Damping function of unified power flow controller

H.F. Wa ng

Abstract: The paper presents the establishment of

a linearised Phillips-Heffron model of a power
system installed with an unified power flow
controller (UPFC). On the basis of the linearised
model, the damping function of the UPFC is
investigated. Basic issues on the design of the
UPFC damping controller are discussed,
regarding the effectiveness and robustness of the
damping function of the UPFC, among which the
selection of effective and robust input control
signals of the UPFC to superimpose its damping
function is specially addressed. An example
power system is presented.

The discussions above are demonstrated by an example

power system. Although the damping function of the
UPFC is investigated for single-machine infinite-bus
power systems in this paper, some basic issues are
raised and studied. Insight and comprehension on these
issues are provided, which will guide further investigation into the UPFC damping function in more complicated power systems.

Introduction

The unified power flow controller (UPFC) was proposed [l] to achieve the flexible AC transmission systems (FACTS). It is a multiple-functional FACTS
controller with primary duty to be power flow control
[2]. The secondary functions of the UPFC can be voltage control, transient stability improvement, oscillation
damping etc. Recently, there has been a growing interest in studying the UPFC, its modelling [3, 41, its basic
function to control the power flow [5] and its capability
to increase system transient stability [6]. In [2] and [3],
the damping function of the UPFC is demonstrated by
examples. However, so far there has been no research
reported which devotes itself to investigation into the
basic issues on the damping function of the UPFC.
Therefore, in this paper, the linearised Phillips-Heffron model of a power system installed with an UPFC
is first established, which is of the same configuration
as that of the unified model for static var compensator
(SVC), thyristor-controlled series compensator (TCSC)
and thyristor-controlled phase shifter (TCPS) presented
in [7]. On the basis of the linearised model established,
the phase compensation method [8] is applied for the
design of the UPFC damping controller:
(i) to select the operating condition of the power system where an effective and robust UPFC damping controller can be designed;
(ii) to choose the most effective and robust input control signal of the UPFC on which the damping function of the UPFC is superimposed;
(iii) to set the parameters of the UPFC damping controller.

L - - - - - - - - - - -UPFC
--A

Fig.1

UPFC installed in single-niuchinein$nite-bus power system

Linearised model of power systems installed

w i t h UPFC

Fig. 1 is a single-machine infinite-bus power system

installed with an UPFC, which consists of an excitation
transformer (ET), a boosting transformer (BT), two
three-phase GTO based voltage source converters
(VSCs) and a DC link capacitor. In Fig. 1, mE, mE and
SE, SE are the amplitude modulation ratio and phase
angle of the control signal of each VSC, respectively,
which are the input control signals to the UPFC. If the
general pulse width modulation (PWM) (or optimised
pulse patterns or space-vector modulation approach) is
adopted for the GTO-based VSC, the three-phase
dynamic differential equations of the UPFC are [3]:
-3

0 IEE, 1999
ZEE Proceedings online no. 19990064
DOL 10.1049/ip-gtd: 19990064
Paper first received 18th May 1998 and in revised form 1st September
1998
The author is with the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK
IEE Proc.-Gener. Transm. Distrib.; Vol. 146, No. I , January 1999

81

cos(wt + S E

+ l200)]

[q
ZEc

+ 6B)

t %[cOs(wt
2cdc

cos(wt

cos(&

+ 6B - 120")

+ 6 B + 120")]

ZBc

By applying Park's transformation and ignoring the

resistance and transients of the transformers of the
UPFC, the equations above become:

[:E::]
[:E

-/E]

[:E:] + [

wc
2
mEsi;6Evd,

mo cos 6
2

1
1

~ v d ,

(1)
The nonlinear dynamic model of the power system of
Fig. 1 is [7]:

s = wow
W =

&;

(P,

- Pe -

(-E,

Dw)/M

+E f d ) / G o

From eqns. 1, 5 and 6 we can obtain:

82

IEE Pro?.-Gener. Transm. Distrih., Vol. 146, No. 1, January 1999

UPFC damping control

WO

- _D

The linearised model of the power system installed with

the UPFC of eqn. 13 can be expressed by Fig. 3 [9],
where H(s) is the transfer function of the UPFC damping controller. From Fig. 3 we can obtain the electric
torque provided by the UPFC damping controller to
the electromechanical oscillation loop of the generator
to be:

0
0
0

0
Kc(s)

(13)
where AmE, AmB, AdE, ASB are the linearisation of the
input control signals of the UPFC. The linearised
dynamic model of eqn. 13 can be shown by Fig. 2,
where only one input control signal is demonstrated,
with U being e (Au = Am,), b (Au = AmB),Se (Au = AS,)
or Sh (Au = ASB). It can be seen that the configuration
of the Phillips-Heffron model is exactly the same as
that installed with SVC, TCSC and TCPS presented in

VI.

Ab

Fig.2 PhillipsHeffion model of power system instulled with UPFC

Also from eqn. 13 it can be seen that there are four

choices of input control signals of the UPFC to superimpose on the damping function of the UPFC, InE, nzB,
SE and 6,. Therefore, in designing the damping controller of the UPFC, besides setting its parameters, the
selection of the input control signal of the UPFC to
superimpose on the damping function of the UPFC is
also important.
IEE Proc.-Gener. Transm. Disfrib., Vol. 146, No. I . January 1999

Fig.3

elect romechanicol
osc iItat ion LooD

0
Kok1

i+

qql-

Closed-loopsystem instulled with UPFC dumping controller

An ideal UPFC damping controller should contribute a

pure positive damping torque to the electromechanical
oscillation loop with ATupFc = DupFcAw, that is:

which results in:

D U P F G = [ K c(A0 ) 11-0 (A0 ) + DU P FC K I L (A0 )]

= F(Xo)H(Xo)

(A0 )

(16)
F(&), which is named as the forward path of the
UPFC damping controller, has a decisive influence on
the effectiveness of the UPFC damping controller.
Since F(&) varies with power system operating conditions and choices of input control signals of the UPFC,
it can be used for the selection of power system operating condition at which the UPFC damping controller is
designed, and of the input control signal of the UPFC
to be superimposed by the UPFC damping function. If
we assume the set of the operating conditions of the
power system is Q(p), F(&) can be denoted as the function of system operating condition p and input control
signal of the UPFC uk, F(&, p, uk). The criterion of the
selection can be:
h s e l e c t e d = min F(Xo,h, U k ) , h E R ( h )
(17)
P

Uselected

= %~xF(XO>
Pselected,

U~C)

Uk E { ~ E > ~ B , ~ E I ~ B }

(18a)

Uselected

min F ( & , P , w)

83

uk E {mE,mBr6Ei6B} 7

(18b)
(i) Eqn. 17 requires that the operating condition, where
the UPFC damping control is least effective, is selected
for the design of the controller, since once the UPFC
damping controller is designed at the least effective
operating condition, its effectiveness at other operating
conditions is guaranteed. Thus the robustness of the
damping controller is achieved.
(ii) For the efficient operation of the UPFC damping
function. the required damping should be provided at
minimum control cost. This can be achieved by applying the criterion of eqn. 18a so that the most effective
input co:itrol signal is selected.
(iii) A good design of damping controller requires that
it provides a steady damping over all the range of
power system operating conditions. If the damping
contribution from the controller increases greatly, on
the one hand, with the variations of power system
operatin,$ conditions, the damping function could be
over-strong at some operating conditions, which would
pose much unwanted influence on other modes in the
power system. On the other hand, a sharp drop in the
damping contribution from the controller with the
changes of power system operating conditions results in
poor robustness. Therefore, the criterion of eqn. 186
requires that, when the input control signal of the
UPFC is selected, the damping contribution by the
UPFC damping controller changes as little as possible
with the variations of power system operating conditions so that a smooth damping function of the UPFC
over Q(j.1) is obtained. However, this criterion should
be applied jointly with that of eqn. 18a, since failing to
meet the requirement of the effectiveness is not a
proper sclection.
A set of similar criteria to eqns. 17 and 18 to select
the effective and robust installing locations and feedback signals of FACTS-based stabilisers are proposed
for a multimachine power system [lo]. The author is
working to generalise eqns. 17 and 18 for the study of
damping function of UPFC installed in multimachine
power systems, where an effectiveness function will be
proposetl to replace F(&, p, uk) in eqns. 17 and 18.
Furthermore, from eqn. 16 we can see that the phase
compensation method can be used to set the parameters of the UPFC damping controller. Without loss of
generalily, we can assume:

H ( s )=

~~

ST,
K u (1+ sTz)(1+ ST^)
+ ST, 1+ STU(1+ ~ T 1 ) (+1 ST^)

H ( X 0 ) = HLO,

F(X0) =

FLp
(19)

By setting:

the required amount damping torque DuPFc can be

provided by the UPFC damping controller. According
to eqn. 20, parameters of the controller can be set.
4

Example

A single-machine infinite-bus power system installed

with an UPFC is shown by Fig. 4, parameters of which
are given in Appendix 7. The system may operate with
84

single or two transmission lines connecting the generator and the infinite-bus bar with the load condition to
be Pe0 = 0.1 - 1.2pu, V,, = l.Opu, Vho= 1.Opu. So, the
set of system operating conditions is:
n(P) = { b :vtO = 1.0 pu, VbO = 1.0 pu,

PO
, = 0.1 pu - 1.2 pu,
single line, two lines}

XL

damping
controller

Fig.4

Single-muchine infinite-bus power system installed with UPFC

The UPFC is installed for the purpose of multiple control functions, one of which will be the suppression of a
low-frequency oscillation occurring in the system, since
it is found that the damping of the responsible electromechanical oscillation mode is negative or very poor
over Q ( p ) , as shown in Fig. 5. From Fig. 5 it can be
seen that, at the operating condition,
CL1

= {VtO = 1.0 pu, V b O = 1.0 pu, PeO

1.2 pur

single line}
0.0051-

;-0.01t

single Line\

-0.015

-0.02

-0.03
-a -0.035

-0.OLI

\
I

0.2

Fig.5

0.L

0.6
0.8
Peo, p.u.
Dumping of oscillation mode over Q(p)

1.o

1.2

the oscillation mode is of poorest damping. Therefore,

pl could be selected as the operating condition at which
the UPFC damping controller is designed. However,
the results of calculation of the forward path, F(&),
over Q ( p ) as shown by Figs. 6 and 7, show that, for all
the candidate input control signals to be superimposed
by the UPFC damping controller, uk E {mE,mB,aB,
aB},pl is not the suitable operating condition to design
the controller, since as predicted by the computation of
F(&) (Fig. 6), at p, the UPFC damping controller is
more effective to damp the oscillation, so that once it is
designed at p l , its effectiveness at other operating conditions cannot be ensured (i.e. the robustness of the
damping controller may not be achieved). With Uk =
,a, we have F(&) = 0 over Q ( p ) . Therefore, the oscillation mode is not controllable if the input control signal
is chosen to be 6,. In the following, 6, will not be
included in the discussion.
IEE Proc.-Gener. Transm. Distrib.. Vol. 146, No. I . January 1999

of eqn. 18a lead to the selection of the input control

signal for the UPFC damping controller as uk = mB.

0.3-

0.25 -

(iii) The results of applying the criteria of eqn. 18b are:

( a ) with ~k = WZE,

0.2 -

maxF(Xo,P,uk) - minF(Xo,P,uk) = 25.73

minF(Xo,P,uk)
(b) with

n .I5-

o,05-

Uk' 6E (single line)

uk:mElsingle line)
u k = m E ( t w o line)

\
f

Peo, pu
Vuriution of magnitude of F(&j over S ( p j

Fig.6

= SE,

m a x F ( X o , P , % ) - m i n F ( X o , P , m ) = o.73
min F(X0, I*, U k )
Therefore, with uk = nzB, the UPFC damping controller
provides the smoothest damping to the oscillation

--0-

uk

Pselected

= {KO= 1.0 PU,

KO= 1.0 PU,

P,o

35r

Uselected

= 0.1 pu, single lines}

=m B

Then the phase compensation method outlined by

eqns. 19 and 20 is used to set the parameters of the
UPFC damping controller at ,uselected with US&ted = mB.
The results are:

h'u = 6.38, Tu = 0.01 S, T, = 10.0 S,

l5

t
uk:mgltwo line)

0.6
0.8
Peo, pu
Variation ofphase ofF(&,j over S ( p )
0.2

Fig.7

0.4

1.0

1.2

(i) According to the criteria of eqn. 17, it can be seen

that the operating condition to be selected for the
design of the UPFC damping controller is:
(a) with uk = mE and SE, p2
{ V I , l.opU, vho
1.Opu, Pe0 = 0.1 pu, two lines};
(b) with Uk = nZg, pssylected= { VI, = l.opU, v h o = l.opU,
P,, = 0.1 pu, single lines}.
the most effective input control
(ii) At p2 and p,Telecled,
signal is uk = mB as indicated by Fig. 6. So the criteria
1

7'1

= 0.9 S,

T2 = 0.89 S, T3 = 0.9 S, T4 = 0.70 s

The oscillation mode is moved by the UPFC damping
controller to 4 = -0.5405 2 j5.2517 with a satisfactory
damping of 0.1.
To verify and confirm the correctness of the selection
of the operating condition and the input control signal
of the UPFC above, the phase compensation method is
used to design the UPFC damping controller with several other selections as shown by Table 1, where pl =
{ V,, = l.Opu, V,, = l.Opu, PeO= 1.2pu, single lines} at
which the oscillation mode is of the poorest damping
when the power system installed no UPFC damping
controller, p2 = { Vto = l.Opu, Vbo = l.Opu, Peo =
0.1 pu, two lines} which is selected for uk = mE and uk =
13,. Other parameters of the UPFC damping controller
in Table 1 are Tu = 0.01s, T , = 10.0s, T, = 0.9s, T3 =
0.9s. From Table 1 we can see that, as predicted by
Fig. 6, to achieve an effective design of the UPFC
~ ~requires
~ ~ , ~lowest gain
damping controller, u , ~ , =~ mB
value (i.e. minimum control cost). From the last column of Table 1, it can be seen that, for all cases, the
damping of system oscillation is improved effectively.
However, when the robustness of the UPFC damping
controller, its effectiveness at the operating conditions

Table 1: Results of the UPFC damping controller designed with five

other selections
Operating
condition

Input control
signal

Parameters of the UPFC damping

controller

1-11

u k = m,

K, = 88.01, T2= 0.48s, T, = 0. 41 s

dE

K, = 24.63, T2= 0.82s, T, = 0.65s

cI1

UI =

Pl

u k = mB

Ku = 10.52, T2= 0.70s. T4= 0.57s

P2

u k = mE

K, = 227.3, T, = 0 . 3 2 ~ ,T4 = 0.45s

1-12

U, =

6,

Ku= 68.92, T, = 0.74s, T, = 0.60s

1EE Proc -Gmer Transm DrJtrib , Val 146, No 1 January 1999

Oscillation mode t o be
assigned by the
controller

A, = -0.4781 + j4.5187
A, = -0.4765 * 14.6642
A, = -0.4620 j4.5496
& = -0.5864 2 j5.5692
A, = -0.6629 * j6.1094
85

Table 2: Results of examining the robustness of the UPFC

damping controller
Condition under wich the
UPFC damping controller
is design
with uk= m, at

v,

Oscillation mode at p2
A0 = -0.0292 f

Oscillation mode at k,

j6.0006

A, = -0.2863 2 j6.0517
A, = -0.4541 f j6.0933

with uk= 6, at pl
with uk= mBat p1

A, = 0.0671 f j1.3910*
A, = - 1.4493 j4.6211
& = -0.4389 2 j4.4659

with uk= m, at p2
with uk= & a t p2

with

Uselected

= mB at

kelected

other than that where it is designed, is examined,

shown by Table 2 of the results of eigenvalue computation, it can be seen that the UPFC damping controller set at ,uselected
with.u,,lected= mB is most efficient and
maintains both effectiveness and robustness.

of eqns. 1 and 2. The oscillation is started by a threephase to-earth short circuit, which occurred at 1.0 second of the simulation and which is cleared after 100ms.
Uk m g
u k = m g with increased
gain

without UPFC damping controller

30C
25C
200

3-

uk=mgwith increased gain

150
100
50

6.0

1.0

8.0

10.0

t,s

ut P,+lted
Nonlrneur siniulution ut pyelecred

2.0

6.0

1.0

8.0

10.0

oi:i[

F u k = m g with increased gain

0.01L

t,s

Nonlineur simulution with UPFC dumping controller designed

,6%inear siinulation at p, (one of two lines is switched off after clearance of

fault)

0.16r.

0.008

0.0060.001 -

k=
;/mB

2.0

Fig. 11 Nonlinear simulation with UPFC dumping controller designed

Fig.8

with increased gain

uk=mg

0.002-

0
0

0.I
0.08-

A
2.0

6.0

4.0

8.0

10.0

t.s

0.06 -

Fig. 12

0.01 0.02 -

ut

Nonlineur simulation with UPFC damping controller designed

Pxlrctcd

Input control signal of mB

0-

without UPFC
t,s

10
9
8
7

Fig.9 Nonlinear simulation with UPFC dumping controller designed

ut PI
Input control signal of mB

ze

2 6

2
1

01
0

1
3
2

Fig. 13

O
L
0

2.0

6.0

1.0

8.0

designed ut

2.0

L.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

t,s
Nonlineur simulation ut 112 with the UPFC damping controller

10.0

t,s

Fig. 10 Nonlinear simulation with UPFC damping controller designed

at PI
Nonlineur simulation at p2

Figs. 8--14 are the results of nonlinear simulation of

the power system, where the power system and the
UPFC are modelled by nonlinear differential equations
86

5
1
3

(i) From Fig. 8 it can be seen that the UPFC damping

controller designed at p1with uk = m E and uk = SE can
suppress the oscillation effectively when the power system operates at p l . However, with uk = mB, the effectiveness of the damping controller is not the same as
that indicated by eigenvalue assignment. This is caused
by the limitation of the input control signal on mB (0 s
IEE Proc.-Gener. Trunsm. DiJlrib.. Vol. 146, No. I . Junuury 1999

mB 5 1) as shown by Fig. 9. The damping controller

does not achieve its damping effect as expected by the
eigenvalue assignment as shown by the last column in
Table 1. However, with an increased gain value K , =
24.63 (same as that with uk = SE), the damping controller with uk = mB can damp the oscillation effectively as
shown by Figs. 8 and 9.

an UPFC, which adds the UPFC, one of the most

important FACTS controllers, into the category of the
unified model presented in [7];
(ii) proposal of three criteria to select the operating
condition of the power system to ensure the robust
design of the UPFC damping controller and the input
control signal to be superimposed by the UPFC damping function to achieve the maximum efficiency of the
damping controller.
(iii) application of the phase compensation method to
set the parameters of the UPFC damping controller.
6

0
0

2.0

6.0

1.0

8.0

10.0

t,s

Fig. 14 Nonlinear simulution ut p,

For uk = m,, the controller designed at , u ~ ~ , , otherwise,
~ ~ , ~ ~ , , designed at

p2

Conclusions

The major contributions of this paper are:

(i) the establishment of the Phillips-Heffron model of a
single-machine infinite-bus power system installed with

IEE Proc.-Gener. Trunsiii. Distrib., Vol. 146, No. I , Junuury 1999

1 GYUGYO, L.: A unified power flow control concept for flexible

AC transmission systems, I E E Proc. C, 1992, 4, (139), pp. 32333 1

2 GYUGYO, L., RIETMAN, T.R., EDRIS, A., SCHAUDER,

(ii) When the power system operates at p2, Fig. 10

shows that the effectiveness of the UPFC damping controller designed at pl is not maintained, as indicated by
the results of eigenvalue computation presented in the
second column of Table 2. Therefore, the robustness of
the damping controller is not achieved.
(iii) Figs. 11 and 12 show that the limitation on m B also
causes the difference between the results of eigenvalue
computation and nonlinear simulation on the effectiveness of the UPFC damping controller designed at p,yelected with U,,[,,ted = mB.However, with increased gain
value to be KU = 16.0, the oscillation is well damped.
(iv) From Fig. 13 it can be seen that the UPFC damping controller designed at p2 with uk = mE and uk = SE
can suppress the oscillation effectively when the power
system operates at p2 as indicated by the results of
eigenvalue computation presented in the last column of
Table 1 . However, when the power system operates at
pl,the damping function of the controller with uk = m E
is over-strong, which moves one pair of eigenvalues of
the power system onto the right side of the complex
plane as indicated by * in Table 2. This is also confirmed by the nonlinear simulation presented by
Fig. 14.
(v) Fig. 14 demonstrates that, at p,, the UPFC damping controller with an increased gain value designed at
with USe,,lected = m B can damp the oscillation as
effectively that designed at p2 with uk = SE, but less
control cost (lower gain value) is needed. Therefore,
p,yelectrd
and uselected= mB are still the correct selection.
5

References

uk= m E

20

C.D., TORGERSON, D.R., and WILLIAMS, S.L.: The unified

power flow controller: a new approach to power transmission
control, IEEE Trans., 1995, PWER-2, (lo), pp. 1085-1097
3 NABAVI-NIAKI, A., and IRAVAM, M.R.: Steady-state and
dynamic models of unified power flow controller (UPFC) for
power system studies, IEEE Trans., 1996, P W R W , ( ] I ) , pp.
1937-1943
4 PAPIC, I., ZUNKO, P., POVH, D., and WEINHOLD, M.:
Basic control of unified power flow controller, IEEE Trans.,
1997, P W R M , (12), pp. 17361739
5 SMITH, K.S., RAN, L., and PENMAN, J.: Dynamic modelling
of a unified power flow controller, IEE Proc. C, 1997, 1, (144),
pp. 7-12
6 LIMYINGCHAROEN, S., ANNAKAGE, U.D., and PAHALAWATHTHA, N.C.: Effects of unified power flow controllers on
transient stability, ZEE Proc. C, 1998, 2, (145), pp. 182-188
7 WANG, H.F., and SWIFT, F.J.: An unified model for the analysis of FACTS devices in damping power system oscillations. Part
I: Single-machine infinite-bus power systems, IEEE Truns., 1997,
PD-2, (12), pp. 941-946
8 WANG, H.F., LI, M., and SWIFT, F.J.: FACTS-based stabilizer designed by the phase compensation method. Part I and 11.
Proceedings of APSCOM-97, Hong Kong, 1997, pp. 638-649
9 LARSEN, E.V., SANCHEZ-GASCA, J.J., and CHOW, J.H.:
Concept for design of FACTS controllers to damp power
swings, IEEE Trans., 1995. PWRS-2, (lo), pp. 948-956
10 WANG, H.F.: Selection of robust installiig locations and feedback signals of FACTS-based stabilizers in multi-machine power
systems, IEEE Trans., 1998, PWRS, (PE-066-PWRS-0-05) (in
press)

Appendix

The parameters of the example single-machine infinitebus power system (in pu except where indicated):
= 5.044 s, x d = 1.0,
H = 4.0 s, D = 0.0,
x q = 0.6, X& = 0.3, ICT = 0.1, ZL = 0.3,
K A = 10.0, TA = 0.01 S, Vdco = 10 kV,

C D ( S )=

Kdc
STdc

1 4-

(voltage controller of

DC link capacitor),
K d c = 2.0 PU, T d c = 0.01 s