Performance Analysis of Some FACTS Devices

Using Newton Raphson Load Flow Algorithm

Biswajeet Kr Medhi

Satyajit Bhuyan

Electrical Engineering Department

Assam Engineering College
Guwahati, India
biswa3009@gmail.com

Electrical Engineering Department

Assam Engineering College
Guwahati, India
satyajitbhuyan1962@gmail.com

AbstractA comparative study and performance analysis is

done for a number of FACTS devices in this paper. The models
used are incorporated in an existing Newton Raphson Load Flow
(NRLF) algorithm using standard IEEE 5 bus and 30 bus system.
Problem of initialization for proper convergence of load flow is
studied and findings are presented. Results are presented for
comparison of performance analysis and evaluation of degree of
suitability of selected FACTS devices.

Keywords Newton-Raphson load flow, FACTS, TCSC,

STATCOM, UPFC, Jacobian, MATLAB.
I.

INTRODUCTION

FLEXIBLE AC transmission system is A power electronic

based system and other static equipment that provide control
of one or more AC transmission system parameters to enhance
controllability and increase power transfer capability. Its first
concept was introduced by N.G Hingorani, in 1988 [1]. Now- adays multiple and multi-type FACTS devices are becoming
interesting areas for the researchers [2]. Flexible AC
transmission systems, so-called FACTS devices, can help
reduce power flow on overloaded lines, which would result in
an increased load ability of the power system, fewer
transmission line losses, improved stability and security and,
ultimately, a more energy-efficient transmission system
[3].The transmission facilities are being overused owing to the
higher industrial demands and deregulation of the power
supply industry. Thus there is a need for exploring new ways
for maximizing the power transfer capability of existing
transmission facilities while, at the same time, maintaining
acceptable levels of network reliability and stability [4]. This
scenario makes necessary the development of power electronic
based devices for high performance control of the power
network. The FACTS controllers provide the most useful
means and thus are used in regulating the power flows,
maintaining transmission voltages within limits and mitigate
the dynamic disturbance. UPFC and STATCOM are effective
and robust devices for power system stability [5].
Static models of three FACTS devices consisting of SVS
model of Unified Power Flow Controller (UPFC), Thyristor
Controlled Series Capacitor (TCSC) and STATCOM have
been selected for the steady-state analysis [6].
To minimize the power transmission loss, reactive power
compensation is used. Reactive power compensation is also

used to maintain power transmission capability and to

maintain the supply voltage within the specified limits.
Control of line impedance of the transmission line is known as
series compensation. When the line impedance changes it
means that either capacitive or inductive compensation can be
obtained which in turn enables to control active power. TCSC
(Thyristor Controlled Series Capacitor) connected in series
with the transmission line provides means to change the
impedance of the line thus providing an option to enhance the
power transfer capability. Shunt connected compensators are
used to increase steady state transmittable power and to
control voltage profile. One such shunt connected
compensator is the STATCOM (Static Compensator) that
comes under FACTS device category. The Synchronous
voltage source UPFC model [7] injects into the system a
voltage of variable magnitude and angle in series with the line.
These parameters adjust automatically so as to control the
active and the reactive powers exchanged between the UPFC
and the AC system.
In this paper FACTS device models are incorporated in Newton
Raphson Load Flow (NRLF) algorithm in order to investigate the
control of power flow and improvement of voltage. All the
equations are then combined in to one set of non-linear algebraic
equations. A jacobian matrix is then formed which is non
symmetric in nature.
II.

MODEL OF FACTS DEVICES

A. Thyristor Controlled Series Compensator

A TCSC can be defined as a capacitive reactance compensator
which consists of a series capacitor bank shunted by a
thyristor-controlled reactor in order to provide a smoothly
variable series capacitive reactance [8]. In a practical TCSC
implementation, several such basic compensators may be
connected in series to obtain the desired voltage rating and
operating characteristics. However, the basic idea behind the
TCSC scheme is to provide a continuously variable capacitor
by means of partially canceling the effective compensating
capacitance. A TCSC is a series-controlled capacitive
reactance that can provide continuous control of power on the
ac line over a wide range. A simple understanding of TCSC
functioning can be obtained by analyzing the behavior of a
variable inductor connected in parallel with a Fixed Capacitor.
The maximum voltage and current limits are design values for

which the thyristor valve, the reactor and capacitor banks are
rated to meet specific application requirements.

III.

IMPLEMENTATION

The basic power flow equations are given by

(1)
(2)

Figure 1: General model of TCSC

B. Static Synchronous Compensator(STATCOM)

STATCOM is a Static synchronous generator operated as a
shunt-connected static VAR compensator whose capacitive or
inductive output current can be controlled independent of the
ac system voltage. STATCOM is one of the key FACTS
Controllers. A STATCOM is a controlled reactive power
source. It provides voltage support by generating or absorbing
capacitors banks. It regulates the voltage at its terminals by
compensating the amount of reactive power in or out from the
power system [5].
When the system voltage is low the STATCOM injects the
reactive power to and when the voltage is high it absorbs the
reactive power. The reactive power is fed from the Voltage
Source Converter (VSC) which is connecting on the secondary
side of a coupling transformer as shown in the Fig 2. By
varying the magnitude of the output voltage the reactive power
exchange can be regulated between the convertor and AC
system.

Where i=1, 2,..n

n is the number of buses.
All other symbols carry their usual meaning.
The Jacobian matrix gives the linearized relationship between
small changes in ik and voltage magnitude Vik with the
small changes in real and reactive power Pik and Qik.

A. Implementation of TCSC in existing NRLF Algorithm

The effect of TCSC on the network can be seen as a
controllable reactance inserted in the related transmission line.
The model of the network with TCSC is shown in Fig 3.

Figure 3: TCSC connected between bus i and j

The controllable reactance, Xc, is directly used as the control

variable to be implemented in the power flow equation. The
power flow equations of the branch can be derived as follows.
(3)

Figure 2: General Model of STATCOM

C. Synchronous Voltage Source UPFC model

The SVS is the solid-state synchronous voltage source
employing an appropriate DC to AC inverter with gate turnoff thyristor used for series compensation of transmission lines
[7].
The series controller could be variable impedance, such as
capacitor, reactor, etc., or a power electronic based variable
source of main frequency, sub synchronous and harmonic
frequencies to serve the desired need. They inject voltage in
series with the line. As long as the voltage is in phase
quadrature with the line current, the series controller only
supplies or consumes variable reactive power. Any other
phase relationship will involve handling of real power as well
[7]. SVS is one such series controller.

(4)
Where

ij = i j
All symbols carry their usual meaning.
Here, the only difference between normal line power flow
equation and the TCSC line power flow equation is the
controllable reactance Xc.
The linearized Newton equations of the compensated
transmission line are given in (5), where the variable
reactance of the TCSC is taken as the state variable.

(5)

B. Implementation of STATCOM in existing NRLF Algorithm

The effect of STATCOM on the network can be seen as a
controllable static synchronous generator operated as a static
VAR compensator whose capacitive and inductive output
currents are controlled to control the bus voltage with which it
is connected.

Fig 4. STATCOM connected at bus i.

Let the STATCOM be connected at bus i as shown in the fig

4.
The general power flow equation of the STATCOM connected
bus will be
At node i,
Pi = Vi2gii + ViVj(gijcos(ij)+bijsin(ij))
(6)
+ Vi2gsh ViVsh(gshcos(is)+bshsin(is))
2
Qi = -Vi bii + ViVj(gijsin(ij)-bijcos(ij))
(7)
Vi2bsh ViVsh(gshsin(is) bshcos(is))
The reactive power injected by STATCOM to the bus is given
by
(8)
Qstat = -Vi2bsh + ViVsh(bshcosish gshsinis)
Where ij = i j
ish = i sh
sh is the voltage angle of STATCOM.
The linearized Newton equations of the compensated bus are
given in (9), where the variable phase angle sh, and the
variable voltage magnitude of the STATCOM are taken as the
state variables.

C. Implementation of SVS UPFC model in existing NRLF

Algorithm
The effect of SVS on the network can be seen as a controllable
voltage source inserted in series with the related transmission
line. The model of the network with TCSC is shown in Fig 5.

Fig.5 SVS connected between i amd j bus

The general power flow equation of the buses between which

the SVS is connected will be.
At node i,
Pi = Vi2gii + ViVj(gijcos(ij)+bijsin(ij))
(10)
ViVs(giicos(is)+biisin(is))
Qi = -Vi2bii + ViVj(gijsin(ij) - bijcos(ij))
(11)
- ViVs(giicos(is) - biisin(is))
At node j,
Pi = Vj2gjj + ViVj(gjicos(ji)+bjisin(ji))
(12)
VjVs(gjicos(js)+bjisin(js))
Qi = -Vj2bjj + ViVj(gjisin(ji) bjicos(ji))
(13)
- VjVs(gjicos(js) bjisin(js))
The linearized Newton equations of the compensated
transmission line are given in (14), where the variable phase
angle s, and variable magnitude Vs are taken as the state
variable.

(14)

IV.

SIMULATION AND RESULTS

The load flow tests are done in a standard IEEE 5 bus as well
as 30 bus systems.

(9)

Fig.6 IEEE 5 bus system

bus voltage at 1pu for the bus where STATCOM is connected.

For both the systems there is a negligible voltage sag in the
sending end of the line where SVS is connected.
TABLE III.

BUS POWERS FOR 5 BUS SYSTEM

Generated power
Uncompensate
d system
P
Q

Bus
North
South

131.1

90.8

40

-61.
6

Fig.7 IEEE 30 bus system

TABLE I.
Uncompensated
system
Voltage
Magnit
ude
(PU)

0.9872
(Lake)
0.9841
(Main)

BUS VOLTAGE MAGNITUDE AND ANGLE COMPARISON FOR 5

BUS SYSTEM

With TCSC

Compensated system
Voltage
With STATCOM

With SVS

Angle
(degre
es)

Magnit
ude
(PU)

Angle
(degre
es)

Magnit
ude
(PU)

Angle
(degre
es)

Magnit
ude
(PU)

Angle
(degre
es)

-4.637

0.9870

-4.727

1.0000

-4.840

0.9790

-5.724

-4.957

0.9844

-4.811

0.9944

-5.109

0.9948

-3.181

Bus
num
ber

Uncompensated
system
Voltage
Magnit
ude
(PU)

1.1010
(bus 6)
1.0022
(bus 7)
1.0100
(bus 8)
0.9918
(bus30

With TCSC

131.
1

90.9

40

-61.
8

With SVS

131.
1

85.3

130.9

94.9

40

-77.
1

40

-66.7

BUS POWERS FOR 30 BUS SYSTEM

With
STATCOM
P
Q

With TCSC
P

With SVS
P

2.61

-0.164

2.61

-0.164

2.61

-0.165

2.61

0.160

0.40

0.498

0.40

0.488

0.40

0.496

0.4

0.511

0.00

0.371

0.00

0.385

0.00

0.370

0.0

0.378

0.00

0.379

0.00

0.369

0.00

0.372

0.00

0.343

11

0.00

0.169

0.00

0.168

0.00

0.167

0.00

0.173

13

0.00

0.109

0.00

0.108

0.00

0.107

0.00

0.113

P in MW
Q in MVAR

Generation remain unaffected with the inclusion of TCSC.

With the inclusion of STATCOM the slack generator reduces
its reactive power generation by almost 6% compared to the
base case for 5 bus system, whereas for 30 bus system all the
generator reduces reactive power generation by a small
amount. Inclusion of SVS results in generation of 4.5% more
reactive power by slack bus for 5 bus systems and for 30 bus
system reactive power generation increases in all the generator
buses except for bus number 8.
A. Power flow comparison of TCSC
POWER FLOW COMPARISON OF TCSC WITH BASE CASE FOR 5
BUS SYSTEM

Power Flows

From

To

bus

Bus

P(MW)

Q(MVAR)

P(MW)

Q(MVAR)

Lake

Main

19.4

2.9

21.0

2.5

Without TCSC

Angle
(degre
es)

Magnit
ude
(PU)

Angle
(degre
es)

Magnit
ude
(PU)

Angle
(degre
es)

Magnit
ude
(PU)

Angle
(degre
es)

-11.06

1.1013

-11.23

1.1010

-11.06

1.008

-11.04

-12.86

1.0007

-12.67

1.0023

-12.86

1.045

-12.85

From

To

-11.82

1.0100

-11.97

1.0100

-11.82

1.0100

-11.41

bus

Bus

-17.63

1.0074

-10.04

1.000

-17.75

0.9900

-17.55

Bus voltage almost remains unaffected with inclusion of

TCSC in both the system. Inclusion of STATCOM maintains

With SVS
P

BUS VOLTAGE MAGNITUDE AND ANGLE COMPARISON FOR 30

BUS SYSTEM

Compensated system
Voltage
With STATCOM

Generated power
Uncompensate
d system
P
Q

TABLE V.
TABLE II.

TABLE IV.

The TCSC is connected between lake bus and main bus for
IEEE 5 bus system to control real power flow at 21MW and
between bus number 6 and 7 for IEEE 30 bus system to
control real power flow at 42MW. The STATCOM is
connected at lake bus in case of 5 bus systems and for 30 bus
system it is connected to bus 30. The SVS is connected
between lake bus and main bus for 5 bus system to control real
power flow at 40MW and reactive power at 2MVAR whereas
for 30 bus system the SVS is connected between bus number 6
and 8 to control the real power flow at 33MW and reactive
power at 6MVAR from bus 8 to bus 6. The results as shown in
tabular form have been obtained and are compared with the
uncompensated system.

With
STATCOM
P
Q

With TCSC

TABLE VI.

With TCSC

POWER FLOW COMPARISON OF TCSC WITH BASE CASE FOR 30

BUS SYSTEM

Power Flows
Without TCSC

With TCSC

P(MW)

Q(MVAR)

P(MW)

38.1

-3.1

42.0

Q(MVAR)

-5.5

The TCSC upholds the target value, which is achieved with

72% series capacitive compensation for LakeMain line of 5
bus system and 61.34% series capacitive compensation of the

line 6-7 for 30 bus system. From the load flow results it is
evident that TCSC controls only the real power flow through a
line and reactive power is almost unaffected. Thus TCSC has
its application only when there is a need to control real power
flow and also to change power flow routes.

TABLE X.

B. Power flow comparison of STATCOM

The 5 bus network is modified to include one STATCOM
connected at Lake bus, to maintain the nodal voltage
magnitude at 1 p.u. The power flow result indicates that the
STATCOM generates 20.5MVAR in order to keep the voltage
magnitude at 1 p.u. at Lake bus.
TABLE VII.

POWER FLOW COMPARISON OF STATCOM WITH BASE CASE

FOR 5 BUS SYSTEM

From

To

bus

bus

North

Power Flows
Without STATCOM

With STATCOM

P(MW)

Q(MVAR)

P(MW)

Q(MVAR)

Lake

41.8

16.8

42.0

11.3

South

Lake

24.5

-2.5

24.5

-9.5

Lake

Main

19.4

2.9

19.6

11.2

The STATCOM parameters associated with this amount of

reactive power generation are Vsh=1.0205 p.u. and sh=4.83
degrees. Use of the STATCOM results in an improved
network voltage profile, except at Elm, which is too far away
from Lake to benefit from the influence of the STATCOM.
The slack generator reduces its reactive power generation by
almost 6% compared to the base case, and the reactive power
exported from North to Lake reduces by more than 32.74 %.
TABLE VIII.

POWER FLOW COMPARISON OF STATCOM WITH BASE CASE

FOR 30 BUS SYSTEM

Power Flows

From

To

bus

bus

27

30

7.1

1.7

7.1

29

30

3.7

6.0

3.7

Without STATCOM
P(MW)

Q(MVAR)

With STATCOM
P(MW)

Q(MVAR)

The STATCOM generates -1.20MVAR and parameter

associated with this amount of reactive power generation are
Vsh=1.0012 p.u. and sh = -17.75 degrees. The reactive power
transmitted from bus 27 to 30 and from 29 to 30 reduces to
almost 50%
C. Power flow comparison of SVS
TABLE IX.

POWER FLOW COMPARISON OF SVS WITH BASE CASE FOR 5 BUS

SYSTEM

Power Flows

From

To

bus

bus

P(MW)

Q(MVAR)

P(MW)

Q(MVAR)

Lake

Main

19.4

2.9

40.0

2.0

Without SVS

With SVS

POWER FLOW COMPARISON OF SVS WITH BASE CASE FOR 5 BUS

SYSTEM

Power Flows

From

To

bus

Bus

P(MW)

29.5

Without SVS

With SVS

Q(MVAR)

-8.7

P(MW)

Q(MVAR)

33.0

-6.0

The most noticeable changes are as follows: there is 16.73%

increase of active power flowing towards Lake through
NorthLake line and 35.2% increase in active power flowing
towards Lake through SouthLake line for 5 bus system. The
increase is in response to the large amount of active power
demanded by the series converter. The SVS parameters
associated with this amount of real and reactive power flow
control are Vs= 0.0595 p.u. and s= -115.19 degrees.
For 30 bus system the active power flow increases to 3 MW in
8-28 line from 0.6MW. The parameters associated with this
amount of real and reactive power flow control are Vs= 0.0112
p.u. and s= -116.62 degrees.
V.

INITIALIZATION OF FACTS PARAMETERS

To achieve a strong convergence of the NRLF algorithm

proper initialization of FACTS parameters is very necessary.
Without proper initialization the NRLF algorithm may
sometimes diverge or take more iteration to converge.
A. Effect of initialization of TCSC parameters
Simulation results shows that choosing initial TCSC reactance
at around 50% of the line reactance gives faster convergence
for both 5 and 30 bus system. It is to be noted that if TCSC
initial reactance is chosen a low or high value then in some
cases it might give faster convergence, whereas in some cases
it take more number of iterations to converge depending upon
the amount of real power flow to be controlled. Hence it will
be a good practice if the initial TCSC reactance is chosen at
50% of the line reactance.
B. Effect of initialization of STATCOM parameters
TABLE XI.

IMPACT OF STATCOM INITIALIZATION

Initial value of
STATCOM
parameters

Number of iterations
required

Voltage
Magnitude
( PU)

Angle
(radian)

5 bus
systems

0.7

1.3

-1

-2

10

10

10

10

30 bus
systems

STATCOM are used to maintain the bus voltage within limits.

It is a good practice to keep the STATCOM variable voltage

magnitude at an initial value same as that of the desired

voltage magnitude of the bus to which it is connected. With
regard to initial assumption of the STATCOM voltage angle
the following conclusion is obtained.

0.7

1.3

Fig.8 Range if initialization of STATCOM variable voltage

The range of initial variable voltage of STATCOM for quicker

convergence of the load flow is 0.3 < Vs < 1.3 with angle fixed
at 0 radians.
C. Effect of initialization of SVS UPFC model parameters
Various initial assumptions of the SVS parameter have been
made and the load flow converges quickly for a particular
combination of the series variable voltage magnitude and
angle. The following combination of voltage magnitude and
angle has been simulated and findings have been presented.
TABLE XII.

CONCLUSION

In this paper, models of some FACTS devices (TCSC,

STATCOM, and SVS) have been incorporated in the existing
NRLF algorithm to observe the impact of these devices on the
system performance. The performance comparison of the
devices is done and the findings are presented. The suitability
of the device depends on the system parameter to be
controlled. For active power flow control TCSC is much
preferred to others. It also increases system stability [11].
STATCOM is suitable for application when system bus
voltage is to be maintained within desired limit. For control of
both active and reactive power flows, SVS is very much
suitable. It is also observed that load flow convergence
strongly depends on initial assumption of the FACTS
parameter. Improper initialization takes more processing time
and more number of iterations. Sometime this may even lead
to divergence of the load flow. This problem of initialization
of device variables has been investigated thoroughly in this
paper and findings are presented. The simulation tool used is
MATLAB 7.8.0 (R2009a).

IMPACT OF SVS INITIALIZATION

Initial value of SVS

parameters
Voltage
Magnitude
( PU)

Angle
(radian)
fixed at

0.01

Number of iterations
required
5 bus
systems

30 bus
systems

-2.25

12

11

0.03

-2.25

0.05

-2.25

0.07

-2.25

0.09

-2.25

Initial value of SVS

parameters
Voltage
Magnitude
fixed at
0.05pu

VI.

Angle
(radian)

Number of
iterations required
5 bus
systems

30 bus
systems

0.05

2.25

0.05

1.25

0.05

0.25

12

10

0.05

-1.25

0.05

-2.25

It is interesting to note that proper initialization takes a major

part in the suitable convergence of load flow. For SVS model
the range of variable voltage is taken as 0.01 < Vs < 0.09 pu
for a fixed s of -2.25 radian. Similarly for a fixed value of Vs
of 0.05pu the range of angle is taken as -2.25< s <2.25 radian.
Best combination is obtained for 0.05pu magnitude of voltage
and -1.25 radian of angle.

References
[1]

Hingorani, N.G., Flexible AC Transmission Systems, IEEE Spectrum,

vol 30, issue 4, pp 4148, April 1993.
[2] Narayana Prasad Padhy, M.A. Abdel Moamen, Power flow control and
solutions with multiple and multi-type FACTS devices , Electric Power
Systems Research 74 (2005) 341351
[3] Ghahremani.E., Kamwa.I., Optimal placement of multiple-type FACTS
devices to maximize power system loadability using a generic graphical
user interface, Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, Vol 28, Issue 2,
May 2013.
[4] Ying Xiao, Y.H.Song and Chen-Ching Liu, Available Transfer
Capability Enhancement Using FACTS Devices, IEEE Transactions
On Power Systems, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 305-312, February 2003.
[5] Amara. S, Hsan. H.A, Power system stability improvement by FACTS
devices: A comparison between STATCOM, SSSC and UPFC,
Renewable Energies and Vehicular Technology (REVET), 2012 First
International Conference on, ISBN: 978-1-4673-1168-7, page 360-365,
26-28 March 2012.
[6] Tiwari. R, Niazi. K.R, Gupta. V, Optimal location of FACTS devices
for improving performance of the power systems, Power and Energy
Society General Meeting, 2012 IEEE, ISSN :1944-9925, pp 1-8, 22-26
July 2012
[7] C. R. Foerte-Esquivel, and E. Acha, Unified power flow controller: a
critical comparison of Newton-Raphson UPFC algorithms in power flow
studies, IEE proceedings, vol. 144. No- 5, september 1997.
[8] N. G. Hingorani and L. Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS Concepts and
Technology of Flexible AC Transmission Systems, IEEE Press. New
York, 1999.
[9] Sunil Kumar Singh, Lobzang Phunchok and Y.R.Sood, Voltage
Profile and Power Flow Enhancement with FACTS Controllers,
International Journal Of Engineering Research & Technology, Vol. 1
Issue 5, July 2012.
[10] C. R. Foerte-Esquivel, E. Acha, and H. Amhriz-Perez, A
Comprehensive Newton-Raphson UPFC Model for the Quadratic Power
Flow Solution of Practical Power Networks, IEEE transactions on
power systems, vol. 15. no.1, february 2000
[11] Xia Jiang, Joe H. Chow, Abdel-Aty Edris, Bruce Fardanesh, and Edvina
Uzunovic, Transfer Path Stability Enhancement by Voltage-Sourced
Converter-Based FACTS Controllers, IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 1019-1025, April 2010.