Analysis of Boundaries of Controllable Power Flow

with UPFC Considering Line Loss

A.Karthikeyan, C.Nagamani and S.Srividhya
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering
National Institute of Technology
Tiruchirappalli-620 015, India

Abstract-This paper presents a new algorithm for a
geometric approach to evaluate the boundaries of controllable
power flow with a UPFC installed in a two-machine power
system considering the constraints of converter ratings of the
UPFC and also the line losses. Similar studies earlier had
ignored the line losses due to resistance of the line. Using a
geometrical approach, the analysis of the effect of placement of
UPFC anywhere within the line is explored in the current
plane. The main advantage of a geometric approach to evaluate
the boundaries of controllable power flow in a power system
with UPFC is that with a minimum computational effort, it
gives a clear insight regarding the feasible operational area of
the system subjected to a set of constraints. The significance of
the proposed approach is that the method is more general and
hence it can be extended to include the losses in the converters,
the losses in the dc link capacitor etc., apart from the other
equipment constraints. Using the proposed geometric
approach, the P - curves of UPFC installed at any point along
the transmission line can be determined. Further the paper
presents a computational verification for the proposed
algorithm and the geometric approach. This is based on the
per-phase equivalent circuit representation of the two machine
power system with UPFC. The two sets of results, viz., from the
geometric approach and from the computational procedure,
are in excellent agreement establishing the validity of the
proposed algorithm.

Index Terms-- FACTS, P- curves, controllable power flow,
equipment ratings, UPFC, MATLAB Program.
I. NOMENCLATURE
V
S
: Sending end voltage, (p.u.)
V
R
: Receiving end voltage, (p.u.)
V
B
: Series voltage source, (p.u.)
I
E
: Shunt current source, (p.u.)
I
S
: Sending end current, (p.u.)
I
R
: Receiving end current, (p.u.)
I
O
: Line current without compensation, (p.u.)
: Angle between the sending and receiving end voltages,
()
: Rotational angle, between x-axis and X-axis, ()
k : Location factor defining electrical distance between
sending end of the line and UPFC, (p.u.)
: Series voltage injection angle ()
: Shunt current injection angle ()
Bold notations of the variables denote the phasors.
II. INTRODUCTION
In recent years, environmental, right-of-way, and cost
concerns have delayed the construction of both power
stations and new transmission lines, while the demand for
electronic energy has continued to grow in many countries.
This situation has spurred interest in providing already-
existing power systems with greater operating flexibility and
better utilization. The flexible ac transmission systems
(FACTS) concept [1], based on applying leading-edge power
electronics technology to existing ac transmission systems,
improves stability to increase usable power transmission
capacity to its thermal limit. A Unified Power Flow
Controller (UPFC) [1][7], offers substantial advantages for
the static and dynamic operation of power system, but it also
brings with it major challenges in power electronics and
power system design.
With a UPFC in the transmission line the equipment
ratings and the line limits influence the operating limits of
controllable power flow. Studies in this context [4]-[6] are
based on a conventional computational approach, wherein
several iterations of computations are carried out and a large
amount of numerical data is compiled to obtain the feasible
areas of operation. An earlier study [3] reported a geometric
approach based on a novel coordinate system to evaluate the
boundaries of the power flow in a simple two machine
power system with UPFC. The advantage of this
geometrical approach is that even with a minimum
computational effort, it gives a straight forward and clear
insight regarding the feasible operational area of the power
system with UPFC. The real power balance constraint in the
power system with UPFC is interpreted in the current plane
analysis. Further the novel coordinate system presented is
invariant to the changes of the UPFC operating point and
simplifies the problem of finding extremes of power transfer.
However, this study had considered a lossless power
system for investigating the feasible operating areas with the
UPFC. Since in practice the line losses also influence the
operating point, it is important to consider these losses in
evaluating the feasible areas of operation with UPFC.
This paper presents a new and more general algorithm for
a geometric approach to evaluate the boundaries of
controllable power flow with a UPFC installed in a power
system with due consideration for line loss. Also using a
computational verification procedure, the validity of
proposed algorithm and the geometric approach is
established. This procedure is based on the per-phase
equivalent circuit representation of the two machine power
system with UPFC. The paper is organized as follows:
978-1-4244-1718-6/08/$25.00 2008 IEEE
Pg 2078
Section III describes the theoretical basis of the geometric
approach and the proposed analytical technique. In section
IV the illustration of two cases with the proposed technique
is presented and the P- curves are given in section V.
Section VI and VII presents the validation of geometric
approach for boundaries of power flow with UPFC by a
computational verification. The conclusions are given in
section VIII.










Fig. 1. Per-phase equivalent circuit of two-machine power system
with UPFC.
III. THEORETICAL BASIS OF GEOMETRIC APPROACH
Fig. 1 shows the per phase equivalent circuit of a simple
two machine power system in which a UPFC is installed at
an arbitrary point in the transmission line. The premise of
the analysis for the lossless power system can be extended to
the system with line loss. The UPFC is installed at an
arbitrary point within the transmission line. The impedance
of the line between sending end voltage and the input
terminal of the UPFC and between the output terminal of the
UPFC and the receiving end voltage are denoted as Z
S
and Z
R

respectively. Thus
Z
S
= kZ and Z
R
= (1-k)Z.
Since the prime objective of installing the UPFC in the
transmission system is to enhance the power transferred
through the line, it is imperative to examine the controllable
ranges of power transferred subject to the constraints. For
simplicity, only two main constraints imposed in the
operation of power system with UPFC, are considered as
follows:
Voltage limit of series converter or V
B
V
Bmax

Current limit of shunt converter or I
E
I
Emax


For the purpose of illustration, the constraints considered
are as in [3]. That is
| V
Bmax
| = 0.4 p.u.
| I
Emax
| = 0.379 p.u.
A. Notion of power balance
Considering zero real power exchange between the series
and shunt converters of UPFC, the power balance is given by
(1)
S R S
P P P + =
where is the line loss expressed as fraction of the real
power at the sending end.
From (1), thus
( ) ) 2 ( 1 =
R
S
P P
In general for the transmission lines the line loss factor
can be considered to vary over a narrow range, say of 3% to
7%. For a given value of the sending and receiving end
power flows P
S
and P
R
differ by a constant power loss P
S
.
Fig. 2 illustrates two pairs of constant power lines P
S1
, P
R1
and

P
S2
, P
R2
for a given loss factor
1
. The point of
intersection of the pair of constant power lines P
S1
and P
R1
at
G
1
defines a feasible operating point corresponding to a
receiving end real power of P
R1
in steady state. Similarly the
point G
2
, where the constant power lines P
S2
and P
R2
lines
intersect corresponds to the steady state operation with the
same loss factor and a receiving end real power of P
R2
. It can
be shown that the locus of the intersection points of multiple
pairs of constant power lines P
S
and P
R
corresponding to the
same line loss factor
1
is a straight line, called as the d-axis.
The d-axis sub-divides the transmission angle into
S
and

R
as shown Fig.2. For a given and , the angle
R
can be
found from Fig. 2.
) 3 1 ( ] [cot ] ) ( csc [ tan
R
=












Fig. 2. Illustration of lines of constant power flow
It can be readily verified from (2) that for the lossless line
(=0), the d-axis bisects the angle with the result that
S

and
R
both equal half of . However, with the line loss
included, the angle distribution varies with and . For
different values of , the orientation of d-axis with respect to
the voltage phasors V
S
and V
R
varies.
B. Interpretation of Geometric Approach
In steady state operation the active power exchanged
between the series converter and the line must be handled by
the shunt converter. Thus the UPFC as a whole exchanges
zero real power with the transmission line. Since the system
under consideration is linear, it can be decomposed into two
sub-circuits viz., one containing series voltage source and
the other containing shunt current source for analyzing their
effects separately and then the principle of superposition can
be used to obtain the combined effect. Thus the circuit of
Fig. 1 is decomposed as shown in Fig. 3. Applying KCL for
the circuits of Fig. 3, the currents I
S
and I
R
can be written as
S A S
I I I + ++ + = == = and (4)
R A R
I I I = == =
R S E
I I I = == = ; (5)
R S E
I I I + ++ + = == =
Pg 2079

















Fig. 3. Decomposition of system into sub-circuits

The expressions for the current components in (4) are given
by
(6)
B O A
I I I + ++ + = == =

Z
R S
O
V V
I

= == =
; ) 7 (
Z
B
B
V
I = == =


E S
I I k) ( = == = 1 and ) ( k 8
E R
I I = == =

Thus for a given magnitude of injected voltage V
B
and
with an unrestricted angle of injection (0-360) the tip of
current phasor I
A
resides on the circumference of the circle
centered at I
0
and with a radius specified by the voltage limit
of the series converter as per (7). According to (4) the
solution pair (I
S,
I
R
) can be viewed as a special composition
of I
A
and I
E
. Location of tip of I
A
on I
E
is uniquely
determined by the factor k. As the UPFC exchanges zero
real power with the system in the steady state, the power
balance stipulates that I
S
and I
R
lie on a pair of constant
power lines P
S
and P
R
respectively. The locus of the tips of
all possible I
A
vectors which lie on a family of possible I
E
vectors (of the given amplitude) is an ellipse, similar to the
lossless case [3],[7].

C. Parametric equation of Ellipse
For the problem of power flow, (referring to Fig. 4), the
coordinates of points E and F are (-vsin
S
,vcos
S
) and
(usin
R
, ucos
R
) respectively. Then the co-ordinates of
G(x,y) are:

[ ] ) ( sin kv sin u ) k ( x
S R
9 1 =
[ ] ) ( cos kv cos u ) k ( y
S R
10 1 + =


Considering the distance between the points, E and F as I
E
,
) ( ) cos v cos u ( ) sin v sin u (
S R S R
11
2 2 2
E
I = == = + ++ + + ++ +
From (9) and (10) , u and v are written as
) (
sin ) k (
sin y cos x
u
S S
12
1

+
=












Fig. 4. Determination of co-ordinates G (x,y).
From (12) and (13), (11) can be written as,
( )
( )
( )
) ( sin
) k ( k ) sin( cos k sin ) k ( sin xy
) k ( k sin sin cos k sin ) k ( sin y
) k ( k cos cos cos k cos ) k ( cos x
R S R S
R S R S
R S R S
14
1 2 2 1 2 2 2
1 2 1
1 2 1
2
2 2
2 2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 2

2
E
I =
+
+ +
+ + +


This is the equation of the locus of the tip of I
A
phasor.
The general form of equation for the ellipse is C By Ax = +
2 2

where the minor and major axes align with the x and y-axes.
However (14) is of the form C Hxy By Ax = + + 2
2 2

indicating that the ellipse here has its minor and major axes
not aligned with x and y-axes and but is rotated through an
angle with respect to the x-y plane. It is possible to denote
a new X-Y plane which is at an angle with respect to the
original x-y plane so that this ellipse can be represented
using C BY AX = +
2 2
in the new X-Y plane. Upon the plane
transformation from x-y to X-Y, the XY term should be
equated to zero since by definition of the new X-Y plane, the
ellipse now has its minor and major axes aligned with new X
and Y axes after the plane transformation.
Further for the transformation of the ellipse to the new X-
Y plane a substitution of sin Y cos X x = and
cos Y sin X y + = in (14) (from Fig. 5) is carried out
where is the rotational angle. Thus in new X-Y plane,
(14) becomes
) (
sin k
sin y cos x
v
R R
13

+
=
Pg 2080
) ( C ) cos XY sin XY sin cos Y sin cos X ( H
) sin cos XY cos Y sin X ( B
) sin cos XY sin Y cos X ( A
15 2
2
2
2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2
= + +
+ + +
+ +










Fig. 5. Plane transformation.
After simplifying and equating the co-efficient of XY term
in (15) to zero, it is found as
) (
B A
H
tan 16
2
2

=
and hence the ellipse equation in X-Y plane is given by,
) ( C ) sin cos Y sin cos X ( H
) cos Y sin X ( B ) sin Y cos X ( A
17 2
2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
= +
+ + + +



On substituting for 2H from (16), (17) can be written as

(18) 1
2
2
2
2
= +
E
Y
D
X

where
( (( (
( (( (

( (( (




+ ++ + + ++ +
= == =

cos sin tan ) B A ( sin B cos A

sin
D
2
2
2 2
2 2
E
I

( (( (
( (( (

( (( (




+ ++ +
= == =

cos sin tan ) B A ( cos B sin A

sin
E
2
2
2 2
2 2
E
I

The lengths of major and minor axes are given by,

) (
cos sin tan ) B A ( sin B cos A
sin
sqrt r 19
2
2 2
2
1
2
|
|

\
|
+ +
=

2
I
E

) (
cos sin tan ) B A ( cos B sin A
sin
sqrt r 20
2
2 2
2
2
2
|
|
|

\
|
+
=

2
E
I



Therefore the ellipse that corresponds to zero real power
flow, P
R
=0 can be described by the parametric equation,
( )
(

=
|
|

\
|
) sin(
) cos(
r
r
R
x
x
q
d

2
1
0
0

where is the parameter taking values in the set [0 2] and
R ( ) is the rotation matrix defined as

( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
) (
cos sin
sin cos
R 21
(

IV. ILLUSTRATION OF TYPICAL SOLUTIONS

The above mathematical basis is used in a simple
MATLAB program to evaluate the boundaries of operating
regions considering only the series injection voltage and the
shunt injection current constraints as mentioned in previous
section. Fig. 6 illustrates the case for maximum real power
P
Rmax
=1.226 p.u, k=0.9 and =60 for =0.07. The phasors
V
S
and V
R
are indicated with an angle =60 between them.
It can be seen from Fig. 6 that each and every point on the
ellipse satisfies the condition that it lies on a line segment
measuring the magnitude of I
E
, with the sub-segments
towards the P
S
and P
R
lines in the ratio I
S
=(1-k)I
E
and I
R
=kI
E
. Thus for k=0.9, all the points on the ellipse are seen to
lie close to the P
S
line since (1-k) I
E
is very small compared
to kI
E
for k=0.9. In Fig. 6, the operating point P is found in
such a way that divides the I
E
phasor between P
S
and P
R

lines in the ratio I
S
= (1-k)I
E
= 0.0379 p.u. and
I
R
=kI
E
=0.3411p.u.. It is observed that the ellipse rotational
angle is 25.49 (angle between x-axis and minor axis of
ellipse). Similarly Fig. 7 illustrates the case for P
Rmin
=0.255
p.u, k=0.2 and =45 for =0.07 and the ellipse rotational
angle is found to be -20.48.



















Fig. 6. Graphical solution for k=0.9, =0.07and =60.


Pg 2081














Fig. 7. Graphical solution for k=0.2, =0.07and =45
V. POWER ANGLE CURVES
Based on the proposed analysis for the geometric
approach, P- curves are plotted for various cases of k,
considering only two constraints as mentioned in section III.
Within these constraints, for the sake of illustration, P-
curves for two values of k are plotted. Fig. 8 shows the
variation of minimum and maximum controllable real
powers P
Rmin
and P
Rmax
with for k=0.7 and 0.9 when
=0.07. It is seen from Fig. 8 with the UPFC installed in the
system the power transfer over the line is varied 0.4 p.u.
approximately. Irrespective of the value of k, the curves of
P
Rmax
are observed to be nearly overlapping (shown in upper
part of Fig. 8). Similarly slight variations in the curves of
P
Rmin
are observed as k varies (shown in lower part of Fig.
8). As can be anticipated, the location factor k has no effect
on the real power flow for a given .
















Fig. 8. Real power P
Rmax and P
Rmin Vs. for k=0.7 and 0.9 .

VI. VALIDATION OF PROPOSED ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUE
In an attempt to validate the proposed technique, the
compliance of the constraints in typical solutions is verified.
For this purpose the equations of power flow in the two-
machine power system with UPFC are considered.

Let the sending end and receiving end voltage of the line be
p.u. V V
R S
1 = == = = == =
Complex power flow at the sending end of the line is,
(22)
*
I V S
S S S
= == =
From (4), (6) and (8), (22) is written as
) ( k
Z
23 1
*
I ) (
V V V
V S
E
B R S
S S (

+
+
=
Substituting for voltage phasors
) ( V V
S S S S
sin j cos + = ; ) ( V V
R R R R
sin j cos =
) ( V V
B B
sin j cos + = ; ) ( ) ( I I
E E
24 sin j cos + =
in (23) and equating the real parts, the real power at the
sending end is
[ [[ [ ] ]] ] [ [[ [ ] ]] ]
) ( ) ( cos k) (
) sin( sin X ) ( cos cos R P
S
S L S S
25 1
1

+ ++ +
+ ++ + + ++ + + ++ + = == =
E
B B
I
V V
Complex power flow at the receiving end of the line is,
(26)
*
I V S
R R R
=
From (4), (6) and (8), (26) is written as
(27)
*
I
V V V
V S
E
B R S
R R (

+
= k
Z
































Fig. 9. Flowchart for finding the maximum and minimum real power for a
feasible operating point.

Substituting for
S
V ,
R
V and
B
V in (27) and equating the
real parts, the real power at the receiving end is
[ ] [ ]
) ( ) ( cos k
) sin( sin X ) ( cos cos R P
R
R L R R
28
1

+ + + + + =
E
B B
I
V V
For a line with losses,
Pg 2082
) (
R
) (
S
P P 29 0 1 = == =
The procedure for finding the maximum and minimum
real power for a feasible operating point is explained in the
flowchart shown in Fig. 9.
VII. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A simple MATLAB program is written to compute the
boundaries of operating regions considering the series
injection voltage and the shunt injection current constraints
as mentioned in previous section. Typical cases of , k and
are considered for illustration of maximum power (P
Rmax
)
condition as assumed previously, V
S
= 1p.u., V
R
= 1p.u., V
B
= 0.4p.u. , I
E
= 0.379p.u. , =0.07, =60 and k=0.9. Firstly
the phasors V
S
and V
R
are drawn with their respective phase
angles with respect to x-axis [reference axis]. Next, I
O
is
calculated (7) and the respective phasor is drawn. The circle
in Fig. 10 represents the possible operating region with
series voltage constraint. The particular combination of

B
V and
E
I values which gives the maximum
power (P
Rmax
) satisfying (29) is computed. This value of is
used to obtain the co-ordinates of the operating point P
(which is nothing but the tip of I
A
).













Fig. 10. Computational Solution for P
Rmax with k=0.9, =0.07and =60













Fig. 11. Computational Solution for P
Rmin with k=0.2, =0.07 and =45

Similarly the values of I
S
and I
R
are also computed and the
phasors are drawn. For the particular case, the computed
results are given as =104.679, =89.7, I
S
=1.3676+0.2135i
and I
R
=1.3656-0.1655i. The phasor diagram is shown in
Fig. 10. Another illustration for the case of k=0.2 when
=45 is shown in Fig. 11.

TABLE I
CO-ORDINATES OF OPERATING POINT P FOR PRMAX






For the sake of comparision, the co-ordinates of operating
point P for the two methods for the same cases of k=0.9 and
=60 and k=0.2 and =45 are given in Table I. As can be
readily observed, the operating point is exactly the same for
the two methods [Geometric and Computational] which
ensures the robustness of the proposed geometrical method.
VIII. CONCLUSIONS
The paper has presented a general strategy to evaluate the
boundaries of controllable power flow of a power system
with UPFC including line losses and constraints on the
converter ratings. The validity of the proposed geometric
approach is also presented using a computational verification
based on per-phase equivalent circuit representation of the
system. It is observed that the P- curves obtained using the
power flow equations are in exact coincidence with the
method proposed in this paper. Thus the proposed analysis
is robust.
REFERENCES
[1] L.Gyugyi, Unified power-flow control concept for flexible AC
transmission systems, IEE Proceedings- C, vol.139, no. 4, pp. 323
331, July 1992.
[2] L. Gyugyi, C.D Schauder, S.L Williams, T.R Rietman, D.R
Torgerson, A Edris: The Unified Power Flow Controller: A new
approach to power transmission control, IEEE Trans. On Power
Delivery, vol. 10, No.2, pp. 1085-1097, Apr 1995.
[3] J. Z. Bebic, P. W. Lehn, and M. R. Iravani, P Characteristics for
the Unified Power Flow Controller Analysis Inclusive of Equipment
Ratings and Line Limits, IEEE Trans.Power Delivery, vol. 18, ,
No. 3, pp 1066-1072, July 2003.
[4] J. Bian, D. G. Ramey, R. J. Nelson, and A. Edris, A study of
equipment sizes and constraints for a unified power flow controller,
IEEE Trans.Power Delivery, vol. 12, pp. 13851391, July 1997.
[5] Jun-Yong Liu, Yong-Hua Song and P.A.Mehta Strategies for
handling UPFC constraints in steady-state power flow and voltage
control IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, No.2, May 2000.
[6] Nabavi-Niaki and M. R. Iravani, Steady-state and dynamic models of
unified power flow controller (UPFC) for power system studies,
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 11, Nov. 1996, pp. 19371943.
[7] S.Srividhya, C.Nagamani, A. Karthikeyan, Investigations on
Boundaries of Controllable Power Flow with Unified Power Flow
Controller IEEE International Conference on Power Electronic,
Drives and Energy Systems, 12-15 Dec-2006, pp. 1.
k
(pu)

( )
Operating point P
Geometric
approach
Computational
approach
0.9 60 1.367+0.1756i 1.367+0.1756i
0.2 45 0.3864+0.1382i 0.3849+0.1383i
Pg 2083