Table 1.
Performance comparison of ANN Power Transfer Capability of Long
and the neurofuzzy method
Time ANN Neurofuzzy Method
(%) (%)
1:00 a.m. ~ 6:00 a.m. 4.47 2.33
7:00 a.m. ~ 12:00 p.m. 3.64 2.95
1:00 p.m. ~ 6:00 p.m. 3.29 2.43
7:00 p.m. ~ 12:00 a.m. 2.46 1.81
[2] T.M. Peng, N.F. Hubele, and G.G. Karady, “Advancement in the
application of neural networks for short-term load forecasting,” IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 7, pp. 250-257, 1992.
[3] V.S. Kodogiannis and E.M. Anagnostakis, “A study of advanced
learning algorithms for short-term load forecasting,” Engineering Ap-
plications of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 12, pp. 159-173, 1999.
[4] A.G. Bakirtzis, J.B. Theocharis, S.J. Kiartzis, and K.J. Satsios,
“Short term load forecasting using fuzzy neural networks,” IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 10, pp. 1518-1523, 1995.
[5] X. Wang, T.Y.C. Wei, J. Reifman, and L.H. Tsoukalas, “Signal
trend identification with fuzzy methods,” in Proc. 1999 IEEE Int. Conf.
Tools with Artificial Intelligence, Chicago, IL, 9-11 Nov. 1999, pp.
332-335, 1999.
[6] L.H. Tsoukalas and T.E. Uhrig, Fuzzy and Neural Approaches in
Engineering. New York: Wiley, 1997.
[7] N. Hatziargyriou, “The CARE system overview: Advanced con-
trol advice for power systems with large-scale integration of renewable
energy sources,” Wind Eng., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 57-68, 1999.
[8] A.G. Dutton, G. Kariniotakis, J.A. Halliday, and E. Nogaret,
“Load and wind power forecasting methods for the optimal manage-
ment isolated power systems with high wind penetration,” Wind Eng.,
vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 69-88, 1999.
Copyright Statement: ISSN 0282-1724/02/$17.00  2002 IEEE.
Manuscript received 25 September 2001. This paper is published
herein in its entirety.
2002 Transmission and Distribution
Conference and Exhibition - Asia Pacific
6-10 October 2002, Yokohama, Japan
The 2002 Transmission and Distribution Conference
and Exhibition - Asia Pacific will be held 6-10 October 2002
in Yokohama, Japan. The conference theme, “New Wave of
T&D Technology from Asia Pacific,” focuses on powering
advances in world-wide T&D technology from the Asia Pa-
cific region, in line with today’s expanding, diversified, and
transfiguring power systems. The conference aims to fos-
ter technical exchange in the Pacific Rim. The technical
presentations and exhibitions will play a significant role for
generating the new wave of T&D technology, and topics of
interest include: equipment innovations pertaining to
transmission and distribution lines; substations,
switchgear, transformers, and surge protective devices; in-
sulated cables and cable accessories; system protection
and automation; control, communication, instrumenta-
tion, and measurement; power system analysis, planning,
and operation; and electric power liberalization and new
businesses.
For more information or submissions, contact IEEE/PES
T&D 2002 Asia Pacific Secretariat, c/o International Commu-
nications Specialists, Inc., Tokyo, Japan, +81-3-3263-6474,
fax +81-3-3263-7077, e-mail t-d2002ap@ics-inc.co.jp.
IEEE Power Engineering Review, May 2002 0272-1724/02/$17.00©2002 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Velammal Engineering College. Downloaded on July 16,2010 at 05:30:35 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Transmission Lines with Midpoint
Sited FACTS and HVDC
Zhenyu Huang, Boon Teck Ooi
Author Affiliation: Department of Electrical and Computer Engi-
neering, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec H3A 2A7, Canada.
Abstract: Long transmission lines are required to transmit power
from remote generation sites to the population centers. When transmis-
sion is by ac, the large reactances of the long lines limit the power
transmissibility. By siting FACTS Controllers or HVDC stations,
which have strong voltage support, at the midpoint of the lines, the
transmission distance between voltage supported nodes is halved and
so is the line reactance. Thus, the maximum steady-state power can be
twice that of the original lines. Digital simulation comparison of a real-
istic ac transmission system shows that the gain factor, based on the
steady-state stability limit, is only 1.59 and not 2. This paper reports on
analysis undertaken to account for the discrepancy. The analysis shows
that the distributed capacitance in the original long transmission line is
already providing voltage support. For this reason, the voltage support
by the midpoint sited FACTS controllers or HVDC stations becomes
less significant. Furthermore, the FACTS controllers or HVDC stations
are inserted at the midpoint through transformers, whose leakage
reactances add to the line impedance.
Keywords: Steady-state stability limit, flexible ac transmission
systems, FACTS, HVDC, voltage source converter.
Introduction: A goal of research in ac transmission is centered on
how to increase the transmitted power limit to the thermal limit. There
are two motivations for this. The first comes from the difficulty in se-
curing the right of way to build new lines so that it is necessary to use
existing lines to transfer more power. The second arises from the fact
that new lines will be remotely located because neighborhood energy
sources are already exploited. Because the large inductive reactances of
long lines lower the transmissible power limit, these lines operate far
below their thermal limit.
Flexible ac transmission systems (FACTS) and HVDC have been
conceived to approach the thermal limit. The class of FACTS control-
lers or HVDC stations based on voltage-source converters (VSC) is ca-
pable of offering voltage support capability. These include the static
compensator (STATCOM), the unified power flow controller (UPFC),
and the voltage-source asynchronous dc link (VSC-HVDC). Placing
such a device at the midpoint of a long transmission line, the voltage
support capability can be exploited. The voltage phase-angle difference
between the two ends of the transmission line can be extended from 90
to 180° for STATCOM, UPFC, and VSC-HVDC. As pointed out and
theoretically proven in [1] and [2], it is possible to transmit twice the
power of the uncompensated line if the voltage is supported at the mid-
point.
Recently, [3] presented results of digital simulations of a high-volt-
age transmission system with an asynchronous VSC-HVDC link divid-
ing the long transmission line into two equal halves. The ratio of the
steady-state stability limits of this system and the original uncompen-
sated ac system is not 2, but 1.59.
This paper provides additional insights into the steady-state trans-
fer capability of long transmission lines and re-evaluates the contribu-
tion of midpoint sited FACTS controllers or HVDC stations. The
distributed shunt capacitances of long transmission lines have been
neglected in the simplified models by which the gain factor of two had
been derived. Because the distributed shunt capacitances provide
voltage support in the original uncompensated line, its transmitted
power is greater than the 1 p.u. base that had been used in the simpli-
fied derivation. Thus, the benefit of the additional voltage support
from the midpoint-sited FACTS controllers or HVDC stations is not
as significant. Furthermore, the FACTS controllers or HVDC stations
are inserted at the midpoint through transformers, whose leakage
reactances add to the line impedance.
51
 Simplified Model Analysis: As is well known, the power transfer
of a transmission line can be evaluated as:

VS VR
P0 = sin( δ S − δR )
ωlL (1)
Figure 1. Simplified model of the system with FACTS or HVDC
where l and L are the per km series inductance and the length of the line,
(VS , δ S ) and (VR , δR ) are the rms voltages and angles of the sending and
receiving ends of the transmission line. The shunt capacitances are ne-
glected, and the line is assumed to be lossless.
Practically, two transformers should be employed: one at the send-
ing end to boost the generator terminal voltage and the second at the re-
ceiving end to step down the transmission voltage to the load voltage
rating level. Then the leakage reactance of transformer, X T , has to be
taken into consideration. To simplify the analysis, X T is assumed to be
Figure 2. Equivalent- circuit of a long transmission line
identical for these two transformers. Then

VS VR  VS 
P0 = sin( δ S − δR )   =
ωlL + 2 X T
(2)  IS 
 XT  X2  
Following the same assumptions, the system with midpoint-sited − sin βL + cosβL j  ZC − T  sin βL + j 2 X T cosβL 
 ZC  Z C    VR 
FACTS controllers or HVDC stations can be modeled as in Figure 1,  
where the FACTS controllers or HVDC stations are represented as a  1 XT   IR 
 j sin βL − sin βL + cosβL 
two-port black box with the terminal voltage V1 and V2 .  Z C ZC  (6)
Assuming that the FACTS controller or HVDC station to be
lossless, it receives power from the sending end and retransmits the The power transferred through the line is determined by
same power to the receiving end:
P0' = Re( VR I*R )
VS V1 V2VR VS VR
P1 = sin( δ S − δ1 ) = sin( δ2 − δR ). = sin( δ S − δR ).
ωlL / 2 + X T ωlL / 2 + X T ( ZC − X T2 / ZC )sin βL + 2 X T cosβL
(3) (7)

The maximum steady-state stability power is reached at the point when When the line is medium length or shorter,βL is small. One can sim-
the angle difference is 90°. Since the line impedances are halved, the plify (7) the same as (2).
maximum power is doubled when the voltages V1 and V2 are If the FACTS controller or HVDC station is put at the midpoint, the
well-supported. The ratio of these two maximum powers is 2: line is separated as two equal-length stages. Following the same manner,
the FACTS controller or HVDC station can improve power transfer as
P1 , max ωlL + 2 X T
R1 = = = 2. VS V1
P0 , max ωlL / 2 + X T P1' = sin( δ S − δ1 ).
(4) ZC sin(βL / 2 ) + X T cos(βL / 2 ) (8)

Transfer Capability of Long Transmission Line: Distributed pa- Still, the maximum steady-state limits happen when the sine func-
rameters are often used to model a long transmission line [4], e.g., the tion reaches its maximum, 1, for (7) and (8). The ratio of these two lim-
telegraph model. Its π-equivalent circuit can be obtained as shown in its is not always 2, but the following:
Figure 2. The transformers are also modeled by XT at the two ends.
Using the lossless assumption, the π-equivalent parameters are P1', max ( ZC − X T2 / ZC )sin βL + 2 X T cosβL
given by R2 = = .
P0', max ZC sin(βL / 2 ) + X T cos(βL / 2 ) (9)
sin βL tan(βL / 2 )
ZL = jωlL , YL = jωcL . Effect of Converter Transformers: Sometimes the converter
βL βL / 2 transformer has to be employed to reduce the high voltage rating of the
(5)
long transmission line to meet the requirement of the power electronics
where β = ω lc and c is the per km shunt capacitance. equipment. One example is shown in Figure 3 with VSC-HVDC.
Defining ZC = l / c , the voltages and currents of the two ends are As shown in (7), including the converter transformer reactance
determined by the telegraph equation: X T , con , the power equation can be deduced as

Table 1. Steady-state stability limits and ratios

Without VSC-HVDC With VSC-HVDC Ratio
P0 P0' P1 P1′ P1′′
Simplified model 2,389 MW / 4,777 MW / / 2
Telegraph model / 2710 MW / 4,926 MW / 1.82
Effect of converter transformer / / / / 4,622 MW 1.70
Digital test 2,590 MW 4,120 MW 1.59

52 IEEE Power Engineering Review, May 2002

Authorized licensed use limited to: Velammal Engineering College. Downloaded on July 16,2010 at 05:30:35 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 VS V1
P1' ' = sin( δ S − δ1 ),
( ZC − X T2 / ZC )sin(βL / 2 ) + 2 X T cos(βL / 2 ) (10)
which assumes X T , con = X T for the simplifying reason. At
δ S − δ1 = 90 °, the ratio is calculated again as
P1',' max ( ZC − X T2 / ZC )sin βL + 2 X T cosβL
R3 = '
= .
P 0 , max ( ZC − X T2 / ZC )sin(βL / 2 ) + 2 X T cos(βL / 2 ) (11)
Digital Simulation Test: The digital simulation test is conducted
by a real-time simulator, HYPERSIM [5], which gives detailed models
of turbine generator, speed governor, exciter, transmission line, trans-
former, etc.
The test system is shown in Figure 3, where a VSC-HVDC, which
consists of two voltage source converters serving as power dispatcher
(PD) and dc voltage regulator (VR), respectively [3], is sited at the mid-
point of a long transmission line. The line parameters are r = 0.0147
Ω/km, l = 0.0009 H/km, and c = 1.308 ×10 −8 F/km. The leakage
reactance is X T = 7.93Ω for all the transformers.
Figure 4 and Table 1 give the results of theoretical calculation and
digital simulation. P0, test and P1, test are obtained by the numerical fitting
of the simulation results.
From Figure 4 and Table 1, it is shown that the simplified model is
not accurate enough to evaluate the transfer capability of a long trans-
mission line, thus the telegraph model should be used so as not to
over-estimate the contribution of FACTS controllers or HVDC stations.
Because the line shunt capacitances generate considerable reactive
power to support voltage, the telegraph model gives more power than
that analyzed by the simplified model, whereas the ratio of 2 is reduced
by 18%. The longer the line, the more reduction will be expected,
shown by (9).
The converter transformers, when applicable, will reduce the bene-
fit from the FACTS controllers or HVDC stations, by 12% in this case.
The discrepancy between the theoretical calculation and the digital
simulation can be attributed to the line resistance, which was included
in the digital simulation model but not in the analysis.
Conclusion: This paper re-evaluated the benefit of FACTS control-
lers and HVDC stations that are sited at the midpoint of long transmis-
sion lines. Previously, using the simplified model, it has been claimed
Figure 3. AC system with midpoint sited VSC-HVDC
Figure 4 Power versus angle characteristics
IEEE Power Engineering Review, May 2002
Authorized licensed use limited to: Velammal Engineering College. Downloaded on July 16,2010 at 05:30:35 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
that the improvement in power transmissibility with respect to the
steady-state stability limit is by a factor of 2. This improvement comes
from the voltage support capability of the VSC family of FACTS con-
trollers or HVDC stations. This paper shows that the improvement is
only by a factor of 1.59.
The decrement is accounted for by better modeling: telegraph equa-
tion to represent transmission (18%), leakage impedances of converter
transformers accounted for (12%), and line resistances.
References:
[1] E.W. Kimbark, “How to improve system stability without risk-
ing subsynchronous resonance,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol.
PAS-96, no. 5, pp. 1608-1619, Sep./Oct. 1977.
[2] B.T. Ooi, M. Kazerani, Z. Wolanski, F.D. Galiana, D. McGillis,
and G. Joos, “Midpoint siting of FACTS devices in transmission lines,”
IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 1717-1722, Oct. 1997.
[3] Z. Huang, B.T. Ooi, L.-A. Dessaint, and F.D. Galiana, “Ex-
ploiting voltage support of voltage source HVDC,” in Proc. 2002 IEEE
PES Winter Meeting, New York, NY, 2002.
[4] J. Machowski, J.W. Bialek, and J.R. Bumby, Power System Dy-
namics and Stability. New York: Wiley, 1997.
[5] Power System Simulator - HYPERSIM: User’s Manual,
DMNU-5700-1.3A, TEQSIM International Inc., Jun. 1999.
Copyright Statement: ISSN 0282-1724/02/$17.00  2002 IEEE.
Manuscript received 1 September 2001, revised 15 November 2001.
This paper is published herein in its entirety.
Cigré 2002 General Session
25-30 August 2002, Paris, France
The Cigré 2002 General Session will be held 25-30
August 2002 in Paris, France. For more information,
refer to the Cigré Web site, http://www.cigre.org.
The preferential subjects proposed by study com-
mittees and selected by the technical committee for
the session reflect the dual objective of Cigré: to capi-
talize on technical knowledge thus making it available
to the largest number, and to meet the expectations of
members facing a constantly changing world in the
areas of technology, environment, finance, and the
opening of markets. Preferential subjects may be
found on the Web, http://www.cigre.org/GB/
2002/fs2002session.htm.
As technical knowledge can no longer progress in-
dependently of knowledge in other areas, in most of
the preferential subjects proposed all or several areas
of knowledge are associated. Also, a growing number
of topics reflect concerns common to several techni-
cal areas which in the present organization of Cigré
are handled separately. Joint sessions, workshops
and panels increase in number at every Session, and
are a way to meet the need to share knowledge and
experience beyond the borders existing at present be-
tween the various technical fields.
In this light, the Administrative Council of Cigré has
asked the technical committee recently to propose
evolutions in the organization of the technical activi-
ties and in the format of the Paris Sessions. The 2002
session will be a turning point as it will be the last to
be based on the present organization yet at the same
time introducing in form and content the future orga-
nization.
53