 Open Access
 Total Downloads : 23
 Authors : Goutham N S, Dr. Mohd. Z. A. Ansari
 Paper ID : IJERTCONV5IS18004
 Volume & Issue : NConPCS – 2017 (Volume 5 – Issue 18)
 Published (First Online): 24042018
 ISSN (Online) : 22780181
 Publisher Name : IJERT
 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Determination of Optimal Location of FACTS Devices for Power System Restoration Including Load Flow and Contingency Analysis
Goutham N S
Student, Dept. of EEE Ghousia College of Engineering Ramanagaram, Karnataka, India
Affiliated to VTU, Belagavi
Dr. Mohd. Z. A. Ansari, Member IEEE Professor and Head, Dept. of EEE Ghousia College of Engineering Ramanagaram, Karnataka, India Affiliated to VTU, Belagavi
Abstract This paper deals with improvement of the power system for better and efficient use of power and improving the reliability of the system under contingencies. The system is subjected to contingencies such as line outages and generator outages. The voltage profile, active and reactive power flows for IEEE 6 bus test system is checked for precontingencies and postcontingencies using NR method of load flow analysis. The voltage sags and swells & reactive power flows at each bus and transmission lines for test system are studied & suitable reactive power compensation is incorporated using FACTS devices by identifying the optimal location thereby restoring the power system to normal condition.
Index Terms Load flow analysis (LFA), contingency analysis, optimal location, FACTS controllers, system restoration.

INTRODUCTION
Due to the increase in population growth and urbanization there is an increase in power demand in day to day life. It is necessary to meet the rising power demand for power utilities, industries and commercial purpose. So there is a need for planning and forecasting the present and future load demand and to use the available power smartly and efficiently. Smartness includes upgrading the existing generation, transmission and distribution network efficiently and developing the new technology without much initial cost of investment and which can be adopted in the present power system [1]. The communication technologies play a vital role in upgrading the power system network. Efficiency depends on how much the power system components work efficiently in day to day life without power interruption. A power system is said to be efficient if the power system equipment's can operated to their prescribed life time [2]. Due to various conditions such as abnormal weather conditions and continuous momentary faults in the power system the life of the power system components gets reduced. It is necessary to prevent the unnecessary momentary faults by incorporating well equipped and fast acting CBs and relays [3]. The reactive power consumption is increasing day by day since most of the loads are inductive in nature. Though the generating station do not supply reactive power to the consumer end there is a shortage of reactive power due to the use of more inductive loads and transmission & distribution losses [4]. Therefore there is a need of incorporating FACTS
controllers at the transmission end and DGs at the generator side.

PROBLEM FORMULATION
This paper deals with the improvement of power system for the better and efficient use of quality power and improving the reliability of the system under contingencies. The voltage profile at each bus, active and reactive power flows of each transmission line is checked for precontingencies and post contingencies for IEEE 6 – bus test system using NR method of load flow analysis. The threshold voltage levels are 0.95 per unit to 1.05 per unit. TCSC is incorporated between the lines which causes voltage drop at the bus and also allows more reactive power to flow during contingency condition. The main aim of placing FACTS controllers is to improve the voltage profile, line flows and thereby to reduce overall losses in the test system.

Description of the System
Fig. 1: IEEE 6 Bus Test Systems
IEEE 6 bus system is shown in Fig.1 has 3 generators, 3 loads and 11 transmission line connected to 6 bus and the bus voltages is maintained between 0.95 p.u to 1.05 p.u. The test system has 1 slack bus and 2 PV bus. The slack bus voltage is specified and for the PV bus the voltage magnitude real and reactive power limits are specified. The system is tested for a Derated MVA of 100MVA, 220kV transmission line.

System data
TABLE 1: TRANSMISSION LINE DATA
The relation between voltage and current at any n bus system is given by
= For i=1, 2 .n (1)
The expression for active and reactive power injection is given by
=1
From Bus
To Bus
R(p.u)
X(p.u)
B/2(p.u
)
Capacity (MW)
1
2
0.1
0.2
0.0.2
30
1
4
0.05
0.3
0.02
50
1
5
0.08
0.25
0.03
40
2
3
0.05
0.25
0.03
20
2
4
0.05
0.1
0.01
40
2
5
0.1
0.3
0.02
20
2
6
0.07
0.2
0.025
30
3
5
0.12
0.26
0.025
20
3
6
0.02
0.1
0.01
60
4
5
0.2
0.4
0.04
20
5
6
0.1
0.3
0.03
20
= [
=1
= [
] For i=1, 2 .n (2)
] For i=1, 2 .n (3)
=  = (4)
=   +
=1
(( cos + sin )
(5)
=  +
=1
(( sin + cos )
(6)
TABLE 2: BUS DATA
The aim of load flow studies is to find the power mismatch both active and reactive power mismatch.
=
, (7)
= , (8)
Bus number
Bus type
V
(p.u)
P g
(MW)
Q g
(MVAR)
1
Slack
0.1
–
–
2
PV
0.05
50
0.02
3
PV
0.08
60
0.03
4
PQ
0.05
0
0
5
PQ
0.05
0
0
6
PQ
0.1
0
0
B. Voltage Performance Index (PIv)
The inability of the power system to operate within the prescribed limits due to violation of bus voltages is described by the voltage performance index.
=1
= (
2
 2
) { }
(9)
TABLE 3: LOAD DATABus number
LOAD
P (MW)
Q (MVAR)
4
PV
0.05
5
PV
0.08
6
70
70


METHODOLOGY PROPOSED
A. Newton Raphson Method
Load flow studies are a major aspect in solving any load flow problem. From load flow studies voltage magnitude, phase angles, active and reactive power flows through a transmission line can be obtained for precontingency case and postcontingency case. The exact situation of the power system can be obtained using load flow studies. NR method of load flow studies gives more accurate results compared to other load flow studies and has fast computational time.
 is the bus voltage magnitude.
  is the ith bus specified voltage magnitude.
is the voltage deviation limit.
z is the exponent of the penalty function and value is (=1) n is the number of buses in the given power system.
W is the real non negative weighting factor and value is (=1)
Here, to calculate Maximum voltage limit is 1.05 per unit and minimum voltage limit is 0.95 per unit since Â±5% deviation in voltage is allowed.

SIMULATION RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Test System
The proposed methodology is tested on IEEE 6 bus test system for precontingency and postcontingency condition and the voltage sags and swells at different bus and active and reactive power flows are obtained respectively.
Based on the proposed methodology, the test system is run for NR load flow studies and results are simulated.

Assumptions and Constraints
The following are the assumptions made and constraints observed:

The lower and upper limit of voltages in per unit is 0.95and 1.05 respectively.

The TCSC is placed in such a way where the line is most sensitive which affect both voltage magnitude of individual bus and reactive power flow in the lines.

TABLE 4: RANKING OF THE LINES
Tripped
Line
PIv
Rank
12
0.7686
11
14
3.570
1
15
1.2732
4
23
0.7726
9
24
1.4846
3
25
0.8368
8
26
1.0033
5
35
0.86638
7
36
1.8576
2
45
0.8852
6
56
0.7707
10
TABLE 5: PRECONTINGENCY AND POSTCONTINGENCY VOLTAGES FOR LINE OUTAGE (35) AND (36)
Bus No.
Precontingency voltage
(p.u) for 35 and 36 line outage
Postcontingency
voltage (p.u) for 35 and 36 line outage
35
36
35
36
1
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
2
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.05
3
1.07
1.07
1.07
1.07
4
0.9520
0.9520
0.9492
0.9492
5
0.9902
0.9902
0.9816
0.9820
6
1.0055
1.0055
1.0043
0.9016
From Table4 it is seen that the outage of line 14 has more PIv value but the line is connected to the generator bus in practice the line which is far away from the generator is affected by fault most of the times i.e. the line 36 and 35. In order to choose between these lines load flow analysis is carried out and also overloading parameter is considered.
From Table5 it can be seen that for line outage 35 at bus 4 the voltage drops down to 0.9492 and for line outage 3
After the placement of TCSC between bus 3 and bus 5 improvement of voltage at bus 4 and bus 5 is observed as given in Table7. Further, reactive power loss before placing TCSC during 35 line outage was 36.67796 Mvar and after the placement of TCSC the losses was found to be 31.818Mvar. Hence, reduction in losses observed was about 13.25%.
6 the voltage at bus4 drops to 0.9492 and also at bus 6 the voltage drops down to 0.9016 which is below 0.95 per unit lower level threshold voltage. So for the placement of TCSC the line which is more sensitive for contingency is taken to consideration further to choose between line 35, 36 % loading of the line under 35 and 36 line outage is considered.
TABLE 6: PERCANTAGE OF LINE LOADING AFTER 35 AND 36 LINE OUTAGE
Line No.
For 35 line outage
For 36 line outage
% of loading
% of loading
12
10.3
5.6
14
50.5
51.0
15
89.6
90
23
12.7
28.0
24
35.3
34.1
25
78.6
80.4
26
25.3
72.4
35
open
33.7
36
73.3
Open
45
15.3
16.5
56
12.8
34.6
From Table6 it is clear that by the removal of line 35 effects the lines 12, 23, 45 56 and the lines are under loaded between 0 – 25%. From these results we can depict that 35 is the most sensitive line. TCSC is placed between the bus 3 and bus 5 to improve the voltage magnitude at bus 2 and bus 4. The rating of the TCSC is determined by the difference of base case reactive power flow to contingency case reactive power flow through the line 35.
TABLE 7: BUS VOLTAGES AFETR PLACEMENT OF TCSC PLACED BETWEEN BUS 3 AND BUS 5
Bus No.
Post contingency voltage after placement of TCSC (p.u)
1
1.05
2
1.05
3
1.07
4
0.9502
5
0.9847
6
1.0049


CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, voltage performance index method is utilized for contingency analysis and for ranking of lines. Based on PIv values the test system is analyzed for voltage sags. During contingency period voltage at bus 4 and bus 6 were effected. TCSC is placed based on voltage sags at
different buses and, percentage loading of lines based on active and reactive power flow. After the placement of TCSC between the buses 3 and 5 the system is analyzed for voltage improvement and was observed that there is a significant increase in voltage profile at all the bus. Also, the reactive power loss is minimized and the system is restored to normal condition.
REFERENCES
 <>Bansilal, D Thukaram and, K Parthasarathy, Optimal reactive power dispatch algorithm for voltage stability improvement, IEEE Trans. Electrical power and Energy Systems, vol. 18,no.7, pp.461468,1996.

K.R.Padiyar,FACTS controllers in power transmission and distribution,pp.554,New Age International Limited, 2007

Abhilipsa Rath, Sriparna Roy, and Ghatak parag Goyal, Optimal allocation of distributed generation and static var compensator (SVC) in a power system using Revamp voltage stability indicator,IEEE Trans.NPSC,2016, vol.3, pp. 16.

Satyanarayana Burada, Deepak Joshi, and Khyati D.Mistry,Contingency analysis of power system by using voltage and active power performance index, IEEE Trans. Power Electronics (ICPEICES) 2016, vol.6, pp.745786.

Duong Quoc Hung, Nadarajah Mithulananthan, Mutile distributted generator placement in primary distribution networks for loss reduction, IEEE Trans. Industrial Electronics, vol. 60, pp. 17001708,Jan 2013.

A.J.Wood and B.F. Wollenberg, Power generation,operation, and control: John Wiley & Sons, 2012.

G. Ejebe and B. Wollenberg, Automatic contingency selection, Power apparatus and systems, IEEE Trans. Pp.97109,1979.

P.Kundur,Power system stability and control, McGrawHill, New york,1994.

XiaoPing Zhang, Christian Rehtanz and, Bikash Pal, Flexible AC Transmission Systems,Springer, Germany 2006.

D.P.Kothari and, I.J.Nagarath, Power System Engineering, McGrawHill, New york,2005.