of real power control, the system requires less reactive power from the sending-end when the HFC is in service. Considering that power ratings of the phase-shifting transformer of HFC and the stand-alone PST are 115-MVA and 230-MVA, respectively, Fig. 14 concludes

Fig. 12. Receiving-end power characteristics of the HFC at different power angles.

to line ), the TSSC can signicantly impact reactive power. While at high tap positions (close to line ), the TSSC can effectively control real power. B. Power-Flow Sensitivity to HFC Control Parameters A sensitivity analysis is conducted to investigate the effectiveness of the HFC control parameters on power ow at different operating conditions. Fig. 12 shows the receiving-end real/reactive power components of the system of Fig. 9 at different power to 60 . For each value of , the HFC paramangles from eters are varied in the same manner as described for the studies reported in Fig. 10. It should be noted that of the system of Fig. 9 is practically within the range of 0 to 20 . However, for the sake of demonstration, Fig. 12 shows up to 60 . Fig. 12 shows that the effectiveness of the PST on real , power-ow control decreases for higher values of . At the PST tap steps can control real power from 0 to about . At , the PST can 207-MW change real power transfer only within the range of 706-MW to ). To the contrary, as Fig. 12 shows, 800-MW the TSSC is more effective in controlling real power at higher and shows. values of as comparison of

2336

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 23, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2008

Fig. 16. Single-phase steady-state equivalent model of UPFC.

Fig. 14. Real and reactive power of the sending-end (curves 1) and the receiving-end (curves 2) when either HFC (a-c) or PST is in service (a-b).

Fig. 17. Acceptable region for magnitude and phase-angle of injected voltage V by the UPFC.

Fig. 15. Comparison of the receiving-end P -Q regions achieved by HFC and stand-alone PST at different power angles.

that the HFC can control real power with a phase-shifting transformer which is rated at half of the rating of the stand-alone PST. It should be noted that the MSC of the HFC is inactive in this comparison. The results shown in Fig. 14 correspond to . As mentioned in Section V-B, the controllable - region achieved by a PST is signicantly reduced as the power angle increases. Fig. 15 compares - regions of the HFC and the and . At , stand-alone PST at is much the range of real power controlled by the HFC . larger than that of the stand-alone PST B. Comparison of HFC and UPFC A steady-state equivalent model of the UPFC [6], Fig. 16, is used to obtain its - characteristics. Similar to the HFC, the UPFC is connected between Bus-10 and Bus-11 of the study system of Fig. 9. Based on the maximum magnitude of the series injected , and assuming that the UPFC voltage operates only in the rst quadrant of the complex power plane (similar to the HFC), its - region is obtained under the following conditions: 1) Range of variations of the magnitude of series injected is within 0 and 0.445 p.u. and subject to the voltage

constraint that voltage at Bus-11, Fig. 9, must not exceed 1.1 p.u. Thus, the shaded area of Fig. 17 species the region that the tip of the phasor of the UPFC injected voltage is located within. 2) Range of variations of the phase-angle of the series injected is within 0 to 90 . voltage of the UPFC 3) Magnitude of the parallel branch voltage is set such that the parallel branch injects 50-MVAr. Fig. 18 depicts the receiving-end - region of the UPFC and indicates that it can control real power ow from 71-MW to 440-MW (the same as that of HFC) and reactive power ow from 40-MVAr to 400-MVAr. The UPFC - characteristic, subject to the voltage constraint at Bus-11, is identied by the bold lines in the - plane of Fig. 18, and indicates that the maximum reactive power is limited to about 200-MVAr. A comparison of the - regions provided by the UPFC and the HFC (i.e., those of Figs. 18 and 13), shows that the UPFC covers all nodes within its controllable region in a continuous fashion, while the HFC only provides discrete points. Figs. 18 and 13 also show that the range of real power controlled by both the UPFC and HFC is the same (71-MW to 440-MW). However, the reactive power region controlled by the UPFC is signicantly wider and almost independent of real power. The reason is the capability of the UPFC parallel branch to inject reactive power independently [6]. The amount of injected reactive power by the HFC through its MSC is depended on the terminal voltage at Bus-11. Thus its range of reactive power control is fairly limited compared to that of the UPFC.

NIAKI et al.: POWER-FLOW MODEL AND STEADY-STATE ANALYSIS OF THE HFC

2337

Fig. 19. Voltage phasors of PST, HFC, and UPFC. Fig. 18. Receiving-end P -Q region of Fig. 9 with UPFC in service.

C. Comparison of Series Injected Voltages by PST, HFC, and UPFC The magnitude of the series injected voltage is one of the main factors to calculate ratings of the PST, the HFC and the UPFC. Therefore, this section provides a comparison of the magnitudes of imposed voltages of these three controllers. In the reported studies, the maximum magnitudes of the series injected voltages by the HFC, the UPFC and the PST were 0.26 p.u., 0.445 p.u., and 0.49 p.u., respectively. The injected series voltage by the PST is in quadrature angle with respect to the line voltage. The imposed series voltage by the HFC is the sum of 1) voltage injected by its PST subsystem and 2) voltage across its TSSC modules. The rst component is in quadrature angle with respect to the line voltage and the second component is in quadrature angle with respect to the line current. However, the phase-angle of the injected voltage of the UPFC can vary from 0 to 90 . Fig. 19 shows voltage phasors introduced by the PST, the HFC, and the UPFC in the complex plane. In this corresponds to the stand-alone PST, gure, 1) and corresponds to the PST subsystem 2) and the TSSC modules of the HFC respectively, and 3) corresponds to the UPFC. is obtained for two different operating conditions (i.e., 1) with line current in phase with the and 2) for line current with phase angle line voltage with respect to the line voltage). Fig. 19 shows that at operating points form to , the magnitude of the injected voltage by the UPFC should be reduced to keep Bus-11 voltage at its maximum limit. For the HFC, the series capacitors assists in power transfer and as a result the required maximum series injected voltage of its PST subsystem can be signicantly smaller comparing to those of the UPFC, and the stand-alone PST. Therefore, the MVA rating of the series transformer subsystem of the HFC (115-MVA) is signicantly smaller than those of the stand-alone PST (230-MVA) and the UPFC (196-MVA). VII. CONCLUSIONS This paper presents HFC as a hybrid compensator for steady-state power-ow control of power transmission lines.

This paper develops a steady-state equivalent circuit and provides a power-ow model of the HFC. The HFC model is used to investigate its steady-state - and power-ow characteristics in a test system. A comparison of the HFC power-ow characteristics with those of a UPFC and a stand-alone PST is also provided. The study results conclude that: the HFC unit can control power ow with its TSSC and PST subsystems; the TSSC is more effective for power-ow control under large power-angles (i.e., heavy line current conditions) and becomes ineffective when the line current is relatively small. To the contrary, the PST subsystem can effectively control power ow under small power-angle conditions and becomes ineffective when the power-angle is large. an HFC unit with a 115-MVA PST and three modules of 4, 8, and 12 TSSC can effectively control power ow from 53-MW to 440-MW in the study system. The same range of real-power control also can be achieved by a stand-alone PST unit or a UPFC unit with series transformer ratings of 230-MVA and 196-MVA, respectively. The imposed amount of reactive power, exchanged with the sending-end and/or receiving-end of the line at maximum real-power transfer, is noticeably smaller for the HFC unit compared with a stand-alone PST unit. A UPFC can minimize the reactive power exchange. APPENDIX A Parameters of the system of Fig. 9. ; ; ; ; PST subsystem of HFC: . APPENDIX B HFC Switching Strategy: Effectiveness of the PST and the TSSC subsystems of the HFC on the steady-state power ow is discussed in Section V-B. However, it should be noted that the time responses of theses two controls are noticeably different (i.e., PST is slow and TSSC is fast in responding to a command). ; ; ; ; stand-alone PST

2338

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 23, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2008

Fig. 20. Switching control strategy for fast power-ow control by an HFC.

Therefore, to rapidly respond to a power-ow command, the sequence of steps that must take place should be predetermined. Since the time response of a TSSC is small, it can be used to respond to a power-ow command rst. This is achieved by enforcing the steady-state operating point of the HFC to be on the solid line of Fig. 11. Thus, the TSSC can be switched in or out to increase or decrease power ow, respectively. Fig. 20 shows a closeup of the - characteristics of Fig. 11. Assume that the initial steady-state operating point corresponds to ( , ) at point on Fig. 20, and the HFC is commended to increase real-power ow to 250-MW. Since 250-MW is larger than the initial , the HFC, through the control action of the TSSC, moves its operating point to . Due to the discrete namay not closely match the ture of the HFC operating point, -MW, required 250-MW, however, it is located within is a prespecied acceptable margin and depends on where the system conguration and the design parameters. Operating point is not an acceptable long-term steady-state operating point since it is close to the limit of the HFC - characteristics, and a new command to increase real-power results in reaching and violating the - limit. Thus, the PST of the HFC (slowly) moves the operating point from to . Operating point violates the acceptable and, thus, the TSSC enforces a new operating point (i.e., ). is not on the middle characteristics solid line, again the Since PST gradually removes the operating points to . Operating does not satisfy the prespecied margin and, thus, point is imposed by the PST. Operating point operating point is the new steady-state operating point and enables the HFC to react to a new power command.

REFERENCES [1] G. Andersson, P. Donalek, R. Farmer, N. Hatziargyriou, I. Kamwa, P. Kundur, N. Martins, J. Paserba, P. Pourbeik, J. Sanchez-Gasca, R. Schulz, A. Stankovic, C. Taylor, and V. Vittal, Causes of the 2003 major grid blackouts in North America and Europe, and recommended means to improve system dynamic performance, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 19221928, Nov. 2005. [2] Y. H. Song and A. T. Johns, Flexible A.C. Transmission Systems (FACTS). London, U.K.: Inst. Elect. Eng. Press, 1999. [3] N. G. Hingorani and L. Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS: Concepts and Technology of Flexible AC Transmission Systems. New York: Wiley, 1999. [4] E. Acha, C. Fuerte-Esquivel, H. Ambriz-Perez, and C. Angeles-Camacho, FACTS Modelling and Simulation in Power Networks. New York: Wiley, 2004. [5] L. Gyugyi, C. D. Schauder, S. L. Williams, T. R. Rietman, D. R. Torgerson, and A. Edris, The unied power ow controller: A new approach to power transmission control, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 10851097, Apr. 1995. [6] S. A. N. Niaki and M. R. Iravani, Steady-state and dynamic modeling of unied power ow controller (UPFC) for power system studies, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 19371943, Nov. 1996. [7] S. A. N. Niaki, Modeling and applications of unied power ow controller (UPFC) for power systems, Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Elect. Comput. Eng., Univ. Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, 1996. [8] W. D. Stevenson, Elements of Power System Analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1982, pp. 218218. [9] W. J. Lyman, Controlling power ow with phase-shifting equipment, AIEE Trans., vol. 49, pp. 825831, Jul. 1930. [10] Z. Han, Phase-shifter and power ow control, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-101, no. 10, pp. 37903795, Oct. 1982. [11] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control. New York: McGrawHill, 1994. [12] M. Noroozian and G. Anderson, Power ow control by use of controllable series components, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 14201429, Jul. 1993. [13] M. Noroozian, L. Angquist, M. Ghandhari, and G. Andersson, Use of UPFC for optimal power ow control, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 16291634, Oct. 1997.
S. Ali Nabavi Niaki (M92SM04) received the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees in electrical engineering from Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran, in 1987 and 1990, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, in 1996. Currently he is in his sabbatical leave at the University of Toronto, ON, Canada. His current research interests include analysis, operation and control of power systems, and FACTS controllers. He joined the University of Mazandaran, Babol, Iran, in 1996.

Reza Iravani (M86SM02F03) received the B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering from Tehran Polytechnic University, Tehran, Iran, in 1976, and the M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada, in 1981 and 1985, respectively. Currently, he is a Professor at the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. His research interests include power electronics and power system dynamics and control.

Mojtaba Noroozian (SM97) received the B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering from Arya-Mehr (Sharif) University, Tehran, Iran, in 1979, the M.Sc. degree in power systems from the University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, Manchester, U.K., in 1981, and the Ph.D. degree from the Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden, in 1994.