OPTIMAL PLACEMENT OF TCSC FOR REACTIVE
POWER PLANNING USING GRASSHOPPER
OPTIMIZATION ALGORITHM CONSIDERING LINE
OUTAGE (N-m)
Muhamad Amirul Asyraf Juhari1, Nor Rul Hasma Abdullah1, Ibrahim
Haruna Shanono1,2, Mahfuzah Mustafa1, Rosdiyana Samad1 and Dwi
Pebrianti1
1Faculty
of Electrical & Electronics Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Pekan Branch, 26600 Pekan,
Pahang, Malaysia.
2Department of Electrical, Faculty of the Engineering, Bayero University Kano, Nigeria
Outline
•
•
•
•
Introduction
Methodology
Results and Analysis
Conclusion
Introduction
o The increasing number of voltage collapse occurrences due to
voltage instability which involves heavy load and
contingencies has motivated further research in voltage
stability.
o The increment in load demands will decrease the reactive
power and voltage, which leads to voltage collapse in the
system.
o Voltage collapse has caused the power utility failed to
function which may involve monetary loses.
o During contingencies, the operating generators fail to operate
and cause the reactive power supply by generator suddenly
drop.
Introduction cont
• Therefore, an efficient voltage stability analysis technique is
required in order to perform the voltage stability study.
• This phenomenon is a progressing issue, which requires a VSA
analysis to be properly conducted especially at the planning
stage.
• The placement of FACTS controllers has been has suggested as
an effective methods to prevent against the voltage collapse
by installation of Thyristor Controlled Series Capacitor (TCSC)
Methodology
Reactive Power Dispatch problem can be
formulated mathematically as follows:
A. Objective Function
where
x is the vector of dependent variables,
u is the vector of control variables,
PL is the real power losses at line-L,
NI is the number of transmission lines,
PL is losses prevailing in the system,
Gij is the conductance of the line joining bus-i
and bus-j,
δij is the phase difference between the
buses,
Vi and Vj are the absolute value of voltages
the buses i and j.
9/27/2023
TCSC Model
By inserting a variable reactance either inductive or
capacitive in series with the transmission line, the
power flow in the transmission line can be
manipulated [2].
Zline
xTCSC
xline
γTCSC
= the impedance of the transmission line,
= the reactance of the line where TCSC is located,
= the reactance of TCSC, and
= the coefficient which represents the compensation degree
of TCSC.
IEEE 30-bus RTS
5 voltage control buses
24 load buses
1 slack bus
41 interconnected lines
5 transformer tap
changers.
The load bus 25 was
selected to perform the
test.
Line outage No: 1 or 9
The selection for line
outage was based on
the most severe line in
the system [2]
back
Flow chart for implementation of GOA for
TCSC
Results And Analysis
• Analysis tested on the IEEE 30-bus RTS bus 25
subjected 40 MVAr loading and population of 50.
• First part: the results for TCSC installation without
contingency (N-1)
• Second part: the results for TCSC installation with
contingency (N-1): Line outage No. 1 and 9
Table 1. Boundaries setting for control variables
for IEEE 30-bus system
Control Variable
TCSC Location
TCSC Sizing (p.u)
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
1
41
-0.8
0.2
Results and Analysis
Table 2: Effect of ORPD with load subjected to bus 26 using PSO (Loading, QL = 25 MVAr)
Total
Generator
% ∆Loss
Q g2
Q g5
Q g8
Q g11
Q g13
Loss
Outage
Analysis
SVSI
No.
(MW)
MW
Pre
0.3636 22.267
28.085 34.941 54.632 21.586 17.693
0
26.7
Post
0.2113 16.328
77.703 -63.921 229.91 33.723 10.437
Pre
0.3878 22.745
39.272 39.761 53.029 23.895
13
42.5
Post
0.2083 13.087
-18.814 32.093 180.302 64.722
Pre
0.4427 24.176
39.003 36.558 60.293
13, 11
19.5
Post
0.2153 19.457
73.328 -75.648 297.957
Pre
0.4482 25.762
43.633 67.508
13, 11, 2
35.9
Post
0.219
16.516
-25.299 281.201
Vm (p.u)
0.7831
1.0394
0.7564
1.0471
0.7032
1.0295
0.6984
1.0206
• All the SVSI values reduce as compared with pre-ORPD with respect to generator
outage number variation.
• The voltage profiles in the system are also improved.
• The transmission losses are minimized.
Table 3. Transmission Losses with manipulated
loading condition with line outage 1
Pre
Optimization
(MW)
Post
Optimization
(MW)
0
8.7550
8.6044
10
9.1019
8.8303
20
9.9514
9.2162
30
11.3487
9.9596
40
13.5580
11.0259
QL
(MVAr)
Location
Line No.
14
1
40
9
2
7
10
40
19
34
2
1
13
5
34
17
2
8
15
34
20
17
33
39
34
Sizing
(MVAr)
-0.5582
-0.3323
-0.0519
-0.6871
-0.8000
-0.6528
-0.2726
0.5017
0.0635
-0.6432
0.1625
-0.4198
-0.6908
-0.3674
-0.5821
-0.7056
-0.0091
0.1497
-0.8000
-0.5208
-0.2550
-0.0201
-0.0468
0.0755
-0.4904
• All the transmission
lossed reduce as
compared with pre-opt
with respect to loading
variation.
• The transmission losses
are minimized.
Conclusion
The result indicated that PSO and EP
techniques had improved the result ;
minimize voltage stability, reduce
transmission losses and voltage profile
PSO technique outperformed EP in
terms of voltage stability improvement
and voltage profile.
Thank You
Q&A