2013 International Conference on Power, Energy and Control (ICPEC)

202
978-1-4673-6030-2/13/$31.00 2013 IEEE

Power System Stability Enhancement With
Genetically Optimized SVC Controller
Salman Hameed
Electrical Engineering Department,
ZH College of Engg. and Tech.,
Aligarh Muslim University,
Aligarh UP (INDIA)
Pallavi Garg
Electrical Engineering Department,
ZH College of Engg. and Tech.,
Aligarh Muslim University,
Aligarh UP (INDIA)
Santosh Kumar Varshney
Electrical Engineering Department,
ZH College of Engg. and Tech.,
Aligarh Muslim University,
Aligarh UP (INDIA)



Abstract Multi-machine power system stability improvement
by tuning of Static Var Compensator (SVC)- based controller
parameters is investigated in the proposed method. The design
problem is formulated as an optimization problem with a time-
domain simulation-based objective function and Real-Coded
Genetic Algorithm (RCGA) is used for searching optimal
controller parameters. A multi-machine power system model is
developed using MATLABs SIMULINK which incorporates
SVC Controller. A fault is created on the transmission line. The
simulation results of the multi-machine power system without
SVC Controller and with SVC Controller are presented. The
simulation results are analyzed which shows that the power
system becomes unstable on the occurrence of the fault if SVC
controller is not used. This paper shows the effectiveness of the
proposed design. The proposed method enhances the multi-
machine power system stability.
Keywords- Power System Stability, Damping of power
oscillations, SVC, Real-coded genetic algorithm, multi-machine
power system
I. INTRODUCTION
Modern power system consists of generators, transmission
lines, loads and transformers. When the loading of long
transmission line is increased, transient stability of power
system on the occurrence of a fault may be a major problem for
power engineers. The problem of unstable power system on
occurrence of the fault can be solved with the use of flexible ac
transmission system (FACTS) controllers. FACTS controllers
are very fast in controlling the system condition and can
improve the voltage stability, steady state stability and transient
stability of complex power system. Static VAR Compensator
(SVC) is a first generation FACTS device which can control
voltage at the required bus and thus improves the voltage
profile of the power system. The reactive power compensation
is done by varying the firing angle of the thyristors of SVCs.
II. STRUCTURE OF SVC- BASED CONTROLLER
A leadlag structure is used in SVC-based controller as
shown in Fig. 1.


Fig. 1 Structure of the SVC-based controller
The input to the controller is the speed deviation . The
structure consists of: a gain block; a signal washout block and
two-stage phase compensation block. The phase compensation
block gives the appropriate phase-lead characteristics to
compensate for the phase lag between input and the output
signals. The signal washout block works as a high-pass filter
which passes signals associated with oscillations in input signal
to pass unchanged. Without it steady changes in input would
modify the output [1-7].
III. PROBLEM FORMULATION
In lead-lag structured controller the value of washout time
constant may be in the range 1-20 seconds and is generally
prespecified. In the proposed structure, we fix the washout time
constant as 10s , T
s
=10s.
The controller gains KS ; and the time constants T
1SVC
,
T
2SVC
, T
3SVC
and T
4SVC
are to be determined.
The SVC controller should minimize the power system
oscillations after a large disturbance so as to improve the power
system stability. In the present study, an integral time absolute
error (ITAE) of the speed deviations is taken as the objective
function. The objective function is written as:
(1)
Where, is the speed deviation and t
sim
is the time of the
simulation.
Objective function is calculated by time- domain simulation
of the power system. For obtaining improved settling time and
2013 International Conference on Power, Energy and Control (ICPEC)

203

overshoot the value of objective function should be minimum.
[8-12].
IV. ADVANTAGES OF GENETIC ALGORITHM (GA)
OVER OTHER OPTIMIZATION TECHNIQUES
Genetic Algorithm (GA) is selected for optimization because it
is robust in comparison to other conventional methods. It is
different from other optimization and search methods as it
works with a coding of the parameter set, not the parameters
themselves. GA search from a population of points, not a
single point and it uses objective function information, not
derivatives or other auxiliary knowledge. Further, GA uses
probabilistic transition rules, not deterministic rules.
GA maintains and manipulates a population of solutions
and implements a survival of the fittest strategy in their search
for better solutions. The fittest individuals of any population
tend to reproduce and survive to the next generation thus
improving successive generations. The inferior individuals can
also survive and reproduce [9-15].
Use of GA requires the determination of following six
fundamental issues:
i. Chromosome representation
ii. Selection function
iii. The genetic operators
iv. Initialization
v. Termination
vi. Evaluation function
The computational flowchart of the GA optimization process
used in the proposed structure is given in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2 Genetic algorithm Flowchart

V. SIMULINK MODELING OF SVC FOR MULTI-
MACHINE POWER SYSTEM
A practical case of Multi-Machine Power System
(MMPS) is considered in this paper.
The model of power system shown in Fig. 3 is developed
using SimPowerSystems blockset. There are three cases:
Case I : Model of Multi-Machine Power System
without SVC (Fig. 4)
Case II : Model of Multi-Machine Power System with
SVC but No Control (Fig. 5)
Case III : Model of Multi-Machine Power System with
SVC Control (Fig. 6)
The system consists of three hydraulic generating units. Two of
2100 MVA, 13.8 kV, 60Hz each and one of 4200 MVA, 13.8
kV, 60Hz, three 3-phase 13.8/500 kV step-up transformer and
a 200 MVA SVC. The generators are equipped with hydraulic
turbine and governor (HTG), excitation system. The HTG
represents a nonlinear hydraulic turbine model, a PID governor
system, and a servomotor. The excitation system consists of a
voltage regulator and DC exciter, without the exciter's
saturation function [16].


Fig. 3 : Multi Machine Power System (MMPS) with SVC


Fig. 4 : SIMULINK Model of MMPS system
without SVC
2013 International Conference on Power, Energy and Control (ICPEC)

204


Fig. 5 : SIMULINK Model of MMPS system
with SVC without control.
Fig.
6 : MATLAB SIMULINK model for MMPS system with
controlled SVC
VI. SIMULATION
The parameters employed for the implementations of
RCGA in the present study are given in Table 1.

Parameter Value/Type
Maximum generations 50
Population size 30
Type of selection Normal geometric [0 0.08]
Type of crossover Arithmetic [2]
Type of mutation Nonuniform [2 50 3]
Termination method Maximum generation
TABLE- 1 PARAMETERS USED IN GENETIC
ALGORITHM
Simulations were conducted in the MATLAB 7.7.0
environment and the optimization process is repeated 20 times.
As three-phase non-linear models of power system components
are used in the present study, realization of RCGA optimization
process consumes on an average 7000 sec of CPU time. The
best final solutions obtained in the 20 runs are given below.
For SVC controller:
K
svc
=168.0367, T
1svc
=0.9049 s, T
2svc
=0.4528 s,
T
3svc
= 0.8208 s, T
4svc
= 0.4483 s
VII. SIMULATION RESULTS
To assess the effectiveness of the proposed controller
simulation studies are carried out for various models. The
behavior of the power system is analyzed at loading condition
P
1
=0.7 p.u., P
2
=0.526687 p.u., P
3
=0.7 p.u. under severe
disturbance. A 12- cycle, 3-phase fault is applied at the middle
of the line at t = 0.1 sec. The original system is restored upon
the fault clearance. The system response under this severe
disturbance is shown in Figs. 7- 22
Case I : Response of Multi-Machine Power System
(MMPS) without SVC
Case II : Response of Multi-Machine Power System
(MMPS) with SVC but No Control
Case III : Response of Multi-Machine Power System
(MMPS) with RCGA optimized SVC- based
controller
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
Time (seconds)
A
c
t
i
v
e

P
o
w
e
r

O
u
t
p
u
t

o
f

M
a
c
h
i
n
e
-
1
,

P
e
o
1





(
p
,
u
.
)

No SVC
SVCbut NoControl

Fig.7 Active Power Output of Machine-1, P
eo
(p.u.) for Case I
and Case II
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
Time (seconds)
A
c
t
i
v
e

P
o
w
e
r

O
u
t
p
u
t

o
f

M
a
c
h
i
n
e
-
2
,

P
e
o
2





(
p
.
u
.
)


NoSVC
SVCbut No Control

Fig.8 Active Power Output of Machine-2, P
eo
(p.u.) for Case I
and Case II
2013 International Conference on Power, Energy and Control (ICPEC)

205

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Time (seconds)
A
c
t
iv
e

P
o
w
e
r

O
u
t
p
u
t

o
f

M
a
c
h
in
e
-
3
,

P
e
o
3



(
p
.
u
.
)


NoSVC
SVCbut NoControl

Fig.9 Active Power Output of Machine-3, P
eo
(p.u.) for Case I
and Case II


Fig10 : Difference of speed variations of machine-1((d
1
)
and machine-3 (d
3
), d
13
for Case I and Case II


Fig11 : Difference of speed variations of machine-1((d
1
)
and machine-2 (d
2
), d
12
for Case I and Case II



Fig.12 : Difference of speed variations of machine-3 (d
3
) and
machine-2 (d
2
), d
32
for Case I and Case II
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
x 10
4
Time (seconds)
d
_
_
t
h
e
t
a
1
-
2







(
d
e
g
r
e
e
)


NoSVC
SVCbut NoControl

Fig13 : Rotor angle deviations d (degree) of machine-1 and
machine-2, d
12
for Case I and Case II
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
Time (seconds)
d
_
_
t
h
e
t
a
1
-
3








(
d
e
g
r
e
e
)


NoSVC
SVCbut NoControl

Fig14 Difference of rotor angle deviations d (degree) of
machine-1 and machine-3, d
13
for Case I and Case II
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
-2000
-1000
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
Time (Seconds)
A
c
t
iv
e

P
o
w
e
r

a
t

B
u
s
-
1







(
M
W
)


NoSVC
SVCbut NoControl

Fig15 : Active Power at Bus-1 or power flow through the line
(MW) for Case I and Case II

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
Time (seconds)
A
c
t
i
v
e

P
o
w
e
r

O
u
t
p
u
t


o
f

M
a
c
h
in
e
-
1





(
p
.
u
.
)

Fig 16 : Active Power Output of Machine-1, P
eo1
(p.u.) for Case
III
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
x 10
-3
Time (seconds)
Speed variations, dw1-3 (p.u.)

No SVC
SVC but No Control
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Time (seconds)
dw1-2 (p.u.)

No SVC
SVC but No Control
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Time (seconds)
dw3-2 (p.u.)

No SVC
SVC but No Control
2013 International Conference on Power, Energy and Control (ICPEC)

206

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
x 10
-3
Time (seconds)
S
p
e
e
d

d
e
v
ia
t
i
o
n
s
,

d
w
1
-
3









(
p
.
u
.
)

Fig17 : Difference of speed variations of machine-1((d
1
)
and machine-3 (d
3
), d
13
for Case III

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
x 10
-3
Time (seconds)
S
p
e
e
d

d
e
v
ia
t
io
n
s
,

d
w
1
-
2




(
p
.
u
.
)

Fig18 : Difference of speed variations of machine-1((d
1
)
and machine-2 (d
2
), d
12
for Case III
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
Time (seconds)
d
_
_
t
h
e
t
a
1
-
2





(
d
e
g
r
e
e
)


Fig19 : Difference of rotor angle deviations d_theta
(degree) of machine-1 and machine-2, d
12
for Case III
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
-16
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
Time (seconds)
d
_
_
t
h
e
t
a
1
-
3





(
d
e
g
r
e
e
)

Fig20 : Difference of rotor angle deviations d_theta
(degree) of machine-1 and machine-3, d
13
for Case III
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Time (seconds)
A
c
t
i
v
e

P
o
w
e
r

a
t

B
u
s
-
1





(
M
W
)

Fig 21 : Response of Active Power at Bus-1 or Power
flow through the line for Case III
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.95
1
1.05
1.1
1.15
1.2
1.25
Time (seconds)
V
r
e
f





(
p
.
u
.
)

Fig 22 : Reference Voltage of SVC, V
ref
for Case III

VIII. CONCLUSIONS
For designing the proposed controller , a non-linear time-
domain simulation-based objective function is used and
RCGA optimization technique is employed to optimally tune
the parameters of the proposed controller.
The models of multi-machine power system (MMPS) are
developed using SimPowerSystems blockset. For modeling of
multi-machine power systems different cases are considered
(i) without SVC, (ii) with SVC but No Control and (iii) with
genetically optimized SVC Controller.
2013 International Conference on Power, Energy and Control (ICPEC)

207

The simulation results show that the power system is
completely unstable without the use of SVC when a three
phase fault occurs on the transmission line. When we use
genetically optimized SVC the power system becomes stable
after few cycles when fault occurs. Thus the proposed SVC
controller can generate variation of the control signals and
gives efficient damping to system oscillations due to any
disturbance and enhances the power system stability.
APPENDIX
A complete list of parameters used appears in the default options of
SimPowerSystems in the Users Manual. All data are in pu.
Generator 1, M1: SB = 2100 MVA, H =3.7 s, VB = 13.8 kV, f = 60 Hz, RS =
2.8544 e -3, Xd =1.305, Xd = 0.296, Xd = 0.252, Xq = 0.474, Xq = 0.243, Xq
= 0.18, Td = 1.01 s, Td = 0.053 s, Tqo = 0.1 s., Pe=0.7 pu.
Generator 2, M2: SB = 4200 MVA, H =3.7 s, VB = 13.8 kV, f = 60 Hz, RS =
2.8544 e -3, Xd =1.305, Xd = 0.296, Xd = 0.252, Xq = 0.474, Xq = 0.243, Xq
= 0.18, Td = 1.01 s, Td = 0.053 s, Tqo = 0.1 s., Pe=0.5267 pu.
Generator 3, M3: SB = 2100 MVA, H =3.7 s, VB = 13.8 kV, f = 60 Hz, RS =
2.8544 e -3, Xd =1.305, Xd = 0.296, Xd = 0.252, Xq = 0.474, Xq = 0.243, Xq
= 0.18, Td = 1.01 s, Td = 0.053 s, Tqo = 0.1 s., Pe=0.7 pu.
Load at Bus1: 250MW
Transformer 1 : 2100 MVA, 13.8/500 kV, 60 Hz, R1 =R2= 0.002, L1 = 0,
L2=0.12, D1/Yg connection, Rm = 500, Lm = 500
Transformer 2 : 1400 MVA, 13.8/500 kV, 60 Hz, R1 =R2= 0.002, L1 = 0,
L2=0.12, D1/Yg connection, Rm = 500, Lm = 500
Transformer 3 : 2100 MVA, 13.8/500 kV, 60 Hz, R1 =R2= 0.002, L1 = 0,
L2=0.12, D1/Yg connection, Rm = 500, Lm = 500
Transmission lines : 3-Ph, 60 Hz, Length = 50km,100km,175/2km, 175km,
R1 = 0.02546 / km, R0= 0.3864 / km, L1= 0.9337e-3 H/km, L0 = 4.1264e-3
H/ km, C1 = 12.74e-9 F/ km, C0 = 7.751e-9 F/ km
Hydraulic turbine and governor : Ka = 3.33, Ta = 0.07, Gmin = 0.01, Gmax =
0.97518, Vgmin =0.1 pu/s, Vgmax = 0.1 pu/s, Rp = 0.05, Kp = 1.163, Ki = 0.105,
Kd = 0, Td = 0.01 s, =0, Tw = 2.67 s each
Excitation system: TLP = 0.02 s, Ka =200, Ta = 0.001 s, Ke =1, Te =0, Tb = 0,
Tc =0, Kf = 0.001, Tf = 0.1 s, Efmin = 0, Efmax = 7, Kp = 0 each
Static Var Compensator : 500KV, 200 MVAR, Droop=0.03

REFERENCES
[1] Narain G. Hingorani and Laszlo Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS-
Concepts and Technology of Flexible AC Transmission Systems,
IEEE Press, 2001.
[2] R. Mohan Mathur and Rajiv Varma, Thyristor- Based FACTS
controllers for Electrical Transmission Systems, IEEE Press, 2002.
[3] K. R. Padiyar, FACTS Controller in Power Transmission and
Distribution, New Age International (P) Limited, Publishers,2007.
[4] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, McGraw-Hill
Inc.1993.
[5] L. Gyugyi, Power electronics in electric utilities: static var
compensators, IEEE Proceedings, vol.76, No. 4, pp. 483-494, April
1988.
[6] E.Z. Zhou, Application of static VAR compensators to increase power
system damping, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, Vol.8, No.2, PP May
1993.
[7] Yousin. Tang & A.P Sakis Meliopoylos, Power Systems small signal
stability analysis with FACTS elements, IEEE, on Power delivery,
vol.12, no. 3, July-1997.
[8] Y. Chang and Z. Xu, A novel SVC supplementary controller based on
wide area signals, Electric Power System Research, Electric Power
Syst. Res. Vol. 77, pp. 1569-1574, 2007.
[9] Sidhartha Panda and N.P.Padhy, Power System with PSS and FACTS
Controller: Modeling, Simulation and Simultaneous Tuning Employing
Genetic Algorithm International Journal of Electrical, Computer and
Systems Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 9-18, 2007.
[10] Sidhartha Panda and N.P.Padhy, Comparison of Particle Swarm
Optimization and Genetic Algorithm for FACTS-based Controller
Design, Applied Soft Computing. Elsevier, Vol. 8, issue 4, pp. 1418-
1427, 2008.
[11] Sidhartha Panda, N. P. Patidar and R. Singh, Simultaneous Tuning of
Static Var Compensator and Power System Stabilizer Employing Real-
Coded Genetic Algorithm, World Academy of Science, Engineering
and Technology 41 2008.
[12] Sidhartha Panda and C.Ardil, Real-Coded Genetic Algorithm for
Robust Power System Stabilizer Design, International Journal of
Electrical, Computers and System Engineering, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 6-14,
2008.
[13] BOUDJELLA.Houari, F.Z. Gherbi, S.Hadjeri and F.Ghezal, Modelling
and Simulation of Static Var Compensator with Matlab, 4th
International Conference on Computer Integrated Manufacturing
CIP2007, 03-04 November 2007.
[14] K. SOMSAI, A. OONSIVILAI, A. SRIKAEW & T.
KULWORAWANICHPONG, Optimal PI Controller Design and
Simulation of a Static Var Compensator using MATLABs
SIMULINK, Proceedings of the 7th WSEAS International Conference
on Power Systems, Beijing, China, September 15-17, 2007.
[15] B. Venkateswara Rao, Dr. G.V. Nagesh Kumar, M. Ramya Priya, and
P.V.S. Sobhan, Implementation of Static VAR Compensator for
Improvement of Power System Stability, 2009 International Conference
on Advances in Computing, Control, and Telecommunication
Technologies,pp 453-457.
[16] SimPowerSystems 4.3 Users Guide, Available:
http://www.mathworks.com/products/simpower/