Dynamic Methodology for Control of Multiple-

UPFC to Relieve Overloads and Voltage

Violations

Belkacem Mahdad
*
, Tarek Bouktir

and Kamel Srairi
*

*
University of Biskra / Laboratory of Energy Systems Modeling (LESM), Biskra (07000), Algeria
Oum El Bouaghi / Department of Electrical Engineering, Oum El Bouaghi, 04000, Algeria



AbstractUnder emergency situations the system security is
the most important concern. The main preoccupation of
dispatcher in such critical situation is to assure service
continuity and to keep the index power quality (Voltage and
Frequency) in the secure limits. Relieving overloads and
voltage violations caused by system contingencies, has great
economic advantage compared to other control strategies,
such as generation rescheduling, and load shedding. The
coordination of control performances of multi type FACTS
devices is very important issue, for the future power system
planning and operation. In this paper, an approach based in
flexible strategy is presented to find the optimal parameters
setting of multi unified power flow controller (UPFC)
devices to relieve overloads and voltage violation based in
practical experience rules from fuzzy logic concept. The
approach proposed is implemented with Matlab and tested
to IEEE-30 Bus system and to the England test system 39
buses.


Key words Optimal power flow, Fuzzy logic, ANFIS,
FACTS, UPFC, Contingencies, Economic Dispatch.

I. INTRODUCTION
In an open electricity market, every consumer will be
able to buy his own electricity from any source desired
with the result that the unplanned power exchanges are
increasing. To increase the system loadability, exploring
and exploiting the available network without considering
the investment of new electrical equipments including
generators, transmission line and transformers, a new
flexible and dynamic technology was introduced in the
electricity market named Flexible AC Transmission
Systems (FACTS). So, what are the technical and
economical advantages to introduce FACTS devices in
Transmission interconnections?
The purpose of the transmission network is to pool
power plants and load centers in order to minimize the
total power generation capacity and fuel cost [1]-[2]. The
cost of transmission lines and losses, as well as
difficulties encountered in building new transmission
lines, would often limit the available transmission
capacity, on the other hand, as power transfers grow, the
power system become increasingly more complex to
operate and the system can become less secure


for riding through the major outages [3]. It may lead to
large power flows with inadequate control, excessive
reactive power in various parts of the system, large
dynamic swings between different parts of the system and
bottlenecks, and thus the full potential of transmission
interconnections cannot be utilized.
The FACTS technology is essential to alleviate some
but not all of these difficulties by enabling utilities to get
the most service from their transmission facilities and
enhance grid reliability.
The objective of FACTS devices is to bring a system
under control and to transmit power as ordered by the
control centers, it also allows increasing the usable
transmission capacity to its thermal limits. With FACTS
devices, we can control the phase angle, the voltage
magnitude at chosen buses and/or line impedances.
Among a variety of FACTS controllers, UPFC is one of
the most interesting and potentially the most versatile. It
can provide simultaneous and independent control of
important power system parameters: line active power
flow, line reactive power flow, impedance and voltage
[4]-[5]. Fig. 1 shows the global impact of FACTS devices
in power system control.



















Fig. 1 Global impact of FACTS devices.

-Relieve overloads
and voltage
violations
-Power losses
reduction
- Improve voltage
stability
+Q
-Q
Vr
P, Q

Dc Power
Link
P, Q
G3
G4
G1
G2
Area i
Area j
EUROCON 2007 The International Conference on Computer as a Tool Warsaw, September 9-12
1-4244-0813-X/07/$20.00 2007 IEEE. 1579

Congestion in transmission lines is one of the important
technical problems that appear particularly in the
deregulated environment.
In this paper, a dynamic approach is presented to adjust
efficiently the parameters setting of multi unified power
flow controller (UPFC) to relieve overloads and voltage
violations caused by system contingencies.
II. POWER FLOW MODELS OF FACTS DEVICES
A. Operation Principales of the UPFC
In this paper the configuration shown in Fig. 2, used to
model the UPFC. This model has a wide range of
applications for investigating the effect of UPFC on the
system. The UPFC may be seen to consist of two VSC
sharing a common capacitor on their DC side and a
unified control system. A simplified schematic
representation of the UPFC is given in Fig. 2.The UPFC
allows simultaneous control of active power flow, reactive
power flow, and voltage magnitude at the UPFC
terminals. Alternatively, the controller may be set to
control one or of these parameters in any combination [4]-
[7]. The active power demanded by the series converter is
drawn by the shunt converter from the AC Network and
supplied to bus m through the DC link. The output voltage
of the series converter is added to the nodal voltage, at bus
k, to boost the nodal voltage at bus m.











Fig. 2 UPFC Operation principales.









Fig. 3 Equivalent circuit based on solid-state voltages sources.
B. Equivalent Circuit and Power Flow Equation of the
UPFC
An equivalent circuit of the UPFC as shown in Fig. 3
can be derived based on the operation principle of the
UPFC. In the equivalent, the UPFC is represented by the
following voltage sources:
( )
) sin( j + ) cos( V = E
sh sh sh sh
(1)

( )
) sin( j + ) cos( V = E
se se se se
(2)
Where
sh
V and
se
V are the controllable magnitude
min
sh
V
sh
V
max
sh
V , and phase angle
0
sh
2 of the voltage source representing the shunt
converter. The magnitude
se
V and phase angle
se
of
the voltage source representing the series converter are
controlled between limits:
min
se
V
se
V
max
se
V , and 0
se
2.
For the series converter:
[ ]
[ ]. ) sin( B ) cos( g V V
) sin( B ) cos( g V V g V P
m se mm m se mm m se
k se km k se km k se mm
2
se se
+ +
+ + =
(3)
[ ]
[ ]. ) sin( B ) sin( g V V
) sin( B ) cos( g V V g V Q
m se mm m se mm m se
k se km k se km k se mm
2
se se
+
+ =

(4)
- For the shunt converter:
[ ] ) sin( B ) cos( g V V g V P
k sh sh k sh sh k sh sh
2
sh sh
+ + =
(5)
[ ] ) cos( B ) sin( g V V B V Q
k sh sh k sh sh k sh sh
2
sh sh
+ =
(6)
and assuming loss-less converter: 0 P P
se sh
= +
The active and reactive power flow equations are:
At bus k:

[ ]
[ ]
[ ] ) sin( B ) cos( g V V
. ) sin( B ) cos( g V V
) sin( B ) cos( g V V g V P
sh k sh sh k sh sh k
se k km se k km se k
m k km m k km m k kk
2
k
k
+ +
+ +
+ + =
(7
)
[ ]
[ ]
[ ] ) sin( B ) cos( g V V
. ) sin( B ) cos( g V V
) sin( B ) cos( g V V g V P
sh k sh sh k sh sh k
se k km se k km se k
m k km m k km m k kk
2
k
k
+ +
+ +
+ + =
(8
)
At bus m:
[ ]
[ ]. ) sin( B ) cos( g V V
) sin( B ) cos( g V V g V P
se m mm se m mm se m
k m mk k m mk k m mm
2
m m
+ +
+ + =
(9)
[ ]
[ ]. ) cos( B ) sin( g V V
) cos( B ) sin( g V V g V Q
se m mm se m mm se m
k m mk k m mk k m mm
2
m m
+
+ =
(10)
C. Multicontrol Functional Model of the UPFC
In the practical applications of the UPFC, it may be
used for control of one or all the following parameters: 1)
the bus voltage, 2) the active power flow, and 3) the
reactive power flow of the transmission line. The
Bus k
Bus m

m
V
se
I
VDC

se
E
Series

Shunt


sh
E

sh
I

k
V
m
V
m
I
Bus k
Bus m

0
m
I
se
E
sh
I
sh
E Re =
)
`

~


sh
I



k
V
1
I
k
I
1580

mathematical descriptions of the three control modes of
the UPFC are presented as follows.
Target 1: Bus Voltage Control
The bus Voltage control constraint is given by
0 V V
des
m k
= (11)
where
des
k
V is the desired bus voltage control
Target 2: The active Power Flow Control
0 P P
des
mk
mk
= (12)
where
des
mk
P is the desired bus voltage control
Target 3: The Reactive Power Flow Control
0 Q Q
des
mk
mk
= (13)
where
des
mk
Q is the desired reactive power control.
mk
P ,
mk
Q are the UPFC branch active and reactive
power flows, respectively leaving the UPFC bus m while
the sending end active and reactive power flows of the
transmission line are
mk
P and
mk
Q respectively.
Equations (11)-(13) can be generally written as
0 F ) X ( F ) X ( F
des
= = (14)
where [ ] . V , , V , , V , X
t
se se j j i i
=











a) P>0, Q>0 b) P<0, Q<0
.










c) P>0, Q<0 d) P>0, Q>0

Fig. 4 Vectorial diagram for global feasible control parameters
solution

Based in the vectorial diagram shown in Fig. 4 the
power flow control is formulated as an OPF problem,
where minimizing the total mismatch of the control
targets is taken as the optimization objective. Constraints
limits of the UPFC device are considered to ensure the
feasibility and the efficiency of the power flow
regulation.
III. DYNAMIC STRATEGY FOR CONTROL OF MULTIPLE
UPFC CONTROLLER.
In practical installation of FACTS in the power system,
there are five common requirements as follows:
-What Kinds of FACTS devices should be installed?
-Where in the system should be placed?
-How much capacity should it have?
-How to coordinate dynamically the interaction between
multiple FACTS and the network to better exploit the
FACTS devices?
-How to estimate economically the optimal size and
number of FACTS to be installed in a practical network.
The intensive use of FACTS devices in the emerging
electricity market environment demands more robust and
online FACTS control methodologies.
How an experienced planning engineers can choose
locations and coordination of multiple FACTS devices
which are probably high suitable, and how they can
exploit efficiently the performance of this devices without
violating the constraints limits?. The main objective of
this section is to formulate the basic idea behind the
approach proposed.
A. Principale of The Approach Proposed
A dynamic methodology based in two-sub problem
algorithm to solving the new formulation of optimal
power flow regulation integrating multi UPFC is
presented in Fig. 5 The proposed algorithm decomposes
the solution of such power flow regulation problem into
two linked sub problems. The first sub problem is an
offline formulation, a robust database is generated based
in power flow solution in normal and abnormal condition,
and the second sub problem is an online control, which
consists in two parts: The first part based in active power
desired database consists to relieve overloads in lines, the
second part based in reactive power desired which adjust
the voltage profile to enhance the system loadability.





















Fig. 5 The global methodology for multiple UPFC control.


Active Power
Rules
Reactive
Power Rules

Power Flow
UPFC Model
Objective
Function

POWER FLOW
Active Power loss+Voltage
Global Data Base
des
P
UPFC
V
Q
P
i
des
des
des
(
(
(

Data
des
P

Data
des
Q

Relieve overload
Adjust
Voltage
Feasible
Solution
z
y
V
-P
Feasible
Solution
-Q
X
X
z
y
V
+P
+Q
X
z
y
V -P
+Q
X
z
y
V -P
+Q
X
z
y
V
+P
-Q
X
z
y
V
+P
-Q
1581



















Fig. 6 The global active and reactive power flow regulation.

B. Objective Function
The objective function of the multi control functional
operation of an UPFC is the combination from the
prescribed control targets:
des
3
des
2
des
1 upfc
V V Q Q P P F + + = (15)
where
des
P ,
des
Q , and
des
V are the control targets of
active and reactive power flow along line, and voltage of
bus K, respectively.
Coefficients
1
,
2
, and
3
can take 1 or 0 based in the
control strategy adopted.
For a power system with
upfc
N FACTS devices integrated
in practical network to enhance the power flow control,
the optimization objective is:

=
=
upfc
N
1 n
upfc
. F MinF (16)
C. Why Using Fuzzy Logic as a Basic Support .
The use of fuzzy logic has received increased attention
in recent years because of its usefulness in reducing the
need for complex mathematical models in problem
solving.
Fuzzy logic employs linguistic terms, which deal with the
causal relationship between input and output variables.
For this reason, the approach makes it easier to
manipulate and solve problems.
- Fuzzy logic is based on natural language.
- Fuzzy logic is conceptually easy to understand.
- Fuzzy logic is flexible.
- Fuzzy logic can model nonlinear functions of arbitrary
complexity.
- Fuzzy logic can be blended with conventional control
techniques.
D. Why the Passge From Fuzzy Logic to Adaptive
Neuro- Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS).
The membership function adopted by engineer
differences from person to person and from time to time,
and therefore they are rarely optimal in terms of
reproducing desired output.
The adaptive neurofuzzy controller was implemented
by Jang (1993) and employs a Takagi-Sugeno-Kang
fuzzy inference system [10]. The basic idea behind these
neuro-adaptive learning techniques is very simple. These
techniques provide a method for the fuzzy modeling
procedure to learn information about a data set, in order
to compute the membership function parameters that best
allow the associated fuzzy inference system to track the
given input /output data. The main objective in using this
approach is to construct a fuzzy inference system whose
membership function parameters are adjusted using either
a back propagation algorithm alone, or in combination
with a least squares type of method. The basic ANFIS
architecture is shown in Fig.7.
Square nodes in the ANFIS structure denote parameters
sets of the membership functions of the Takagi-Sugeno-
Kang fuzzy system. Circular nodes are static/non-
modifiable and perform operations such as product or
max/min calculations.














Fig. 7 ANFIS model structure.

If the inference system has inputs, x1, x2, and output y as
shown in Fig. 7, then a first order TSK rule base might
be:
Rule 1: If
1
x is
1
A and
2
x is
1
B then
1 2 1 1 1
r x q x p 1 f + + =
Rule 2: If
1
x is
2
A and
2
x is 2 B then
2 2 2 1 2
r x q x p 2 f + + =
Rule n: If
1
x is
n
A and
2
x is Bn then
n 2 n 1 n
r x q x p fn + + =
Where
1
A .
n
A ,
1
B .
n
B are membership functions and
1
p
n
p ,
1
q
n
q and
1
r
n
r are constants within the
consequent functions. Each node in layer 2 multiplies the
incoming signals and sends the product out. Each nod in
layer 3 estimates the ratio (wk) of a rule of the kth rule
firing strength to sum of the firing strength of all rules.
The final layer computes the overall output as the
summation of the incoming signals.

=
n
n
n
n
n
w
f w
y (17)

ij
P

ij
Q
i j

ij
P

ij
Q
i j

ij
P

ij
Q
i j
i j

ij
Q
i j

ij
P

i j

ij
P

ij
Q
A1
A2
B1
B2


X1
P
X2
V

y
X1 X2
X1 X2
w1
w2
1

2

Layer 1
Layer 2
Layer 3
Layer 4
Layer 5
1582

E. Data Base Training and Design
The input-output pattern required for training of the
ANFIS is generated as follow.
1. Design of generalized database carried out at various
loading conditions with active power demand
D
P and
reactive power demand
D
Q varying in the range given
by,
( ) % Kl 1 * P P
D D
+ = , and ( ) % Kl 1 * Q Q
D D
+ =
where Kl, loading factor varying from 1% to 10%.
2. repeat step 1 at the various choices of UPFC control
strategies namely: Active power control (
1
=1,
2
=0,
3
=0), reactive power flow control (
1
=0,
2
=1,
3
=0), voltage control (
1
=0,
2
=1,
3
=0).
The adaptive network is trained using the training data
generated and the hybrid-learning algorithm. The
membership functions of the resulting fuzzy inference
system after 20 training epochs when the error reduced to
0.001 is shown in Fig. 8.

0.96 0.98 1 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08
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
i
p
in1mf1 in1mf2 in1mf3 in1mf4 in1mf5 in1mf6 in1mf7 in1mf8 in1mf9 in1mf10

Fig. 8 Membership function for the voltage index after
sample ANFIS training.

The algorithm steps in the proposed methodology to
dynamic control of multiple UPFC to relieve overloads
and enhance system loadability are as follows:

Step1: Database generation: Perform the initial
operational load flow solution, obtain the values of
voltage deviation at each load bus, and evaluate active
power flow and reactive power flow for the following
cases:
-Load flow solution in normal condition without UPFC.
-Load flow solution in normal condition with one UPFC.
-Load flow solution in normal condition with multiple
UPFC.
-Load flow solution with load incrementation without
UPFC.
-Load flow solution with load incrementation with UPFC.
Step2: The parameters in rules and membership function
of fuzzy system are designed based on operation
experience only, and which is difficult to adjust on-line.
Off-line adaptive neuro-fuzzy logic inference system
proposed utilizes power losses index and minimal voltage
drop detected in the practical network to generate the
desired active power, and the desired reactive power flow
control for each UPFC.
Step3: The objective function is to relieve overloads:
Perform the operational load flow with UPFC model with
the new settings of the active power flow desired for each
UPFC controller generated from database active power
desired.
Step3: The objective function is to enhance system
loadability: Perform the operational load flow with UPFC
model with the new settings of the reactive power desired
for each UPFC controller generated from database
reactive power desired.
Step4: For the step3 and step4, parameters of UPFC
controller are checked.
Step5: Perform the final load flow solution and output
results.
IV. CASE STUDIES AND RESULTS ANALYSIS
The proposed methodology for multi-UPFC control is
applied to IEEE-30bus test system of 6 generators, 30
buses and 41 transmission lines. Table. I shows the initial
UPFC data used to relieve overloads and voltage
violation in the balanced network.
TABLE I. UPFC DATA

Hi V
sh

(p.u)
Lo V
sh

(p.u)
Hi V
se

(p.u)
Lo V
se

(p.u)
) 0 ( V
sh

(p.u)
) 0 ( V
se

(p.u)
UPFC1-
UPFC2
1.1 0.9 0.20 -0.20 1 0.035
UPFC1-
UPFC2
1.1 0.9 0.10 -0.10 1 0.025

-Case 1: One UPFC is installed at bus 3, to control power
flow on line 3-4, the output results are presented at Table
II. Based in database active power flow desired,
overloads violations reduced compared to the normal case
(without UPFC).
TABLE II. POWER FLOW RESULTS AFTER UPFC CONTROL
Line Power
Flow
Line Flow
MVA
Line
Rating
MVA
Minimum
Voltage
Bus
Line 1-2 103.6257 150
Line 1-3 86.6976 150
Line 2-4 27.1346 150
Line 3-4 81.3941 150


0.9691


30

-0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
1.02
1.022
1.024
1.026
1.028
1.03
1.032
Series Voltage
S
h
u
n
t V
o
la
tg
e

Fig. 9 Series and shunt voltage variation for one UPFC at
different active power desired without load incrementation.

-Case 2: Two UPFC are installed at bus 3 and at bus 27 to
control power flow on line 3-4 and line 27-30, the output
results are summarized at Table III. Based in database
1583

active power flow desired, and data base reactive power
flow desired, overloads violations reduced and voltage
magnitude enhanced in normal situation and with load
incrementation compared to the normal case (without
UPFC and with one UPFC).
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
0.1
0.105
0.11
0.115
0.12
0.125
0.13
0.135
Active Power Control
P
o
w
e
r

l
o
s
s
e
s

p
.
u
Kld=10%
Kld=5%
Kld=0%
UPFC1 at Bus 3-4
UPFC2 at Bus 27-30


Fig. 10 Active power losses at normal and abnormal situation
with two UPFC installed.
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
Active Power Control
V
s
e
r
i
e

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
1
-0.14 -0.12 -0.1 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
Active Power Control
V
s
e
r
i
e

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
1
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
1.015
1.02
1.025
1.03
Active Power Control
V
s
h
u
n
t

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
1
-0.14 -0.12 -0.1 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04
1.015
1.02
1.025
1.03
Active Power Control
V
s
e
r
i
e

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
1


Fig. 11 Series and shunt UPFC 1 parameters variation at
different active power desired without load incrementation.
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
Active Power Control
V
s
e
r
i
e

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
2
-0.14 -0.12 -0.1 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
Active Power Control
V
s
e
r
i
e

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
2
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
1.0505
1.0505
1.0506
1.0507
1.0507
Active Power Control
V
s
h
u
n
t

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
2
-0.14 -0.12 -0.1 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04
1.0505
1.0505
1.0506
1.0507
1.0507
Active Power Control
V
s
e
r
i
e

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
2
Kl=0%
Kl=0%
Kl=0%
Kl=0%


Fig. 12 Series and shunt UPFC 2 parameters variation at
different active power desired without load incrementation.
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
Active Power Control
V
s
e
r
i
e

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
1
-0.14 -0.12 -0.1 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
Active Power Control
V
s
e
r
i
e

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
1
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
1.015
1.02
1.025
1.03
1.035
1.04
Active Power Control
V
s
h
u
n
t

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
1
-0.14 -0.12 -0.1 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04
1.015
1.02
1.025
1.03
1.035
1.04
Active Power Control
V
s
h
u
n
t

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
1
Kl=5%
Kl=5%
Kl=5% Kl=5%

Fig.13 Series and shunt UPFC 1 parameters variation at
different active power desired with load incrementation
(Kl=5%).

0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
Active Power Control
V
s
e
r
i
e

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
2
-0.14 -0.12 -0.1 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
Active Power Control
V
s
e
r
i
e

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
2
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
1.0506
1.0507
1.0507
1.0507
1.0508
Active Power Control
V
s
h
u
n
t

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
2
-0.14 -0.12 -0.1 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04
1.0506
1.0507
1.0507
1.0507
1.0508
Active Power Control
V
s
h
u
n
t

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
2
Kl=5%
Kl=5%
Kl=5% Kl=5%

Fig. 14 Series and shunt UPFC 2 parameters variation at
different active power desired with load incrementation
(Kl=5%).

0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
Active Power Control
V
s
e
r
i
e

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
1
-0.14 -0.12 -0.1 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
Active Power Control
V
s
e
r
i
e

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
1
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
1.015
1.02
1.025
1.03
Active Power Control
V
s
h
u
n
t

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
1
-0.14 -0.12 -0.1 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04
1.015
1.02
1.025
1.03
Active Power Control
V
s
h
u
n
t

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
1
Kl=10%
Kl=10%
Kl=10% Kl=10%

Fig. 15 Series and shunt UPFC 1 parameters variation at
different active power desired with load incrementation
(Kl=10%).

1584

0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
Active Power Control
V
s
e
r
i
e

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
2
-0.14 -0.12 -0.1 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
Active Power Control
V
s
e
r
i
e

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
2
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
1.0505
1.0505
1.0506
1.0507
1.0507
Active Power Control
V
s
h
u
n
t

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
2
-0.14 -0.12 -0.1 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04
1.0505
1.0505
1.0506
1.0507
1.0507
Active Power Control
V
s
h
u
n
t

f
o
r

U
P
F
C
2
Kl=10% Kl=10%
Kl=10%
Kl=10%

Fig. 16 Series and shunt UPFC 2 parameters variation at
different active power desired with load incrementation
(Kl=10%).
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
0
20
40
60
80
100
Lines
A
c
t
i
v
e

P
o
w
e
r

T
r
a
n
s
i
t
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
0
50
100
150
Lines
A
c
t
i
v
e

P
o
w
e
r

T
r
a
n
s
i
t
PD=283.4 MW
Pdes1=0.9 p.u
Pdes2=-0.15 p.u
Pdes1=0.5 p.u
Pdes2=0.15 p.u
PD=283.4 MW

Fig. 17 Active power transit at lines for the best active power
desired and for the worst active power desired (Kl=0%).
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Lines
A
c
t
i
v
e

P
o
w
e
r

T
r
a
n
s
i
t
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
0
50
100
150
Lines
A
c
t
i
v
e

P
o
w
e
r

T
r
a
n
s
i
t
Pdes1=0.9 p.u
Pdes2=-0.15 p.u
PD=297.57 MW
PD=297.57 MW
Pdes1=0.55 p.u
Pdes2=-0.15 p.u

Fig. 18 Active power transit at lines for the best active power
desired and for the worst active power desired (Kl=5%).

The following conclusions are drawn from the results
reported in different Figures and Tables:
-It is important to consider the UPFC operational limits to
get a feasible solution.
-This approach proposed needs to update continuously
the input database (for any change in network
configuration) to guarantee an efficient solution.
-In addition to the simplicity of this approach proposed,
the global database incorporated makes it flexible to
evaluate and calculate efficiently economical
compensators sizes.
V. CONCLUSION
A simple and dynamic methodology based in practical
reasoning rules from fuzzy logic theory with database
generated and coordinated based in adaptive neuro-fuzzy
logic inference system (ANFIS) capable of governing
multiple UPFC by a flexible adjustment active power,
reactive power, and voltage regulation at a specified bus.
The case studies demonstrate that the approach proposed
provides a useful and flexible tool for engineer to
enhance the system loadability and relieve overloads in
lines.
The objective of the approach proposed is to coordinate
and adjust dynamically the parameters of the UPFC
installed to the network to assure service continuity and
to keep the index power quality (Voltage and Frequency)
in the secure limits. The methodology proposed is tested
and applicable to many small types of balanced network
configuration.
As for the future work along this line, the author will
strive to develop an adaptive and a flexible algorithm to
coordinate the control parameters of multiple UPFC
installed in a large practical network to enhance the
power quality in critical situation.

REFERENCES
[1] M. Huneault, and F. D. Galiana, A survey of the optimal power
flow literature, IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 6, no. 2, pp.
762-770, May 1991.
[2] M. A. Abdel-Moumen and P. P. Narayan, Optimal power flow
incorporating FACTS devices bibiography and survey, in Proc.
IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Transmission Distribution Conf. Expo.,
2003, pp. 669-676.
[3] O. Alsac and B. scott. Optimal load flow with steady state
security, IEEE Trans. Power Appara. Syst. , pp. 745-751, May-
June 1974.
[4] C. R. Feurt-Esquivel, E. Acha, Tan SG, JJ. Rico, Efficient object
oriented power systems software for the analysis of large-scale
networks containing FACTS controlled branches, IEEE Trans.
Power Systems, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 464-472, May 1998.
[5] S. Gerbex, R. Cherkaoui, and Alain J. Germond, Optimal
location of multitype FACTS devices in a power system by
means of genetic algorithms, IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol.
16, no. 3, August 2001.
[6] C. A. Canizares, Power flow and transient stability
models of FACTS controllers for voltage and angle stability
studies, IEEE Proceeding ,2000
[7] A. Nabavi- Niaki and M. R. Iravani, Steady-state and dynamic
models of unified power flow controller (UPFC) for power flow
stydies , IEEE Trans. Power Syst., Vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 1937-1943,
Nov. 1996.
[8] Y. Xiao, Y. H. Song, and Y. Z. Sun, Power flow approach to
power systems with embeded FACTS devices, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., Vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 943-950, Nov. 2002.
[9] S. An, J. Condren, and T.W. Gedra, An ideal transformer UPFC
model, OPF first-order sensitivities, and application to screening
for optimal UPFC locations, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., Vol. 22,
no. 1, pp. 68-75, February. 2007.
[10] T. Takagi and M.Sugeno, Fuzzy identification of systems and its
application to modeling and control, IEEE Trans. Sys. Man.,
Vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 116-132, 1985.
1585