Power system transient stability
enhancement by optimal control of
static VAR compensators
J Machowski
Warsaw University of Technology, at present with
Kaiserslautern University. Germany
D Nelles
Kaiserslautern University, 6750 Kaiserslautern.
Germany
A stud), of power system transient stability enhancement
through the effective use of static VAR compensators is
presented. The optimal control strategy resulting from the
direct Lyapunov method and Pontryagin's maximum
principle requires a control signal based on the state
variables not available at the compensator bus. It is proved
that this optimal signal can be replaced by the time
derivative of an electric quantity derived from local
measurements. A control algorithm based on this quantity
gives smooth and very effective regulation. Tests done for
two-machine and multi-machine systems have confirmed
the validity and robustness of the proposed control
algorithm.
Keywords: online control strategies, security assessment,
transient stability, security enhancement, static VAR
compensators, optimal control
I. I n t r o d u c t i o n
Intensive progress in power electronics has provided the
electric energy transmission and distribution industry
with efficient tools for reactive power control 1-3. The
thyristor-controUed compensators (static VAR compen-
sators) have been successfully applied to the correction
of power factor, load balancing, voltage control and
maximization of the power system transfer capability.
Modern static VAR compensators can change their
output power from minimum to maximum in a very short
time. Therefore they can be also utilized to improve
power system transient stability. Obtaining an effective
control algorithm to realize this goal is however not a
trivial task.
Received May 1991; revised April 1 992
,Vol 14 No 6 December 1992 0142-0615/92/60411-11 © 1992 Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd
The conventional regulators of static VAR compen-
sators are designed as proportional plus integral con-
trollers regulating voltage magnitude. They are very
effective in forcing the voltage error to zero in steady-state
system operation. In transient state they are incapable
of providing very much damping 4'5 because voltage error
has no information on system dynamic response.
More robust regulation can be obtained when the
voltage error is supported by frequency deviation and
when an adaptive control with self-tuning regulator is
used. An example of such a modern regulator has been
described in Reference 6. In a less sophisticated alterna-
tive solution (Figure 1) the conventional regulator is
equipped with a supplementary control loop utilizing
another signal depending on power swing. In this solution
the voltage regulator has a long time delay and changes
the thyristor firing practically only for persistent voltage
error. In the transient state the thyristor firing is changed
by the signal coming from the supplementary control
loop (PSS). Various supplementary s;gnals and control
algorithms have already been tried in order to maximize
the influence of the compensator on system damping.
Among them are rotor slip 7, frequency deviation s, tie-line
reactive power 9 and tieqine active power 1°'11. In this
paper the design of the supplementary control loop is
formulated as a problem of optimal control theory. The
minimized function is defined as the total energy of the
system measured with respect to the post-fault equi-
librium point. Optimal control is derived using two
different methods: the direct Lyapunov method and
Pontryagin's maximum principle. The obtained control
strategy requires a control signal based on the state
variables not available at the compensator bus. It is
proved that this optimal control signal can be replaced
by the time derivative of a locally measurable electric
quantity. Implementation of the control algorithm based
on this quantity is very easy. The obtained regulation of
411
 I1,1 Network with line resistances and load at the
~ thyristor intermediate point
L/ref - AVR firing --.,.- For the considered network the active power can be
expressed for both generators by the following formulae:
PA(6) = PAO + b sin (6 -/~AB)
PB(5) = P B 0 - b s i n (6 +/~AB) (31
signal ~ , I where:
PAO = IEAIZ[YAA[sin ]~AA PBO = IEBIZ]YBnIsin ]'~BB
l l GAA
Figure 1. Conventional regulator of static VAR com- YAA - - + -- /~AA= atan ----
pensator (AVR) equipped with supplementary control ZAO ZAB BAA
loop (PSS) 1 1 Gss
YBB = + ,UBB= atan - - -
ZBO ZAB BBB
the compensator is very smooth and close to optimal. 1 GAB
Tests done for two and multi-machine systems have YAa = #An = atan (4)
confirmed validity and robustness of the proposed ZAB BAB
control algorithm. and b = ]EAHEalIYAB]is the magnitude of the power-angle
generator characteristic.

II. System model 11.2 "Purely reactive network

The study system is illustrated in Figure 2. Two For the simplified network model without network
equivalent generators are connected through a long resistances and load at the intermediate point it is obvious
transmission system with the static VAR compensator at that:
the intermediate point.
Stability of the two-machine system is determined by PA0=PBo=0, /tAB=0 and PA(~) = --PB(3) (5)
one relative power angle 5 = 6 A - 6 B and one differential Then equation (1) takes the following form:
equation:
d25
Md23 Mdt 5 = Pm - PA(t~) (6)
dt 2 = p m - p(3) (1)
where inertia constant M and power Pm still depend on
where Pro, P(3) are the relative mechanical and electric ratio r -- MAIM B.
powers and M is the relative inertia constant of both
generators such that: 11.3 State-space mode/
The compensator susceptance Bs(t) is controlled by the
PmA -- rPmB PA(6) - rPs(6) output signal of the regulator and can be expressed in
Pm -- , P(b) = ,
l+r l+r the following way:
M 1
M---- " ~ A (2) Bs(t) = itl (7)
l+r
where r=MA/MR is the ratio of the individual inertia where ~(t) is the control function and Xsc=XAXR/
constants. (X A+ XB) is the short circuit system reactance seen from
For a particular case when the second generator is the the compensator bus used here as the impedance unit.
infinite bus (MB= oo and r = 0 ) equation (1) reduces to The choice of such a particular impedance unit is very
a differential equation describing the first generator. convenient for the simplicity of all further formulas.
For typical data the maximal available compensator
power is much less than the short circuit system capacity
GA C GB and ~(t) is a very small number
GI ~MIN ~ ~(t) ~< 0~MAX (8)
vc cA
constrained by two limits resulting from capacitive and
ZAA ZA C ZB a -70 inductive power ratings of the compensator.
For a purely reactive network with a compensator at
Es E, the intermediate point, the active power of the sending
machine reduces to:
PA(~) = bAB sin/~ (9)
&A &B &a B ZS
~,, F--- where
bAB= !EAllEBI (10)
ZAO ZSO XAB
is the magnitude of the power-angle characteristic and
Figure 2. Study system XAB is the transfer equivalent reactance resulting from

412 Electrical Power & Energy Systems

the star-mesh transformation of network model including III. Optimal control s t r a t e g y
compensator susceptance The optimal control strategy of a static VAR compen-
sator has already been discussed in References 13 and
XAB = XA + XB-- BsXAXa (11) 14. Here the optimal control strategy is derived for the
Substituting for Bs from equation (7) in this formula, it state-space model ~¢ using the direct Lyapunov method
is easy to obtain from (10) that: and Pontryagin's maximum principle.
IEAIIEB[ [EAIIEBI 1
bAB = - - = _ - - II1.1 Direct Lyapunov method
XAB X A Jr- X s I -- ~(t)
The direct Lyapunov method can be used for power
1 [ ~(t) ] system stability analysis in the following way. The
=b. b 1+ Lyapunov function and stability region are constructed
1 --~(t)- 1--~/ for the post-fault equilibrium point and at the same time
where b=IEAIIEBI/(XA+X~) is the magnitude of the for the post-fault and post-control state when the motion
power-angle characteristic of the system without compen- of rotors is absolutely free. The system is stable if during
sator. Taking into account that a(t) is a very small a given fault the system trajectory does not leave the
number it is possible to simplify the above formula to post-fault stability region determined by the Lyapunov
function. A good assessment of the stability region
bAB= b[1 + ~t(t)] (12)
for the system described by equation (14) can be
because ct/(l-c t)~ ~. Formula (9) now takes the follow- obtained ~5,16 from the energy-type Lyapunov function
ing form
V=½MA(O2-[PmA((~--6s)+b(cos(~--COS6s)] (15)
PA(6) = b[1 + ct(t)] sin 6 (13)
where b is the magnitude of the power-angle characteristic
This means that ~(t) has an approximately additive for the post-fault equilibrium point. The first component
influence on the magnitude of power-angle characteristic. of equation (15) is equal to the kinetic energy of the
An example of power-angle characteristics for extreme system and the second component is equal to the
values of ~t(t) is depicted in Figure 3. The important fact potential energy of the system calculated with respect to
should be noticed that the active power of the generator the post-fault equilibrium point 6s. Function (15) is the
is strongly influenced by the compensator only for large first integral of (14) for ~(t)=0.
power angles. For very small power angles the com- The stability region of the considered system is
pensator has no influence on the active power of the determined by the following inequality
generator.
The considered system model can be summarized as V(6, o9) ~<Vc (16)
the set of the following state space equations: where Vc is the value of the Lyapunov function at the
unstable equilibrium point (~o= 0, 6 = 7t- 6s).
d6
--~---(O The Lyapunov function is equal to zero at the
dt post-fault equilibrium point and is maximal at each point
of the stability boundary. The control system should move
do)_ 1 [ P m _ b s i n 6 ] _ l [bsin6]ct(t) (14) the transient point as much as possible to the vicinity of
dt M the post-fault equilibrium point and therefore should
with two state variables 6, ~o and one controlled input minimize the value of the Lyapunov function as much as
~(t). possible, taking into account constraints ~MAX, 7M~N
imposed on the control function a(t).
P(5) The control strategy minimizes the value of the
Lyapunov function if, along the system trajectory, it
maximizes the negative value of the time derivative of
the Lyapunov function.
The time derivative of the Lyapunov function along
/~.." '"...~ CLMIN the controlled part of the system trajectory can be

//.... expressed in the following way:

dV (?V d6 ~V d~)
12- - + --- (17)
dt 26 dt &o dt
- rt -1[12 5 where on the basis of (15):
0V (~V
- [ P m - b sin 6], -Moo (18)

~\". . .
\'...
..../
.../
03 &o
After substituting into equation (17) the relevant com-
ponents from equations (18) and (14) we obtain:

dV
I2 . . . . co[b sin 5]c~(t) = - ¢OPA(CS)~(t) (19)
dt

Figure 3. Influence of compensator susceptance on Supplementary control of the compensator forces a

power-angle characteristic permanent decay of total system energy V(6,co) if the

Vol 14 No 6 December 1992 413

function clearance {31 the controlled system trajectory tends to
the post-fault equilibrium point 6s. Switching points
0(& co)= - I/=coPA(~)~t{t)=co[bsina]~(t) (20) appear on the horizontal axis when e)=0 and on the
is positive. This means that e(t) must always have the vertical axis when flo(~) = PA{6)=/,sin ~ = 0.
same sign as function (oPa(a). Therefore the control
system must realize the following strategy: 111.2 Pontryagin's m a x i m u m principle
The above control strategy (21) can be also obtained
:¢MAX for signal > ~MAX
from Pontryagin's maximum principle 17. The proof is as
~(t)=~signal for ~MiN<~signal<.~A x (21) follows.
/ A system is described by differential equations (14) and
V~MIN for signal <<.C~MIN
the minimized function is equal to the total system energy
where: (15). The Hamiltonian for this system is given by:
signal = KRcoflo(6) (22)
H= [em-bsint~]~, 1 - [bsin/i]~(t)Ol +coO2 (25)
depends on rotor slip co and nonlinear function: M
rio(a) = [b sin 6] = PA(6) (23) where Ox and ~2 are adjoined variables satisfying the
following canonical equations:
K R is the gain of the regulator.
For control strategy (21) the above function (20) is equal (?H
- <,
to &o
~b(~, co)= KRCO2[b sin 6] 2 ~H 1
~2 = -- ~ = M [ b c o s 6 J E 1 + ~(t)34'~ (26)
and is always positive.
The maximum damping effect can be expected when
the continuous control in equation (21) is replaced by Due to Pontryagin's maximum principle the following
the following bang-bang control: boundary condition must be satisfied for the post-fault
equilibrium state (6 = 6s, m = 0, c~= 0):
3¢(t)=J'0~MAX) for [carlo(a)]>0
(24)
LC~Mh~ for [cofl0(6)]<0 I//l(O)=0) = -- (~V ,
CU.)If or ta = 0
in which c~(t) is equal to one of its extreme values.
Both control strategies (21) and (24) require the change 2(6 = 6 s , = o) = - I27)
of co(t) from plus to minus and vice versa in two cases: ~5 ]fora=a~
(1) when co changes sign and (2) when flo(b)=PA(b)
Hence, taking into account boundary values ~V/&o = O,
= b s i n 6 changes sign. The point of system trajectory
co=0 resulting from equation (18) for the post-fault
for which ~(t) must change sign is called the switching
equilibrium state we obtain:
point. For the considered system model all switching
points occur on both axes of the phase plane. This is ~l(co=0), ~b2(6=@ :~=0)=0 (28)
illustrated in Figure 4.
More careful consideration of equation (26) leads to a
The stability region obtained from the Lyapunov
surprising conclusion that canonical equations of the
method is surrounded by the curve V(6, co) = Vc. The first
considered nonlinear system can be analytically solved
part of the system trajectory { 1,2, 3} is forced by a fault
and the solution is expressed by the following formulae:
in the network. Starting from the moment of fault
O 1(t) = Mco(t ) (29)
O2(t) = - [PmA-- b(l + ~(t)) sin d] (30)
It is easy to check that for this solution the boundary
condition (28) is satisfied and therefore the optimal
reactor
control c~(t)can be determined as the function maximizing
Hamiltonian (25). In formula (25) function c~(t) occurs
explicitly in the second component and therefore H
reaches a maximum if the following function
1
~b(6, co) = -M[bsin6]c~(t)Ol=co(bsin~)~(t) (31)

5 is positive and maximal. This condition is identical

---Im~-
to that obtained from the direct Lyapunov method
(equation (20)).

111.3 Equal-area m e t h o d
The equal-area method is often used to give simple
explanations of transient phenomena in electric power
systems s'19. A useful illustration for physical interpre-
capacitor
tation of the above control strategy is given in Figure 5.
A fault in the transmission line suddenly changes the
Figure 4. Stability area and optimal switching points active power of the generator from the value at point 1

414 Electrical Power & Energy Systems

 PA(5)
5 vicinity of all switching points o)=0 the compensator
ct(t) =0 " ~'
CE(/) =CEMIN~ i N 15
X \ t pmA I~ i ~,-x'~
/ /
-~ I "5/)/~,;
2 3
13
/"
Figure 5. Physical interpretation of the optimal control
strategy
to a smaller value at point 2. The resulting acceleration
power involves kinetic energy proportional to the area
{1,2, 3,4}. In the case without any control (~=0) this
area is larger than the maximal available deceleration
area {4, 18, 19} and the considered system is unstable. In
the case when an optimally controlled compensator is
used the system behaviour is as follows.
When the fault is cleared, the control signal (22) is
positive and the maximal available capacitor is switched
on. This enlarges the maximal available deceleration area
to {4, 5, 20} and the system is stable. The rotor slip co is
reduced to zero at point 6 where area {4, 5, 6, 8} is equal
to area { 1,2, 3, 4}. In backward motion ~o changes sign
and the maximal available reactor is switched on. The
reactor reduces the active power of the generator and the
kinetic energy {7,8,9} lost by the rotor during its
backward motion and necessary further back swing is
small. The acceleration area opposing this back swing is
enlarged by optimal control at the next switching point
{ 10} when PA(6) changes sign and the maximal available
capacitor is switched on. Resulting maximal acceleration
area is {9, 10, 11,21}. Rotor slip co is reduced to zero at
point 11 where area {9,10,11,12} is equal to area
{7,8,9}. In forward motion m changes sign and the
maximal available reactor is switched on. This decreases
the kinetic energy from the acceleration power in forward
motion and at the same time contributes to a smaller
forward rotor swing.
Figure 5 also provides the important information that
from a practical point of view, continuous control is more
suitable than bang-bang control. For deep power swing
(point 15) close to the critical condition the sudden
change from capacitor to reactor decreases the generator
power to below the mechanical power (point 16) and the
system becomes unstable. Such system instability is
Vol 14 No 6 December 1992
impossible in the case of continuous control when in the
susceptance is changed slowly.
Further consideration of control implementation relates
to continuous control.
IV. I m p l e m e n t a t i o n based on local
measuremts
20 For practical implementation the above optimal signal
(22) must be replaced by another signal based on an
electric quantity measured at the compensator bus.
_ _~ IV.1 Conditions determining electric quantity
r~
An electric signal used to imitate the optimal control
signal must contain information about system dynamic
response. Therefore it should be sought among signals
of the following form:
signal = K Rdq (32)
dt
where q is an electric quantity derived from local
measurements.
For constant electromotive forces the time derivative
of any quantity q can be expressed in the following way:
dq 0q d6 0q dc~ 0q 0q dc~
-- = • + ....... ~o+ . . . . (33)
dt 06 dt 0c~ dt 06 0c~ dt
The first condition which must be satisfied by the selected
quantity can be expressed in the following way:
Oq >> Oq (34)
08 0~
This means that the first component of (33) dominates
over the second component and the dynamic behaviour
of signal (32) depends mainly on rotor slip
dq Oq d 6 0 q
-~ . . . . . . e) (35)
dt - 06 dt 06
When this condition is not satisfied then, as results from
(33) for small o9, there is an effective feedback between
control signal ~(t) and its time derivative d~/dt. Supple-
mentary control can be unstable. Depending on the sign
of partial derivative 0q/0~ there are two different kinds
of system dynamic response.
For negative value of 0q/0~ the feedback between the
control signal and its time derivative is negative. Then
for a small positive disturbance d ~ / d t > 0 the system
response dq/dt resulting from (33) is negative. This in turn
produces negative control signal c~(t)= signal = KR(dq/dt )
resulting from (21) and (32) and the same time negative
value of dc~/dt. For negative value of d~/dt the system
response dq/dt is positive which in turn produces a
positive control signal and positive value dc~/dt again.
The supplementary control loop forces permanent oscil-
lations called hunting phenomenon. This is illustrated in
Figure 6.
For a positive value of ?~q/&~the feedback between
control signal and its time derivative is positive. Then for
a small positive disturbance, dc~/dt>0, the system
response dq/dt is positive and gains the initial change.
Control signal c~(t) grows up involving deceleration
power and at the same time a negative slip co which
opposes a further increase of dq/dt. The system oscillates
415
 on the value of ?q/£~. When the relative wflue of ? q ? ~
is small then the required smoother length and time dela3
are short. The averaging process has practically no
influence on the power system transient stability. How-
ever when the relative value of ?q/?:~ is large then the
required smoother length and time delay involved arc
!
long. The averaging process delays all switching points
and makes the regulation less effective.

IV.2 Selection of electric quantity

Many electric quantities have been considered as candi-
dates for supplementary control. Only two of them have
been selected for presentation in the paper. These are the
t negative value of the second power of voltage magnitude
and the second power of current magnitude:
qu(t) = -rUI 2 (39)
and
q~(t) = +II] 2 (40)
Figure 6. Compensator hunting for small rotor slip co
and negative value of ~q/'t?~ The respective control signals are:
d
signalv = KR di [ - IUI2] (41)
but slower than in the previous case. When partial
derivative Oq/&~ is small, the system is stable because the
feedback between d~/dt and ~(t) is too weak to force any signall- K d [+IIAI 2] (42)
visible oscillations. - Rdt
If condition (34) is satisfied then signal (32) based on For the purely reactive network above, quantities can be
(35) can be expressed in the following way expressed by the following formulae:
s i g n a l ~ KR6Oflq(6) (36) qv(t)= -]UI 2 = - U U *
where: XAX B 1
z -b •
X , + X n (1--~) 2
~q (37)
/(]q(6) = (26
IEAI+ +2COS6 (43)
is a function depending on p o w e r angle and system x. IE.I x , IE.I
parameters.
After comparing (36) and (37) with (22) and (23) it is ql(t) = + IIA12= I A I *
easy to conclude that the locally-measured signal (32) is = B2AIEA] 2 + B~.IEBI z + 2BAABABIEAIIEB] COS 6
equivalent to the optimal control signal (22) if the selected
quantity q satisfies the following condition: (44)

/~q (6) = Cq/~O(6 )

and therefore
?q
~6 = CqPA(6) = cq[b sin 6] (38)
where Cq is any constant value not equal to zero.
Generally, the above requirements (34) and (38)
imposed on the electric quantity should be satisfied for
any power angle. There are however two facts which can
weaken these difficult requirements. From a practical
point of view, condition (38) can be satisfied only for
large power angles. For small power angles the compen-
sator susceptance has only a slight influence on generator
power (Figure 3) and at the same time has only a slight
influence on stabilization or destabilization of the power
system. Exact determination of the control signal for
small power angles is not very important. Small per-
manent oscillations resulting from violation of condition
(34) can be suppressed by smoothing the control signal
and averaging its value for a certain period. This can be
done by a low-pass filter introduced into the supplementary
control loop. The required smoothing period, and at the
same time the signal delay, involved by the filter depend
where BAA, BAtI are equivalent susceptances obtained
from star-mesh transformation. They both depend on
~(t).
Both quantities (39) and (40) satisfy condition (38) for
all power angles because their partial derivatives
flu(6)= ?qw ~'lUI z XAX B 2b
?.6 = - ,?6 = X A + X l l ' i r i 2 ] ~ ) 2 " sin6 (45)
(?IIAI 2
ill(6) = -(?qJ = + -- -- 2BAABAB]EAI IEB] sin 6 (46)
are proportional to (sin 6) as required for optimal control.
It must be remarked that for inductive network, BAAis
negative but BA!! is positive and/3~ has the same sign as flu.
From the point of view of condition (34) both
quantities, (39) and (40), have different properties. For
the voltage-oriented quantity (39), it is easy to derive the
explicit formula for ~qu/&~ and realize that it has large
negative values and condition (34) cannot be satisfied.
For the current-oriented quantity (40), the explicit
formula for Oq~/#~ is very complicated and does not
provide any direct information. From numerical compu-
tations for various system data it can be found that aql/¢~
does not have large values and condition (34) is satisfied.

416 Electrical Power & Energy Systems

For a better comparison of both quantities Figure 7
illustrates a typical plot of partial derivatives Oqu/#~ and
#qt/#a obtained for a purely reactive network and typical
system data. All values of Oqt#got and #qt/#~ are divided
by magnitudes of functions (45) and (46), respectively.
Such relative value of #q/#ot is small for the current- !
oriented signal and large for the voltage-oriented signal.
Comparison of system dynamic behaviour with supple-
mentary control based on both quantities is illustrated
in Figure 8. In the case of voltage-oriented signal, Figure as
8a shows system responses with very fast oscillations,
typical for hunting phenomenon. There are many
needless switching points and the control function
oscillates around a value similar to that required by
optimal control strategy. A low-pass filter with long
length, used to smooth the control signal, suppresses
most of the oscillations (Figure 8b) but some switching ~6
b
points are missed and others appear with delay. In the
case of supplementary control based on current-oriented
signal (Figure 8c) the regulation process is very smooth
even for a very short filter length. Response time of such
a filter is short and there is practically no time delay
f
between switching moments detected by algorithm and
required by optimal strategy.
There are also other electric quantities which could be
considered as candidates for supplementary control. One
of them is the voltage-oriented quantity IIIUIcos q~l used
in Reference 20 for detection of power swing in out-of-step
relaying systems. More detailed analysis of the usefulness
of this quantity for the considered control system leads
to the following conclusions. A control system based on
I IUI cos q~ll is subject to hunting phenomenon but not so
much as for IUI 2. Quantity I IuI cos ~01 satisfies condition
(38) for medium and large power angles. For small power
angles (depending upon the ratio of both equivalent
electromotive forces) the sign of the control function can
be wrong. Therefore, the improvement in system damp- °t' f
ing obtained in the case of this quantity is worse than in
the case of the current-oriented signal.
Much worse damping is also obtained for power-
t
oriented signals described in former publications. A
power-oriented signal does not satisfy condition (38) for

8q / eq
-~--d/ a8

q = _lZl z Figure 8. Comparison of system dynamic response

/ 6 (rad)
with voltage and current-oriented control: (a) results
for voltage-oriented signal with short filter length
(TF=2Oms); (b) results for voltage-oriented signal
with long filter length (TF=lOOms); (c) results
for current-oriented signal with short filter length
(TF=20 ms). Small squares mark all switching points
(1,2 .... ) resulting from optimal control strategy. Black
points mark all switching points detected by given
algorithm (1 ', 2',...)

a power angle larger than n/2 because derivative 0P/~15

Figure 7. Relative values of
current-oriented signal
changes the sign for this angle. Power-oriented control
contributes to system stabilization only for power swings
not exceeded 6 = n/2. For larger power angles 6 > n/2 the
wrong compensator element is switched on and negative
damping is produced. Therefore for deep power swings
Oq/#c~ for voltage and the power-oriented control can contribute to system
destabilization.

Vol 14 No 6 December 1992 417

 Current-oriented signal seems to be the most suitable The question is whether the current-oriented signal can
supplementary signal for static VAR compensator detect switching points (48) with satisfactory accuracy.
control. Currents of both generators (Figure 2) are given by:
IV.3 Control algorithm based on Ill ~ for network liAr2 = IA I* = IY~AIIEAI2 + IY~BIIE.I2
with resistances and load at compensator bus --21YAAHYABItEAIIEBIcos(6--~AB+#AA) (50)
For a network model with resistances and load at the
compensator bus there is PA(6)#--PB(6) and formulae II.12 = IBI~ = Iy2BIIEBI2 +IYA2BIIEAI2
(2) cannot be simplified as has been done for the purely --21YBBI[YABIIEAIIE.Icos(6--~AS+~BB) (51)
reactive network. Equation (1) with formulae (3) must
be considered. On the basis of (35) it can now be written that:
d 2
IV.3.1 Optimal control strategy diJIAI-- o.flLd6) (52)
For a network with series resistance RAa function (15)
does not constitute a Lyapunov function and cannot be and
used formally for stability analysis. Validity of previously
obtained control strategy (21) can be confirmed by the dtlI,12 ~ ~o//n(6) (53)
equal-area method. The illustration is similar to that
shown in Figure 5. The only difference is that now the
where
power-angle characteristic must be drawn for relative
power P(6) given by equations (2). Switching points of ,qA(6) = 21YAAIIYABIIEAIIE,Isin (6-/~AB +/~AA) (54)
algorithm (21 ) will now appear for moments when oJ = 0
and moments when function ft.(6) = 21YrmllYARIIEAIIERIsin (6 -]-,/"/AB #BB) -- (55)
Comparison of (54) and (55) to zero leads to the
/~°(6)=P(5)= i b+r [sin (6--1tAR)+rsin (6+t~Aa)] (47) conclusion that signal (52) detects switching point (49)
with an error of less than ~AA and signal (53) with an
is equal to zero. For flo(6)=P(6)=O from formula (47) error of less than (2#Aa -/~Bs). For negative value of ItAB
it is obtained that: this means that the optimal switching point is situated
between points detected by both signals (52) (53). Figure
6(p=o)=atan[: +i tan (#AB)I (48) 10 illustrates this fact and shows that function//o(6) for
optimal control always lies between function flA(5) and
fla(6). For small r = M A / M n function flo(6) is closer to
and optimal switching point P ( 5 ) = 0 appears for the
flA(CS) and for large r = M A / M n is closer to fla(6). The
power angle dependant on ratio of (usually unknown)
average value offlA(6 ) and fla(5) gives a good approximation
inertia constants r = MA/MB.
of flo(5).
On the basis of the last conclusion the following
IV.3.2 Modification of control signal
quantity and control signal can be accepted for the
The ratio of inertia constants satisfies (0 ~<r ~< 1) and for
its extreme values we obtain from (48) that: supplementary loop:
I/At 2 + lIB] 2
/tAB ~< 5~p : o) ~<0 (49) q= (56)
2
this means that optimal switching points P(6)= 0 always
appear for very small values close to zero. For the d
inductive network the argument ftAB is negative and siqnal, = K R dt [IIAI2 + IIRj2] (57)
switching points appear on a vertical line close to the
origin of the phase plane (Figure 9).
•!3(5)
l.O
t .._._
. . ~ B o
/ !3A(6]
(5)
reactor ~~apdcffor I
( /"
I .X \/
5 ) ='~' . ~". [~B
~AA+ ~A8 ..}'/
w)=Vc /Z~."/ V" ~/Z '. ~" 3~/Z 6

:".....!\.\- ..::h "" " "

'.... .\ / ./
--~B ""'~//

capacitor
Figure 10. Function fl(6) for the optimal control
strategy flo(6) and for both electric currents flA(6),
Figure 9. Switching pointsforsystem with local load /~B(6)

41 8 Electrical Power & Energy Systems

For switching points (~o=0) on the horizontal axis
(Figure 9) signal (57) does not make any mistake.
Switching points ( P = 0 ) on the vertical line (Figure 9)
are detected with a time error depending on the ratio
r = MAIM B and arguments ]JAA, ~BB" This small error is
made in the region of small power angles where exact
determination of control signal is not necessary.
The load at the compensator bus has an influence on
the derivative ~q/&t which is decisive for stability of
supplementary control. Numerical computations for
various loading conditions provide the following in-
formation. Active power demand at the intermediate
point only slightly affects the relative value of Oq/d~.
Derivative Oq/O~ is more sensitive to reactive power.
Capacitive load at the intermediate point increases ?q/?:7.
Inductive load at the intermediate point makes Oq/~
negative for large power angles and positive for small
power angles. For any reasonable reactive power demand
condition (34) is satisfied and system regulation is stable
even for a very short smoothing filter.
IV.4 Measuring algorithm
The proposed control algorithm utilizes the second power
of electric current magnitude. In the digital technique
there are various algorithms suitable for this computation.
They differ with computational effort, time response and
sensitivity to harmonics which can appear in measured
quantity. For a contol system a very fast algorithm is
not necessary. More desired features are the computa-
tional simplicity and insensitivity to harmonics. From
this point of view the algorithm based on a one-cycle
Fourier transformation could be recommended 21.
•In formula (33) it has been assumed that system
parameters are constant and that the time derivative
dq/dt of a given quantity q results only from the change
of power angle 6 and control function ~(t). This is true
only in the post-fault condition. At the moment when a
fault occurs and is cleared the system parameters are
changed very suddenly, forcing large and sudden changes
of given electric quantity. Figure 11 illustrates a typical
behaviour of q = ]I]2 in the case when a fault is cleared
without automatic reclosing. There are two very short
t
idq
dt
F the intermediate point of the transmission system and
t the control signal (57) have been calculated in lines at
v -
I various loading conditions the current-oriented signal
! smoothly with a very short low-pass filter and switching
Figure 11. Example of the wave form of electric
quantity q = Ill2 and its time derivative
Vol 14 No 6 December 1992
Figure 1 2. Measuring unit: (1) anti-aliasing filter and
analog-digital converter; (2) one-cycle Fourier com-
pu tation of magnitude for fundamental frequency; (3)
one-cycle fourier computation of fifth harmonic; (4)
differentiator; (5) interrupter; (6) buffer; (7) low-pass
filter (smoother)
jumps of the relevant time derivative, marked in the figure
by dotted lines.
In the control system of the static VAR compensator
any big jump of the time derivative dq/dt would
unnecessarily switch on and off the capacitor or reactor.
Obviously such an action has no influence on the power
system damping and should be avoided by eliminating
from the control signal all sudden changes resulting from
faults and switching operations in the network. Simple
application of high-stop or low-pass filters does not give
satisfactory results. For a large sudden change any such
filter responds with more or less fuzzy impulses and
obviously does not eliminate unnecessary switchings.
A measuring unit which completely eliminates all
sudden changes is illustrated in Figure 12. The input
signal i(t) travels through an anti-aliasing filter and is
sampled in an analog-digital converter. A digital signal
is processed by two Fourier algorithms computing the
second power of the magnitude for the fundamental
frequency [15ol2 and the fifth harmonic 1125o12. For slow
changes of electric current the anti-aliasing filter does not
pass the fifth harmonic and the output signal of 1125012
is equal to zero. The output signal 115o[2 is differentiated
and transmitted through a buffer memory to a low-pass
filter smoothing the control signal. When a sudden
change of input signal i(t) occurs the anti-aliasing filter
responds with a fuzzy impulse which obviously contains
higher-order harmonics. The Fourier algorithm 1125012
response is an approximately one-cycle impulse which is
used to interrupt the transmission of the basic signal
115012 to the low-pass filter. The low-pass filter then
obtains from the buffer memory an old sample and the
sudden jump is missed. When the output signal 1125012
disappears, new samples of the basic signal 115012 are
again transmitted.
V. Test results
Simulation tests for a two-machine system have been
done for various loading conditions including a load at
loads at the generator terminals. Currents IA, In used in
the compensator bus. Tests have confirmed that for
properly detects all switching points. It can operate
moments are only slightly delayed. Proposed current-
oriented control is not very sensitive to system parameters.
It can operate stably and effectively with the same gain
419
 for various system parameters resulting from line outages G3
and abnormal network states.
An example of results obtained from the two-machine
system with a load at the compensator bus and loads at
generator terminals is shown in Figure 13. The considered
post-fault condition is close to the critical condition and
saddles on active power waves, typical for deep power
swing, can be observed (Figure 13a). In the forward
motion the maximal available capacitor is switched on
(Figure 13b and Figure 13c) until switching point co = 0
is reached. In backward motion the maximal available
reactor is switched on, this decreases energy lost by the
system (Figure 13c), The back swing of the rotor is very
deep and switching points P = 0 can be also observed.
The control signal is smoothed by a low-pass filter which
G5
gives only a short delay in the appearance of switching
G7
points ( o = 0 (Figure 13d). Switching points P = 0 are
additionally delayed due to an error made by the Figure 14. CIGRE test system
algorithm in detection of P(6) = 0 (Figure 13c and Figure
13d). All these errors have only a slight influence on a 6(G7)
power system damping and the proposed algorithm
operates almost as the optimal control strategy.
Simulation tests for multi-machine systems have been
done for a three-machine test systemr"l'L ten-machine
New England test system 22 and seven-machine C I G R E
test system 16. Results showed that a controlled SVC can
effectively damp the power oscillations on a transmission 2 4 6 8 I0
A12 14 f/s
,
~
v

link where it is installed.

In this paper two results for C I G R E test system (Figure b 6(G6)
14) are presented as examples for multi-machine systems.
The compensator is situated at bus B8 being the
intermediate point of the long transmission link between
generators G6, G7 and the rest of system. The fault is
assumed in line L7 near bus B6. Results are shown in
Figure 15. 4 6 8 I0 12 14 f / s
In the first case the fault is cleared without automatic C B shunt(B8)
reclosing and line L7 is switched off together with the
fault. Inertia constants of both faulted generators G6 and

a
2
' 6 (rod) C P(pu) VVY
I
E
,~(G7)
P(pu) PM d
i0
0.5
d)

b 216 (red)
d cu(rad/s)
2v V V vj,0v w,/:
tP(PU) DH ~ r a d ) e ~,6 (G6)
1.0 /
os ,Cc~) G
IBc(PU)

-osf W~~ k~"L£4ys Tr-

Figure 13. Example of test results: (a) power angle
and power for system without any control; (b) power
angle, power and compensator susceptance for system
with proposed control; (c) trajectory on plane P versus
6 and (d) trajectory on plane co versus 5. Small squares
[ ] and black points • mark switching points co = 0 and
P = 0 respectively
Figure 15. Example of results for ClGRE test system:
(a), (b) and (c) power angles of G6, G7 and
compensator susceptance in the case of fault clearance
without reclosing; (d) and (e) power angle in the case
of fault clearance with automatic reclosing of line L?.
Small squares and triangles mark curves with and
without control of SVG, respectively

420 Electrical Power & Energy Systems

G7 are different and their dynamic behaviour consists of
two waveforms resulting from two different modes of
oscillations (Figure 15a, b). There are slow oscillations
between G 6 + G 7 and the rest of the system and fast
internal oscillations between G7 and G6. The proposed
control algorithm is trying to damp both modes of
oscillations (Figure 15c) but only slow oscillations
between G6 + G7 and the rest of system are effectively
damped. Fast oscillations between G7 and G6 persist
in spite of the control action. This can be justified on
the basis of formula (12). Small ~(t) has a significant
influence on bAB only if b is also relatively small. The
compensator with small power ratings cannot change the
power flow between generators connected by a line with
big susceptance. In the post-fault condition, a com-
pensator is situated at the middle point of the trans-
mission link connecting G6 + G7 with the rest of system.
Equivalent susceptance of this link is small and a
compensator with typical power ratings can significantly
damp these oscillations. Equivalent susceptance between
G7 and G6 is much larger and a compensator with typical
power ratings cannot practically contribute to the
damping of oscillations between these generators.
In the second case the fault is cleared with successful
automatic reclosing of line L7. In the post-fault condition
generator G6 is well coupled with the test of system
through line L7 and the compensator situated at bus B8
can significantly affect only equivalent susceptance
between G7 and the rest of system. Therefore more
damping can be observed for generator G7 than for
generator G6 (Figure 15d, e).
VI. Conclusions
Optimal control strategy for the supplementary regulator
of a static VAR compensator can be obtained from the
direct Lyapunov method and Pontryagin's maximum
principle when the minimized function is equal to total
system energy. The optimal control signal required by
this strategy is based on state variables 6, 09 not available
at the compensator bus. It has been shown that this
optimal control signal can be imitated by a time
derivative of locally-measured electric quantities. A new
control algorithm based on such a signal has been
proposed and confirmed by simulation tests for two-
machine and multi-machine systems.
VII. Acknowledgment
The financial support received from Deutsche Forschungs-
gemeinschaft is gratefully acknowledged.
Vol 14 No 6 December 1992
VIII. References
1 Frank, H Thyristor-controlled shunt compensation in power
network' ASEA Journal No 5-6 Vol 54 (1981 )
2 Miller, T. J. E. Reactive power control in electric systems
John Wiley & Sons, New York (1982)
3 He, Jin and Mohan, Ned 'Switch mode var compensator
with minimized switching losses and energy storage elements'
IEEE Trans. on Power Systems Vol PWRS-5 No 1 (1990)
4 Hammad, A E 'Analysis of power system stability enhance-
ment by static var compensators' IEEE Trans. on Power
Systems Vol PWRS-1 No 4 (1986)
5 Ohyma, T, Yamashita, K., Maeda, T., Suzuki, H. and
Mine, S 'Effective application of static var compensators to
damp oscillations IEEE Trans. on PAS Vol PAS-104 (June
1985)
6 Smith, J R, Pierre, D A, Sadighi, I, Nehrir, M H and
Hauer, J F 'A supplementary adaptive var unit controller for
power system damping' IEEE Trans. on Power Systems Vol
PWRS-4 No 3 (1989)
7 Cheng, C H and Hsu, Y Y "Application of power system
stabilizer and static VAR controller to multi machine power
system' IEEProc Vol 137 Pt.C No 1 (1990)
8 Padiyar, K R, Rajasekharm, P, Radhakrishna, C and Pal,
i A 'Dynamic stabilization of power systems through reactive
power modulation' Elec. Mach and Power Systems (1986)
pp 281-293
9 Kapoor, S C 'Dynamic stability of long transmission systems
with static compensators and synchronous machines' IEEE
Trans. on PAS Vol PAS-98 No 1 (1979)
10 O'Brien, i and Ledwich G 'Static reactive-power com-
pensator controls for improved system stability" Proc. lEE
Vol 134 Pt C No 1 (1987)
11 H a m m a d A 'Static VAR compensators for maximizing power
transfer and stabilization of HVAC interconnections' IEEE/
CSEE Joint Conference on High Voltage Transmission in
China, Beijing (1987)
12 Padiyar, K R and Varma, R K 'Static VAR system auxiliary
controller for improvement of dynamic stability' Electrical
Power and Energy Systems Vol 12 No 4 (1990)
13 Nelles, D 'Valuation fundamentals for the stabilizing effect of
compensators' CIGRE SC 31/32, Brasilia (1 981 )
14 Nelles, D 'Influence of static compensators on transient
stability" Proceedings of 7th PSCC Conference, Lausanne
(1981 )
15 L/iders, G A "Transient stability of multi machine power system
via direct method of Lyapunov" IEEE Trans. on PAS Vol PAS-90
No 1 (1971 )
16 Pal, M A "Power system stability. Analysis by the direct method
of Lyapunov North Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam
(1981)
17 Kirk, D E Optimal control. An introduction Prentice Hall
(1 970)
18 Venikov, V A Transient process in electrical power systems
Mir, Moscow, UAAR (1978)
19 Anderson, P M and Fouad, A A Power system control and
stability Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa (1977)
20 liar F 'Innovations in the detection of power swings in
electrical networks' Brown Boveri Review No 68 (1981)
pp 87-93
21 Phadke, A G and Thorp, J S Computer relaying for power
systems Research Studies Press, Taunton, England; John Wiley
& Sons, New York (1 988)
22 System engineering for power emergency operating state
control Davos, Switzerland September 30-October 5 (1979)
CONF-790904 P1, UC-97c
421