Optimal Multi-type FACTS Allocation using
Genetic Algorithm to Improve Power System
Security
H. R. Baghaee, M. Jannati, B. Vahidi, Senior Member IEEE, S.H.Hosseinian and S. Jazebi
Abstract—as power transfer increases, operation of power system
become gradually more complex. Short circuit level increases and so
power system will become less secure. Moreover, the problem of
power system security has become a mater of grave concern in the
deregulated power industry. FACTS devices can control power flow
because of their flexibility and fast control characteristics. Placement
of these devices in suitable location can lead to control in line flow
and maintain bus voltages in desired level and so improve power
system security.
This paper presents a novel algorithm for allocation of FACTS
devices based on Genetic Algorithm (GA). Cost function of FACTS
devices and power system losses are considered in this algorithm.
Proposed algorithm is tested on IEEE 30 bus power system for
optimal allocation of multi-type FACTS devices and results are
presented
Keywords—Power System Security, FACTS Devices, Optimal
Allocation, Genetic Algorithm.
I. INTRODUCTION
W ith increasing power demand, operation of power
system becomes more complex and power system will
become less secure. Moreover with the electricity
market deregulation, number of unplanned power exchanges
increases due to the competition among utilities and direct
contracts concluded between generation companies and
costumers. If these exchanges are not controlled, some lines
may become overloaded. Because many of the existing
transmission lines could not cope with increasing power
demand, control of power flow in order to have more
efficient, reliable, and secure system is in the interest of the
transmission system operator (TSO). To overcome this
problem, introduction of FACTS devices is an alternative.
FACTS devices can control power flow parameters such as
series impedance, voltage, phase angle, and so can reduce
flow of heavily loaded lines and supports voltages. In
addition, FACTS devices can improve both transient and
small signal stability margins. They can enable lines to flow
the power near its nominal rating and maintain its voltage in
Authors are with the Electrical Engineering Department in Amirkabir
University of Technology, Hafez Ave, Tehran-Iran (phone: 0098-21-
66466009; fax: 0098-21-66406469; e-mails: hrbaghaee@aut.ac.ir and
saeed_3j@aut.ac.ir, vahidi@aut.ac.ir, hosseinian@aut.ac.ir,
mohsen.jannati@aut.ac.ir ).
978-1-4244-1933-3/08/$25.00 ©2008 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY JAMSHEDPUR. Downloaded on March 09,2010 at 11:13:47 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
desired level and so enhance power system security in
contingencies by their fast control characteristics and their
continuous compensating capability [1-6].
Effect of FACTS devices on power system security, reliability
and loadability has been studied according to proper control
objectives [4-14]. Some of papers have been focused on
finding suitable location for FACTS devices to improve
power system security and loadability [13-16]. Optimal
allocation of these devices in deregulated power systems has
been presented in [17-18]. Some of papers have used heuristic
approaches and intelligent algorithms to find suitable location
of FACTS devices [15-18]. Genetic Algorithm (DEA) has
been previously used for many optimization problems like
optimal power flow, economic dispatch and controller
optimization, congestion management and etc in power
systems [19-21].
This paper presents a novel heuristic method based on GA to
find optimal location of multi-type FACTS devices to
enhance power system security considering investment cost
these devices and power system losses. Proposed method is
tested on IEEE 30 bus system and results are presented.
II. FACTS DEVICES MODEL
A. FACTS Devices
In this paper, three different FACTS devices have been
selected to place in suitable location to improve security
margins in power system. These are: TCSC (Thyristor
Controlled Series Capacitor), SVC (Static VAR Compensator)
and UPFC (Unified Power Flow Controller). These are shown
in Fig. 1.
Power flow through the transmission line i-j namely Pij is
depended on line reactance X ij , bus voltage magnitudes Vi , V j ,
and phase angle between sending and receiving buses δ i − δ j .
This is expressed by Eq. 1.
ViV j
Pij = sin(δ i − δ j ) (1)
X ij
TCSC can change line reactance and SVC can be used to
control reactive power in network. UPFC is the most versatile
member of FACTS devices family and can be applied in order
162
 to control all power flow parameters (i.e. line impedance, bus
voltage, and phase angle). Power flow can be controlled and
optimized by changing power system parameters using
FACTS devices. So optimal choice and allocation of FACTS
devices can result in suitable utilization in power system.
B. Mathematical Model of FACTS Devices
In this paper steady state model of FACTS devices are
developed for power flow studies. So TCSC is modeled
simply to just modify the reactance of transmission line. SVC
and UPFC are modeled using the power injection models [22-
∆Qi = QSVC (4)
• UPFC
Two types of UPFC models have been reported [28-31]. One
is coupled model [28] and other is decoupled model [29-31].
In the first type, UPFC is modeled with series combination of
a voltage source and impedance in the transmission line. In
decoupled model, UPFC is modeled with two separated buses.
First model is more complex compared with the second one
because modification of Jacobian matrix in coupled model is
inevitable. While decoupled model can be easily implemented
in conventional power flow algorithms without modification
of Jacobian matrix elements, in this paper, decoupled model
has been used for modeling UPFC in power flow study (Fig.
2)

UPFC controls power flow of the transmission line where is

installed. To obtain UPFC model in load flow study, it is
represented by four variables: Pu1 , Qu1 , Pu 2 , Qu 2 . Assuming
UPFC to be lossless, real power flow from bus i to bus j
can be expressed as:
Pij = Pu1 (5)
Although UPFC can control the power flow, but can not
generate the real power. So:
Pu1 + Pu 2 = 0 (6)
Each reactive power output of UPFC Qu1 , Qu 2 can be set to an
arbitrary value depend on rating of UPFC to maintain bus
voltage.

Fig. 1 Considered FACTS Devices (a) TCSC (b) SVC (c) UPFC III. SECURITY INDEX
The security index for contingency analysis of power system
is expressed as follows [32-33]:
24]. Models integrated into transmission line for TCSC and 2
JV = ∑ wi Vi − Vref ,i (7)
UPFC and SVC is modeled and incorporated into the bus as i
shunt element of transmission line. Mathematical models for Sj
FACTS devices are implemented by MATLAB programming J P = ∑ wj ( )2 (8)
language. j S j , amx

• TCSC Where:
TCSC acts as the capacitive or inductive compensator by Vi , wi are Voltage amplitude and associated weighting factor
modifying reactance of transmission line. This changes line for ith bus respectively,
flow due to change in series reactance. In this paper TCSC is
S j , w j are Apparent power and associated weighting factor for
modeled by changing transmission line reactance as below:
X ij = X line + X TCSC (2) jth line respectively,
X TCSC = rTCSC . X line (3)
Where X line is reactance of transmission line and rTCSC is
compensation factor of TCSC. Rating of TCSC is depended
on transmission line where it is located. To prevent
overcompensation, TCSC reactance is chosen between
−0.7 X line to 0.2 X line [26-27].

• SVC
SVC can be used for both inductive and capacitive
compensation. In this paper SVC is modeled as an ideal
reactive power injection at bus i :
Fig. 2 Decoupled model for UPFC

163

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY JAMSHEDPUR. Downloaded on March 09,2010 at 11:13:47 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Vref ,i is Nominal voltage magnitude which is assumed to be
1pu for all load buses (i.e. PQ buses) and to be equal to
specified value for generation buses (i.e. PV buses) ans
S j ,max is Apparent power nominal rate of jth line or ransformer

IV. PROPOSED GENETIC ALGORITHM

Genetic Algorithm (GA) is one of the most famous meta-
heuristic optimization algorithms witch is based on natural
evolution and population. Genetics which is usually used to
reach to a near global optimum solution. In each iteration of
GA (referred as generation), a new set of string (.i.e.
chromosomes) with improved fitness is produced using
genetic operators (i.e. selection, crossover and mutation).
A. Chromosome’s structure
Chromosome structure of GA is shown in Fig. 3. this involves
rating and location of FACTS devices.
B. Selection
In proposed GA, method of tournament selection is used for
selection [34-35]. This method chooses each parent by
choosing nt (tournament size) players randomly and choosing
the best individual out of that set to be a parent. In this paper
nt is chosen 4.
C. Cross Over
Cross over allows the genes from different parents to be
combined in children by exchanging materials between two
parents. Cross over function randomly selects a gene at the
same coordinate from one of two parents and assign it to the
child. For each chromosome, a random number is selected. If
this number is between 0.01 and 0.3, two parents are
combined; else chromosome is transferred with no cross over.
D. Mutation
GA creates mutation children by randomly changing the genes
of individual parents. In this paper, GA adds a random vector
from a Gaussian distribution to the parents. For each
chromosome, random number is selected. If this number is
between 0.01 and 0.1, mutation process is applied; else
chromosome is transferred with no mutation.
Fig.4 Cost Function of the FACTS devices:
SVC, TCSC and UPFC
: Upper limit: Total investment Costs
: Lower limit: Total investment Costs
: :UPFC :TCSC
TCSC:
CTCSC = 0.0015s 2 − 0.713s + 153.75 (US $ / KVAR ) (9)
SVC:
CSVC = 0.0003s 2 − 0.3051s + 127.38 (US $ / KVAR ) (10)
UPFC:
CUPFC = 0.0003s 2 − 0.2691s + 188.22 (US $ / KVAR ) (11)
Where s is the operating range of the FACTS devices in
MVAR and CTCSC , CSVC and CUPFC are in US $ / KVAR . These
cost functions are shown in Fig. 4.
F. Fitness Function
The goal of optimization algorithm is to place FACTS devices
in order to enhance power system security level considering
cost function of FACTS devices. So these devices should be
place to prevent congestion in transmission lines and
transformers and maintain bus voltages close to their
reference value .
Security index introduced in part III, were used in objective
function considering cost function of FACTS devices and
power system losses. Fitness function is expressed as below:
Fitness = a1.J P + a2 .JV + a3 .(Total Invesment Cost ) + a4 .(Losses) (12)
The coefficient a1 to a4 are optimized by trial and error
to 0.2665 , 0.5714 , 0.1421 and 0.02 respectively.

V. SIMULATION RESULTS

Fig.3 a typical chromosome

E. FACTS devices Cost Function

Using Siemens AG Database [17], cost function for SVC,
TCSC and UPFC are developed as follows:

164

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY JAMSHEDPUR. Downloaded on March 09,2010 at 11:13:47 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TABLE .1: SIMULATION RESULTS OF DIFFERENT CASES
Losses
Scenario JP JV Cost ($)
(MVA)
1 3.45 24.2 - 28.36
2 3.39 19.6 9197500 22.51
3 3.33 19.1 4521600 26.3
4 3.21 16.4 8501600 23.09
5 3.09 10.5 27897000 20.49

Fig 5: Performance index evolution (best and average fitnesses in every iteration)

TABLE .2: FACTS LOCATION AND SIZES RESULTS

Device Type UPFC TCSC SVC
Size Location Size Location Size Location
Size/Location
(MVA) (Bus No-Bus No) (MVA) (Bus No-Bus No) (MVA) (Bus No.)
TCSC - - 90.6 1-2 - -
SVC - - - - 39 1
UPFC 48.3 12-15 - - - -
Multi-type 75.9 12-15 73.1 2-5 66.7 1

Simulation studies were done for different scenarios in IEEE
30 bus power system. Five different scenarios are considered:
• Scenario1: power system normal operation (without
FACTS devices installation).
• Scenario 2: one TCSC is installed
• Scenario 3: one SVC is installed
• Scenario 4: one UPFC is installed
• Scenario 5: Multi-type (TCSC, SVC and UPFC)
FACTS devices are installed.
The first scenario is normal operation of network without
installing any device. In second, third and forth scenario just
installation of one device is considered. Each device is placed
an optimal location obtained by DEA introduced in part IV.
Multi-type FACTS devices installation is considered in 5th
scenario. In this case three different kinds of FACTS devices
(shunt, series and combinational compensation device) are
used to place in optimal location to enhance power system
security.
Performance index evolution of implemented methods is
shown in Fig.5. Results are presented in Table.1.
This results show the installation of one device in network
could not lead to improve security of power system and
reduction in power system losses simultaneously. So multi-
type FACTS devices should be placed in optimal location to
both improve security margins and reduce losses in the
network. Table.2 shows optimal location of devices in
scenarios.
VI. CONCLUSION
In this paper a novel approach for optimal placement of
Multi-type FACTS devices based on Genetic algorithm (GA)
was presented. Simulation of IEEE 30 bus test system for
different scenarios shows that the placement of Multi-type
FACTS devices leads to improvement in security and
reduction in losses of power system.
REFERENCES
[1] N.G.Hingurani, L.Gyugyi, “Understanding FACTS: Concepts and
Technology of Flexible AC transmission Systems”, IEEE Press, New York,
2000.
[2] M.Noroozian, L.Angquist, M.Ghandhari, G.Anderson, "Improving Power
System Dynamics by Series-connected FACTS Devices", IEEE Trans. on
Power Delivery, Vol. 12, No.4, October 1997.
[3] M.Noroozian, L.Angquist, M.Ghandhari, Ghderson, "Use of UPFC for
Optimal Power Flow Control", IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, Vo1.12, No.4,
October 1997.
[4] Roy Billinton, Mahmud Fotuhi-Firuzabad, Sherif Omar Faried, Saleh
Aboreshaid, "Impact of Unified Power Flow Controllers om Power System
Reliability", IEEE Trum. on Paver Systems Vo1.15, No.1, February 2000.
[5] James A. Momoh, Jizhong 2. Zhu, Garfled D. Boswell, Stephen Hoffman,
"Power System Security Enhancement by OPF with Phase Shifter", IEEE
Truns. on Power Systems, Vol. 16, No.2, May 2001.
[6] Sung-Hwan Song; Jung-Uk Lim; Seung-Il Moon, “FACTS Operation
Scheme for Enhancement of Power System Security “, Power Tech
Conference Proceedings,2003 IEEE Bologna Volume 3, 23-26 June 2003
Vol.3, pp. 36 - 41
[7] Sun-Ho Kim; Jung-Uk Lim; Seung-Il Moon, “Enhancement of power
system security level through the power flow control of UPFC”, IEEE Power
Engineering Society Summer Meeting, 2000. Volume 1, 16-20 July 2000, pp.
38 - 43 vol. 1
[8] Kazemi, A.; Shayanfar, H.A.; Rabiee, A.; Aghaie, J, “Power system
security improvement using the unified power flow controller (UPFC) “,
Power India Conference, 2006 IEEE 10-12 April 2006, pp. 1-5 .
[9] Singh, J.G.; Singh, S.N.; Srivastava, S.C, “Placement of FACTS
Controllers for Enhancing Power System Loadability”, Power India
Conference, 2006 IEEE 10-12 April 2006, pp. 1-7
[10] Jurado, F. and Rodriguez, J.A. “Optimal location of SVC based on system
loadability and contingency analysis”. Proceeding$ sfEmerging Technologies
and Facloy Aulomotion. Vol. 2, 1999. pp. 1193-1199.

165

Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY JAMSHEDPUR. Downloaded on March 09,2010 at 11:13:47 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 [11] Sing, S.N and David A.K. “A New Aproach for Placement of FACTS
Devices in Open Power Markets”, IEEE Power Engineering Review, Vol. 21,
No.9, September 2001, pp. 58-60
[12] F.D.Galiana, K.Almeida, M.Toussaint, J.Griffin and D.Atanackovic
“Assessment and Control of the Impact of FACTS Devices on Power System
Performance”, IEEE Trans. Power Systems, Vol. 11, No. 4, Nov 1996
[13] Thukaram, D.; Jenkins, L.; Visakha, K, “Improvement of system security
with unified-power-flow controller at suitable locations under network
contingencies of interconnected systems”, Generation, Transmission and
Distribution, IEE Proceedings- Volume 152, Issue 5, 9 Sept. 2005, pp.682 -
690
[14] K.S. Verma, S.N.Singh, and H.O. Gupta, “Location of Unified Power
Flow Controller for Congestion Management”, Electric Power System
Research, 2001, Vol. 58, pp 89-96,
[15] S.Gerbex, R. Chekaoui, A.J.Germond, “Optimal Location of Multi-type
FACTS Devices in a Power System be Means of Genetic Algorithm”,IEEE
Trans, Power Systems, Vol. 16, , Agoust. 200 , pp. 537-544.
[16] Gerbex, S.; Cherkaoui, R.; Germond, A.J, “Optimal location of FACTS
devices to enhance power system security”, Power Tech Conference
Proceedings, 2003 IEEE Bologna Vol. 3, 23-26 June 2003 pp. 1-7.
[17] L.J.Cai and Erlich, “Optimal choice and allocation of FACTS devices in
deregulated electricity market using genetic algorithms”, Power Systems
Conference and Exposition, 2004. IEEE PES 10-13 Oct. 2004 pp. 201 - 207
vol.1
[18] J. Baskaran, V. Palanisamy,“ Genetic Algorithm applied to Optimal
Location of FACTS Device in a Power System Network considering economic
saving cost”, Academic Open Internet Journal , 2005,Vol 15,pp. 1-3
[19]J.M. Ramirez and G.A. Marin, "Alleviating congestion of an actual power
system by genetic algorithms", Power Engineering Society General Afeeting,
2004. IEEE, 6-10 June 2004, Vol. 2, pp. 2133-2141.
[20] H.C.Leung and T.S.chung Optimal power flow with a versatile FACTS
controller by Genetic algorithm approach.proceeding of the 5th international
conference on advances in power system control,operation and
management,APSCOM 2000 october,pp.178-183.
[21] T.K.MOK, Haoming Liu, Yixin Ni, Felix F. Wu, Ron Hui, "Tuning the
fuzzy damping controller for UPFC through genetic algorithm with
comparison to the gradient descent training" Int. J Electrical power and energy
systems, Vol 27, 2005 pp. 275-283.
[22] Gerbex,R.cherkaoui, and A.J.Germond, “Optimal location of multi-type
FACTS devices in a power system by means of genetic algorithm.”IEEE
Trans. power system, vol.16, pp.537-544, August 2001.
[23] J. Cai and I. Erlich, “Optimal choice and allocation of FACTS devices
using genetic algorithms”IEEE Trans, Power system pp, 1-6.
[24] K. S. Verma, S. N. Singh and H. O. Gupda, “Location of unified power
flow controller for congestion management”, Electric power system research
Vol 58, 2001, pp. 89-96,.
[25] H.C.Leung and T.S.chung Optimal power flow with a versatile FACTS
controller by Genetic algorithm approach.proceeding of the 5th international
conference on advances in power system control,operation and
management,APSCOM 2000 ,pp.178-183.
[26] T.T.Lie and W. Deng,”Optimal flexible AC transmission systems
(FACTS) devices allocations”, Electrical power and energy system, 1997, Vol
19, pp. 125-134,.
[27] J.Baskaran, V.Palanisamy,”Optimal Location of FACTS Device in a
Power System Network Considering Power Loss using Genetic Algorithm”
EE-Pub on line journal, march 7,2005.www.eepub.com.
[28] M. Noroozian, L. Angquist, M. Ghandhari, G. Andersson, "Use of UPFC
for Optimal Power Flow Control", IEEE Trans. on power delivery, Vol. 12,
No. 4, October 1997, pp. 1629-1634.
[29] S. H. Kim, J. U. Lim, S. II. Moon, "Enhancement of Power System
Security Level Through the Power Control of UPFC", IEEE con, 2000, pp. 38-
43.
[30] T. H. Kim, J. Ch. Seo, J. U. Lim, S. Moon, J. K. Park, B. M. Han, "A
Decoupled Unified Power Flow Controller Model for Power Flow Considering
Limit Resolution", IEEE 1998, pp. 1190-1195.
[31] J. U. Lim, S. I. Moon, "An Operation Scheme of UPFC's Considering
Operation Objective and States", IEEE 2002, pp. 610-615.
[32] Atif S. Debs, Modem Power Systems Control and Operation,
KluwerAcademic Publishers, ppl19-122, 1988.
[33] Allen J. Wood, Bruce F. Wollenberg, Power Generation, Operation, and
Control, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp430-432,1996
166
Authorized licensed use limited to: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY JAMSHEDPUR. Downloaded on March 09,2010 at 11:13:47 EST from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[34] B. L. Miller and D. E. Goldberg, “Genetic Algorithms, Tournament
Selection, and the Effects of Noise,” Complex Systems, pp. 193-212, June
1995
[35] MATLAB Genetic Algorithm and Direct Search Toolbox User’s Guide,
The Math Works, 1998.
VII. BIOGRAPHYIES
Hamid Reza Baghaee received the BSc degree in
Electrical Engineering from Kashan University in
2006. Currently he is graduate student of Power
Engineering in Amirkabir University of
Technology. His research interests are power
system dynamic and control, HVDC & FACTS
devices, Distributed Generation (DG), power
market and application of Artificial Intelligence in
power systems.
Saeed Jazebi was born in 1983. He received the B.S
degree in electrical engineering from Shahid Bahonar
University, Kerman, Iran. He is working toward his
the M.S degree in electrical engineering at Amirkabir
University, Tehran, Iran. His field of interest includes
distribution system planning, optimization techniques
and high voltage.
Behrooz Vahidi (M’ 2000, SM’ 2004) was born in
Abadan, Iran in 1953. He received the B.S. in electrical
engineering from Sharif University of Technology,
Tehran, Iran in 1980 and M.S. degree in electrical
engineering from Amirkabir University of Technology,
Tehran, Iran in 1989. He also received his Ph.D. in
electrical engineering from UMIST, Manchester, UK in
1997. From 1980 to 1986 he worked in the field of high
voltage in industry as chief engineer. From 1989 to
present he has been with the department of electrical
engineering of Amirkabir University of Technology where he is now an
associate professor. His main fields of research are high voltage, electrical
insulation, power system transient, lightning protection and pulse power
technology. He has authored and co-authored over 120 papers and five books
on high voltage engineering and power system.
Seyyed Hossein Hosseinian was born in 1961 in Iran.
He received both the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees from the
Electrical Eng. Dept. of Amirkabir University of
technology, Iran, in 1985, and 1988, respectively, and
PhD degree in Electrical Engineering Dept, university of
Newcastle England, 1995. At the present, he is the
assistant Professor of Electrical engineering Department
in Amirkabir University of technology (AUT). His
especial fields of interest include transient in power systems, Power Quality,
Restructuring and Deregulation in power systems. He is the author of four
books in the field of power systems. He is also the author and the coauthor of
over eighty technical papers.
Mohsen Jannati was born in Shahreza, Iran in 1982.
He received B.S. in electrical engineering from Isfahan
University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran in 2006.
Currently, he is a graduate student of power
engineering the department of electrical engineering of
a Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
His main fields of research are power system transient,
Digital protection of power system and power system
modeling.