Abstract-- This paper presents an application of fuzzy

control to determine the control signal of static var

compensator (SVC) for reactive power compensation and
power factor correction. Input signals for the FLC are chosen
as load reactive power and initial firing angle of thyristors.
The control signal is calculated using fuzzy membership
functions. The effectiveness and feasibility of the TSK
(Takagi-Sugeno-Kang) and mamdani type fuzzy controllers
for thyristors firing control in SVC is compared.
Effectiveness of the proposed technique is demonstrated by
simulation studies on a single machine infinite bus system.
Results obtained show improvement in the overall system
characteristics using the proposed adaptive fuzzy logic SVC
controller.
Index TermsSVC, Fuzzy controller, Power Factor,
Reactive power.
I. INTRODUCTION
ar compensation is defined as the management of
reactive power to improve the performance of ac
power systems. The concept of Var compensation
embraces a wide field of both system and customer
problems, especially related with power quality issues,
since most power quality problems can be solved with an
proper control of reactive power [1-2]. In general, the
problem of reactive power compensation is viewed from
two parts: load compensation and voltage support. In load
compensation the purposes are to increase the value of the
system power factor, to balance the real power drawn from
the ac supply, to compensate voltage regulation, and to
eliminate current harmonic components produced by large
and fluctuating nonlinear industrial loads [3-4].
The Static Var Compensator (SVC) has been designed
to compensate reactive power, increase voltage stability
Sohrab Khanmohammadi is with University of Tabriz, Faculty of
Electrical and Computer Engineering (e-mail: khan@tabrizu.ac.ir)
Mehrdad Tarafdar Hagh is with University of Tabriz, Faculty of
Electrical and Computer Engineering, (e-mail: tarafdar@tabrizu.ac.ir)
Mehdi Abapour is with University of Tabriz, Faculty of Electrical and
Computer Engineering, (e-mail: mehdi.abapour@tabrizu.ac.ir)
and to reduce voltage oscillation [l]. The SVC consists of
shunt reactors which current can be continuously
controlled by thyristor valves thus the inductive power of
reactors can be controlled. These reactors are called
Thyristor Controlled reactors (TCR).ln the parallel of the
TCRs there are number of the filter capacitor banks .The
Filter Circuits (FC) are providing needed amount of
capacitive power and absorbing harmonic current
generated by load and TCR. The difference between
inductive power of TCR and capacitive power of filter
circuits is the output power of SVC [5]. However, in recent
years, static Var compensators (SVCs) employing
thyristor-switched capacitors (TSCs) and thyristor-
controlled reactors (TCRs) to provide or absorb the
required reactive power have been developed [1]. The
application of control algorithms based on fuzzy sets
theory, proposed by Zadeh [6], has grown in recent years
[7-8]. This control method can be regarded as an adaptive
control based on a linguistic process which is in turn based
on the prior experience and heuristic rules used by human
operators. The implementation of such control consists of
translating the input variables to a language, like: positive
big, zero, negative medium, etc. and to establish control
rules so that the decision process can produce the
appropriate outputs. If necessary, these linguistic outputs
are transformed to numeric values [6].
Fuzzy logic control is one of the best and most
successful techniques among expert control strategies, and
is well known as an important tool to control non-linear,
complex, vague, and ill-defined systems. The use of fuzzy
set theory in providing effectiveness control based on the
knowledge and technical experience of operators and the
establishment of intelligent control have found favour in
industry. The SVC system model based on the intelligent
controller was given in the paper. This paper proposed a
two input one-output fuzzy logic controller (FLC) for
SVC. Also the effectiveness and feasibility of the TSK
(Takagi-Sugeno-Kang) and mamdani methods for TCR
thyristors firing control is compared.
II. SHUNT COMPENSATION
Fig. 1 shows the principles and theoretical effects of
shunt reactive power compensation in a basic ac system,
which comprises a source, a power line, and a typical
Fuzzy Logic Based SVC for Reactive Power
Compensation and Power Factor Correction
S. Khanmohammadi, M. Tarafdar Hagh, M. Abapour
V
1241
978-981-05-9423-7 c 2007 RPS
inductive load. Fig. 1(a) shows the system without
compensation and its associated phasor diagram. In the
phasor diagram, the phase angle of the current has been
related to the load side, which means that the active current
is in phase with the load voltage. Since the load is assumed
inductive, it requires reactive power for proper operation
and hence, the source must supply it, increasing the current
from the generator and through power lines. If reactive
power is supplied near the load, the line current can be
reduced or minimized, reducing power losses and
improving voltage regulation at the load terminals [1]. This
can be done in three ways: 1) with a capacitor; 2) with a
voltage source; or 3) with a current source. In Fig. 1(b), a
capacitor device is being used to compensate the reactive
component of the load current. As a result, the system
voltage regulation is improved and the reactive current
component from the source is reduced or almost
eliminated.
AC source
Load
3
Line impedance
V
1
V
2
Z I
AC source
Load
3
Line impedance
V
1
V
2
Z I
c
o
m
p
o
n
s
e
t
o
r
I
P
I
Q

I
I
P
I
Q
V
2
V
1
R
L
*I
X
L
*I

I
IP
I
Q
V
2
V
1
R
L
*I
P
X
L
*I
P
(a)
(b)
Fig. 1. Principles of shunt compensation in a radial ac system,(a) without
reactive compensation. (b) With shunt compensation
If the load needs leading compensation, then an
inductor would be required. Also, a current source or a
voltage source can be used for inductive shunt
compensation. The main advantage of using voltage- or
current-source Var generators (instead of inductors or
capacitors) is that the reactive power generated is
independent of the voltage at the point of connection.
III. TCR(THYRISTOR CONTROLLED REACTOR) BRANCH
The TCR branch makes use of the TSC
overcompensation to fine-tune the SVC VARs supplied to
the load. This fine- tuning is completed by varying the
firing delay angle of the thyristors. The firing delay angle
is the time delay from the start of each half-cycle that the
TCR is turned on. Firing angles of TCR will be in the
range of (t/2)<o<t for each half-cycle. Eq. (1) derived
from the conduction angle equation in [4], illustrates the
relationship between the firing angle and the TCR
reactance (X
TCR
).
1
)] /( )) ( 2 sin( ) ( 2 [

=
L TCR
X X t o t o t (1)
Fig. 2 shows the relationship between the firing angle
and the TCR reactance.
90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
Thyristor firing angle (degree)
T
C
R

i
m
p
e
d
a
n
c
e

(
o
h
m
)
Fig. 2 TCR impedance vs thyristor firing angle
Fig. 3 shows the relationship between the firing angle and
the SVC impedance. This figure illustrate that the SVC
impedance is so sensitive in small firing angles.
1242 The 8
th
International Power Engineering Conference (IPEC 2007)
90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180
0
500
1000
1500
Thyristor firing angle (degree)
S
V
C

i
m
p
e
d
a
n
c
e

(
o
h
m
)
Fig. 3 SVC impedance vs thyristor firing angle
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
Several simulink simulations were created to verify the
feasibility of the SVC design and the TCR fuzzy
controller. For the particular simulink model is shown in
Fig. 4. Three reactive loads are switched in different times.
Load 2 is switched on at t
1
=0.4s and switched off at
t
3
=1.2s and load 3 is switched on at t
2
=0.8s. The TSC
branch and a TCR branch were modeled with their
respective controllers. The TSC branch consists of a single
switched capacitor while the TCR branch consists of a
reactor that is fed a firing angle determined by the fuzzy
controller. The fuzzy controller accepts the phase angle
difference of the load and firing angle of thyristors as an
input and outputs the optimum firing angle of TCR.
AC
Load
1
Load
2
Load
3
Line impedance
BR1 BR2
TCR TSC
source
Fig. 4. Analyzed power circuit topology
Fig. 5 shows the displacement power factor (PF) of the
load without the branches compensating.
Fig. 6 shows the active and reactive power at load side
without compensation. As shown in this figure at t
1
=0.4s
and t
2
=0.8s.reactive power increases and power factor (PF)
decreases by inductive load increasing. Also at t
3
=1.2s one
of inductive loads retreat from power system and therefore
power factor increases and reactive load decreases.
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Time (s)
P
o
w
e
r

f
a
c
t
o
r
Fig. 5. Power factor (PF) of the load without the branches
compensating
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Time (s)
P
o
w
e
r

(
W
)
Active power
Reactive powert
Fig. 6. Active and reactive power at load side without compensation
A. Mamdani type fuzzy controller
In this section a Mamdani type double input single output
(DISO) Fuzzy Linguistic Controller has been designed
which has the following memberships and rules.
-200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
input1
D
e
g
r
e
e

o
f

m
e
m
b
e
r
s
h
ip
NVB VS M NB NM NS NVS ZERO S B VB
Fig. 7 The fuzzy membership function of reactive power at load side
(input 1 of fuzzy controller)
The 8
th
International Power Engineering Conference (IPEC 2007) 1243
TABLE. I
FUZZY CONTROLLER RULES (MAMDANI TYPE FUZZY CONTROLLER)
Reactive power
NVB NB NM NS NVS Z VS S M B VB
VS NVVB NVB NM NS NVS Z VS S M VB VVB
S NVVB NVVB NB NS NS Z S S B VVB VVB
M NVVB NVVB NVVB NM NM Z M M VB VVB VVB
B NVVB NVVB NVVB NVVB NB Z B VB VVB VVB VVB
VB NVVB NVVB NVVB NVVB NVB Z VB VVB VVB VVB VVB



o
VVB NVVB NVVB NVVB NVVB NVVB Z VVB VVB VVB VVB VVB
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
x 10
-3
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
input2
D
e
g
r
e
e

o
f

m
e
m
b
e
r
s
h
i
p
M VB VS S B VVB
Fig. 8 The fuzzy membership function of initial thyristor firing angle
(input 2 of fuzzy controller)
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
x 10
-3
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
output1
D
e
g
r
e
e

o
f

m
e
m
b
e
r
s
h
i
p
NVVB NB S NVB NVS VS NMNS ZERO M VB B VVB
Fig. 9 The fuzzy membership function of variation of thyristor firing
angle (output of fuzzy controller)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Time (s)
P
o
w
e
r

f
a
c
t
o
r
Fig. 10. Power factor (PF) of the load with the branches compensating
(Mamdani type fuzzy controller)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Time (s)
p
o
w
e
r

(
W
)
Active Power
Reactive Power
Fig. 11. Active and reactive power at load side with compensation
(Mamdani type fuzzy controller)
As shown in figures 10 and 11 with using fuzzy
controller we have suitable power factor and reactive
power compensation.
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
x 10
-3
Time (s)
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

T
C
R

f
i
r
i
n
g

a
n
g
l
e
Fig. 12. Variation of TCR firing angle (Mamdani type fuzzy controller)
B. Sugeno type fuzzy controller
In this section a sugeno type double input single output
(DISO) Fuzzy Linguistic Controller has been designed
which has same memberships at input.
This controller has following rules
1244 The 8
th
International Power Engineering Conference (IPEC 2007)
TABLE. II.
FUZZY CONTROLLER RULES (SUGENO TYPE FUZZY CONTROLLER)
Reactive power
NVB NB NM NS NVS Z VS S M B VB
VS NH NVB NB NS NVVVS Z VVVS S B VB H
S NH NH NVB NS NVVS Z VVS S VB H H
M NH NH NVVVB NM NVVS Z VVS M VVVB H H
B NH NH NH NVVB NVS Z VS VVB H H H
VB NH NH NH NH NVB Z VB H H H H



o
VVB NH NH NH NH NH Z H H H H H
0 0.5 1 1.5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
Time (s)
T
C
R

c
u
r
r
e
n
t

(
A
)
Fig. 13. TCR current at different time
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Time (s)
P
o
w
e
r

F
a
c
t
o
r
Fig. 14. Power factor (PF) of the load with the branches compensating
(Sugeno type fuzzy controller)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Time (s)
P
o
w
e
r

(
W
)
Active power
Reactive power
Fig. 15. Active and reactive power at load side with compensation (Sugeno
type fuzzy controller)
As shown in fig. 14 and 15 using sugeno type controller
results power factor correction and reactive power
compensation similar to section (a). But as shown in fig. 17
using mamdani type fuzzy controller has results better
characteristics in reactive power and power factor.
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
x 10
-4
Time (s)
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

T
C
R

f
i
r
i
n
g

a
n
g
l
e
Fig. 16. Variation of TCR firing angle (Sugeno type fuzzy controller)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Time (s)
P
o
w
e
r

f
a
c
t
o
r
With Mamdani type fuzzy controller
With Sugeno type fuzzy controller
Fig. 17. Comparison of Mamdani and Sugeno type fuzzy controller for
power factor correction
V. CONCLUSION
The fuzzy logic control strategy of SVC is researched in
the paper. The effectiveness and feasibility of the TSK
(Takagi-Sugeno-Kang) and Mamdani type fuzzy controllers
for thyristors firing control in SVC is shown and compared
clearly. Simulation results show good performance of fuzzy
controller in power factor correction and reactive power
The 8
th
International Power Engineering Conference (IPEC 2007) 1245
compensation. Also in this paper demonstrated that using
Mamdani type fuzzy controller has results better
characteristics in reactive power and power factor.
VI. REFERENC
[1] Dixon, J., Moran, L., Rodriguez, E., Domke, R.; "Reactive Power
Compensation Technologies: State-of-the-Art Review",
Proceedings of the IEEE, Volume 93, Issue 12, Dec. 2005 pp:
2144 2164.
[2] T. J. Miller, Reactive Power Control in Electric Systems. New
York: Wiley, 1982.
[3] E. Wanner, R. Mathys, and M. Hausler, Compensation systems
for industry, Brown Boveri Rev., vol. 70, pp. 330340, Sep./Oct.
1983.
[4] G. Bonnard, The problems posed by electrical power supply to
industrial installations, Proc. IEE Part B, vol. 132, pp. 335340,
Nov. 1985.
[5] Hedayati, M.; "Technical Specification and Requirements of
Static VAR Compensation (SVC) Protection Consist of TCR ,
TSC and Combined TCR/TSC" Universities Power Engineering
Conference. Vol 1, 6-8 Sept. 2004 pp : 261 - 264.
[6] Ronan Marcel0 Martins Fuzzy Logic Based Control for Electric
Power System
[7] Suiton, L. C. R. & Towill, D. R., An Introduction to the use of
Fuzzy Sets in the Implementation of Control Algorithms, JIERE,
vol. 55, N. 10, pp. 357-367, Oct. 1965.
[8] Graham, B. P., Newell, R. B., Fuzzy Adaptive Control of a First-
Order Process, Fuzzy sets and Systems, N. 31, pp. 47-65, North
Holland, 1989.
VII. BIOGRAPHIES
Sohrab Khanmohammadi was born in Khoy, Iran,
on February 15, 1953. He graduated from the Sharif
University of Technology in Iran, He has got his
D.E.A on automatic from university of Paul
Sabatier, D.S.A on advanced Automatic and System
and Engineering Doctoral From Ecol National
DAeronautique et de lEspace , Toulouse France.
He is currently the Professor of Control and System
at the Control department, Faculty of Electrical and
Computer Engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz,
Iran. His interested research fields are Fuzzy
systems, Decision making, simulations and artificial
intelligence.
Mehrdad Tarafdar Hagh received his M. Sc. with
first honor and PhD. both in power engineering from
University of Tabriz, Iran in 1992 and 2000,
respectively. He joined faculty of electrical and
computer engineering of University of Tabriz in
2000. He has published more than 70 papers in
power system and power electronics related topics.
His interest topics include power system operation,
FACTS and power quality.
Mehdi Abapour received his B.S. degree
in power engineering from University of
Tabriz in 2005. He is M.Sc student in
power electronic engineering. His interest
topics include fault current limiters,
power quality and power system
operation.
1246 The 8
th
International Power Engineering Conference (IPEC 2007)