AN ADAPTIVE MODEL PREDICTIVE APPROACH TO POWER OSCILLATION DAMPING UTILIZING VARIABLE SERIES REACTANCE FACTS DEVICES

Nicklas P. Johansson(1), Hans-Peter Nee(1), Lennart ngquist(1) (1) Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden ABSTRACT This paper describes an adaptive method of controlling FACTS devices for power oscillation damping. The method is based on step-wise series reactance modulation. Here, a reduced model of the power system with only two rotating masses is used as a basis for the control design. The model parameters are updated using local measurements of the active power on the controlled line. An adaptive closed loop controller is developed based on the principle that it is possible to stabilize an oscillation in a power system which is characterized by one major mode of oscillation by switching a reactance in series with one transmission line in a small number of steps. The reduced model parameters are recomputed when new information of the system response is known making the control scheme an adaptive one. The paper also includes the derivation of a damping controller with a power flow control feature and a verification of the controllers using digital simulations of power system models of different complexities. transient stability program (SIMPOW) to simulate power systems of different complexities.

INTRODUCTION Flexible AC Transmission System (FACTS) devices have received an increasing interest during the last decades. It is well known that power flow can be controlled and oscillations can be damped using controllable reactive elements inserted in series with the line in order to vary the effective reactance of the line. For example TCSC Thyristor Controlled Series Capacitor devices can be used. For power oscillation damping using such devices, different control methods can be applied. These include loop-shaping methods but also robust control approaches as well as methods based on non-linear control theory [5] and and time-optimal control schemes [6]. In this paper, a closed loop adaptive model predictive controller is presented. It is based on the dead-beat controller for power oscillation damping (Discrete Open Loop Controller using grid parameter Estimation - DOLCE) presented in [2]. The controller is intended for use as a part of a control scheme for a FACTS device that should also include transient control and a slower closed loop for long-term power flow control. The methodology is very similar to Model Predictive Control (MPC), however in this case, the motion equations involved are non-linear and the linear theory cannot be used. This paper presents theory that solves the MPC problem in an interesting special case but it does not give a general solution. The controller is based on a reduced model of the power system. The model parameters are continuously updated using local measurements in order to adapt the control to the grid changes. The model relies on the assumption that there is a dominant mode of power oscillation in the system and that any other modes have significantly smaller amplitudes than the dominant mode. This situation is not uncommon in a real-life power system. The paper includes verification of the controller using a time-domain simulation software (PSCAD) and a

REDUCED GRID MODEL The reduced model of the power system (see Figure 1) consisting of two synchronous machines with interconnecting transmission lines is characterized by four parameters; one series reactance Xi, one parallel reactance Xeq, the dominant angular frequency of the power oscillation i and the damping exponent of this oscillation mode - k. The line where the FACTS device is installed, denoted the controlled line, is represented as a variable reactance X. When applied to real power systems, the model can be thought of as a representation of two different grid areas with lumped moments of inertia and their connecting power lines. The average total power flow - Ptot0, between the machines or power grid areas is assumed to be controlled by the dispatch and it is assumed to be constant during a particular damping event. The reduced model together with basic parameter estimation methods using local measurements is presented in [1]. In [1], the model is also verified for larger power systems.

Figure 1: Reduced power grid model To achieve good damping, up-to-date values of the model parameters are necessary. To accomplish this, three different approaches are proposed. 1) During normal operation, parameters are estimated by periodically exciting the system with small steps in series reactance at the FACTS device. The response in the active power on the controlled line is measured and parameter extraction is performed according to [1]. 2) In the event of a large system disturbance such as a three-phase short circuit somewhere in the system, the

grid parameters may change very fast. In order to enable fast extraction of the new grid parameters after such an event, the routines presented in [2] can be used. 3) To account for any errors in the parameters extracted using the above mentioned techniques, an estimation of parameters based on the step responses of the active power on the controlled line to the control signal changes during the damping action is proposed. This method is derived later in the paper. It should be noted that all the parameter estimation in the preparation of this paper has been performed neglecting measurement noise. Sensitivity analysis of the estimation methods shows that measurements with tolerable errors can be obtained using modern measurement equipment.

Here, Xtot(n) = Xtot(N) for n>N and Ptot0 is the constant average active power transmitted between areas. The problem is now formulated as a non-linear MPC problem. Below, the problem will be solved for the control variable X which is derived from Xtot.
Open Loop Controller with Power Set-Point In [2], dead-beat damping controllers that solve the problem (3) above for one step (N=1) and two steps (N=2) are presented and verified for power systems of different complexities. In order to extend the flexibility of the DOLCE controllers presented in [2], an open loop two-step (N=2) controller where a post-damping, active power set-point of the FACTS line can be provided is presented here. This controller solves the damping problem (3) with an added predefined constraint on the state variables after the damping event (at n=N). One possible application of this controller setting is the case where a line disconnection in the system changes the power flow and initiates an electro-mechanical oscillation. In such a case the aim of the FACTS device may be to damp the oscillation and to swiftly change the active power on the line to a predefined post-fault value. This open loop power flow control scheme would in a full control system be complemented by a slow closed loop to secure a good long-term power flow control in the presence of model errors.

THEORY OF DAMPING METHODS Problem formulation The equations governing a system which can be reduced to the one depicted in Figure 1 can be written in a first order approximation as 2 0 d 1 U U sin(1 2 ) 1 2 = Pm1 2 2 H1 X tot dt (1) 2 0 d 2 U U sin( 2 1 ) 1 2 = Pm2 2 2H 2 X tot dt Here H1,2 are the inertia constants of each lumped machine representation, 1,2 is the electrical angle relative to the rotating frame of each machine, Pm1,2 is the mechanical power for each machine which is assumed constant, U1 and U2 denote the voltages at the lumped machine terminals which are assumed to be well controlled and thus constant, Xtot is the total reactance between the areas and 0 is the electrical angular frequency of the grid. This is a non-linear system of equations with the state variables 1 and 2. The control variable is here assumed to be Xtot. Next, assume that the system is subject to an electromechanical oscillation. The system is discretized such that a change in the control variable is only allowed at the points in time which coincide with peaks of the power oscillation. This is done since at these instants, the time derivatives of the system state variables 1,2 (the relative speeds of the lumped machines) are zero. The goal of the control is to stabilize the system completely in a given number of time steps N. This can be done by setting the output variable to the total power flow between the machines U U sin(1 2 ) P = 1 2 . (2) tot X tot

The goal can be written as an optimization problem 2 (3) min P ( (N), (N), Xtot (N)) P 2 tot0 Xtot (0..N) tot 1

If the total reactance between the lumped machines in the reduced grid changes due to an adjustment in the series reactance of the FACTS device, ( 1- 2) in (2) will in the millisecond time-range stay constant since it is governed by the machine inertias of the two areas. Thus, since (2) is valid both directly before and directly after the reactance change; it follows that P X =P X . (4) p0 tot 0 p1 tot1 Here, Pp0 denotes the total active power transmitted directly before the step and Pp1 denotes the total active power transmitted directly after the step. Now, in order to find a valid solution to the damping problem, the steps must be taken at points in time where the oscillation has peaks. Pp0 must then be the value at a specific oscillation peak. Xtot0 denotes the initial total reactance between areas and Xtot1 is the reactance after the step. Assume that this reactance step is conducted at a low peak of a power oscillation which is oscillating around an average power flow Ptot0. The next high peak of the oscillation can be approximated as P = (P P )ekT / 2 + P . (5) p1 tot 0 p1 tot 0 Here the damping exponent is denoted by k and the cycle time of the oscillation after the reactance step is denoted by T. If a new reactance step is applied at this peak of the oscillation changing the total reactance to Xtot2, the total transmitted power after this step must equal the stationary value Ptot0 in order to theoretically eliminate the oscillation as it is explained in [2]. Basically, the value of the transmitted power between areas is forced to the stationary value by changing the reactance at a point in time where the speeds of both

lumped machine representations are already nominal. Thus, both state variables and their time derivatives are at their stationary values and no oscillation can longer occur. Now, (4) and (5) yield
P X p0 tot 0 kT /2 . P e +P X =P X tot0 tot1 tot 0 tot 2 tot 0 X tot1

(6)

calculate Ptot0 and the parameters valid after the fault should be used in the calculation of Pp0. The parameters valid after a fault can be estimated using routines in [2]. A sketch of ideal curve traces during a two-step damping process where a power oscillation is initiated by a fault (at t=1s, cleared at t=1.1s) is seen in Figure 2.

In [1], the relation between the stationary active power on the controlled line before and after a reactance step was derived as Pxstep = Pxstat

X eq + X . X eq + X + X

(7)

Here Pxstat denotes the average active power on the controlled line before the step and Pxstep denotes the average power after the step. X is the effective reactance of the controlled line before the step including any series compensation, Xeq is the parallel reactance as defined in the reduced model above and X is the series reactance step at the FACTS device. If a set-point for the active power on the controlled line is known as Pxsp, then with the knowledge of the system parameters Xeq, X and the starting point average active power on the line Pxstat, the necessary step in reactance X to reach the setpoint can be calculated from (7), setting Pxstep=Pxsp. Using this value together with the expression for the total reactance between the reduced model machines after a reactance step ( X + X ) X eq X tot = X i + , (8) X + X + X eq the total reactance Xtot2 after the damping action can be calculated, provided that Xi is known. Using Xtot2, it is possible to calculate the parameter Xtot1 in (6). Ptot0 can be derived from the stationary value of the controlled line power Pline0 before any disturbance using
Ptot = X eq + X X eq P line

Figure 2: Ideal curve traces during a two-step power oscillation damping process with power set-point. Closed loop control The standard MPC scheme solves an optimization problem like (3) in every time step, adjusting the control signal from the latest result of the optimization to account for any model errors. This can also be done in this context. One way to do this is to start by solving the problem (3) for N=2 as in the above section. Then, before the second step, the output signal (in this case the power on the controlled line) is measured and the problem (3) is solved again for the remaining samples up to N, so called receding horizon control. In this case it means that the second step will be aimed to kill any output signal error in a single step. A solution to this problem is presented in [2] and the necessary step in the control variable can be written
X (X + X ) P eq eq linePeak 1 X X tot = X (X + X ) P tot line0 eq eq

(9)

Here Pline is the power on the controlled line and Ptot is the total power transmitted between the areas. This expression is valid both at steady state and during reasonably slow dynamics. The relation can also be used to calculate Pp0 from the measured peak value of the power on the controlled line Pxp0. The output of the above derivation is the total reactance after the first reactance step Xtot1 and the reactance after the second step Xtot2 to fulfil the demands on post-damping active power set-point and the demand to theoretically eliminate the oscillation in two steps. Using (8), it is now possible to determine the steps in reactance X1 and X2 that should be applied to the controlled line at the FACTS device in order to fulfill the demands. It should be noted that in a situation where the grid parameters change as a result of a fault at the start of the oscillation, different values of the parameters have to be given to the parameters in equations (6), (7), (8) where the parameters valid after the fault should be used and parameters for the different applications of (9), where the parameters valid before the fault should be used to

(10)

if the grid parameter Xeq changes to Xeq and Xtot changes to Xtot due to grid changes (like line disconnections) at the start of the oscillation. Here PlinePeak is the power on the controlled line at the oscillation peak and Pline0 is defined above. Xtot and Xeq can be estimated using the methods described in [2]. Note that if the grid parameters do not change as a result of the fault, the first factor in (10) equals one. From (10), the required reactance step on the controlled line is found using (8). Due to model errors, an intolerable oscillation may still exist after the two-step damping process. In this case, the process can be repeated in single or double steps until the oscillation is sufficiently damped. To illustrate the principle of a closed-loop controller with a predefined post-damping active power set-point, a simulation of a simple power grid was performed in PSCAD/EMTDC. The system is drawn in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Power grid used in PSCAD simulations Here the FACTS device is represented by the variable reactance in the figure. In this system, a three phase short circuit is applied (at time t=1.5s). The fault is being cleared after 100 ms. The undamped power oscillation traces are depicted in Figure 4. In the figure, the total power denotes the total active power transmitted between the machines in Figure 3 and the line parallel to the controlled line is denoted the parallel line. Note that since the characteristics of both lines are equal, both lines transmit the same power.

Figure 5:Closed loop damping, set-point 500MW Adaptive control loop The control scheme presented above is adaptive since the parameters of the model are continuously estimated using the methods from [1] and [2]. To make the system more robust to errors in the parameters, an adaptive control loop which uses the step responses in line active power of earlier reactance steps (during a damping event) to update the grid parameters is proposed below.

Figure 4: 3-ph SC trace in PSCAD system Now, in order to apply the damping methods, parameter estimation is (prior to the fault) performed using the methods from [1]. In this case the grid parameters before and after the fault clearance are the same. Thus, the methods presented in [2] do not change the initial parameters. Once the power oscillation is initiated, the first low peak is localized and from the locally measured active power peak value on the controlled line, the equations (6), (7), (8), (9) are combined together with a predefined controlled line postcontingency set-point value of 500 MW to determine the two required reactance steps. These series reactance steps are then applied at the first low peak and at the following high peak. The result can be seen in Figure 5. The second step is recalculated from measurements of the controlled line power at the peak at t=4.7s. A residue oscillation is detected and a single corrective step is calculated from (10) and applied at t=8.3s. Here, the primary goal has been to damp the oscillations with the secondary goal to keep the power set-point since a slow closed loop power flow controller is assumed to be present in the system, taking care of the long-term reference following. This approach leads, in this case, to a post-fault power on the controlled line which is 10% higher than the set-point. It is possible to prioritize the set-point by repeating the two-step process instead of applying a single step to kill the residue.

It was shown above that (4) is valid for the total transmitted power before and after a step in the total reactance between the lumped machines in the reduced grid model. With the definitions above, (4) and (9) can be used to derive a relation between the power on the controlled line directly before and directly after the reactance step. This relation can be applied to the two steps in a closed loop two-step damping scheme to yield ( X + X eq ) X tot 0 P 0 Pxp1 = xp0 ( X + X eq ) X 1 tot1 . (11) ( X + X eq ) X 1 tot1 P Pxp 2 = ( X + X ) X xp1 eq tot 2 2 Here Pxp0/Pxp1 denotes the active power on the controlled line before/after the first reactance step and Pxp1/Pxp2 denotes power on the line before/after the second reactance step (see Figure 2). X and Xtot with subscripts 0, 1, and 2 denote the reactance of the controlled line and the total reactance before, in between, and after the steps respectively. Eq. (11) can be solved for the grid parameters Xi and Xeq with the knowledge of the step values and measurements of the step responses in active power by means of (8). A unique solution exists given that the two reactance steps have different magnitudes, which is normally the case when the initial parameters are non-reliable. The updated parameters aid in optimizing any subsequent steps in a damping scheme.

VERIFICATION FOR A LARGE SYSTEM

To verify the damping schemes in a more realistic power system, simulations using the SIMPOW software have been performed. The system studied was a

modified version of the CIGRE NORDIC32 system from [4], designed to include a simplified model of the grid in northern Norway including certain additional generation. All the PSS units were disabled in the system. The system is shown in Figure 6. In this system, a FACTS device represented by a controllable reactance was installed in series with the northernmost line connecting Norway and Sweden. A 3-phase short circuit (at t=1s) at one point in the grid as indicated in the figure was simulated followed by a clearing of the fault by a disconnection of the indicated line after 100ms. This fault results in inter-area power oscillations in the system and a major change in the grid parameters.

When an oscillation residue is detected, new single-step controllers are calculated and executed. In this case it is assumed that the desired average active power flow on the line after the fault is higher than the actual value after the initial two-step damping, and the correcting steps are chosen to act at low peaks in the oscillation yielding a final higher series compensation of the line. The resulting waveforms are seen in Figure 7. It can be noted that the first and second reactance steps differ substantially in magnitude. In the case of a perfect estimation, these steps would have been equal in magnitude and in opposite direction. The reason for this is that the estimation methods from [2] give non-reliable grid parameters in this fault case, and the oscillation residue is considerable. In this case, the closed loop introduces new series reactance steps at t=4.8s and t=6.0s with an improved damping as a result.

CONCLUSIONS

The controllers described above have shown some potential in the damping of power oscillations using variable reactance FACTS devices. Verification has been done in simulations of different power grids with fast changing parameters with good results. Since the estimation methods presented in [2] have flaws, the adaptive control loop approach is considered the most promising one.

Figure 6: Modified CIGRE NORDIC32 system The FACTS device is controlled using the above closed, adaptive loop principles. The grid parameters of the system are initially determined using the methods from [1]. Then, using the methods in [2] the parameters are updated using local measurements of the first downswing in the active power of the controlled line after the fault. The two-step closed loop controller with the aim of maintaining the natural power flow in the system (setting Pxstep=Pxstat in (7)) is then applied. Subsequently, measurements of the active power on the line directly before and directly after each of the steps are used to update the grid parameters using (8) and (11).

REFERENCES

1. Johansson, N P, Nee H-P and ngquist L, Estimation of Grid Parameters for The Control of Variable Reactance FACTS Devices IEEE PES General Meeting 18-22 June 2006 2. Johansson, N P, Nee H-P and ngquist L, Discrete Open Loop Control for Power Oscillation damping utilizing Variable Series Reactance FACTS Devices, UPEC2006, September 2006 3. Kundur, P, Power system stability and control, McGraw-Hill, 1994 4. CIGRE TF 38.02.08, Long Term Dynamics Phase II, Final Report, March 1995 5. Zhou, X , Liang, J, Overview of control schemes for TCSC to enhance the stability of power systems, IEE Proc.- Gener. Transm. Distrib. Vol 146 No. 2, March 1999 6. Kosterev, D. N, Kolodziej, W. J, Bang-Bang Series Capacitor Transient stability Control, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, vol. 10, No. 2, May 1995

AUTHORS ADRESS

Figure 7: 3-ph SC adaptive loop damping

Nicklas Johansson Royal Institute of Technology Dept. of Electrical Systems, Teknikringen 33 100 44 Stockholm, SWEDEN Email: nicklas.johansson@ee.kth.se