2014 IEEE 8th International Power Engineering and Optimization Conference (PEOCO2014), Langkawi, The Jewel of Kedah,

Malaysia. 24-25 March 2014

Advanced Modeling and Control of a Power System

with U P F C
Abraham P. A 1#, Jose P Therattil2#
#
Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Jyothi Engineering College, Cheruthuruthy,
Thrissur, Kerala, India.
1
abey.alexander@gmail.com 2 josetherattil@yahoo.co.in

The balance of the paper is framed as follows: A nonlinear

Abstract- Conventional trend has been to represent a power
system in terms of both, differential and algebraic equations. A
system being modelled by purely differential equations are
favourable for enhanced control design. In this paper an
approach to develop a nonlinear dynamic representation of the
single machine-infinite bus power network with UPFC as a
stabilizing device is undertaken. Once the dynamic
representation is achieved, a new method for control design is
explained. The nonlinear control law is developed using back
stepping methodology. Simulation results on a single machine
power system illustrate the effectiveness of the suggested method.
dynamical model of the power network is appropriated in part
II. The benefit of this method is that there is no mixing up of
algebraic equations and differential equations in the control
design. The proposed controller is derived in III where as
computer analysis is shown in part IV. Finally, the conclusions
are summarized in part V.
II. POWER SYSTEM MODELING
Representation of Power System with UPFC

I. INTRODUCTION Fig.1 shows the schematic diagram of a single machine

Electrical networks are operated very close to their stability
limit. Voltage stability, transient stability and small-signal
stability constrains the power transfer in an integrated power
system. Available transmission corridors’ full utilization is
limited by these constrains [1]-[2]. power system stabilizer
(PSS) has drawn sizable consideration as a convenient
approach to stabilize power systems [3]-[5]. The use of power
system stabilizer may not develop sufficient damping to inter
area modes [6]. So, more efficient substitutes are needed other
than PSS. Recently the UPFC has been chosen to unify the
gains of both STATCOM and SSSC together in a single
device. So, among FACTS devices, UPFC is the superior. The
references [7], [8] explain the elementary ideas on UPFC.
The following contributions are proposed in this paper.
• A common nonlinear dynamical approximation of a
power network is developed using UPFC as a
controller.
• To obtain Oscillation damping, integrated linear and
nonlinear control means for UPFC is carried out.
infinite bus system connected with UPFC. The main
constituents are converters, transformers and DC link
capacitor. The ac to ac converters act as voltage sources. They
develop reactive power which is obtained by circulating
current among the phases of the ac system, employing gate
turn off type thyristers, without using any reactive energy
storage element. Converter 2 does the core function of the
UPFC. It functions by inserting a voltage in series with the
line through a coupling transformer. The voltage has
adjustable phase angle and magnitude. mSH and įSH are the
amplitude modulation ratio and phase angle of the control
signal of VSC 1 respectively and mSR and įSR of VSC 2.
General pulse width modulation (PWM) technique is adopted
for the VSC. A third order nonlinear mathematical model
describes the generator. While deriving the algebraic
equations resistance and transients of the transmission lines
are ignored. The algebraic equations are
Pe = VTd I d + VTq I q (1)
where
VTd = X q I q ; VTq = Eq' − X d' I d ; Eq' = Eq − ( X d − X d' ) I d ;
I d = I SHd + I SRd ; I q = I SHq + I SRq
  
VT = j X T I + VS (2)
   
VS = VSR + j X L ISR + VI (3)

§ VSHd · § 0 − X SH 0 0 · § I SHd ·
¨ ¸ ¨ ¸¨ I ¸
¨ VSHq ¸ = ¨ X SH 0 0 0 ¸ ¨ SHq ¸
¨V ¸ ¨ 0 0 0 − X SR ¸ ¨ I SRd ¸
¨ SRd ¸ ¨ ¸¨ ¸
Fig.1 Sample Power System with UPFC. ¨ VSRq ¸ © 0 0 X SR 0 ¹ ¨© I SRq ¸¹
© ¹

978-1-4799-2422-6/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE 154

 2014 IEEE 8th International Power Engineering and Optimization Conference (PEOCO2014), Langkawi, The Jewel of Kedah,
Malaysia. 24-25 March 2014

§ mSH Vdc cos(δ SH ) / 2· •

¨ ¸ I q terms is a method to have a pure dynamical system. Thus
m V sin(δ SH ) / 2¸
+ ¨ SH dc (4) we have
¨ mSRVdc cos(δ SR ) /2¸
¨ ¸
© mSRVdc sin(δ SR ) /2 ¹ ∂I d ∂I d • ∂I d •' ∂I d • ∂I d •
= δ + ' Eq + Vdc + mSH +
∂t ∂δ ∂E q ∂Vdc ∂mSH
Subsequent manipulation besides rearrangement gives
∂I d • ∂I • ∂I •
δ SH + d mSR + d δ SR (7a)
X SRL Eq' X m V sin(δ SH ) ∂δ SH ∂mSR ∂δ SR
I SHd = − SRLTd SH dc + •
X DT X DT 2 ∂I q ∂I q • ∂I q ∂I q • ∂I q •
= δ+ Eq' + Vdc + mSH +
X Td X m V sin(δ SR ) ∂t ∂δ ∂Eq' ∂Vdc ∂mSH
VI cos(δ ) + Td SR dc (5a)
X DT X DT 2 ∂I q • ∂I q • ∂I q •
δ SH + mSR + δ SR (7b)
X SRLTq mSH Vdc cos(δ SH ) X Tq ∂δ SH ∂mSR ∂δ SR
I SHq = − VI sin(δ ) −
X QT 2 X QT Solving equation (7) we obtain a new set of dynamic
X Tq mSRVdc cos(δ SR ) equations as
(5b)
X QT 2 § • · § • ·
¨ δ ¸ ¨ mSH ¸
X SH Eq' § • · ¨ • ¸
X Td mSH Vdc sin(δ SH ) a13 · ¨¨ •' ¸¸ § b11 b12 b13 b14 · ¨ δ SH ¸
I SRd = + − ¨ I d ¸ § a11 a12
X DT X DT 2 ¨ • ¸ = ¨a ¸ E +¨ ¸¨ ¸ (8)
¨ I q ¸ © 21 a22 a23 ¹ ¨ q ¸ © b21 b22 b23 b24 ¹ ¨ • ¸
© ¹ ¨ • ¸ mSR
X TSHd X m V sin(δ SR ) ¨ Vdc ¸ ¨ ¸
VI cos(δ ) − TSHd SR dc (5c) © ¹ ¨ • ¸
X DT X DT 2 © δ SR ¹
X TSHq mSRVdc cos(δ SR ) X TSHq
I SRq = + VI sin(δ ) − Parameters a11......b24 are shown in the Appendix. The
X QT 2 X QT
• •
X Tq mSH Vdc cos(δ SH ) expression for I d and I q thus obtained is a nonlinear
(5d)
X QT 2 •
dynamic system in continuous time with control inputs mSH ,
The non-linear dynamic equivalent of the scheme • • •
employing UPFC is furnished below. The nominal loading δ SH , mSR and δ SR . The formation of these equations not
condition and system parameters are mentioned in Appendix. only avoid the need for solving difficult nonlinear algebraic
equations but also help us to convert the nonlinear system
•
δ = ω − ω0 (6a) described by equation (6) into standard parametric feed-back
form without losing the nonlinear characteristics of the power
• ω ω − ω0 system. Once the control inputs are defined, the UPFC control
ω = 0 [ Pm − Pe − D( )] (6b)
2H ω0 parameters mSH , δ SH , mSR and δ SR can be obtained by
• •
1 integrating the control inputs. By substituting the values of δ ,
Eq' = '
[ E fd − ( X d − X d' ) I d − Eq' ] (6c)
Tdo • •
• E q' and Vdc from equations (6) into (8) we obtain
3mSH
V dc = [cos(δ SH ) I SHd + sin(δ SH ) I SHq ] +
4Cdc § u1 ·
§ • · ¨ ¸
3mSR ¨ I d ¸ = § C1 ( x) · + § b11 b12 b13 b14 · ¨ u 2 ¸
(9)
[cos(δ SR ) I SRd + sin(δ SR ) I SRq ] (6d) ¨ • ¸ ¨ C ( x) ¸ ¨ b ¸
b24 ¹ ¨ u3 ¸
4Cdc ¨ I q ¸ © 2 ¹ © 21 b22 b23
© ¹ ¨ ¸
© u4 ¹
New Dynamic Representation of Power Network • • • •
By defining u1 = mSH , u2 = δ SH , u3 = mSR and u4 = δ SR , and
Equations (1)-(5) contain algebraic equations while (6) has the using equation (6) and (9) we get the new nonlinear dynamic
differential equations. Together they form an approximate representation as
representation of power system. But it is difficult to achieve a •
controller design in this environment. Therefore, it is better to δ = ω − ω0 (10a)
use an appropriate set to replace the set of algebraic equations. • ω ω − ω0
• ω = 0 [ Pm − Pe − D( )] (10b)
Taking derivatives of current equations for obtaining I d and 2H ω0

155
 2014 IEEE 8th International Power Engineering and Optimization Conference (PEOCO2014), Langkawi, The Jewel of Kedah,
Malaysia. 24-25 March 2014

• reference value Vdcref . That is, the control law for the variable
1
Eq' = '
[ E fd − ( X d − X d' ) I d − Eq' ] (10c)
Tdo δ SH of the shunt part converter of a UPFC is in the form
• 3mSH 1 K
V dc = [cos(δ SH ) I SHd + sin(δ SH ) I SHq ] + δ SH = ( K P 2 + I 2 )(Vdcref − Vdc ) (12)
4Cdc 1 + sT2 s
3mSR Control Strategy for Variables u3 and u4 of the Series Part
[cos(δ SR ) I SRd + sin(δ SR ) I SRq ] (10d)
4Cdc
• As shown above, the series part of a UPFC generates an ac
I d = C1 ( x ) + b11u1 + b12 u2 + b13u3 + b14 u4 (10e) voltage source, whose inner impedance is X SR , in series with
• transmission line with variable voltage magnitude VSR and
I q = C2 ( x) + b21u1 + b22 u2 + b23u3 + b24 u4 (10f)
•
phase δ SR of the voltage phasor VSR . Here VSR and δ SR are
mSH = u1 (10g) restricted in the following set
•
δ SH = u2 (10h) S = {(VSR , δ SR ) ∈ R 2 0 ≤ VSR ≤ VSR max , 0 ≤ δ SR ≤ 2π } (13)
•
mSR = u3 (10i) The functions of adjustment of the injected voltage VSR are to
• regulate the active and reactive power flows of the
δ SR = u4 (10j) transmission system in both the steady-state and the dynamic
process. First step needed to undertake for the controller
The proposed advancement is a complementary scheme of design is the following coordinate transformation.
solving the differential – algebraic equations; for which
achieving the control design has always been a challenge. x = [δ − δ 0 , ω − ω0 , ω0 ( Pm − P e ) / 2 H ]

III. CONTROLLER DESIGN We approximate Pe = E q' I q . This step is needed only for the
controller development. With this, the new coordinate will
There are four control variables u1 , u2 , u3 and u4 of UPFC
satisfy
control in the above equation, which will be discussed in detail •
in the subsequent sections as will be the control laws x1 = ω − ω0 (14a)
• ( P − P )ω D(ω − ω0 )
Control Strategy for Variables u1 and u2 of the Shunt Part x2 = m e 0 − (14b)
2H 2H
The shunt part converter of a UPFC is able to provide reactive
power compensation for the transmission system so as to
ω0 ª I q Eq
• '
I q E fd Id Iq
regulate the voltage magnitude VS of node 1 (see Fig. 1). In x3 = «
'
− ' − Eq' C2 ( x) + ' ( X d − X d' ) −
2 H « Tdo T Tdo
order to keep VS basically constant in the dynamic process, ¬ do

mSH may be controlled by the strategy of proportional and Eq' (b21u1 + b22 u2 + b23u3 + b24 u4 ) º¼ (14c)
integral (PI) strategy of the voltage deviation of VS from its The above equation can be written as
expected reference value VSref . As a result, the control law •
x = F ( x, u ) (15)
for the amplitude modulation index mSH of shunt VSC can be
u = [u1 u2 u4 ]
T
x = [ x1 x3 ]
T
logically given as x2 u3
1 K
mSH = ( K P1 + I 1 )(VSref − VS ) (11) Assumption: Constant phase angle control
1 + sT1 s
Control of UPFC injected power is essential for oscillation
The shunt part of a UPFC supplies active power to the dc-link damping. One way of achieving this is by varying VSR under
capacitor Cdc to meet the demand of the series part. It is constant phase angle δ SR . Then for δ SR around ± 900,
known that the direction of the exchange active power flow ( maximum active power is injected for a given VSR . This
PShunt ) between shunt VSC and the AC power system can be •
requires that δ SR = u4 = 0
changed by means of regulating the variable δ SH , so as to
With this assumption let us start the design by rewriting
control the active power getting into or out of the dc capacitor. •
In order to keep the constant of the dc capacitor voltage in the x1 = x2 (16a)
dynamic process, it is reasonable to adopt a conventional PI •
controller to regulate the dynamics of Vdc relative to its x2 = x3 + ϕ 2 x2 (16b)

156
 2014 IEEE 8th International Power Engineering and Optimization Conference (PEOCO2014), Langkawi, The Jewel of Kedah,
Malaysia. 24-25 March 2014

• ( M 1 x1 + Pm1 + M 1 ( Kδ + ϕ 2 ) x2 + M 1 K z1 z1 )
x3 = CT 1 + gu3 + Γϕ3 (16c) x3s = (22)
K1
D
where ϕ 2 = − , and ϕ3 = X d − X d' . The other parameters, By defining the new Lyapunov function
2H
like CT 1 , g and Γ are given in Appendix. With the x12 z12 z2
L2 = K A ( + )+ 2 (23)
introduction of the following functions 2 2 2
With K A being another design constant, we can easily show
f1 ( x1 ) = 0 ; η1 ( x1 ) = 1 ; μ1 ( x1 ) = 0 ; ϕ1 = 0 ; f 2 ( x1 , x2 ) = 0 ;
that
η 2 ( x1 , x2 ) = 1 ; μ 2 ( x1 , x2 ) = x2 ; f 3 ( x1 , x2 , x3 ) = CT 1 ; d • • •
η 3 ( x1 , x2 , x3 ) = g ; μ3 ( x1 , x2 , x3 ) = Γ ( L2 ) = K A ( x1 x1 + z1 z1 ) + z 2 z 2 < 0 guaranteeing that the
dt
The standard parametric feedback form [9] as shown in (17) states x1 , z1 and z 2 asymptotically converge to zero
can be obtained from equation (16) provided that
•
xi = f i ( x1 ,.., xi ) + η i ( x1 ,.., xi ) xi +1 + μ iT ( x1 ,.., xi )ϕ i •
z 2 = − K A z1 K1 / M 1 − K z 2 z 2 (24)
(17)
(1 ≤ i ≤ n) Note:- We have to select the design constants ( K δ , K z1 , K z 2
Here ‘ n ’ represents the order of the system which equals to and K A ) in such a way that the eigen values of the linear
three for our case; and xn +1 = ui . It can be inferred that ϕi , f i , system have negative real parts. Thus the states x1 and z1 are
η i and μi are all smooth functions. Now the objective of our bounded following the stability of z 2 .
suggested controller is to design the control input ui , such that Again by using the relation z 2 = ( x3 − x3 s ) and equation (16)
the system state xi are stable. Equation (16) is a special case we can write that
of strict feedback form where back stepping can be used for • •
z 2 = f T 1 + ( gT 2 )r2 − x3s (25)
the controller design. It is important to note that this method of
obtaining standard parametric feed-back form of power system Equating (24) and (25) we have
which help us to design controller using back stepping 1 •
u3 = (− K A z1 K1 / M 1 − K z 2 z2 − fT 1 + x3s ) (26)
technology is the original contribution of the authors. gT 2
By differentiating equation (22), and using (16), (19) and the
Linear control method are normally using to damp inter area
relation z 2 = ( x3 − x3 s )
oscillations in a power system. But we aim nonlinear control
scheme for the same purpose. This can be achieved by • 1
x3s = [ M 1 x2 + M 1 ( Kδ + ϕ 2 )( K z1 − ϕ 2 ) x2 +
defining an appropriate Lyapunov function. The control K1
design is explained as follows. ( Pm1 − K1 x3 )( Kδ + ϕ 2 + K z1 )] (27)
Introducing Kδ and K z1 as design constants, we introduce
To sum up, we have completed the linear and nonlinear hybrid
z1 = x2 + Kδ x1 which results in controller design for a UPFC. The hybrid control strategy is
• proposed in combination with equations (11), (12) and (26).It
x1 = z1 − Kδ x1 (18) is shown in Fig. 2. The negative dynamic interactions among
• • • controllers are avoided by careful tuning of controllers
Differentiate z1 we get, z1 = x2 + Kδ x1 now substitute the
individually. The values of gains and time constants are given
•
value of x2 from (16) in the Appendix.
• Pm1 K
z1 = + ( Kδ + ϕ 2 ) x2 − 1 x3 (19)
M1 M1 IV. COMPUTER SIMULATIONS
by defining z 2 = ( x3 − x3 s ) , where x3s is the steady state The advantageousness of the designed controller is proved by
value of x3 , we have performing the computer verification on a single-machine
• Pm1 K infinite bus system. The aim of the controller is the damping
z1 = + ( Kδ + ϕ 2 ) x2 − 1 ( z 2 + x3s ) (20) of the generator oscillations after the fault is cleared. For
M1 M1
comparing, the generator is first fitted with conventional
x12 z12 controller. The details are given in [10]. Fig. 3 displays the
Now choose a Lyapunov function L1 = + block diagram image of the conventional controller where the
2 2
d • • input to the damping controller is the deviations in generator
( L1 ) = x1 x1 + z1 z1 (21) speed. The reference setting of the power flow controller is
dt modulated by its output. Therefore, an increased electric
The system will be asymptotically stable if RHS of the power output is secured in phase with the speed variation. The
equation (21) is negative. This can be achieved at z 2 = 0. Then parameters of this controller have been optimised for better
we have operation.

157
 2014 IEEE 8th International Power Engineering and Optimization Conference (PEOCO2014), Langkawi, The Jewel of Kedah,
Malaysia. 24-25 March 2014

Fig. 2 Proposed controller

Secondly, the above mentioned controller is changed by the
suggested integrated control whose parameters are determined
by trial and error method. In both these examples, the
generator is modeled by the third-order approximation with δ ,
ω and Eq' as state variables. The loads are represented by
constant impedance model. The fault studied in the simulation
is that the system runs without any fault for 0.2 seconds. Next
a three-phase to ground fault occurs on one of the transmission
lines at mark F as shown in figure and persists for 0.15
seconds. Finally, the fault is cleared by disassociating the
faulted line by opening the circuit breakers at both ends.
Simulation results are shown in Fig. 4 - 7. The software
program to simulate the power system and the controller has
been written in FORTRAN in house and graphs are plotted
using MATLAB software. RK4 numerical integration method
is used to solve the differential equations with an integration
step of 0.001 second.
Fig. 4 shows the variation of rotor angle of the generator at an
operating condition Pe = 1.2pu. With the proposed controller,
the system gets stabilized within 1.25 seconds and thus the
proposed controller gains an advantage over the conventional
controller where it takes more than three seconds for the same.
Fig. 5 shows the changes in the generator terminal voltage for
a period of three seconds. The quick convergence of the
terminal voltage of the generator to an acceptable range can be
seen. The acceptable range is ±10% of its steady state reading.
On employing the proposed control it is confirmed that there
is no unnecessary side effect on the generator terminal
voltage.
Fig. 4 Load angle variation at Pe = 1.2pu
Fig. 5 Variation of Terminal Voltage.
Fig. 6 displays injected voltage of the UPFC with proposed
controller. As exhibited in figure, the injected voltage (and
hence power) during fault is less than 10 % of the steady state
value. Consequently, the required rating of the transformers
and converters gets significantly minimized as compared to
that of conventional controller.
The designed controller with same initial parameters is now
subjected to a new operating condition to show that the
proposed controller is independent of any particular operating
point. Here with Pe = 0.1pu, the dynamic performance is
shown in Fig. 7. The results show that the proposed controller
behaves very well in damping rotor oscillations even at the
operating conditions at which the conventional controller was
designed. Secondly, no appreciable difference in controller
performance between the two cases (Pe = 0.1and Pe = 1.2) are
observed when using proposed controller. This proves that the
proposed controller works well over a wide range of operating
condition.

Fig. 3 Power System with Conventional Controller.

Fig. 6 UPFC injected Voltage.

158
 2014 IEEE 8th International Power Engineering and Optimization Conference (PEOCO2014), Langkawi, The Jewel of Kedah,
Malaysia. 24-25 March 2014

b13 = −( X SH Vdc sin(δ SR )) / 2 X DT ;

b21 = ( X SRLVdc cos(δ SH )) / 2 X QT ;
b22 = −( X SRL mSH Vdc sin(δ SH )) / 2 X QT ;
b23 = ( X SH Vdc cos(δ SR )) / 2 X QT ;
b24 = −( X SH mSRVdc sin(δ SR )) / 2 X QT

ω0 ª I q Eq' I q E fd º
CT 1 = « ' − ' − Eq' C2 ( x ) − Eq' (b21u1 + b22 u 2 + b24 u 4 ) »
2H «¬ Tdo Tdo »¼
Fig. 7 Load angle variation at Pe = 0.1, pu. ω0 Eq' b23 ω0 I d I q
g=− ; Γ= '
2H 2 HTdo
V. CONCLUSIONS
K P1 = 10.0 ; K I 1 = 10.0 ; K P 2 = 1.0 ; K I 2 = 3.0 ; Kδ = 0.1 ;
In this paper, a dynamic representation for a power system K z1 = 0.2 ; K z 2 = 90 ; K A = 1.0
with UPFC as stabilizing controller was proposed. The
proposed integrated linear - nonlinear control is unaffected to REFERENCES
the changes in operating conditions. Faster damping to the
inter area oscillation is achieved using the proposed controller. [1] Kundur, P. ‘Power System Stability and Control’.
The injected voltage from the UPFC is reduced considerably McGrawHill, New York, 1994
and hence lower rating UPFC can be used. The said method is [2] Kundur, P., Paserba, J., Ajjarapu, V., Andersson, G.,
free from algebraic equations and is a complementary way of Bose,A., Canizares, C., Hatziargyriou, N., Hill, D.,
solving the differential-algebraic model. The obtained Stankovic, A., Taylor, C., Van Cutsem, T., and Vittal,
simulation result confers the effectiveness of our approach. V. “Definition and classification of power system
stability IEEE/CIGRE joint task force on stability terms
APPENDIX and definitions,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems,
vol.19, no.3, pp. 1387- 1401, Aug. 2004 .
Parameters of the sample power system [3] Sadegh Vaez-Zadeh, “ Robust Power System Stabilizers
Generator M = 2H = 8.0MJ/MVA; D =0.0; for Enhancement of Dynamic Stability over a Wide
T’do = 5.044s; Xd = 1.0pu; Operating Range,” Electric Power Components and
Xq = 0.6pu; X’d = 0.3pu. Systems, 29:7, 645-657, 2001.
Excitation System KA = 4.0; TA= 0.01s. [4] Shaoru, Zhang., and Fang, Lin, Luo., “An Improved
Transformers XT = XSH = XSR = 0.1pu. Simple Adaptive Control Applied to Power System
Transmission Lines XL1= XL2 = 0.3pu. Stabilizer,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics,
Operating Condition Pe= 1.2pu; VT = 1.0pu; vol.24, no.2, pp.369-375, Feb. 2009.
DC link parameters Vdc= 10.0pu; Cdc = 2.0pu [5] Peng, Zhao., and Malik, O.P., “Design of an Adaptive
UPFC parameters mSR = 0.0; įSR = 131.50; PSS Based on Recurrent Adaptive Control Theory,”
mSH = 0.1935; įSH = 52.760 IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol.24, no.4,
pp.884-892, Dec. 2009.
Computation of constants in the model [6] Xianzhang, Lei., Lerch, E.N., and Povh, D., “Optimization
X SRL = X SR + X L ; X SRLTd = X SR + X L + X T + X d' ; and coordination of damping controls for improving
system dynamic performance,” IEEE Transactions on
X TSHd = X T + X SH + X d' ; X Td = X T + X d' ; Power Systems, vol.16, no.3, pp.473-480, Aug 2001.
X DT = X TSHd X SRL + X SH X Td ; [7] Gyugyi, L., “Unified power-flow control concept for
X TSHq = X T + X SH + X q flexible AC transmission systems,” IEE Proceedings
Generation, Transmission and Distribution, vol.139,
X SRLTq = X SR + X L + X T + X q ; X Tq = X T + X q ; no.4, pp.323-331, Jul 1992.
X QT = X TSHq X SRL + X SH X Tq [8] Gyugyi, L., Schauder, C.D., Williams, S.L., Rietman,
T.R., Torgerson, D.R., and Edris, A., “The unified power
a11 = ( X SH VI sin(δ )) / X DT ; a12 = ( X SRL + X SH ) / X DT ; flow controller: a new approach to power transmission
a13 = −(mSH sin(δ SH ) X SRL + mSR sin(δ SR ) X SH ) / 2 X DT control,” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol.10,
no.2, pp.1085-1097, Apr 1995.
a21 = ( X SH VI cos(δ )) / X QT ; a22 = 0 ;
[9] Khalil, H.K., “Nonlinear systems,” Upper Saddle River,
a23 = ( X SRL mSH cos(δ SH ) + X SH mSR cos(δ SR )) / 2 X QT ; NJ: Prentice Hall, 2002.
[10] Wang, H.F., “Damping function of unified power flow
b11 = −( X SRLVdc sin(δ SH )) / 2 X DT ;
controller,” IEE Proceedings- Generation, Transmission
b12 = −( X SRL mSH Vdc cos(δ SH )) / 2 X DT ; and Distribution, vol.146, no.1, pp.81-87, Jan 1999.

159