Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Proceedings
of ICRMET-2016
FUZZY LOGIC CONTROL OF STATCOM FOR VOLTAGE
REGULATION
[1]
V.SWATHI,[2]K.JANARDHAN
[1]
IAETSD 2016
ISBN:978-1535061506
ICRMET-2016
Based on the above equations,Proceedings
the traditionalof
control
strategy
can be obtained, and the STATCOM control block diagram
is shown in Fig. 2 [10], [11], [25].
As shown in Fig. 2, the phase-locked loop (PLL)
provides the basic synchronizing signal which is the reference
angle to the measurement system. Measured bus line voltage
Vm is compared with the reference voltage Vref , and the
voltage regulator provides the required reactive reference
current Iqref . The droop factor Kd is defined as the allowable
voltage error at the rated reactive current flow through the
STATCOM. The STATCOM reactive current Iq is compared
with Iqref, and the output of the current regulator is the angle
phase shift of the inverter voltage with regard to the system
voltage. The limiter is the limit imposed on the value of
control while considering the maximum reactive power
capability of the STATCOM.
Ls
Ls
ibs
ics
(2)
(3)
2()
(4)
where ids and iqs are the d and q currents corresponding to ias,
ibs and ics, K is a factor that relates the dc voltage to the peak
phase-to-neutral voltage on the ac side; Vdc is the dc-side
voltage; is the phase angle at which the STATCOM output
voltage leads the bus voltage ; is the synchronously rotating
angle speed of the voltage vector; and Vdl and Vql represent
the d and q axis voltage corresponding to , Val, Vbl and Vcl .
Since Vql=0, based on the instantaneous active and reactive
power definition, (6) and (7) can be obtained.
3
Pl = vdl ids
(6)
2
ql = vdl iqs
2
www.iaetsd.in
(7)
IAETSD 2016
ISBN:978-1535061506
It should be noted that the current Imax and Imin and the
angle max and min are the limits imposed with the
consideration of the maximum reactive power generation
capability of the STATCOM controlled in this manner. If
one of the maximum or minimum limits is reached, the
maximum capability of the STATCOM to inject reactive
power has been reached. Certainly, as long as the
STATCOM sizing has been appropriately studied during
planning stages for inserting the STATCOM into the
power system, the STATCOM should not reach its limit
unexpectedly.
V(t)Kp-v(t) + Ki-v(t)
Proceedings
ofs) ICRMET-2016
()
= Iqref (t+T
(11)
y(t) = Ki-v(t)
()
y(t-Ts) = Ki-v(t) ( ) ;
+
V(t)Kp-v(t) + Ki-v(t)
) =
y(t-Ts) = Iqref(t)
() - Ki-v(t) (
Iqref(t+Ts) Iqref(t)
(13)
Over a very short time duration, we can consider Ki-v(t)=Kiv(t-Ts). Hence, (13) can be rewritten as
+
V(t)Kp-v(t) + Ki-v(t)
()
2
[()] =
0
3
0
1
[2
2
3
2
3
2
1
2
1
2 ]
()
[()]
()
(15)
(8)
) = 0 , we then have
Setting Ki-v(
Kp-v(t0) = R
Then, we have
Vm(t) = 2 () + 2()
) = 0, we then have
Setting Kp-v(
(9)
Ki-v(t0) =
()
+5
(18)
V(t)dt
(10)
(19)
(17)
V(to)
= Kv *
+5
()))+()
()
IAETSD 2016
ISBN:978-1535061506
Proceedings
ofthe
ICRMET-2016
Vss then there is no reason to
change any of
identified
parameters ,Kp-v(t), Kp-i(t), Ki-I(t) andKi-V(t) . The power
system is running smoothly. On the other hand, if , Vm(t)Vss
then adaptive PI control begins.
The measured voltage is compared withV ref(t) , the
reference voltage defined in (10). Then, Kp-v(t)and Ki-V(t)
are adjusted in the voltage regulator block (outer loop) based
on (23) and(24), which leads to an updated Iqrefvia a current
limiter as shown in Fig. 3.
Then, the Iqref is compared with the measured qcurrent . The control gains Kp-i(t) and Ki-I(t) are adjusted
based on (25) and (26). Then, the phase angle is determined
and passed through a limiter for output, which essentially
decides the reactive power output from the STATCOM.
(20)
Kv =
V(to)
+5
()))+()
()
(21)
+
V(t)Kp-v(t) + mvKp-v(t)
Kp-v(t) =
= Kv * V(t)
Kv V(t)
+
V(t)+ mv
(22)
(23)
Ki-v(t) = mv * Kp-v(t)
(24)
()
+
()+
Ki-I(t) = mI * Kp-I(t)
(25)
(26)
IAETSD 2016
ISBN:978-1535061506
voltage. When the fault clears, the voltage gets back to around
1.0 p.u.
In all simulation studies, the STATCOM
immediately operates after the disturbance with the
expectation of bringing the voltage back to 1.0 p.u. The
proposed control and the original PI control are studied and
compared.
B. Response of the Original Model
In the original model, Kp-v= 12,Ki-v= 3000, KpI=5,Ki-I= 40. Here, we keep all of the parameters unchanged.
The initial voltage source, shown in Fig. 6, is 1 p.u., with the
voltage base being 500 kV. In this case, if we set 1, then we
have the initial mv calculated as mv = 770.87. Since, in this
caseV(t0)=Vmax, and Kv= 84.7425, based on (23)(26), we
have
ofTable
ICRMET-2016
respectively. Observations areProceedings
summarized in
I. From
the results, it is obvious that the adaptive PI control can
achieve quicker response than the original one. The necessary
reactive power amount is the same while the adaptive PI
approach runs faster, as the voltage does. Set , where t=+
is the output angle of the current regulator, and is the
reference angle to the measurement system.
TABLE I
PERFORMANCE COMPARISON FOR THE ORIGINAL
SYSTEM PARAMETERS
10
IAETSD 2016
ISBN:978-1535061506
D. Change of Load
In this case, the original PI controller gains are
kept, which Kp-v= 12,Ki-v= 3000, Kp-I=5,Ki-I= 40.
Proceedings
ICRMET-2016
switched off at 0.2 s to represent
a differentof
network
which
may correspond to scheduled transmission maintenance.
Here, we have
11
IAETSD 2016
ISBN:978-1535061506
Proceedings
of ICRMET-2016
TABLE
III
PERFORMANCE COMPARISON WITH CHANGED
TRANSMISSION
12
G. Severe Disturbance
In this case, a severe disturbance at 0.2 s causes a
voltage decrease from 1.0 to 0.6 p.u. and it occurs at
substation A. After that, the disturbance is cleared at 0.25 s.
IAETSD 2016
ISBN:978-1535061506
The results are shown in Figs. 17 and 18. Due to the limit of
STATCOM capacity, the voltage cannot get back to 1 p.u.
after the severe voltage drop to 0.6 p.u. After the disturbance
is cleared at 0.25 s, the voltage goes back to around 1.0 p.u.
As shown in Fig. 17(a) and the two insets, the adaptive PI
control can bring the voltage back to 1.0 p.u. much quicker
and smoother than the original one. More important, the Q
curve in the adaptive control (Qmax =40MVar) is much less
than the Q in the original control (Qmax =118 MVar).
of ICRMET-2016
In the literature, Proceedings
various STATCOM
control
methods have been discussed including many applications of
PI controllers. However, these previous works obtain the PI
gains via a trial and error approach or extensive studies with
a tradeoff of performance and applicability. Hence, control
parameters for the optimal performance at a given operating
point may not always be effective at a different operating
point. To address the challenge, this paper proposes a new
control model based on adaptive PI control, which can selfadjust the control gains dynamically during disturbances so
that the performance always matches a desired response,
regardless of the change of operating condition. Since the
adjustment is autonomous, this gives the plug-and-play
capability for STATCOM operation.
In the simulation study, the proposed adaptive PI
control for STATCOM is compared with the conventional
STATCOM control with pre-tuned fixed PI gains to verify
the advantages of the proposed method. The results show that
the adaptive PI control gives consistently excellent
performance under various operating conditions, such as
different initial control gains, different load levels, change of
the transmission network, consecutive disturbances, and a
severe disturbance. In contrast, the conventional STATCOM
control with fixed PI gains has acceptable performance in the
original system, but may not perform as efficient as the
proposed control method when there is a change of system
conditions.
Future work may lie in the investigation of multiple
STATCOMs since the interaction among different
STATCOMs may affect each other. Also, the extension to
other power system control problems can be explored.
REFERENCES
www.iaetsd.in
V. CONCLUSION
13
IAETSD 2016
ISBN:978-1535061506
static synchronous compensator, IET Gen. Transm. Distrib.,
vol. 5, no. 9, pp. 930940, 2011.
[10] A. H. Norouzi and A. M. Sharaf, Two control schemes
to enhance the dynamic performance of the STATCOM and
SSSC, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 435442,
Jan. 2005.
[11] M. S. E. Moursi and A. M. Sharaf, Novel controllers for
the 48-pulse VSC STATCOM and SSSC for voltage
regulation and reactive power compensation, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 19851997, Nov. 2005.
[12] Matlab & Simulink, GTO-based STATCOM Dec.
2013.[Online].Available:http://www.mathworks.com/help/p
hysmod/sps/powersys/ug/gto-based-statcom.html, Feb. 2012
[13] H. Li, F. Li, J. D. Kueck, and D. T. Rizy, Adaptive
voltage controlwith distributed energy resources: Algorithm,
theoretical analysis, simulation and field test verification,
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 16381647, Aug.
2010.
[14] H. Li, F. Li, Y. Xu, D. T. Rizy, and S. Adhikari,
Autonomous and adaptive voltage control using multiple
distributed energy resources, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol.
28, no. 2, pp. 718730, May 2013.
[15] P. Rao, M. L. Crow, and Z. Yang, STATCOM control
for power system voltage control applications, IEEE Trans.
Power Del., vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 13111317, Oct. 2000.
www.iaetsd.in
Proceedings of ICRMET-2016
14
IAETSD 2016