86

CHAPTER 3

OPTIMAL LOCATION, SIZING AND

PARAMETER SELECTION OF THYRISTOR
CONTROLLED SERIES CAPACITOR

3.1 INTRODUCTION

Seyed Abbas Taher et al (2011) mentioned that, due to the

installation of capacitor, the improvement of voltage profile and system losses
are reduced, which depends on how capacitors are placed and operated in the
system that serves a variety of load. Kazemi & Andami (2004) states that,
FACTS provide dynamic control of the power transfer parameters like
transmission voltage, line impedance and phase angle. This plays the major
thrust in power electronics based technology. FACTS based controller design
based on PSO and GA is discussed by Panda & Padhy (2008a). For solving
the problem of FACTS sizing and allocation, PSO which is another
evolutionary computation technique could be used. Kirschner & Thumm
(2004) stated that, in the FACTS family, the TCSC is an important member
and it is capable of changing the transmission line impedance and load current
continuously. Kothari & Nagrath (2013) stated that, for the same performance
series capacitors are often less costly than SVCs and losses are very low. Also
from Gianluigi Migliavacca (2013) cost of TCSC is low when compared with
other FACTS devices. So TCSC is used to reduce the losses. This chapter
consists of two sections.

Section-1 deals with the comparative analysis of PSO and DE for

the optimal allocation and sizing of a TCSC, series FACTS device in a RDS to
 87

minimize the total real power loss and to improve the voltage profile of the
RDS. The criterion which is used to find the solutions to optimize the voltage
profile of the system and the TCSC size such that voltage deviations at each
bus do not exceed a predefined set value. The feasibility and effectiveness of
the optimization methods proposed have been demonstrated on 69 bus RDS
consisting of 68 sections.

Section-2 deals with the optimal placement and sizing of TCSC is

done for the 12, 34 and 69 bus test systems using PSO. From the optimal
effective TCSC reactance (XTCSC ) value obtained from the PSO algorithm, the
reactance characteristics curve of a TCSC device is drawn between effective
TCSC reactance ( XTCSC ) and firing angle ‘α’. This characteristics curve gives
the effective value of the firing angle ‘α’ and the main parameters of TCSC (such
as XC and XL) are also designed. Therefore, this section consists of two parts.

Part-1 (Using PSO)

• Optimum location of TCSC
• Sizing of TCSC (XTCSC)

Part-2 (Using Degree of Series Compensation ‘k’)

• Selection of firing angle ‘α’
• Design of parameters XC and XL

3.2 FLEXIBLE AC TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS

FACTS Technology was invented by N.G.Hingorani in 1986. For

the modifications of natural electrical characteristics of ac power system,
FACTS controllers are used which is classified as series and shunt.
Transmission or distribution system parameters are modified by using series
compensation and the equivalent impedance of the load can be changed by
 88

shunt compensation technique. In both the cases, FACTS controls the reactive
power flows through the system and improves the overall performance of ac
power system. Series controllers increase the power handling capacity,
whereas shunt controllers improve the voltage at a particular location. The
series compensation improves the power transmission capability of the lines
which is an economic method.

3.2.1 Thyristor Controlled Series Capacitor

TCSC, which is also a type of series compensator, can provide

many benefits for a power system including control of power flow in the line,
damping power oscillations, and mitigating SSR. The TCSC concept is that, it
uses an extremely simple main circuit. The capacitor is inserted directly in
series with the transmission line and the thyristor controlled inductor is
mounted directly in parallel with the capacitor. Thus, no interfacing equipment
like high voltage transformers is required. This makes TCSC much more
economic than some other competing FACTS technologies. Thus it makes
TCSC simple and easy to understand the operation.

The basic operation of TCSC device can be easily explained from a

schematic diagram shown in Figure 3.1. It consists of a series compensating
capacitor shunted by a TCR. TCR is a variable inductive reactor XL controlled
by firing angle ‘α’. Figure 3.2 shows the reactance characteristics curve of a
TCSC device drawn between effective reactance of TCSC and firing angle ‘α’.

The effective reactance ‘XTCSC (α)’ of TCSC operates in three

regions: inductive region, capacitive region and resonance region. Inductive
region starts increasing from inductive reactance XL||XC value to infinity
(parallel resonance condition, ‘XL (α) = XC’), and decreasing from infinity to
capacitive reactance XC for capacitive region.
 89

C T

i j

T
L
TCR

Figure 3.1 Schematic diagram of TCSC device

Resonance occurs between the two regions. From the literature of

Meikandasivam et al (2013), the reactance characteristics of TCSC operation
in both capacitive and inductive regions through variation of firing angle ‘α’ is
as shown below:
a) Region 90° to αLlim - Inductive region
b) Region αClim to 180° - Capacitive region
c) αLlim to αClim - Resonance region

The resonance region is avoided by installing limits in the firing

angle ‘α’. At the resonant point, the TCSC exhibits very large impedance and
results in a significant voltage drop. It is clear that the vernier operation of
TCSC can only enhance the apparent reactance in both capacitive and
inductive domain. Also, firing angles close to the resonant point would lead to
high reactance operation which is not practical. To avoid high reactance
region, maximum and minimum control angles in the inductive and capacitive
regions (i.e., αLlim and αClim) should be established.
 90

XL

Capacitive region

αLlim to 180°

Resonance
Region

Firing Angle 1180°

90° Firing Angle

Inductive region

90° to αLlim
XC

Figure 3.2 TCSC’s reactance characteristic curve

Nagalakshmi & Kamaraj (2011) have pointed out that, TCSC

consists of series compensating capacitor shunted by TCR. It is modeled as a
controllable reactance, inserted in series with the transmission line to adjust
the line impedance and thereby control the power flow.

Srivastava et al (1999) stated that, usually the characteristic of a

TCSC is defined by the overall reactance of the device against the firing angle
‘α’ of the TCR that is connected in parallel with a fixed capacitor. This
characteristic is nonlinear in nature.

Change of impedance of TCSC is achieved by changing the

thyristor controlled inductive reactance of inductors connected in parallel to
 91

the capacitor. The magnitude of inductive reactance is determined by firing

angle ‘α’, which can also be controlled continuously flowing amplitude of
current reactor from the maximum value to zero. Angle switching thyristors
can change inductive reactance controlled choke from a minimum value (α =
0, XTCR = XL).

3.2.2 Mathematical Modeling of TCSC

A TCSC is a series type FACTS device inserted for line reactance

compensation in the line between ‘i’ and ‘j’ as shown in Figure 3.3.

i j
XTCSC Xij

Figure 3.3 Line with TCSC

TCSC can operate either in inductive mode or in capacitive mode.

(+) Sign is for inductive reactance and (-) sign is for capacitive reactance. So
the net reactance of the transmission line becomes,
X TOTAL = X ij ± X TCSC (α )
(3.2)

The firing angle ‘α’ of TCSC varies from 90° to 180°. Effective
TCSC reactance (XTCSC) with respect to firing angle (α) can be given as:

X TCSC (α ) = − X C + C 1 ( 2 ( π − α ) + sin( 2 ( π − α )))

− C 2 cos 2
( π − α )( ω tan( ω ( π − α )) − tan( π − α ))
(3.3)
where,
X + X
C 1 = C L
π (3.4)
 92

 X CX L 
= 4  
π  X C − X L
1

C 2
X L (3.5)
X
ω = C
X L (3.6)
X C
k =
X L (3.7)
X CX L
X TCSC =
X C −X L (3.8)

3.3 PROBLEM FORMULATION

The objective of the optimal placement and sizing of TCSC is to

minimize the active power loss in the distribution network.

The objective function:

minf = min(PT , )
Loss (3.9)
where PT,LOSS is calculated using equation (2.29).
Constraints:
Inequality constraints:
Real power generation constraint

P gi min ≤ Pgi ≤ P gi max

(3.10)
Reactive power compensation constraint

Q gi min ≤ Q gi ≤ Q gi max
(3.11)
Voltage constraint
| Vi min |≤ Vi ≤| Vi max | i = 1,2,....N (3.12)
Current constraint
| I i min |≤ I i ≤| I i max | (3.13)
 93

Reactance limit of TCSC

− 0 . 9 * X ij ≤ X TCSC ≤ 0 . 9 * X ij
(3.14)

3.4 PARTICLE SWARM OPTIMIZATION

PSO algorithm is that a population called a swarm is randomly

generated and the swarm consists of individuals called particles. Each particle
in the swarm denotes a probable explanation of the optimization problem.
With a random velocity, each particle moves through a D-dimensional search
space. Each particle’s velocity and position is updated using the following
equations:

Vi k1+1 = ωVi k1 + C1rand1 * (Pbest − Si k1 ) + C 2 rand2 * (Gbest − Si k1 )

(3.15)
S i k1+1 = S i k1 + Vi k1+1 (3.16)
[(ω max −ω min ) * current generation number]
ω = ω max − (3.17)
Maximum generation number

where
ω max Initial value of the inertia weight

ω min Final value of the inertia weight

A certain velocity which progressively gets close to ‘Pbest’ and

‘Gbest’ can be calculated using equation (3.15). The current position can be
modified by using equation (3.16).where Sk1 is current searching point, Sk1 +1 is
modified searching point, Vk1 is current velocity, Vk1 +1 is modified velocity of
agent ‘i’, ‘ω’ is weight function for velocity of the agent, ‘C1’ and ‘C2’ are
 94

weight coefficients for each term and rand1, rand2 are the random value
generated between [0, 1].

3.4.1 Implementation of PSO Algorithm

The PSO-based approach for solving the optimal placement and

sizing of TCSC problem to minimize the real power loss takes the following
steps:
Step 1: Get the Input. The input data are line (Line Impedance) and bus data
(Load Power i.e., Real Power and Reactive Power) and bus voltage
limits.
Step 2: Calculate the loss using distribution load flow based on DLF
Method.
Step 3: Set the bus count C=2.
Step4: With random positions and velocities, randomly generates an initial
population.
Step 5: Set the generation counter k1 = 0.
Step 6: For each particle calculate the active power loss using equation
(2.29).
Step 7: Check the bus voltage lies in the limits or not. If it is not lies in the
limit that particle is infeasible.
Step 8: For each particle, compare its objective value with the individual
best. If the objective value is lower than Pbest, set this value as the
current Pbest, and record the corresponding particle position.
Step 9: Choose the particle associated with the minimum individual best
Pbest of all particles, and set the value of this Pbest as the current
overall best Gbest.
Step 10: Update the velocity and position of particle using equations (3.15)
and (3.16) respectively.
 95

Step 11: If the generation number reaches the maximum limit, go to Step 12.
Otherwise, set generation index k1= k1 + 1, and go back to Step 6.
Step 12: If the bus count reaches the maximum limit, go to step13. Otherwise,
set bus count C=C+1, and go back to step 4.
Step 13: Print out the optimal solutions.
The solutions include the optimal location and size of TCSC in
RDS. The corresponding fitness values to these solutions indicate the
minimum total real power loss.

3.5 DIFFERENTIAL EVOLUTION ALGORITHM

DE is an intelligent based algorithm. The mathematical formulation

of DE algorithm is introduced below.

3.5.1 Initialization

From Bakare et al (2007), DE was introduced by Rainer Storn &

Kenneth Price in 1997 as heuristic optimization method. DE algorithm aims at
evolving a population with a size of ‘p’, D–dimensional parameter vectors, so-
called individuals, which train the candidate solutions. That is shown in
equation (3.18).

X iG = { X 1i , G , X i2, G ,......... ....., X iD, G } i = 1,.... p

(3.18)

Qin et al (2009) stated that, this moves towards the global optimum.
By consistently randomizing individuals, the initial population should cover
the entire search space as much as possible. This randomization of the
individuals is taken place within the search space constrained by the
prescribed minimum and maximum parameter bounds given in equations
(3.19-3.20)

X min = { X 1min ,......... , X dmin } (3.19)

 96

X max = { X 1max ,......... , X dmax } (3.20)

The initial value of the jth parameter in the ith individual at the
generation Gen=0 is generated by equation (3.21).

X ij, o = X min
j
+ rand ( 0 ,1) * ( X max
j
− X min
j
) j = 1, 2 , 3 ,.... D

(3.21)
where [0,1] represents an uniformly distributed random variable within the
range [0,1].

3.5.2 Mutation Operation

After initialization, DE employs the mutation operation. It produces

a mutant vector Vi,G with respect to each individual Xi,G , so-called target
vector, Xi,G in the current population. For each target vector at the generation,
its associated mutant vector Vi,G ={ v1i,G,………, vDi,G } can be generated via
certain mutation strategy. The mutant strategy proposed in this chapter is
given in equation (3.22)
“DE/rand/1”:
Vi, G = X + H * (X −X )
ri ri ri (3.22)
1, G 2, G 13 , G

Here, the indices r1i , r2i and r3i are mutually exclusive integers
randomly generated within the range [1, p] and the scaling factor ‘H’ is a
positive control parameter for scaling the difference vector X best, G. It is the
best individual vector within the best fitness value in the population at
generation.
 97

3.5.3 Crossover Operation

After the mutation, crossover operation is applied to each pair of

the target vector Xi,G and its corresponding mutant vector Vi,G to generate a
trial vector Ui,G={u1i,G,………, uDi,G }. DE employs the binomial (uniform)
crossover is defined in equation (3.23).

If (rand j (0,1) ≤ CR or ( j = jrand )

u ij,G = Vij,G
Else
u ij,G = X ij,G
where j = 1,2,....D (3.23)
where, the crossover rate ‘CR’ is a user-specified constant within the range
[0,1] , which controls the fraction of parameter values copied from the mutant
vector. ‘jrand’ is a randomly chosen integer in the range [0,D]. The binomial
crossover operator copies the jth parameter of the mutant vector Vi,G to the
corresponding element in the trial vector Ui,G if (randj(0,1) ≤ CR or (j=jrand).
Otherwise, it is copied from the corresponding target vector Xi,G.

There exists another exponential crossover operator in which the

parameters of trial vector Ui,G are hereditary from the corresponding mutant
vector Vi,G starting from a randomly chosen parameter index till the first time
randj(0,1) > CR . The remaining parameters of the trial vector Ui,G are copied
from the corresponding target vector Xi,G . The condition j= jrand is introduced
to ensure that the trial vector Ui, G will differ from its corresponding target
vector X i, G by at least one parameter.
 98

3.5.4 Selection Operation

If the values of some parameters of a newly generated trial vector

exceed the corresponding upper and lower bounds, they randomly and
uniformly reinitialize them within the specified range. Then, the objective
function values of all trial vectors are evaluated. After that, a selection
operation is performed. The objective function value of each trial vector is
compared to that of its corresponding target vector f(Ui,G) in the current
population. If the trial vector f(Ui,G) has less or equal objective function value
than the corresponding target vector, the trial vector will replace the target
vector and enter the population of the next generation. Otherwise, the target
vector will not change.
If f ( U i , G ) < f (X i, G )
X ij, G +1 = U ij, G
Else
X ij, G +1 = X ij, G
(3.24)

3.6 IMPLEMENTATION OF DE ALGORITHM

The DE-based approach for solving the optimal placement and

sizing of TCSC problem to minimize the active power loss takes the following
steps:

Step 1: Get the Input. The input data are line (Line Impedance) and bus data
(Load Power i.e., Real Power and Reactive Power) and bus voltage
limits.
Step 2: Calculate the loss using distribution load flow based on DLF
Method.
Step 3: Set the bus count C=2 (because first bus is the source bus).
Step 4: Randomly generates an initial target vector using equation (3.18).
 99

Step 5: Set the generation count k1=0.

Step6: Choose r1, r2, r3 with condition that r1 ≠ r2 ≠ r3.
Step 7: Find Vi,G using mutant strategy (DE/rand/1).
Step 8: Mutation: Generate donor vector using equation (3.22).
Step 9: Find the fitness value for both trial vector and target vector.
Step 10: Using equation (3.24) compare the target vector and trial vector
selected by fitness to determine which can be reverse into next
generation.
Step 11: If the generation reaches the maximum limit, go to step12.
Otherwise, set generation count k1=k1+1, and go back to step6.
Step 12: If the bus count reaches the maximum limit, go to step13. Otherwise,
set bus count C=C+1, and go back to step 4.
Step 13: Print out the optimal solution.

The solutions include the optimal location and size of TCSC in

RDS. The corresponding fitness values to these solutions indicate the
minimum total real power loss.

3.7 CALCULATION OF FIRING ANGLE (α)

After finding the optimum place and sizing of TCSC using PSO
with real power loss as the objective function, the value of firing angle ‘α’ is
calculated as follows.
i) Using XTCSC obtained from PSO algorithm, for various value of
degree of series compensation (k), XL and XC are calculated using
equations (3.7, 3.8).
ii) Using the equations (3.3-3.6), reactance characteristics curve of a
TCSC device drawn between effective reactance of TCSC and firing
angle ‘α’ for various ‘k’.
 100

iii) From the best value of ‘k’, the firing angle ‘α’ for the required
XTCSC is obtained.

3.8 IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 2

The complete structure of this work to solve the optimal TCSC
placement and sizing of the test systems using PSO algorithm is shown in
Figure 3.4. At first the power loss is calculated from DLF method. After
placing the TCSC, the active power loss is calculated using PSO algorithm.
The real power loss is minimized, by placing the TCSC in optimum place. The
procedure is repeated until no further minimum losses from the TCSC
placement are achieved. From XTCSC obtained from PSO algorithm, for
various values of ‘k’, reactance characteristics curve of a TCSC device is
drawn between effective reactance of TCSC (XTCSC) and firing angle ‘α’.
From the best value of ‘α’, the main parameters of TCSC such as ‘k’, XL and
XC are designed.

3.9 CASE STUDIES FOR SECTION 1

The 69 bus test system [Table A3.1] developed is considered for

implementing the PSO and DE algorithms for each and every bus to calculate
the optimum placement and sizing of TCSC and the simulated results are
tabulated and analyzed using MATLAB 2010. The total real power loss for the
test system obtained from the DLF is 224.9 KW.
 101

PT,Loss

TCSC allocation and

DLF Analysis I sizing using PSO.
Line and Bus Calculation of X TCSC
data V

NO

Minimum
Loss

YES

Reactance characteristics Using X TCSC

Firing and α α
Firingangle is is curve of a TCSC device is for various
obtained fromthe
obtained from the drawn. value of ‘k’ find
curve
cure. XC and XL and
α

Figure 3.4 Flow chart of the entire work

3.9.1 Simulation Results using PSO Method

From Figure 3.5, it is clear that, the voltages at the buses are at the
limit between |Vimin| to |Vimax|. It means that the voltage profile lies within the
limit after applying the TCSC using PSO analysis. Vimin, Vimax are obtained
from the DLF Analysis.

Also from Figure 3.7, it is clear that, with TCSC the total real
power loss is lesser. It is found out that the optimum placement of TCSC is
56th branch (i.e., between the bus 56 and 57) in the test system (69 bus test
system). Also, it is inferred that, real power loss is minimum when TCSC is
applied at the 56th branch and from the PSO analysis the optimum TCSC size
is 9.8327 Ohm. In this work, the weight function ‘ω’ varies from 0.5 to 0.9,
 102

weight coefficients C1 and C2 vary from 1.3 to 1.6 and the population size is
30.

Figure 3.5 Comparative analysis between DLF and PSO (Bus number Vs
Voltage)

3.9.2 Simulation Results using DE Method

From Figure 3.6, it is clear that, the voltages at the buses are at the
limit between |Vimin| to |Vimax|. It means that the voltage profile lies within the
limit after applying the TCSC using DE analysis. Vimin, Vimax are obtained
from the DLF Analysis.
 103

Figure 3.6 Comparative analysis between DLF and DE (Bus number Vs

Voltage)

From Figure 3.7, it is found that, the optimum placement of TCSC

is 56th branch in the test system (69 bus system) using DE technique. Also
from Figure 3.7, it is inferred that, real power loss is minimum when TCSC is
applied at the 56th branch (i.e, between the bus 56 and 57). Also it is clear that,
from the DE analysis, the optimum TCSC size is 9.9998 Ohm. Also, the total
real power loss calculated from the DE analysis is 222.68KW. In this work,
xjmax and xjmin varies between -90% to +90% of line reactance, mutation
operator ‘H’ value varies between 0.5 to 0.8 , crossover operator ‘CR’ varies
between 0.4 to 0.6 and the population size is 30.

3.9.3 Comparative Analysis

From Figure 3.7, it is clear that, the total real power loss is
minimum in PSO technique when compared with the DE technique. Also, the
size of the TCSC and the convergence time is also minimum in the PSO
technique when compared with the DE technique.
 104

Figure 3.7 Comparative analysis between DE and PSO (Bus number Vs

Real power loss (KW))

From Table 3.1, it is concluded that, PSO is very much faster and
accurate than the DE technique for this work. DE takes much longer time than
PSO. In the two cases (i.e., PSO and DE methods), the optimum branch
number to place the TCSC is 56.

But, while comparing the two methods, namely, PSO method and
DE method the optimum size of the TCSC, total real power loss in the primary
distribution system and the convergence time is very much lesser in PSO
method.
Table 3.1 shows the comparative analysis of PSO and DE with and
without TCSC. From Table 3.1, it is concluded that, compared to DE, PSO
convergence time is minimum with best results ( i.e., minimum real power
loss and size of TCSC with improved voltage profile).
 105

The optimum size of TCSC in PSO is 9.8377 Ohm and for DE it is

9.9998 Ohm. Also, the total real power loss in PSO is 218.8 KW and for DE it
is 222.68 KW. Therefore from the study, it is concluded that, with minimum
TCSC size the total real power loss is minimized by using PSO algorithm in
RDS.
Table 3.1 Comparative analysis of PSO and DE

With TCSC
Without TCSC
PSO DE
Total Active Power Loss (KW) 224.9 218.8 222.68
Voltage (p.u) 0.9625 1.0062 0.9875
Branch - 56-57 56-57
Size of TCSC (Ohm) - 9.8377 9.9998
Convergence Time (min) - 3 11

3.10 CASE STUDIES WITH SECTION 2

In order to evaluate the proposed work, 12 bus, 34 bus and 69 bus

test systems [data are tabulated in Tables A1.1, A2.1and A3.1] are considered.
The total power loss for the 12 bus, 34 bus and 69 bus test systems obtained
from the DLF are 0.0145 MW, 0.1638 MW and 0.2254 MW respectively. The
simulated results are tabulated and analyzed using MATLAB 2010.

3.10.1 PSO Result Analysis

The parameters used to evaluate PSO algorithm are listed in Table

3.2. From Table 3.3, after placement of TCSC, the real power loss is 0.0138
MW, 0.0411 MW and 0.1990 MW for 12 bus, 34 bus and 69 bus respectively.
The optimum branch number for 12 bus, 34 bus and 69 bus is 6, 20 and 56
respectively. The convergence characteristics are shown in Figure 3.8 to
Figure 3.10. The voltage profile is also improved. The size of the TCSC and
the line reactance for the test systems are given in Table 3.3.
 106

Table 3.2 Selection of parameters for various algorithms used

Parameters
Test
system Population Iteration C1,C2 ωmax ωmin Φmax Φmin
12 bus 25 100 1.8 0.8 0.1 0.42 0.41
34 bus 30 80 1.8 0.8 0.1 0.42 0.41
69 bus 30 80 1.8 0.8 0.1 0.42 0.41

Table 3.3 Results from PSO algorithm

Without TCSC With TCSC

12 34 69 12 34 69
bus bus bus bus bus bus
Total Active Power 0.0145 0.1638 0.2254 0.0138 0.0411 0.1990
Loss (MW)
Voltage (p.u) 0.9613 0.9663 0.9625 0.9791 1.008 1.0062
Branch - - - 6-7 20-21 56-57
Size of TCSC (XTCSC) - - - 26.7433 44.0259 9.8377
(Ohm)
 107

Figure 3.8 Evolution of objective function with respect to iteration

number for branch number 6 in 12 bus distribution test
system

Figure 3.9 Evolution of objective function with respect to iteration

number for branch number 20 in 34 bus distribution test
system
 108

Figure 3.10 Evolution of objective function with respect to iteration

number for branch number 56 in 69 bus distribution test
system

3.10.2 Reactance Curve Analysis

The reactance curve between the firing angle ‘α’ and the XTCSC for
various values of ‘k’ is shown in Figure 3.11 to Figure 3.31. Values
corresponding to the optimal XTCSC obtained from the PSO, the firing angle
‘α’ and the resonance region for different test systems with different ‘k’ values
are tabulated in Table 3.4. Table 3.5 shows the maximum variation in
capacitive and inductive reactance region for various values of ‘k’.

From Tables 3.4 and 3.5, the best value of ‘k’ is chosen to be 3
because it has the maximum distance between the resonance region and the
firing angle ‘α’ which means the firing angle ‘α’ is far away from the
resonance region. Always it is not preferable to operate the firing angle ‘α’
nearer to the resonance region.
 109

Table 3.4 Firing angle and resonance region for various ‘k’

Distance
Degree of Starting of Ending of Firing between
Resonance
Test series Resonance Resonance Angle resonance
Region
System compensation Region Region ‘α’ region and
(deg)
(k) (deg) (deg) (deg) firing angle
‘α’ (deg)
k=2 112.9 121.5 8.6 103.7 9.2
k=3 124.4 133.2 8.8 111.3 13.1
12-Bus k=4 130.5 138.7 8.2 117.7 12.8
k=5 136 144.7 8.7 123.7 12.3
k=6 139 147.3 8.3 128.8 10.2
k=2 113.1 122.5 9.4 103.4 9.7
k=3 124.4 133.3 8.9 109.8 14.6
34-Bus k=4 129.9 138.8 8.9 116.8 13.1
k=5 135.9 144.4 8.5 123.1 12.8
k=6 138.8 147.3 8.5 128 10.8
k=2 113 122.6 9.6 103.1 9.9
k=3 124.4 133.3 8.9 109.8 14.6
69-Bus k=4 129.9 138.8 8.9 116.8 13.1
k=5 135.9 144.4 8.5 123.1 12.8
k=6 138.8 147.3 8.5 128 10.8

From Tables 3.4 and 3.5, it is inferred that, the maximum value of
capacitive reactance corresponding to ‘k’ equal to 3 is high compared to ‘k’
equal to 2. Even then, k=3 is chosen to be the best because it has the maximum
distance between the firing angle ‘α’ and resonance region which is mostly
preferred. The maximum value of capacitive reactance in k=3 can be
overlooked when compared to other values of capacitive reactance obtained
from the remaining values of ‘k’.

Also, from the Table 3.4, it is observed that, for each value of ‘k’,
the tabulated values show the similarities within the test system. It shows the
superlative of this work. From Table 3.5, it is inferred that, the maximum
 110

variation of capacitance increases with ‘k’. The XL and XC values with 'k’
equal to 3 are listed in Table 3.6.

Table 3.5 Maximum variation of XL and XC

Maximum variation in Maximum variation in

Capacitive Reactance Region Inductive Reactance Region
k
(Ohm) (Ohm)
12 Bus 34 Bus 69 Bus 12 Bus 34 Bus 69 Bus
2 266 418.8 98.1 1069 1769 399.6
3 420 682.9 150.7 1088 1800 406.7
4 1144 1873 423.3 457.1 758.8 171.5
5 620.5 1004 228.1 1015 1680 379.6
6 991.2 1618 366.7 623.3 1032 233.3
7 1209 1530 348.5 983.5 1160 144.4

Table 3.6 Parameters of TCSC with k=3

XL XC Firing Angle ‘α’

Test System
(Ohm) (Ohm) (deg)
12-Bus 17.82887 53.4866 111.3
34-Bus 29.3506 88.0518 109.8
69-Bus 6.55847 19.6754 109.8
 111

Figure 3.11 Reactance curve for k=2 (12bus)

Figure 3.12 Reactance curve for k=3 (12bus)

 112

Figure 3.13 Reactance curve for k=4 (12bus)

Figure 3.14 Reactance curve for k=5(12bus)

 113

Figure 3.15 Reactance curve for k=6 (12bus)

Figure 3.16 Reactance curve for k=7 (12bus)

 114

Figure 3.17 Reactance curve for k=8 (12bus)

Figure 3.18 Reactance curve for k=2 (34bus)

 115

Figure 3.19 Reactance curve for k=3 (34bus)

Figure 3.20 Reactance curve for k=4 (34bus)

 116

Figure 3.21 Reactance curve for k=5 (34bus)

Figure 3.22 Reactance curve for k=6 (34bus)

 117

Figure 3.23 Reactance curve for k=7 (34bus)

Figure 3.24 Reactance curve for k=8 (34bus)

 118

Figure 3.25 Reactance curve for k=2 (69bus)

Figure 3.26 Reactance curve for k=3 (69bus)

 119

Figure 3.27 Reactance curve for k=4 (69bus)

Figure 3.28 Reactance curve for k=5 (69bus)

 120

Figure 3.29 Reactance curve for k=6 (69bus)

Figure 3.30 Reactance curve for k=7 (69bus)

 121

Figure 3.31 Reactance curve for k=8 (69bus)

3.11 CONCLUSION

In this chapter, in section 1, comparative analysis of PSO and DE

methods for optimal placement and sizing of TCSC in a RDS to minimize the
total real power loss is successfully done. From the results, it is concluded
that, for the optimal placement and sizing of TCSC in the primary distribution
system PSO is better than DE methods in terms of its accuracy and
convergence speed. But the placement is equal in PSO and DE methods. Also,
the size of TCSC obtained from PSO method is very much lesser than that of
the size obtained from DE method. Using PSO, the real power loss can be
minimized simply and quickly without any complex calculations. Thus the
results obtained, suggests new and promising research area utilizing PSO
technique for optimal placement and sizing of TCSC in RDS.

Also, in section 2, the main parameters of TCSC such as firing

angle ‘α’, XL and XC values are selected from the sizing of TCSC obtained
from the PSO algorithm. This selection is done by the degree of series
compensation ‘k’. From the distance between the firing angle ‘α’ and the
 122

resonance region, the best value of ‘k’ is chosen. The proposed work has been
tested using three different RDS and the results are tabulated. The firing angle
‘α’ obtained for various test systems shows the similarities for each value of
‘k’. Thus, the results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed work for
placement, sizing and parameter selection of TCSC in FACTS compensated
distribution systems.