Dual Scheme Based Mathematical Modeling
of Magnetically Controlled Shunt Reactors
6 – 500 kV
Boris Bazilev, Victor Bespalov, Svetlana Dyagileva, Petr Makarov,
Maria Makarova, and Boris Oleksyuk

Abstract--Topicality of mathematic modeling of Magneti-
cally Controlled Shunt Reactors (MCSR) as a network element
using common existing software elements is shown in the
article. Principles of the MCSR dual scheme creation as a
thyristor controlled reactor or a static var compensator (in
case of modeling of Source of Reactive Power, including a
MCSR and a capacitor bank) are explained. Principles of
development the mathematic model of the MCSR dual scheme
are demonstrated. Example of development and application of
MCSR dual mathematical model for calculating steady-state
modes of high-voltage electric grid is shown. The potential of
the MCSR dual mathematic model application for
development of the algorithm of MCSR (SRP) automatic
control at the point of connection to electrical grid is assessed.
Index Terms--Automatic Voltage control, Energy efficiency,
Energy exchange, High-voltage techniques, Power system
simulation, Reactive power control.
I. NOMENCLATURE
ACS – Automatic Control System,
CB – Capacitor Bank,
CW – Control Winding,
MCSR – Magnetically Controlled Shunt Reactor,
NW – Network Winding,
SVC – Static Var Compensator,
SRP – Source of Reactive Power,
TCR – Thyristor Controlled Reactor.
II. INTRODUCTION
I N the last years, MCSR 6-500 kV firstly belonged to the
class of experimental models and pilot units moved into
the category of industrial applications. Moreover, a new
type of equipment has been developed: Source of Reactive
Power (SRP). SRP consists of MCSR and capacitor banks
(CB) with a shared automatic control system (ACS), and is a
This work was supported in part by SKRM Ltd., Moscow, and CIA
Clever Reactor, Riga.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of I. V. Grushetskis,
general manager of CIA Clever Reactor, for the financial support.
B. I. Bazilev and S. V. Dyagileva are with ESKO Ltd., Moscow,
Russian Federation (e-mail: borbaz@mail.ru, svetikx@inbox.ru).
V. Y. Bespalov and P. N. Makarov are with Moscow Power Engineer-
ing Institute, Moscow, Russian Federation (e-mail: bespalov@gmail.com,
petr.makarov@gmail.com).
M. A. Makarova is with Moscow State University, the Department of
Computational Mathematics and Cybernetics, Moscow, Russian Federation
(e-mail: mrmakarova@gmail.com).
B. V. Oleksyuk is with Moscow Power Engineering Institute, Moscow,
Russian Federation (e-mail: oleksyuk@gmail.com).
      
functional equivalent of static var compensator (SVC), while
having a number of better characteristics.
Today's market dictates tough requirements for the power
engineering sector. There is an acute problem to justify the
need for MCSR quickly and effectively.
In addition, it required some computer resources to
upgrade existing MCSR and MCSR-based devices.
Thanks to the development of information technologies
the possibility to model various electrical devices appears.
Modeling allows to determine in advance the exact amount
of compensation devices needed to solve a specific task, to
analyze the steady-state and transient modes of a high-
voltage electrical grid or its part, to determine exact range of
required rated power of compensators, to build a model of a
grid with necessary compensation devices and assess the
results, to configure the main characteristics of MCSR
optimally, to precisely tune the control system. Then one
can predict the results and calculate the economic benefits
from the positive effects achieved in the particular projects.
III. THE DUAL MODEL OF MCSR
Direct modeling of MCSR is a very complicated task due
to the necessity of building the magnetic circuits of the
device. Previously the equipment with a similar principle of
operation was not applied in the software for the electric
applications and the default libraries of standard devices do
not contain MCSR models. Aiming to model the direct
electromagnetic scheme a special program NRAST was
developed. However, the program hasn’t been popularized,
and its capabilities are significantly limited. Today it
constrains the development of existing markets and the
formation of new ones.
A. Basic Principles of the Dual Model Building
The topicality of mathematic modeling of MCSR as a
network element using common existing software applica-
tions appeared. Moreover, we needed the closest to MCSR
software elements in the meaning of functional relation.
Finally, we’ve chosen a thyristor controlled reactor (TCR)
used in SVC (and the whole SVC if we are talking about
SRP) as the above-mentioned common model.
In essence, the phase of MCSR is a two-winding
transformer with a split leg. Network winding is connected
to the power grid, the control winding is connected to an
adjustable source of DC voltage [1].
 The basic principle of making the dual scheme is to
replace the control winding of MCSR by the TCR. Thus,
there is no need to use the magnetic system of MCSR in the
model.
General diagram of one phase of MCSR (left) and
corresponding TCR-based principal dual scheme (right) are
shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. Structural diagram of a phase of MCSR (left) and a TCR-based dual
model (right).
In the dual scheme the function of the control winding is
performed by the TCR: operation of back-to-parallel
connected thyristor valves and inductances is similar to the
work of saturable half-bars in MCSR. Schemes of the
control winding and the network winding and their
connection through the magnetic system are performed via
linear inductances and the coupling transformer. The
scheme which shows the leakage inductance between
network winding and control winding is represented by a
linear inductance connected directly to the network.
Angle I shown in the Fig. 1 is the thyristor firing angle.
At the same time ( – I) corresponds to angle I (counted in
electrical degrees), is the time of saturated condition of the
bar during the half-period of voltage. In the half-period
(rated) mode, the angle of the thyristors
I =  – I = /2 ,
where Uc and Uy – network voltage and magnetization
voltage, respectively;
Ic and Iy – network current and magnetization current,
respectively [2].
B. Dual Model Structure
For the development of dual model EMTP ATPdraw
software application has been chosen. It can model electrical
circuits and simulates work of electrical circuits in real time.
In addition, EMTP has its own common elements library
(transformers, valves, etc.) and allows presenting the results
of modeling in a convenient graphical form. Finally, we can
combine basic electric elements, subroutines and algorithms
both in one model for simulation of the work of the
automatic control system (ACS).
Generally the model is based on 3 main blocks: MCSR
(TCR with pre-connected inductances through a saturable
transformer), CB and ACS.
The basic structure of MCSR dual model is shown below
(Fig. 2).
Fig. 2. The dual model of MCSR in EMTP ATPdraw.
1. Leakage inductance between NW and CW.
2. Coupling transformer.
3. TCR with harmonic filters.
4. Control pulse-generating block for the thyristors.
5. Resistance, modeling no-load losses in reactor.
6. Resistance, modeling short circuit losses in reactor.
7. Extra Resistance for internal purposes.
For simplicity, in the dual model of MCSR control pulse-
generating block for the thyristors is built as a subroutine.
The detailed TCR block is shown below:
Fig 3. The block of TCR in EMTP ATPdraw.
(1) TCR is built of three single-phased delta-connected
thyristor reactors.
C. Calculations of Basic Parameters
Pre-connected inductance Lnw-cw (inductance of network
winding in the dual model) is determined as:
Lnw  cw L phase / 2 . (2)
Inductances of control winding Lcw (which are connected
in series with thyristors) are defined as:
Lcw 3L phase / 2 , (3)
where
L phase X /Z 2
U rated / (2S fQrated ) (4)
is the inductance of one phase of reactor,
U rated and Qrated are voltage and reactive power rated values
of 3-phase reactor respectively, X is X-reactance of reactor
[3].
The losses in reactor are modeled with resistances and
calculated as:
2
1 U rated
Rnl X (5)
K nl K nl Qrated
for no-load losses in reactor;
2
U rated
Rsc K sc X K sc
Qrated
for short circuit losses in reactor, where K nl and K sc are
coefficients of no-load and short circuit losses respectively.
D. Example of Dual Model Application
For demonstration of the developed dual model the
results of a research for a part of 132 kV electrical grid in
Argentina is shown.
There were significant voltage drop and power losses in
power transmission lines in normal steady-state and post-
emergency modes due to significant reactive power flow.
The main objective was to analyze the grid and to define the
optimal connecting points for SRPs, to choose SRPs ratings
and to configure ACSs of these SRPs in an optimal way. We
expected to stabilize voltage in the grid nodes, to reduce
reactive power flows through the grid in all modes. The
solutions and recommendations were made using new
irregular method that allows exclude on-load tap changers
of transformers from voltage regulation process.
According to data on the load and grid configuration
provided by the client, steady-state modes were analyzed
and two nodes were chosen to be equipped with 132 kV
SRPs: MCSR 15 Mvar and two CB 15 Mvar (30 Mvar of
total capacity), one for each of chosen nodes.
Using the same given data, a model of network grid was
built in EMTP software and the recommended solution with
SRP models based on dual model of MCSR connected in
the chosen nodes was tested and proved.
The above-mentioned diagram of the model is shown
below (Fig. 4).
Fig. 4. Model of tested segment of 132 kV electric grid, Argentina.
After confirmation of the adequacy of the model, control
measurements of voltage level in the key nodes has been
made. Three scenarios were considered:
 scheme of reactive power compensation proposed by
the client (default scheme);
 scheme of reactive power compensation according to
the results of the research (dual model);
 no reactive power compensation (no compensation).
The voltage levels in 6 controlled nodes according to the
results of simulation are shown in the diagram below:
(6)
Fig. 5. Modeling results. The deviation of voltage level from the rated
value for considered scenarios.
Thus the efficiency of the dual model was confirmed
practically. In addition, recommendations based on the
irregular method of analyzing steady-state modes of high-
voltage electrical grid were approved.
Modeling of different scenarios showed that the
installation of recommended SRPs leads to the following
positive effects:
 voltage stabilization in 132 kV grid (voltage variation
in grid nodes in any normal mode does not exceed 1%
from the rated value);
 power losses reduction up to 55% in all operational
modes (from 16,8 MW to 7,6 MW);
 about 40% increase of transmission capability of the
whole corridor without new transmission lines con-
struction;
 gives perspective of 15% load increase in all grid
nodes relatively to current high load values.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
The great advantage of the dual model is ability of
presenting general-purpose simulation and algorithms of
ACS as a subroutines and programming modules, as well as
quick and accurate adjustment of the internal parameters of
the model.
The dual model allows to simulate quickly and accurately
all possible test scenarios of electrical grid real-time pro-
cesses and to analyze the results.
In the future, after the appropriate analysis is done,
mutual work of MCSR and CB connected in one node will
be optimized. In case of several CB installed, the number of
CB switching can be greatly reduced by developing an
optimal SRP control algorithm.
MCSR optimization is a separate problem. Well-config-
ured internal parameters of devices and control algorithm of
ACS guarantees voltage stabilization in the connection node
up to 0,1%–0,5% of the rated value and the increase of the
speed of MCSR in the most cases.
It should be noted that real ACS is a sophisticated device.
Special manufacturer tests of MCSR and CB together are
time-consuming, complicated and expensive procedure.
Sometimes it is even impossible to test the real hardware.
The dual model provides us the opportunity.
V. REFERENCES
[1] A. M. Bryantsev, “Electric reactors controlled by BIAS Magnetization
in Power Systems” in symposium “Magnetically controlled electric
reactors” [in Russian], vol. 2, M: Znak, 2010, pp. 5-10.
[2] M. A. Biki, E. N. Brodovoy, A. M. Bryantsev, A. I. Lurie and L. V.
Leytes, “Electromagnetic processes in controlled power reactors” [in
Russian], Electricity, 1994, 6, pp. 18-23.
[3] A. M. Bryantsev, “Basic equations and characteristics of magnetically
controlled ferromagnetic reactors with extreme saturation of parts of
the magnetic system” [in Russian], Soviet Electrical Engineering,
1991, 2, pp. 38-46.
VI. AUTHORS
Boris Bazilev, vice-president of ESKO Ltd, Moscow, Russian Federation.
Victor Bespalov, professor of Moscow Power Engineering Institute,
Moscow, Russian Federation.
Svetlana Dyagileva, deputy technical director of ESKO Ltd, Moscow,
Russian Federation.
Petr Makarov, post graduate student of Moscow Power Engineering
Institute, Moscow, Russian Federation.
Maria Makarova, post graduate student of Moscow State University,
Faculty of Computational Mathematics and Cybernetics, Moscow, Russian
Federation.
Boris Oleksyuk, post graduate student of Moscow Power Engineering
Institute, Moscow, Russian Federation.