project report on IPFC

OPTIMAL LOCATION OF INTERLINE POWERFLOW CONTROLLER (IPFC) IN POWER

TRANSMISSION SYSTEM

A PROJECT REPORT

Submitted by

PRAKASH CHANDRA 3460810232PRABHAT CHANDR 3460810230PRANAV KUMAR 3460810235RAHUL KUMAR 3460810243

in partial fulfillment for the award of the degree

of

BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING

IN

ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING

AARUPADAI VEEDU INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,

PAIYANOOR

VINAYAKA MISSIONS UNIVERSITY, SALEM

APRIL 2012

VINAYAKA MISSIONS UNIVERSITYAARUPADAI VEEDU INSTITUE OF TECHNOLOGY

BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

Certified that this Project Report “OPTIMAL LOCATION OF INTERLINE

POWER FLOW CONTROLLER(IPFC) IN POWER TRANSMISSION

SYSTEM ” is the bonafide work of “Prakash chandra (3460810232), Prabhat

chandr (3460810230), Pranav kumar (3460810235) & Rahul kumar

(3460810243)” who carried out the project work under my supervision.

SIGNATURE SIGNATUREDr. N. VEERAPPAN, M.E., Ph.D Ms. G.NITHYA,BE, M.E. HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT SUPERVISOR

Lec / EEEDepartment of EEE Department of EEEAVIT, Paiyanoor AVIT, PaiyanoorChennai – 603104 Chennai - 603104

Project viva voce held on _____________________

INTERNAL EXAMINER EXTERNAL EXAMINER

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We, the project members firstly thank The Almighty for the divine intervention,guidance and the blessings bestowed upon us throughout the tenure of our projectwork.

We are also very grateful to Dr. A.S. Ganesan, Vice Chairman,Vinayaka Missions Research Foundation and Dr. N.R. Alamelu, M.E., PhD,Principal, AVIT, Paiyanoor for providing us the adequate support and facilities inthe college for completing this Project Work.

We would like to express our sincere gratitude to our HOD(EEE), Dr.N. Veerappan, M.E., PhD, for granting us his kind permission to realize thisProject and also for his proper guidance, valuable advice, support andencouragement.

We extend our thanks to our guide MS. G.NITHYA, BE, ME / EEE, for guiding tocomplete this project successfully.

We are grateful to our Project Co-ordinators, Mrs.B.Sowmya, Asst Prof (Gr-II) &Mrs. J.Suganthi, Asst Prof, EEE Department for guiding us in realizing ourproject successfully.

Our sincere thanks are also to the other faculty members and non-teaching staff ofEEE Department for their kind co-operation for the successful completion of thisproject.

Last but not the least, we extend our thanks to our parents, family members andfriends for their prayers and encouragement for completing this projectsuccessfully.

PRAKASH CHANDRA PRABHAT

CJANDR PRANAV KUMAR

RAHUL KUMAR

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Flexible AC Transmission System (FACTS) was first introduced by Narain

G. Hingorani in the United States of America in the year of 1988. The FACTS

controller is defined by the Institution of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

(IEEE) as “a power electronic based system and other static equipment that

provide control of one or more AC transmission system parameters to enhance

controllability and increase power transfer capability”. There are 3 main categories

in FACTS Controller, which are namely series, shunt, shunt-series or series-series

FACTS Controller with every categories have its own functions.

The series connected FACTS Controller uses the basic principle of the cancellation

of a portion of the reactive line impedance could increase the transmittable power.

This is due to the fact that AC power transmission over long lines was primarily

limited by the series reactive impedance of the line. The series connected FACTS

Controller could improve the voltage stability limit, increase the transient stability

margin, power oscillation damping and sub-synchronous oscillation damping.

Some examples of the series FACTS Controllers are Thyristor2 Switched Series

Capacitor (TSSC), Thyristor-Controlled Series Capacitor (TCSC) and Static

Synchronous Series Compensator (SSSC).

1

On the other hand, the shunt connected FACTS Controller uses the basic principle

of the steady state transmittable power and the voltage profile along the line could

be controlled by appropriate reactive shunt compensation. The shunt connected

FACTS Controllers could be used to improve the voltage profile of a specific bus,

improve the transient stability and power oscillation damping. Some examples of

then shunt connected FACTS Controllers are Static VAR Compensator (SVC) and

the Static Synchronous Compensator (StatCom).

For the combinational shunt-series and series-series connected FACTS Controllers

combines the main principles of the series and shunt connected FACTS

Controllers. It able to control, simultaneously or selectively, all the parameters

affecting the power flow in the transmission line, that are impedance, voltage and

the phase angle. The shunt series connected FACTS Controller provides

multifunctional flexibility required to solve many of the problems facing by the

power delivery industry. Some examples of shunt-series connected FACTS

Controllers are Unified Power Flow Controller (UPFC) and series-series FACTS

controller are Interline Power Flow Controller (IPFC).

1.2 Objectives of Project

Main objective of this project is to investigate the location and optimal

placement of interline power flow controller to maintain the voltage profile, real

and reactive power flow in transmission line in power system.

2

1.3 Scope of Project

There are several scope that have been outlined in order to narrow and

specific the project in such a way that the objectives of the project could be

achieved. This project is to consider the ability to improve the voltage profile and

power transfer capability. Recently, Because of the problems such as the

congestion management, the reduction of the operational cost and the overall

generating cost, the additional control freedoms of FACTS devices have aroused

great interest in the application of FACTS devices especially the IPFC and the

Generalized Unified Power Flow Controller (GUPFC). The software that would be

used throughout the project is MATLAB based sim Power System.

1.4 Problem Statement

Recently, Because of the problems such as the Congestion management,

the reduction of the operational Cost and the overall generating cost, the additional

control freedoms of FACTS devices have aroused great interest in the application

of FACTS devices especially the interline power flow controller (IPFC) .

However, very few publications have been presented on the investigation on the

location of IPFC in power system and its effect. So, the study on optimal

placement and location investigation is described in this project.

1.5 Outline of project report

This report consists of 6 Chapters. The first chapter contained 5 sections,

namely Background, Objective of Project, Scope of Project, Problem Statement

and the Outline of the project report.

3

In the second chapter, Introduction of General Theory on FACTS Controllers,

Continuous Power Flow and reviews of related work are presented.

Chapter 3 elaborates on the determination of location of interline power flow

Controllers (IPFC).

Chapter 4 Interline power flow controller and its performance in power

transmission system.

Chapter 5 presents the results of simulation using MATLAB sim power software.

The chapter consists of simulation of test system with and without IPFC controller

and comparison of result for optimal placement of IPFC in test bus system.

Lastly, Chapter 6 concludes the thesis and presents several suggestions for future

work related to the project.

4

CHAPTER 2

THEORY AND LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

In this chapter, the basic working principle of the FACTS Controllers would

be discussed. It would also include brief overview of the continuous power flow

analysis. Lastly, the reviews of related work would also be included.

2.2 General Theory on FACTS Controllers

In general, FACTS Controllers can be divided into four categories:

• Series Controllers

• Shunt Controllers

• Combined series-series Controllers

• Combined series-shunt Controllers

Series Controllers: [Figure 2.2(b)] The series Controller could be a variable

impedance, such as capacitor, reactor, etc., or a power electronics based variable

source of main frequency, subsynchronous and harmonic frequencies (or a

combination) to serve the desired need. In principle, all series Controllers inject

voltage in series with the line. Even a variable impedance multiplied by the current

flow through it, represents an injected series voltage in the line. As long as the

voltage is in phase quadrature with the line current, the series Controller only

supplies or consumes variable reactive power. Any other phase relationship will

involve handling of real power as well.

5

Shunt Controllers: [Figure 2.2(c)] As in the case of series Controllers, the shunt

Controllers may be variable impedance, variable source, or a combination of these.

In principle, all shunt Controllers inject current into the system at the point of

connection. Even a variable shunt impedance connected to the line voltage causes a

variable current flow and hence represents injection of current into the line. As

long as the injected current is in phase quadrature with the line voltage, the shunt

Controller only supplies or consumes variable reactive power. Any other phase

relationship will involve handling of real power as well.

Combined series-series Controllers: [Figure 2.2(d)] This could be a combination

of separate series controllers, which are controlled in a coordinated manner, in a

multiline transmission system. Or it could be a unified Controller, Figure 1.4(d), in

which series Controllers provide independent series reactive compensation for each

line but also transfer real power among the lines via the power link. The real power

transfer capability of the unified series-series Controller, referred to as Interline

Power Flow Controller, makes it possible to balance both the real and reactive

power flow in the lines and thereby maximize the utilization of the transmission

system. Note that the term "unified" here means that the de terminals of all

Controller converters are all connected together for real power transfer.

Combined series-shunt Controllers: [Figures 2.2(e) and 2.2(f)] This could be a

combination of separate shunt and series Controllers, which are controlled in a

coordinated manner [Figure 2.2(e)], or a Unified Power Flow Controller with

series and shunt elements [Figure 2.2(f)]. In principle, combined shunt and series

Controllers inject current into the system with the shunt part of the Controller and

voltage in series in the line with the series part of the Controller. However, when

6

the shunt and series Controllers are unified, there can be a real power exchange

between the series and shunt Controllers via the power link.

7

Figure 2.2 Basic types of FACTS Controllers:

(a) general symbol for FACTS Controller; (b) series Controller; (c) shunt

Controller; (d) unified series-series Controller; (e) coordinated series and shunt

Controller; (f) unified series-shunt Controller; (g) unified Controller for multiple

lines; (h) series Controller with storage; (i) shunt Controller with storage;

(G) unified series-shunt Controller with storage.

8

2.3 Continuous Power Flow

Basic principles of power flow control

To facilitate the understanding of the basic principle of power flow control and to

introduce the basic ideas behind the different type of FACTS controllers, the

simple model shown in Fig. 2. The sending and receiving end voltages are assumed

to be fixed. The sending and receiving ends are connected by an equivalent

reactance, assuming that the resistance of high voltage transmission lines is very

small. The receiving end is modeled as an infinite bus with a fix angle of zero

degree. .

Fig. 2.3(a) Model for calculation of real and reactive power flow control

9

10

Fig. 2.3(b) Power angle curve

Complex, active and reactive power flows in this transmission system are defined,

respectively, as follows:

Similarly, for the sending end:

11

Where V S and V R are the magnitudes of sending and receiving end voltages,

respectively, while δ is the phase-shift between sending and receiving end voltages.

Fig2.3 shows the evolution of the active power delivered. It’s clear from the

demonstrated equations, that the active and reactive power in a transmission line

depend on the voltage magnitudes and phase angles at the sending and receiving

ends as well as line impedance.

2.4 Reviews of Related Work

The paper by S.Gerbex,R.Cherkaoui and A.J.Germond, Member ,IEEE. is mainlyabout the optimal location of FACTS devices like TCSC, TCVR, TCPST, SVC andUPFC. A.Dehghanpour, S.M.H.Hosseini and N.talebi , IEEE-2011 is mainlyworked on power flow management by IPFC in transmission system.M.F.Moghadam, M.Khederzadeh, IEEE-2011. is mainly about voltagecompensation with IPFC using all degree of freedom.

Mahdad et. al. (2006) basically presented method on how to choose the type

of FACTS Controllers, the location (or the placement) and control the FACTS

12

Controllers. They use 2 types of compensation, namely the SVC for shunt

connected FACTS Controller and TCSC for series connected FACTS Controller.

They have stated that they would use system loading ability and loss minimization

as a measure of power system performance. Similar with the preceding paper, they

applied the continuous power flow method in order to determine the weak bus by

comparing the voltage profiles of each bus in the system. With the data obtained,

they have chosen the bus in which has the worst voltage profile (worst voltage

collapse among other buses). Based on their finding, they placed SVC and again,

they applied continuous power flow method to obtain the voltage profiles. After

comparison made the maximum loading parameter and the voltage stability proven

to be increased. For this project, the approach proposed by Mahdad et. al. (2006)

would be used to compare the FACTS Controllers. The use of CPF is more reliable

than the ordinary power flow method available for this case, since the power flow

method simulate the increasing of load, and therefore the FACTS Controllers

effects and performance are most likely could be studied.

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This project would demonstrate the effects and the performance of implementing

IPFC in the power system. Before the performance and the effect of IPFC in power

13

system were evaluated, firstly the location or the placement of the IPFC it selves

was determined. In realizing this, an analysis named continuous power flow

analysis was used in order to determine the weak bus and the underutilized line,

and hence determine the location of FACTS Controllers in the test system.

3.2 The Determination of Location of IPFC

The IPFC were placed on the location in such a way that the capability of

Controllers to compensate a particular bus or line could be optimized. Therefore,

continuous power flow analysis was applied in order to determine the weakest bus

and the underutilized line in the test system. The test system was analyzed with and

without the IPFC. Voltage profiles for all the buses in the test network were noted

and the bus in which collapses the worst among other buses has been selected as

the weak bus. On the other hand, based on the continuous power flow report, the

most underutilized line was determined. And finally the optimal location of

interline power flow controller is determined.

.

3.3 Summarized Flow Chart

The methodology adopted above is best explained by means of a flow chart.

Figure below shows the summarized the flow chart of the adopted methodology.

14

Figure 3.3(a) The flow chart of methodology adopted

15

The first thing is the selected test system, Test System is constructed by using the

MATLAB Simulink. Then, the CPF was applied on the test system without the

consideration of IPFC(base case) to obtain the performance of the system without

any compensation, and tabulate the CPF result. Then the implementation of IPFC

in the test system at different bus and find the voltage profile of each bus and also

the CPF report. Compare the tabulated results which is obtained from with and

without IPFC in test system at different location in the line. And finally find the

optimal placement of interline power flow controller in test system.

16

CHAPTER 4

OPERATION OF IPFC

4.1 INTRODUCTION

The ongoing expansion and growth of the electric utility industry

continuously introduce changes to a once predictable business. Electricity is

increasingly being considered and handled as a commodity. Thus transmission

systems are being pushed closer to their stability and thermal limits with the

focus on the quality of power delivered. In the evolving utility environment,

financial and market forces will continue to demand a more optimal and

profitable operation of the power system with respect to generation, transmission

and distribution. Advanced technologies are paramount for the reliable and

secure operation of power systems. To achieve both operational reliability and

financial profitability it is clear that more efficient utilization and control of the

existing transmission system infrastructure is required. Improved utilization of

the existing power system is provided through the application of advanced

control technologies. Power electronics based equipment or Flexible AC

Transmission systems (FACTS) provide proven technical solutions to address

these new operating challenges being presented today. FACTS technologies

allow for improved transmission system operation with minimal infrastructure

investment, environmental impact and implementation time compared to the

construction of new transmission lines. FACTS technologies provide advanced

solutions as cost effective alternative to new transmission line construction.

FACTS provide the needed corrections of transmission functions in order to

efficiently utilize existing transmission systems and therefore, minimize the gap

between the stability and the thermal level.

17

4.2 INTERLINE POWER FLOW CONTROLLER (IPFC)

Objective of Interline Power Flow Controller (IPFC) is to provide a

comprehensive power flow control scheme for a multi-line transmission system, in

which two or more lines employ a SSSC for series compensation. A multi-line

IPFC comprises of number of ‘n’ SSSC’s, one for each line of the transmission

system to be controlled, with a common dc bus as illustrated schematically by a

block diagram as shown in Fig:4.1. The IPFC scheme has the capability to transfer

real power between the compensated lines in addition to executing the independent

and controllable reactive power compensation of each line. This capability makes it

possible to equalize both real and reactive power flow between the lines, to transfer

power demand from overloaded to under-loaded lines to compensate against

resistive line voltage drops and the corresponding reactive line power and to

increase the effectiveness of the compensating system for dynamic disturbance like

transient stability and power oscillation.

Fig: 4.2(a) General schematic of IPFC

Consider a IPFC scheme shown in Fig:4.2 consisting of two back-to-back dc to ac

inverter each compensating a transmission line by series voltage injection. This

arrangement has two synchronous voltage sources with phasors V1pq and V2pq in

series with transmission Lines 1 and 2, represent the two back to back dc to ac

inverters. The common dc link is represented by a bidirectional link (P12=P1pq=P2pq)

for real power exchange between the two voltage sources. Transmission Line-1,

represented by reactance X1, has a sending end bus with voltage phasor V1S and a

receiving end bus with voltage phasor V1R. The sending end voltage phasor of

18

Line-2 represented by reactance X2 is V2S and the receiving end voltage phasor is

V2R.

Fig:4.2(b) IPFC with two VSC’s

Transmission relationship between the two systems, system 1 selected to be the

prime system for which free controllability of both real and reactive line power

flow is stipulated. A phasor diagram of system 1, defining the relationship between

V1S,V1R,VX1 (the voltage phasor across X1) and the inserted voltage phasor V1pq

with controllable magnitude (0≤V1pq≤V1pqmax) and angle (0≤ρ1≤360°) is shown in

Fig:2.3. The inserted voltage phasor V1pq is added to the fixed sending end voltage

phasor V1s to produce the effective sending end voltage V1Seff=V1S+V1pq. The

difference V1Seff-V1R provides the compensated voltage phasor, VX1 across X1. As

angle ρ1 is varied over its full 360° range, the end of phase V1pq moves along a

Fig: 4.2(c) IPFC prime converter and corresponding phasor diagram

circle with center located at the end of phasor V1S. The area within this circle

obtained with V1pqmax define the operating range of phase V1pq and thereby the

achievable compensation of Line-1. The rotation of phasor V1pq with angle ρ1

modulates both the magnitude and the angle of phase VX1 and therefore both the

transmitted real power P1R and the reactive power Q1R vary with ρ1 in a sinusoidal

manner. This process requires the voltage source representing Inverter 1 (V1pq) to

supply and absorb both reactive and real power, Q1pq and P1pq which are sinusoidal

function of angle ρ1.

19

4.3 Block diagram of IPFC

Fig-4.3(a) block diagram

4.4 Advantages of IPFC

Interline Power Flow Controller(IPFC) can control the power flow in a multi-

line system. Power imbalance between overloaded lines and under-loaded lines

corrected. Hence minimize the gap between the stability and thermal level.

AC transmission power of a line

P = (Vs * VR * sin δ) /X.

20

Three main variables that can be directly controlled to impact its performance are

Voltage

Angle

Impedance

Suitable adjustment of any of these parameters can achieve power flow control in

the transmission line.

Examples of some existing conventional equipment

Series capacitor – Controls impedance

Phase shifting transformer – Controls angle

Switched capacitor and reactor - Controls voltage

Synchronous condenser - Controls voltage

Traditional approach of using mechanical switch cannot realize full utilization of

the transmission because of the need for large stability margin. Mechanical

switch based operations has more disadvantages. i.e.

Large stability margin

Poor dynamic performance

Non cycling/repeatability

Discontinuous, not smooth control

More wear and tear, high rate of failures

21

Interline Power Flow Controller (IPFC) FACTS controller has the following

advantages.

Lower stability margin

Good dynamic performance

Cycling/repeatability

Continuous and smooth control

Negligible failures

Power electronics based solutions of FACTS controllers are the solution for the

present and future problems of the transmission system.

CHAPTER 5

SIMULATION RESULT AND DISCUSSION

5.1 Introduction

22

In order to analyze the IPFC, some simulations are done in this project. The first

simulation was involving the 5 bus system without the consideration of any

FACTS controllers, meaning it was just to measure the system performance

without the FACTS compensation effect. Then, the system performance was

measured with IPFC and effects taken into account. Similarly the simulation of

IEEE 4,8,14,30 bus has been done with and without IPFC.

Fig-5.1(a) Test power system for analyzing the effect of location of IPFC

5.2 Simulation of Base Case (Without IPFC)

23

Fig-5.2(a) Test power system without IPFC

24

Fig-5.2(b) Real and reactive power generated by generator 1without IPFC

Fig-5.2(c) Real and reactive power generated by generator 2 without IPFC

25

Table 1: Bus data obtained from simulation without IPFC

Bus No Voltage(KV) Generation LoadMW MVAR MW MVAR

1 126.2 265.7 143.8 0.0 0.02 262.6 0.0 0.0 165.4 82.723 256.0 0.0 0.0 157.3 0.04 258.6 0.0 0.0 200.6 80.245 127.1 268.4 145.5 0.0 0.0

Total 534.1 289.3 523.3 162.96

Table 2: Line data obtained from simulation without IPFC

Line flow and losses

From Bus

To Bus

PMW QMVAR From Bus

To Bus

PMW QMVAR Line loss

MW MVAR1 2 277.042 113.812 2 1 -275.2 -87.893 1.842 25.919

1 5 -13.142 -3.312 5 1 13.234 2.104 0.092 -1.208

2 3 109.8 5.173 3 2 -106.9 -0.499 2.9 4.673

4 3 51.03 -9.537 3 4 -50.38 -0.499 0.65 -10.036

5 4 255.166 114.896 4 5 -251.6 -89.77 1.736 25.126

Total 7.22 44.486

Table 3: Losses in transformer1&2 without IPFC

Transformer Transformer lossesMW MVAR

1 1.8 33.3

2 1.8 28.5

Total 3.6 61.8

Total losses: 10.82 MW, 106.286 MVAR

26

5.3 Test power system with IPFC between line 1 and 2 at bus1

Fig-5.3(a) Test power system with IPFC between line 1 and 2 at bus1

27

Fig-5.3(b) Real and reactive power generated by generator 1 with IPFC

Fig-5.3(c) Real and reactive power generated by generator 2 with IPFC

28

29

Table 4: Bus data obtained from simulation with IPFC at bus 1


1 129.5 281 161.4 0.0 0.02 267.7 0.0 0.0 172 85.983 260.5 0.0 0.0 162.9 04 262.6 0.0 0.0 206.9 82.745 128.8 271.8 138.3 0.0 0.0

Total 552.8 299.7 541.8 168.72

Table 5: Line data obtained from simulation with IPFC at bus 1


From Bus

To Bus

PMW QMVAR From Bus

To Bus

PMW QMVAR Line loss

MW MVAR1 2 287.964 121.768 2 1 -286.1 88.09 1.864 33.678

1 5 -8.864 3.132 5 1 8.936 -8.804 0.072 -5.672

2 3 114.1 2.112 3 2 -111.1 -2.718 3.0 0.606

4 3 52.45 2.718 3 4 -51.77 -13.08 0.68 -10.362

5 4 261.164 119.198 4 5 -259.3 95.82 1.814 23.378

Total 7.43 41.628

Table 6: Losses in transformer1&2 with IPFC at bus 1


1 1.9 36.5

2 1.7 27.9

Total 3.6 64.4


30

5.4 Test power system with IPFC between line 1 and 2 at bus 5

Fig-5.4(a) Test power system with IPFC between line 1 and 2 at bus 5

31

32



33

Table 7: Bus data obtained from simulation with IPFC at bus5


1 127.8 273 140.1 0.0 0.02 266.4 0.0 0.0 170.3 85.133 260.4 0.0 0.0 162.8 0.04 263.7 0.0 0.0 208.7 83.465 130.0 279.8 159.6 0.0 0.0

Total 552.8 299.7 541.8 168.51

Table 8: Line data obtained from simulation with IPFC at bus5


From Bus

To Bus

PMW QMVAR From Bus

To Bus

PMW QMVAR Line loss

MW MVAR1 2 283.81 112.622 2 1 -282.1 -94.37 1.71 17.63

1 5 -12.61 -6.223 5 1 12.724 3.059 0.114 -3.164

2 3 111.7 9.236 3 2 -108.8 -4.227 2.9 5.009

4 3 54.69 -6.087 3 4 -53.97 -4.227 0.72 -10.314

5 4 265.28 126.24 4 5 -263.4 -89.547 1.89 36.693

Total 7.334 45.845

Table 9: Losses in transformer1&2


1 1.8 33.7

2 1.8 30.3

Total 3.6 67


5.5 Test power system with IPFC between line 1 and 3

34

Fig-5.5(a) Test power system with IPFC between line 1 and 3

35



36

37

Table 10: Bus data obtained from simulation with IPFC between line 1&3


1 126.5 291.5 168.2 0.0 0.02 271.3 0.0 0.0 176.7 88.343 264.0 0.0 0.0 167.3 0.04 266.2 0.0 0.0 212.6 85.035 127.0 276.7 149.5 0.0 0.0

Total 568.2 317.7 556.6 173.37

Table 11: Line data obtained from simulation with IPFC between line 1&3


From Bus

To Bus

PMW QMVAR From Bus

To Bus

PMW QMVAR Line loss

MW MVAR1 2 299.49 129.80 2 1 -297.4 -92.07 2.092 37.73

1 5 -9.992 2.001 5 1 10.075 -7.475 0.082 -5.474

2 3 120.7 -3.729 3 2 -117.4 7.635 3.3 3.906

4 3 50.42 11.63 3 4 -49.81 -0.7635 0.61 -10.86

5 4 264.926 111.725 4 5 -263.0 -96.66 1.926 25.06

Total 8.01 50.362



1 2 40

2 1.7 30.3

Total 3.7 70.3


38

5.6Test power system with IPFC between line 2 and 3


39



40

41



1 126.5 291.5 168.2 0.0 0.02 271.3 0.0 0.0 176.7 88.343 264.0 0.0 0.0 167.3 0.04 266.2 0.0 0.0 212.6 85.035 127.0 276.7 149.5 0.0 0.0

Total 568.2 317.7 556.6 173.37



From Bus

To Bus

PMW QMVAR From Bus

To Bus

PMW QMVAR Line loss

MW MVAR1 2 299.49 129.80 2 1 -297.4 -92.07 2.092 37.73

1 5 -9.992 2.001 5 1 10.075 -7.475 0.082 -5.474

2 3 120.7 -3.729 3 2 -117.4 7.635 3.3 3.906

4 3 50.42 11.63 3 4 -49.81 -0.7635 0.61 -10.86

5 4 264.926 111.725 4 5 -263.0 -96.66 1.926 25.06

Total 8.01 50.362



1 2 40.4

2 1.7 30.3

Total 3.7 70.7


42


Fig-5.7(a)Test power system with IPFC between line 1 and 4

43



44



1 125.9 281.9 149.9 0.0 0.02 270.6 0.0 0.0 175.8 87.883 264.5 0.0 0.0 167.9 0.04 268.0 0.0 0.0 215.5 86.185 128.3 288.9 170.3 0.0 0.0

Total 570.8 320.2 559.2 174.06

Table17: Line data obtained from simulation with IPFC between line 1&4


From Bus

To Bus

PMW QMVAR From Bus

To Bus

PMW QMVAR Line loss

MW MVAR1 2 291.96 119.357 2 1 -290.1 96.67 1.867 22.287

1 5 -11.967 -6.657 5 1 12.074 3.633 0.107 -3.024

2 3 114.3 8.796 3 2 -111.3 -3.491 3.0 5.305

4 3 57.4 -7.08 3 4 -56.63 3.491 0.77 -3.589

5 4 274.926 133.367 4 5 -272.90

-93.27 2.026 40.107

Total 7.77 61.08



1 1.9 37.2

2 1.9 33.3

Total 3.8 70.5

45

Total losses: 11.57 MW,131.586 MVAR


46



47


48



1 125.9 281.9 149.9 0.0 0.02 270.6 0.0 0.0 175.8 87.883 264.5 0.0 0.0 167.9 0.04 268.0 0.0 0.0 215.5 86.185 128.3 288.9 170.3 0.0 0.0

Total 570.8 320.2 559.2 174.06



From Bus

To Bus

PMW QMVAR From Bus

To Bus

PMW QMVAR Line loss

MW MVAR1 2 291.96 119.357 2 1 -290.1 96.67 1.867 22.287

1 5 -11.967 -6.657 5 1 12.074 3.633 0.107 -3.024

2 3 114.3 8.796 3 2 -111.3 -3.491 3.0 5.305

4 3 57.4 -7.08 3 4 -56.63 3.491 0.77 -3.589

5 4 274.926 133.367 4 5 -272.9 -93.27 2.026 40.107

Total 7.77 61.086



1 1.9 37.2

2 1.9 33.3

Total 3.8 70.5

Total losses:11.57 MW, 131.586 MVAR

5.8.1DISCUSSION

49

Several simulations have been ran, and the performance of IPFC controllers used

have been evaluated. Transmitted powers in each line is a function of the voltage

amplitude of sending end and receiving buses, phase shift of sending and receiving

end buses, and series impedance of the line. IPFC can directly or indirectly impact

on each of these factors, and increase the power transfer capability of the line.

Therefore, it could be concluded that IPFC would improves the maximum power

transfer level in the case when IPFC is installed between line 1 and 4 or between

line 2 and 4 because of symmetry.

Hence from the simulation result optimal location of interline power flow

controller (IPFC) should be at the line 1and 4 or line 2 and 4.

50

5.9 Four bus system

Fig-5.9(a) four bus system without IPFC

51

Fig-5.9(b) Real and reactive power in bus-1

Fig-5.9(c) Real and reactive power in bus-2

Fig-5.9(d) Real and reactive power in bus-3

52

Fig-5.9(e) 4 bus line model with IPFC

53

Fig-5.9(f) IPFC model

Fig-5.9(g) Real and reactive power in bus-1

54

Fig-5.9(h) Real and reactive power in bus-2

Fig-5.9(i) Real and reactive power in bus-3

TABLE 22: Real and Reactive power with and without IPFC in 4 bus system.

BUS NO REAL POWER( MW)

WITHOUT

COMPENSATION

REAL POWER( MW)

WITH

COMPENSATION

REACTIVE POWER( MVA)

WITHOUT

COMPENSATION


WITH

COMPENSATION

BUS-1 6.084e5 2.404e5 2.27e5 8.728e4

BUS-2 1.336e5 1.814e5 2.098e4 2.85e4

BUS-3 2.4e5 2.96e5 7.539e4 9.298e4

55

56

5.10 8 bus line model

Fig-5.10(a) 8 bus line model without IPFC

Fig-5.10(b) Real and reactive power in bus-1

57

Fig-5.10(c) Real and reactive power in bus-6

Fig-5.10(d) Real and reactive power in bus-7

58

Fig-5.10(e) 8 bus system with IPFC

59

Fig-5.10(f) IPFC model

Fig-5.10(g) Real and reactive power in bus-1

60

Fig-5.10(h) Real and reactive power in bus-6

Fig-5.10(i) Real and reactive power in bus-7

TABLE 23:Real and Reactive power with and without IPFC in 8 bus system.

BUS NO REAL POWER( MW)

WITHOUT

COMPENSATION

REAL POWER( MW)

WITH

COMPENSATION


WITHOUT

COMPENSATION


WITH

COMPENSATION

BUS-1 0.1422 0.1465 0.0400 0.0313

BUS-6 0.0280 0.0287 0.1823 0.183

61

BUS-7 0.327 0.321 0.103 0.105

BUS-8 0.198 0.200 0.0414 0.0423

BUS-2 0.1797 0.181 0.0282 0.0284

62

5.11- 14 bus line model

Fig-5.11(a) 14 bus system without IPFC

63

Fig-5.11(b) voltage across bus -3

Fig-5.11(c) Real and reactive power across bus-3

Fig-5.11(d) Voltage across bus-11

64

Fig-5.11(e) Real and reactive power across bus-11

Fig-5.11(f) 14 bus system with IPFC

65

Fig-5.11(g) Voltage across bus-3

Fig-5.11(h) Real and reactive power across bus-3

66

Fig-5.11(i) Voltage across bus-11

Fig-5.11(j) Real and reactive power across bus-11


BUS NO REAL POWER WITHOUTIPFC (MW)

REAL POWER WITHIPFC (MW)

REACTIVE POWERWITHOUT IPFC

(MVAR)

REACTIVEPOWER WITHIPFC (MVAR)

BUS-7 0.214 0.306 0.242 0.558

BUS-1 0.247 0.2337 0.258 0.245

67

BUS-3 0.328 0.491 1.033 1.542

BUS-11 0.13 0.39 0.0136 0.41

68

5.12 30 Bus line model

Fig-5.12(a) IEEE 30 BUS SYSTEMS

69

Fig-5.12(b) Voltage across bus-11

Fig-5.12(c) Real power at bus-11

Fig-5.12(d) Reactive power at bus-11

70

Fig-5.12(e) IEEE 30 bus system with IPFC

Fig-5.12(f) Voltage across buss-11

71

Fig-5.12(g) Real power at bus-11

Fig-5.12(h) Reactive power at bus-11


Bus no P (MW)without

IPFC

P (MW) with

IPFC

Q (MVAR)without

IPFC

Q (MVAR)with

IPFC

VOLTAGE

(V) withoutIPFC

VOLTAGE

(V) with IPFC

5 0.212 0.208 0.099 0.098 7198 7144

11 0.418 0.421 0.131 0.132 6783 6798

12 0.35 0.36 1.482 1.51 6868 6931

13 0.338 0.344 1.065 1.08 6069 6112

19 0.341 0.346 0.134 0.136 6868 6931

21 0.286 0.31 0.0934 0.101 6295 6540

72

CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE STUDY

6.1 Conclusions

Several simulations have been ran, and the performance of IPFC controllers used

have been evaluated. Transmitted powers in each line is a function of the voltage

amplitude of sending end and receiving buses, phase shift of sending and receiving

end buses, and series impedance of the line. IPFC can directly or indirectly impact

on each of these factors, and increase the power transfer capability of the line.

Therefore, it could be concluded that IPFC would improves some of the power

system parameters.

Based on the results obtained, IPFC improved the voltage profile of the bus at

which has the lowest PV curve. This improvement was in terms of to maintain the

voltage steady approximately at 1 p.u. with the increasing of load and also to

support the bus when the voltage collapses. IPFC is able to transfer real power

between compensated lines in addition to compensate reactive power for each

individual line, independently. So it can equalize both real and reactive power flow

between the lines, transfer power demand from overloaded to under loaded

Lines, compensate against resistive voltage drops, and increase the effectiveness of

the system for dynamic disturbances.

73

6.2 Suggestions for Future Study

There are several suggestions for future study, and these are:

i. The IPFC should be tested on a very large network, to view its capability

handling complex network.

ii. The IPFC should be tested with respect to dynamic machine, to observe its

effect to machine dynamic performance.

iii. More type of FACTS Controllers should be used, and hence could observe and

compare the difference with interline power flow Controllers.

74

REFERENCES

1. Understanding FACTS Concepts and Technology of Flexible AC

Transmission Systems Narain G. Hingoranl Hingorani Power Electronics

Los Altos Hills, CA Laszlo Gyugyi Siemens Power Transmission &

Distribution Orlando, FL Mohamed E. El-Hawary, Consulting Editor IEEE

Power Engineering Society.

2. FACTS CONTROLLERS IN POWER TRANSMISSION AND

DISTRIBUTION K. R. Padiyar Department of Electrical Engineering

Indian Institute of Science Bangalore-560 012 India.

3. An Overview of Flexible AC Transmission Systems P. Asare Purdue

University School of Electrical Engineering T. Diez Purdue University School

of Electrical Engineering A. Galli Purdue University School of Electrical

Engineering E. O'Neill-Carillo Purdue University School of Electrical

Engineering J. Robertson Purdue University School of Electrical Engineering.

4. M. Fekri Moghadam, H. Askarian Abyaneh , S. H.Fathi Department of

Electrical Engineering Amirkabir University of Technology Tehran, Iran ,M.

Khederzadeh Department of Electrical Engineering Power & Water

University of Technology Tehran, Iran 978-1-4244-8756-1/11/ 2011 IEEE

75

5. A Hybrid Technique for Controlling Multi Line Transmission System Using

Interline Power Flow Controllern B. Karthik Lecturer, Department of

Electrical and Electronics EngineeringSona College of Technology, Salem,

Tamilnadu, India European Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X

Vol.58 No.1 (2011), pp.59-76 EuroJournals Publishing, Inc.

2011http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr.htm

6. Digital Simulation of Thirty Bus System with Interline Power Flow

Controller G. Irusapparajan and S. Rama Reddy International Journal of

Computer and Electrical Engineering, Vol. 3, No. 4, August 2011

7. Modeling and Digital Simulation of Interline Power Flow Controller System

P.Usha Rani and B. S.Rama Reddy International Journal of Computer and

Electrical Engineering, Vol. 2, No. 3, June, 2010 1793-8163

8. Damping Performance Analysis of IPFC and UPFC Controllers Using

Validated Small-Signal Models Shan Jiang, Student Member, IEEE, Ani M.

Gole, Fellow, IEEE, Udaya D. Annakkage, Senior Member, IEEE, and D. A.

Jacobson, Senior Member, IEEE

9. Dynamic Modeling of Interline Power Flow Controller for Small Signal

Stability Alivelu M. Parimi, Nirod C. Sahoo, Irraivan Elamvazuthi, Nordin

Saad Electrical and Electronics Department Universiti Teknologi

PETRONAS, Tronoh 31750, Perak, Malaysia.

76

10. Interline Photovoltaic (I-PV) Power System – A Novel Concept of Power

Flow Control and Management Vinod Khadkikar, Member, IEEE, and James

L. Kirtley, Jr., Fellow, IEEE

.

77

1.

78

79

Date post:	13-Apr-2017
Category:	Documents
Upload:	prakash-chandra
View:	121 times
Download:	10 times

project report on IPFC

Documents