Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007) 470483

TCSC control design for transient stability improvement of a

multi-machine power system using trajectory sensitivity
Dheeman Chatterjee, Arindam Ghosh
Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur 208 016, India
Received 14 May 2005; received in revised form 18 April 2006; accepted 24 April 2006
Available online 15 June 2006

Abstract
This paper discusses the effects of thyristor controlled series compensator (TCSC), a series FACTS controller, on the transient stability of a
power system. Trajectory sensitivity analysis (TSA) has been used to measure the transient stability condition of the system. The TCSC is modeled
by a variable capacitor, the value of which changes with the firing angle. It is shown that TSA can be used in the design of the controller. The
optimal locations of the TCSC-controller for different fault conditions can also be identified with the help of TSA. The paper depicts the advantage
of the use of TCSC with a suitable controller over fixed capacitor operation.
2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: TCSC; Trajectory sensitivity analysis; Dynamic simulation; Transient stability margin; Optimal location

1. Introduction
The demand of electrical power is ever increasing. However,
the process of development of new infrastructure for power generation and dispatch is restricted due to mainly economic and
partially environmental constraints. These result in the need for
better utilization of the existing system. Flexible AC transmission system (FACTS) controllers are potent tools to achieve this
goal. These devices help in pushing the system to their limits
and thus to attain higher operational efficiency. The use of these
controllers increases the flexibility of operation by providing
more options to the power system operators.
In the steady state, FACTS controllers like TCSC help in
controlling and increasing the power flow through a line. However, the other important aspect of these controllers is their use
during large disturbances like faults because of their capability
to improve the transient stability condition of a power system.
The effectiveness of TCSC-controllers in enhancing the transient stability limit has been studied in Ref. [1]. Evaluation of
transient stability condition of the system is essential for understanding the effects of application of FACTS devices. Structure
preserving energy margin sensitivity has been used in Ref. [2]

Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 512 2597179; fax: +91 512 2590063.
E-mail address: aghosh@iitk.ac.in (A. Ghosh).

0378-7796/$ see front matter 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.epsr.2006.04.011

to determine the effects of shunt and series FACTS controllers

on system stability. Transient energy function (TEF) method is a
standard tool used for this purpose. It is based on direct method
of Lyapunov and depends on finding a suitable energy function
and identifying the unstable equilibrium point of the post-fault
system. This is a rather difficult task especially in the case of
large power systems. The trajectory sensitivity (TS) has been
proposed in Ref. [3] as an alternative to the TEF based methods.
It helps to identify stressed systems for a set of contingencies
and is independent of unstable equilibrium point calculations
and model complexity. The use of TS in finding critical values
of parameters has been discussed in Ref. [4]. The application
of TS is extended to hybrid systems in Ref. [5]. The use of TS
to investigate the Nordel Power Grid disturbance of 1 January
1997 is discussed in Ref. [6].
Different control strategies for effective use of series connected FACTS devices are discussed in Refs. [1,7,8]. A
bangbang control of TCSC is used in Ref. [1] to improve stability of power systems. In Ref. [7], a power flow control loop and
a stability control loop have been used in unison to provide the
required control action for a TCSC. A control strategy based on
energy function method is derived in Ref. [8] which is shown to
be effective for both small signal and large signal disturbances.
In this paper, a dynamic simulation of the power system has
been carried out. Dynamics of the network have been considered
along with the dynamics of the generators and exciters. Trajec-

D. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh / Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007) 470483

471

that in this work the TCSC is operated only in the capacitive

mode. The capacitive reactance XFC of the TCSC is chosen as
half of the reactance of the line in which the TCSC is placed and
the TCR reactance XP is chosen to be 1/3 of XFC .
2.2. Dynamic model of multi-machine power systems
Fig. 1. TCSC circuit and its equivalent.

Dynamics of the generators as well as transmission lines are

considered while modeling the multi-machine power system.

tory sensitivity with respect to fault clearing time has been used
to assess transient stability margin of power systems. At first, a
controller has been designed for effective use of TCSC under various fault conditions. TS has been used for finding suitable values
of the controller parameters. The effects of placement of TCSCcontrollers at various locations of a power system on the transient
stability are studied. A comparison of the effects of TCSCcontroller with those of fixed capacitors is also carried out.
The TCSC is represented by a fundamental frequency lumped
reactance model that varies with the change in the firing angle.
The system under consideration is the three-machine, ninebus WSCC system [9]. System loads are taken as constant
impedance.
2. Modeling of the TCSC and the power system

2.2.1. Generator dynamics

The generators are represented by the flux-decay model as
shown in Fig. 2(a). Also a simplified static exciter model with
one gain and one time constant is considered (Fig. 2(b)). In
Fig. 2(a):



xd i
Ei i =
Vi sin(i i ) + jEq i ej(i /2)
1
(2)
xqi
The generator and exciter dynamics are described by following equations [11]:
di
= ri s ,
dt

i = 1, . . . , m

(3)

KDi
2Hi dri
(ri s ),
= Pmi Pei
s dt
s

2.1. Modeling of TCSC

dEq i

xd
=  i Eq i +
dt
xdi

The TCSC model is given in Fig. 1. The overall reactance XC

of the TCSC is given in terms of the firing angle as [10]:


Tdo
i

XC = 1 (XFC + 2 ) 4 5 XFC

i = 1, . . . , m

(1)

i = 1, . . . , m

(4)


xdi
1 Vi cos(i i ) + Efdi ,
xd i
(5)

where
2( ) + sin 2( )
XFC XP
,
, 2 =

XFC XP

XFC
, 4 = 3 tan [3 ( )] tan( ),
3 =
XP
1 =

5 =

422 cos2 ( )
XP

TAi

dEfdi
= Efdi + (Vrefi Vi )KAi ,
dt

sin(i i )
+ 0.5
Pei = Eq i Vi
xd i
i = 1, . . . , m

Let us denote the fundamental frequency capacitance of the

TCSC, which is equal to 1/(s XC ), as Ctcsc . It is to be noted

i = 1, . . . , m

1
1

xqi
xdi

(6)


Vi2 sin 2(i i ),
(7)

where is the angular position of the rotor, r the rotor speed, s

the synchronous speed, m the number of machines, H the inertia
constant, KD the damping coefficient, Pm the mechanical power

Fig. 2. (a) Flux-decay model of generator and (b) static exciter model.

472

D. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh / Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007) 470483

input, Pe the electrical power output, xd and xq the d-axis and

q-axis synchronous reactance, xd the d-axis transient reactance,
 the d-axis open circuit time constant, K and T the gain
Tdo
A
A
and time constant of the exciter, V the terminal voltage of the
machine in per unit and is its angle.
Now if we replace rotor speed (ri ) with per unit speed deviation (denoted by ri ) in Eqs. (3) and (4) using the relations:
ri =

ri s
s

and

2Hi

i = 1, . . . , m

d ri
= Pmi Pei KDi ri ,
dt

i = 1, . . . , m

di1
dt

vc1 vs vc2 = Ri + L

eTabc = [ ea

eb

ec ],

iTabc = [ ia

ib

ic ]

vTabc = [ va

vc ],

vb

and

d
i1abc
dt

(16)

(8)

vc1 abc vsabc vc2 abc = Riabc + L

(9)

vc2 abc e2abc = L2

(10)
di
dt

For three-phase systems, using the notations:

e1abc vc1 abc = L1

2.2.2. Network dynamics

First let us consider a single line containing the TCSC (as
shown in Fig. 3). R and L are the resistance and inductance
of the line, respectively. The variable capacitor Ctcsc represents
the TCSC (as described in the previous subsection). The voltage
across this capacitor is denoted by vs . Nominal- representation
of transmission lines is considered and hence line-charging susceptance is included. The capacitor Cch at each end of the line
represents half of the line-charging. L1 and L2 are the inductances corresponding to the d-axis transient reactance of the
generators; e1 and e2 are the instantaneous values of generator
internal emfs (Ei i in phasor form as per Eq. (2)). It can be
seen that there are three loop currents i1 , i and i2 in this case.
Denoting the voltages across the two line-charging capacitors by
vc1 and vc2 , the following relations can be written from Fig. 3:
e1 vc1 = L1

(15)

Eqs. (10)(15) can be rewritten as

d ri
1 dri
=
dt
s dt

Then, we get modified Eqs. (8) and (9) as

di
= s ri ,
dt

d
1
(i i2 )
vc =
dt 2
Cch

(12)

d
1
vc1 =
(i1 i)
dt
Cch

(13)

d
1
vs =
i
dt
Ctcsc

(14)

d
i2abc
dt

(18)
(19)

d
1
iabc
vsabc =
dt
Ctcsc

(20)

1
d
(iabc i2abc )
vc abc =
dt 2
Cch

(21)

We can transform any three-phase variable in abc frame to

a pseudo-stationary dq0 frame [9,12]. Using this abc to dq0
transformation in Eqs. (16)(21), we get

 
 
 
 
e1d
v c1 d
0
L1
i1d
d i1d

=
+ L1
dt i1q
e1q
v c1 q
L1
0
i1q
(22)


vc1 d

v c1 q

=


v c2 d

e2d
e2q

L
R


vsd
vsq

R
L

v c2 q



v c2 d
v c2 q

id
iq


=

d
+L
dt

id


(23)

iq

L2

L2



i2d
i2q

d
+ L2
dt

i2d

i2q
(24)

d
dt

Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of a single line (nominal- representation) containing

TCSC.

(17)

1
d
vc1 abc =
(i1abc iabc )
dt
Cch

(11)

di2
vc2 e2 = L2
dt

d
iabc
dt

v c1 d
v c1 q


0 
i1d id

1 i1q iq
Cch



0
vc1 d
+
v c1 q
0

1
Cch
=

(25)

D. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh / Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007) 470483

d
dt

d
dt

vsd

vsq

v c2 d
v c2 q

Ctcsc
=

1
Cch
=

0

+

0   
i
0
d +
1 i



vsd
vsq



3.1. Trajectory sensitivity: computation and quantication

(26)

0 
i
d
1 i
Cch

3. Application of trajectory sensitivity analysis in

transient stability margin assessment

Ctcsc

v c2 d
v c2 q

i2d

Suppose a multi-machine power system is represented by a

set of differential equations given as
x = f (t, x, ),

i2q

(27)

In a multi-machine power system there are several such lines

with various interconnections giving rise to a number of such
loop currents. Let us denote those currents by say i1 , i2 , . . ., ip .
Also there are line-charging capacitors denoted by say C1 , C2 ,
. . ., Cr . Let the voltages across these capacitors be denoted by
vc1 , vc2 , . . . , vcr . Taking these currents (i1 , i2 , . . ., ip ) and voltages (vc1 , vc2 , . . . , vcr ) as the state variables and proceeding as
above, we can get the equations for the complete multi-machine
system network. Loads are considered as constant impedance
type. The constant values of resistances and inductances representing the loads are also included in the line dynamics equations.
Integration of Eqs. (5), (6), (8) and (9) gives values of Eqi ,
Efdi , i and ri . These are used to find generator internal emf
(Ei i ) as per Eq. (2). In the next step, ei , the instantaneous value
of this voltage Ei i , is used to solve network Eqs. (22)(27).
Then, the generator terminal voltages and angle (Vi i ) are
obtained from these solved variables. Also the electrical power
outputs of the generators, Pei are calculated using Eq. (7). These
are then used in the solution of Eqs. (5), (6), (8) and (9) in the
next time step. A block diagram representation of this procedure
is given in Fig. 4.
A symmetrical fault is simulated in one of the lines at a time.
The location of the fault is chosen to be one end of the line,
which is almost equivalent to a fault at the bus. The fault may
be of self-clearing type or it may have to be cleared by isolating
the corresponding line from its two ends. System response is
studied under both types of faults.

Fig. 4. Block diagram representation of the power system model.

473

x(t0 ) = x0

(28)

where x is the state vector and is a vector of system parameters. The sensitivities of state trajectories with respect to system
parameters can be found by perturbing from its nominal value
0 . The equations for trajectory sensitivity can be found as [3]:


f
f
x =
(29)
x +
,
x (t0 ) = 0
x

where x = x/. Solution of (28) and (29) gives the state trajectory and trajectory sensitivity, respectively [3]:
However, the sensitivities can also be found in a simpler way
by using numerical method. To describe this, let us choose only
one parameter, i.e., becomes a scalar and the sensitivities with
respect to it are studied. Two values of are chosen (say 1 and
2 ). The corresponding state vectors x1 and x2 , respectively are
then computed. Now the sensitivity at 1 is defined as
sens =

x2 x1
x
=
2 1

(30)

If is small, the numerical sensitivity is expected to be very

close to the analytically calculated trajectory sensitivity value.
In the case of a power system, sensitivity of state variables,
e.g., the generator rotor angle () and per unit speed deviation
( r ) can be computed as in (30) with respect to some parameter
. Now one of the generators, say the jth one, is taken as the
reference. Then, the relative rotor angle of the ith machine (i.e.
the excursion of the rotor angle of the ith machine with respect to
the rotor angle of the reference machine) is given by ij = i j .
The sensitivity of ij with respect to is computed as
i
j
ij
=

(31)

The sensitivity of relative rotor angle is considered here

instead of the sensitivity of of an individual machine because
the relative rotor angle is the relevant factor when angular stability is concerned.
Trajectory sensitivities (ij / and ri /) give us information about the effect of change of parameter on individual
state variables and hence on the generators (to which the particular state variable correspond) of the system. However, to
know the overall system condition, we need to sum up all these
information. The norm of the sensitivities of ij and ri are calculated for this. The sensitivity norm for an m machine system
is given as

 m 
2 
2 


ij
r
i
(32)
+
SN = 

i=1

474

D. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh / Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007) 470483

Table 1A
Variation of normalized with TCSC location: self-clearing fault
Fault near bus

5
6
8

TCSC in line
45

57

46

69

78

89

0.6827
1.0743
1.0464

1.1081
1.2423
1.0346

1.0411
0.6850
1.0331

1.1363
1.0727
1.0795

0.9953
0.9493
1.0626

1.0065
0.9603
0.9462

Table 1B
Variation of normalized with TCSC location: fault cleared by line isolation

Fig. 5. Single line diagram of the WSCC nine-bus system.

Next a new term (ETA) is introduced [4]. is defined as

the inverse of the maximum of SN , i.e., = 1/max(SN ). As the
system moves towards instability, the oscillation in TS will be
more resulting in larger values of SN . This will result in smaller
values of . Ideally should be zero at the point of instability.
Therefore, the value of gives us an indication of the distance
from instability. In this paper TS with respect to fault clearing
time (tcl ) and the corresponding has been used for assessing
the relative stability conditions of the system.
3.2. Assessment of transient stability margin using
trajectory sensitivity
The system studied in this paper is the WSCC 3 machine ninebus system shown in Fig. 5. A three-phase fault is simulated in
one of the lines of the nine-bus system. The simulation is done
in three steps. To start with, the pre-fault system is run for a
small time. Then, a symmetrical fault is applied at one end of a
line. Simulation of the faulted condition continues till the fault is
cleared after a time tcl . Then, the post-fault system is simulated
for a longer time (say 5 s) to observe the nature of the transients.
The fault may be of self-clearing type (i.e. isolation of line is
not required for fault clearance) or may be cleared by isolating
the faulted line. The trajectory sensitivity and are computed
for fault in different lines.
Let us consider the value of for the case without TCSC as
the base and denote it by 0 . Next, a TCSC is placed in open

Fault near
bus

Line
isolated

TCSC in line

45
57

1.0754 1.0139 1.1567 1.0095 1.0220

0.7609
1.0974 1.2399 1.0487 1.0421

46
69

1.0955 1.2559
1.0203 0.9660 0.9764
1.0892 1.3018 0.7152
0.9777 0.9993

78
89

0.9708 0.9474 1.0825 1.1550

0.9716
0.9859 0.9668 1.0714 1.1534 0.9689

45

57

46

69

78

89

loop (i.e. without any controller) in one of the lines at a time and
the corresponding values of are computed for different fault
locations. These values are then normalized with respect to 0 .
Therefore, if the value of normalized in a particular operating
condition is greater than 1.0, it indicates that the absolute value
of is more than 0 . Table 1A shows the values of normalized
for different combinations of TCSC and fault locations when
the faults are of self-clearing type. Table 1B shows the same for
faults cleared by line isolation. The faults are considered to be
located near one of the load buses (bus 5, 6 or 8) in all the cases.
The value of tcl is taken as 0.15 s and the firing angle () of the
TCSC as 160 . As described in the previous section, gives the
transient stability margin of the system. Therefore, a normalized
> 1.0 means that the transient stability margin is higher than
that for the system without TCSC. Further, those locations of
TCSC are preferable (from transient stability improvement point
of view) for which the value of are higher. It can be seen from
Tables 1A and 1B that the preferable location of TCSC is line
69 in the cases of fault near bus 5 or bus 8 whereas it is line
57 for fault near bus 6.
The results are verified by PSCAD/EMTDC simulation. A
fault of duration 0.15 s is simulated in line 69. The responses
of relative machine angle delta31 (3 1 ) are shown in Fig. 6
for two cases: (a) the TCSC placed in line 46 and (b) the TCSC

Fig. 6. Response of delta31 for fault in line 69 with TCSC in: (a) line 64 and (b) line 57.

D. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh / Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007) 470483

475

placed in line 57. The firing angle of TCSC is 160 in both the
cases. It is clear that the maximum peak of the response is much
lower in case of TCSC in line 57, which indicates a higher
transient stability margin. This is in accordance with the higher
value of normalized for the TCSC in line 57 than in line 46
in the corresponding cases in Table 1B.
4. The control scheme and use of TSA in the choice of
control parameters
4.1. The control scheme
In the next step, a controller is employed along with the
TCSC. The block diagram of the control scheme used is shown
in Fig. 7. The active power flow (P) through the line containing
TCSC is taken as the control variable. It is compared with the
reference value of active power flow (Pref ) and the error is fed
to a PI controller. The output of the PI is the firing angle of the
TCSC, . This is passed through a limiter to keep it within
the capacitive operation zone of the TCSC (between 145 and
180 ). The output of the limiter is supplied to the firing circuit of
TCSC. The capacitance value of the TCSC (Ctcsc ) is computed
as described in Section 2.1. This capacitance is then included in
the line dynamics.
This scheme is sufficient if the fault is only of self-clearing
type, because there is no change in system configuration and
hence the steady state power flow should remain the same before
and after the fault. But when the fault is cleared by isolating
the faulty line, the system configuration changes resulting in a
change of the steady state power flow through the lines. Therefore, a corresponding change in Pref is needed. An additional
control action is taken to achieve this, which is shown in Fig. 8.
The current flowing through the line (containing TCSC) in dq
frame, id and iq , are used for this purpose. First, the current values in the pre-fault steady state, denoted by id0 and iq0 , are stored
to calculate
i0 =


i2d0 + i2q0

(33)

Fig. 7. Block diagram of control scheme.

Fig. 9. (a) Variation of normalized with controller constants; fault in bus 5,

TCSC in line 69; (b) variation of normalized with KI for different KP ; fault
in bus 5, TCSC in line 69; (c) variation of normalized with KI for different
KP ; fault in bus 8, TCSC in line 57.
Fig. 8. Block diagram of control scheme for power reference.

476

D. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh / Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007) 470483

Then, at every time step, the current values of id and iq are

measured to obtain

i = i2d + i2q
(34)
The change in i (denoted by i) is calculated as
i = i i0

(35)

This i is fed through a proportional controller to produce the

Pref , the change in the power reference. Pref is then added
with the pre-fault steady state value of power reference (Pref0 )
to get the new power reference (Pref ).
4.2. Choice of controller constants using trajectory
sensitivity analysis
The effect of the TCSC on the transient stability of the system depends largely on the proper functioning of the controller.
Therefore, choice of suitable values of controller constants KP
and KI is very important. TSA is used here for making that
choice.
As shown in Tables 1A and 1B and discussed in Section
3.2, TCSC causes improvement of system stability condition
the most when it is placed in line 69 or line 57. So, henceforth we shall study the effect of TCSC (along with controller)
in these two locations. First, let us consider the case of selfclearing fault near one of the three load buses (bus 5, 6 or 8)
at a time, with tcl = 0.15 s. Trajectory sensitivity and are computed for different combinations of KP and KI . These values
are then normalized with respect to the corresponding value of
0 . A three-dimensional plot of variation of normalized with
the controller constant is shown in Fig. 9(a). For the same fault
and TCSC locations, the variation of normalized with KI for
three different values of KP (KP = 0.1, 0.5 and 0.8) are shown
in Fig. 9(b). It can be observed form the two figures that higher
values of can be obtained with the controller constant combinations (KP = 0.5 or 0.8 and KI < 1.0) or (KP = 0.1 or 0.5 and

KI > 6.0). Fig. 9(c) is for a fault near bus 8 with TCSC in line 57.
In this case, higher values can be obtained for combinations
(KP = 0.5 and 1.5 < KI < 2.0) or (KP = 0.8 and KI = 3.0). Hence,
the TCSC will be most effective in transient stability improvement of the system when the controller constants are in these
ranges.
Next, we consider the cases in which the faults are cleared
by line isolation. As before, values for different KP and KI are
found. The variation of normalized with KI for different values
of KP are shown in Fig. 10 for a fault near bus 5 (line 45 isolated
to clear the fault) with the TCSC in line 69. It can be seen that
the suitable combinations of constants in this case are (KP = 0.1,
KI > 3.0), (KP = 0.5, KI < 1.0 or KI > 3.0) and (KP = 0.8, KI < 1.0
or KI > 6.0). Table 2 shows the most suitable combination of KP
and KI values found by this study for different fault locations
with TCSC in line 57 or 69.
4.3. Effect of fault clearing time on the relation of with
controller constants
Up to this point, we have observed the effect of TCSCcontroller constants on the value of (and hence on the transient
stability condition of the system) for a particular value of fault
clearing time (tcl ). However, tcl may also be different in different situations. Therefore, the same study, i.e., variation of
with controller constants, is carried out at different tcl values.
Fig. 11(a) and (b) shows the plots of variation of with KI (at
a particular KP ) for different values of tcl . Fig. 11(a) is for a
fault near bus 6 (line 46 isolated) with TCSC in line 57 and
KP = 0.8. The three plots correspond to tcl = 0.15, 0.20 and 0.25 s.
Fig. 11(b) is for a self-clearing fault near bus 8 with TCSC in line
69 and KP = 0.8. Here, the three plots correspond to tcl = 0.10,
0.15 and 0.20 s.
It is quite clear from the figures that the nature of variation
of normalized remains the same for different fault durations
(tcl ). Higher values of are obtained for the same ranges of controller constants even when the fault duration varies. Therefore,
controller constants chosen on the basis of variation of at a
particular tcl will be helpful in effective operation of the TCSC
in improving stability margin even when the tcl is different.
4.4. Comparison with the effects of TCSC in open loop

Fig. 10. Variation of normalized with KI for different KP ; fault in line 45 and
TCSC in 69.

Another issue of interest is the comparison between the

effects of TCSC-controller and the TCSC used in open loop,
i.e., without a controller. In open loop, the TCSC acts as a fixed
capacitor throughout the period of disturbance. Let us term this
as the fixed capacitor mode of operation. The effects of this
fixed capacitor and the effects of a TCSC-controller combination (with suitably chosen controller constants) on the transient
stability condition are investigated and compared here. The values of for these two cases with different types and locations
of fault are given in Table 3.
It can be observed from the table that for all the fault locations, the value of is higher in case of compensation by
TCSC-controller combination than in the fixed capacitor mode
of operation, the difference being quite high in some of the cases.

D. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh / Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007) 470483

477

Table 2
Suitable controller constants and corresponding normalized for different fault and TCSC locations
TCSC in line

57

69

Self-clearing fault

Fault cleared by line isolation

Fault bus

(KP , KI )

Faulted line

(KP , KI )

0.8, 9.00

1.6357

45

0.8, 9.00

1.4641

0.8, 0.12

1.7357

46
69

0.8, 9.00
0.8, 9.00

1.8279
1.9094

0.5, 1.80

1.0906

78
89

0.8, 1.80
0.5, 1.20

0.9758
1.0014

0.1, 6.00

1.2944

45
57

0.1, 6.00
0.1, 6.00

1.2972
1.4221

0.8, 9.00

1.3001

46

0.8, 9.00

1.2487

0.8, 1.80

1.1583

78
89

0.8, 1.80
0.8, 0.60

1.2560
1.2636

Fig. 11. Variation of normalized with controller constants at different fault clearing time: (a) fault near bus 6, line 46 isolated, TCSC in line 57 and (b) self-clearing
fault near bus 8, TCSC in line 69.

Therefore, it can be concluded that the improvement in the transient stability condition of the system is much more with the
TCSC-controller combination. This can also be verified from
Fig. 9(b) and (c) and Fig. 10, where for fixed capacitor (with-

out controller) mode of operation is also plotted along with the

values with controller. In Fig. 10, the values for all the combinations of KP and KI are higher than the fixed capacitor , whereas
in Fig. 9(b) and (c), the values with controller are higher than

Table 3
Comparison of for system compensated by fixed capacitor and TCSC-controller
Type of fault

Fault location

TCSC in line
57

69

Fixed capacitor

With controller

Fixed capacitor

With controller

Selfclearing

Bus 5
Bus 6
Bus 8

1.1081
1.2423
1.0346

1.6357
1.7357
1.0906

1.1363
1.0727
1.0795

1.2944
1.3001
1.1583

Fault
with
line
isolation

Line 45
Line 57
Line 46
Line 69
Line 78
Line 89

1.0139

1.2559
1.3018
0.9474
0.9668

1.4641

1.8279
1.9094
0.9758
1.0014

1.1567
1.2399
1.0203

1.1550
1.1534

1.2972
1.4221
1.2487

1.2560
1.2636

478

D. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh / Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007) 470483

fixed capacitor for most of the KP and KI combinations. These

results highlight the effectiveness of the application of a TCSC
along with a controller in improving the transient stability of a
power system.
5. Optimization of controller constants and its effect on
transient stability
5.1. Optimization of controller constants using trajectory
sensitivity analysis
A method to choose the TCSC-controller constants for transient stability improvement has been described in the previous
section. The constants are chosen for either self-clearing fault
or for fault cleared by line isolation. However, the type of the
fault is generally not known beforehand. Therefore, the controller needs to be designed such that it can serve both the cases.
This choice can be made by a compromise of the results for the
two types of faults.
Fig. 12 shows a combined plot of the normalized for the
two cases for different values of KP .
The solid lines in the figure are for self-clearing fault near
bus 5 and the dash-dotted lines are for a fault near bus 5 with
subsequent removal of line 45. The fault duration in both the
cases is the same, 0.15 s. It can be observed from the figure that
the common zone of higher values of (between the plots for the
two types of faults) are for controller constant values (KP = 0.1
or 0.5 or 0.8, KI > 6.0) and (KP = 0.5 or 0.8, KI < 1.0).
However, with the increase in the number of combinations
of KP and KI and hence in the number of plots, it becomes
very difficult to figure out the most suitable constants from the
combined plots only. Therefore, a new term called optimization
index (OI) is invoked. Suppose, for a particular combination of
KP and KI , scf and f are the values in case of self-clearing
fault and fault cleared by line isolation, respectively. Then, OI
is defined as the arithmetic mean of scf and f :
OI =

scf + f
2

Fig. 12. Variation of normalized with controller constants for different types
of faults.

OI is computed for different combinations of KP and KI and

used to make the choice of constants. Earlier, that combination
of KP and KI was being considered as most suitable for which the
value of was found to be maximum. Now, for this optimization
case, that combination of KP and KI is considered suitable for
which OI is maximum. Plot of variation of OI with KI for a
particular KP is shown in Fig. 13(a) along with the corresponding
plots of normalized for both types of faults. The fault is near
bus 5 and line 45 is isolated to clear the fault. The TCSC is in
line 69 and KP is chosen as 0.1. Fig. 13(b) shows the plots of
variation of OI with KI for three different values of KP . Fault
and TCSC locations are the same as before. From these figures,
one can clearly identify the optimized set of constants (for both
types of fault) to be KP = 0.1 and KI = 6.00. The same method
is carried out for other fault and TCSC locations also and the
optimized controller constants found are shown in Table 4 along
with the corresponding normalized values.
In Section 4.2, the best possible controller constants to serve
each type of fault were found separately (Table 2). Let us now

Fig. 13. (a) Variation of normalized and OI with KI and (b) variation of OI with controller constants.

D. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh / Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007) 470483

479

Table 4
Optimized controller constants and corresponding for different fault and TCSC locations
TCSC in line

57

69

Self-clearing fault

Fault cleared by line isolation

Fault bus

(KP , KI )

Faulted line

(KP , KI )

0.8, 9.00

1.6357

45

0.8, 9.00

1.4641

0.8, 9.00

1.7225

46
69

0.8, 9.00
0.8, 9.00

1.8279
1.9094

0.5, 1.80

1.0906

78
89

0.5, 1.80
0.5, 1.80

0.9559
0.9908

0.1, 6.00

1.2944

45
57

0.1, 6.00
0.1, 6.00

1.2972
1.4221

0.8, 9.00

1.3001

46

0.8, 9.00

1.2487

0.8, 1.80

1.1583

78
89

0.8, 1.80
0.8, 1.80

1.2560
1.2452

compare those with the optimized constants (and corresponding

values) given in Table 4. In some cases, the best possible
constants for both type of fault are same. As for example:
(i) Fault in bus 5, line 45 isolated; TCSC in 57. For both type
of fault, KP = 0.8, KI = 9.00.
(ii) Fault in bus 8, line 78 isolated; TCSC in 69. For both type
of fault, KP = 0.8, KI = 1.80.
Naturally the optimized constants in these cases are also the
same as the individual best possible constants. However, the
situation is different in some of the cases (shown in bold face in
Table 4). A few of these cases are discussed below.
(i) Fault in bus 6, line 46 isolated; TCSC in 57. The best possible constants for self-clearing fault are KP = 0.8, KI = 0.12
whereas for fault with line isolation the constants are
KP = 0.8, KI = 9.00. The optimized constants in this case are
KP = 0.8, KI = 9.00, i.e., in the case of self-clearing fault, the
optimized constants (corresponding = 1.7225) are different from the best possible constant values (corresponding
= 1.7357).
(ii) Fault in bus 8, line 89 isolated; TCSC in 69. The best possible constants for self-clearing fault are KP = 0.8, KI = 1.80
whereas for fault with line isolation the constants are
KP = 0.8, KI = 0.60. The optimized constants in this case
are KP = 0.8, KI = 1.80. Here, the optimized constants (corresponding = 1.2452) are different from the best possible
constant values (corresponding = 1.2636) in case of fault
with line clearance.
It is clear from the results that in some cases the use of optimized constants results in slightly lower value of and hence
a comparatively less improvement of stability in one fault type.
However, the difference (1.7225 in place of 1.7357 or 1.2452 in
place of 1.2636) is too small to be significant and in exchange
the TCSC-controller is being designed to counter both types of
faults which is more suitable for practical application.

5.2. Effect of TCSC-controller with properly chosen

constants on transient stability
Let us now investigate the effect of a TCSC-controller with
suitably chosen constants on the transient stability condition
of the power system. It can be observed from Table 4 that the
normalized values are greater than 1.0 in most of the cases,
which indicates an improvement of transient stability margin
on application of a TCSC with properly chosen constants. This
can be verified from Fig. 14(a), which shows the variation of
relative rotor angle delta2-1 for a self-clearing fault near bus
5 (tcl = 0.15 s). Plots are shown for: (i) system without TCSC
and (ii) system with TCSC-controller in line 69. The controller
constants are the optimized values as given in Table 4. Reduced
oscillation in case of system with TCSC means a more stable
system. Similarly, Fig. 14(b) shows the variation of delta2-1 for
a fault near bus 6 (tcl = 0.15 s) cleared by isolating line 46. Plots
are shown for: (i) system without TCSC, (ii) system with TCSCcontroller in line 57 and (iii) system with TCSC-controller in
line 69. It is clear from the figure that, in comparison to the
system without TCSC, the oscillation is damped for both the
TCSC placements. However, the damping is much more in case
of TCSC placed in line 57 than in case of TCSC in line 69
which indicates that placement of TCSC in line 57 is more
beneficial than in line 69 for this fault location. This is consistent with the higher value of normalized for TCSC in line 57
(1.8279) than that for TCSC in line 69 (1.2487) as shown in
Table 4.
For further investigation, the fault duration is increased up
to the critical clearing time (tcr ) for the system without TCSC.
For a self-clearing fault in bus 5, this value of tcr is found to
be 0.41 s. So the system gets unstable for a fault clearing time
more than this tcr . However, if the TCSC is placed in suitable
location with properly chosen values of controller constants,
the system continues to remain stable even for a higher fault
clearing time. This is shown in Fig. 15. The fault duration is
taken as 0.42 s (>tcr ) and the relative rotor angle delta2-1 s for
the two cases, system without TCSC and system with TCSC-

480

D. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh / Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007) 470483

Fig. 14. (a) Variation of relative rotor angle delta2-1 for a self-clearing fault near bus 5 and (b) variation of relative rotor angle delta2-1 for a fault in line 46.

controller at line 69 (with optimized constant values), are plotted. The relative rotor angle are found to diverge and become
unbounded in case of system without TCSC whereas it remains
bounded and stable when a TCSC is placed in line 69. The
plots clearly show the effectiveness of the TCSC with suitably
designed controller to improve transient stability condition of the
system.
5.3. Comparison with a self-tuning controller
A PI controller is applied here for effective use of a TCSC
in a multi-machine power system to improve transient stability
margin. Trajectory sensitivity has been used for the tuning of the
PI controller. To assess the performance of this method, a selftuning controller is employed in place of the PI controller in the
same system under the same operating conditions and the results
are compared. A pole-shift controller is used for this purpose.
The detailed equations of the pole-shift self-tuning controller
are given in Appendix A.

Fig. 15. Relative rotor angle delta2-1 for a fault in bus 5, fault-clearing time
0.42 s.

A comparison of the results for the two controllers is shown in

Figs. 16 and 17. A self-clearing fault of duration 0.4 s is considered in bus 6 with the TCSC being placed in line 57. Response
of relative rotor angle delta2-1 is shown in Fig. 16(a) and (b)
with the two controllers. The parameters of the PI controller are
chosen from Table 2. The choice of the parameters of the poleshift controller is discussed in Appendix A. It can be seen that
the variations of delta2-1 with the two controllers match quite
closely.
In the next case, a fault of duration 0.35 s in bus-8 is considered with the TCSC placed in line 57. The fault is cleared by
isolating line 78. When there is no TCSC, the system becomes
unstable. However, if a TCSC is placed, the system maintains
stability for both the types of controllers. The response of delta21 for the system without TCSC and the system with TCSC
controlled by the two controllers is shown in Fig. 17(a) and (b).
It is clear from the figure that the response of delta2-1 matches
quite closely for the two controllers.

Fig. 16. Relative rotor angle delta2-1 for a self-clearing fault in bus 6, TCSC in
line 57 with: (a) pole-shift controller and (b) PI controller.

D. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh / Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007) 470483

481

If TCSC is used without any controller, the firing angle

remains constant throughout and hence the capacitance value
offered by it becomes fixed. The effect of TCSC in this fixed
capacitor mode on the system stability is also studied and compared with the effects of TCSC-controllers. It is found that in
most of the cases, a controller, with suitably chosen parameters,
makes the TCSC more effective in improving system stability.
The effectiveness of the TCSC-controller (in terms of
improvement of transient stability) is found to vary with its
placement location in the system. The placement of the TCSC
is found to be beneficial for system stability in majority of the
cases. A system without TCSC becomes unstable when the fault
duration exceeds the critical clearing time. However, TCSC in
suitable location with chosen parameters may help the system
to remain stable even under those conditions.
Acknowledgement
Fig. 17. Comparison of improvements in delta2-1 by the application of TCSC
controlled by: (a) pole-shift controller and (b) PI controller; fault applied in line
78, TCSC in line 57.

From the results shown in Figs. 16 and 17 we can conclude

that the performance of the PI controller tuned using TSA is
very much comparable with the pole-shift self-tuning controller.
Moreover, the design of the self-tuning controller is much trickier than the PI controller. Also the self-tuning controller can have
a severe problem like estimation parameter divergence resulting
in unstable closed-loop system. Such problems however do not
occur with a simple controller like the PI.
6. Discussions and conclusions
This paper presents a study of the effects of a TCSC-controller
on the variation of transient stability condition of a power system. The dynamics of the power system, including both the
network and the generators, have been simulated. Trajectory
sensitivity analysis is used to assess the stability condition of
the system. The inverse of the maximum value of the norm of
the sensitivities () of state variables like generator rotor angle
and rotor speed deviation is used as a measure of transient stability margin.
The effectiveness of the TCSC is found to be dependent on
the choice of the controller parameters. Trajectory sensitivity
has been shown to be a useful tool for making that choice. A
fault in a power system can be either of self-clearing type or
it is cleared by line isolation. The suitable controller parameters for these two types of faults may be different. A technique
has been discussed to choose optimized controller parameters
so that the TCSC can be effective for both types of faults. To
verify the performance of this TSA based PI controller tuning method, a self-tuning pole-shift controller has also been
simulated and the results of control action of the two controllers are compared. It is found that the results are very
much comparable. However, with the use of PI, the complexities associated with the pole-shift self-tuning controller can be
avoided.

The authors are thankful to Prof. M.A. Pai of University of

Illinois at Urbana-Champaign for his valuable suggestions and
constructive criticism on the paper.
Appendix A
The pole-shift self-tuning controller [13] is discussed in this
appendix. Suppose the system is governed by the difference
equation:
A(z1 )y(k) = B(z1 )u(k) + e(k)

(36)

where y(k) is the sampled value of the system output, u(k) is the
control input, e(k) is a zero-mean, uncorrelated random noise
input. The polynomials A and B are given in backward shift
operator notation z1 as
A(z1 ) = 1 + a1 z1 + + an zn ,
B(z1 ) = b1 z1 + + bm zm

(37)

where n m. Combining (36) and (37) we get

y(k) = a1 y(k 1) an y(k n) + b1 u(k 1)
+ + bm u(k m) + e(k)

(38)

Let us define the following two vectors:

= [ a1

an

b1

bm ] ,

(k) = [ y(k 1) y(k n) u(k 1) u(k m) ]

Eq. (38) then can be written in a compact form as

y(k) = T (k) + e(k) = T (k) + e(k)

(39)

It is to be noted that the vector contains the system parameters,

while the vector contains the past input and output and is called
the regression vector.
It is assumed that the parameters of the system are unknown
and can also vary with time. We can then estimate the parameter vector on-line using the system input and output. This is
called system identification. In this we have used what is called

482

D. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh / Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007) 470483

Fig. 18. Identified system parameters when a fault is applied in line 78 with TCSC in line 57.

the recursive least squares (RLS) method, where the parameters are computed recursively at each sampling instant using the
following equations [13]:
T

(k) = y(k) (k 1)(k),

1) + K(k)(k),
(k)
= (k
K(k) =

P(k 1)(k)
,
+ T (k)P(k 1)(k)

P(k) = [I K(k)T (k)]P(k 1)

(40)

In the above equation, is a scalar less than 1 used for discounting old data.
Once the parameters are estimated, they are then used in the
pole-shift control in which the control law is given by
u(k) =

S(z1 )
{yref (k) y(k)}
R(z1 )

(44)

where 0 < < 1 is called the pole-shift factor that determines the
penalty on control.
In the simulation studies performed in Section 5.3, the system
order is chosen with n = m = 3. The parameters and are chosen
as 0.8 and 0.985, respectively for the self-clearing fault, the result
of which is shown in Fig. 16(a). These parameters are chosen as
0.8 and 0.999 for fault and subsequent line removal, the result of
which is shown in Fig. 17(a). Some of the identified parameters
for this case are shown in Fig. 18. In this the fault is applied at 4 s
and is removed by line isolation at 4.35 s. Most of the parameters
can be observed to vary in three distinct steps associated with
pre-fault, during-fault and post-fault conditions.
References

S(z1 ) = s0 + s1 z1 + + sn1 z(n1) ,

(42)

The controller parameters, i.e., polynomials S and R, are then

obtained by the solution of the following equation:
1 )R(z1 ) + B(z
1 )S(z1 ) = T (z1 )
A(z

) = 1 + a 1 z1 + + n a n zn
T (z1 ) = A(z

(41)

where yref is the reference value and the polynomials S and R

are given by
R(z1 ) = 1 + r1 z1 + + rm1 z(m1)

to more stable locations as [13]:

(43)

and B
are the estimates of the polynomials A and B and
where A
are obtained from (40).
In (43), the polynomial T is the closed-loop system characteristic equation. We can define it by shifting the open-loop poles

[1] K.R. Padiyar, K. Uma Rao, Discrete control of TCSC for stability improvement in power systems, in: Proceedings of the Fourth IEEE Conference on
Control Applications, September 2829, 1995.
[2] K.N. Shubhanga, A.M. Kulkarni, Application of structure preserving
energy margin sensitivity to determine the effectiveness of shunt and series
FACTS devices, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 17 (3) (2002) 730738.
[3] M.J. Laufenberg, M.A. Pai, A new approach to dynamic security assessment using trajectory sensitivities, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 13 (3) (1998)
953958.
[4] M.A. Pai, T.B. Nguyen, Trajectory sensitivity theory in nonlinear dynamical systems: some power system application, in: N. Michel, D. Liu, P.J.
Antsaklis (Eds.), Stability and Control of Dynamical Systems with Applications: A Tribute to Anthony, Birkhauser, Boston, 2003.
[5] I.A. Hiskens, M.A. Pai, Trajectory sensitivity analysis of hybrid systems,
IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Part 1: Fundam. Theory Appl. 47 (2) (2000)
204220.

D. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh / Electric Power Systems Research 77 (2007) 470483

[6] I.A. Hiskens, M. Akke, Analysis of the Nordel Power Grid disturbance of
January 1, 1997 using trajectory sensitivities, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 14
(3) (1999) 987994.
[7] A.D. Del Rosso, C.A. Canizares, V.M. Dona, A study of TCSC controller
design for power system stability improvement, IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
18 (4) (2003).
[8] M. Noroozian, L. Angquist, M. Gandhari, G. Anderson, Improving power
system dynamics by series-connected FACTS devices, IEEE Trans. Power
Deliv. 12 (4) (1997).
[9] P.W. Sauer, M.A. Pai, Power System Dynamics and Stability, Prentice Hall,
Upper Saddle River, 1998.

483

[10] N. Christl, R. Hedin, P.E. Krause, S.M. McKenna, Advanced series compensation (ASC) with thyristor controlled impedance, in: Proceedings of
the CIGRE General Session, Paris, 1992.
[11] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, McGraw-Hill, New York,
1994.
[12] K.R. Padiyar, Power System Dynamics, Stability and Control, BS Publications, Hyderabad, 2002.
[13] A. Ghosh, G. Ledwich, O.P. Malik, G.S. Hope, Power system stabilizers
based on adaptive control techniques, IEEE Trans. Power Appl. Syst. PAS103 (1984) 19831989.