International Journal of Reviews in Computing

© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved. IJRIC

www.ijric.org E-ISSN: 2076-3336

NOVEL DEVELOPMENT OF A FUZZY CONTROL SCHEME

WITH UPFC’s FOR DAMPING OF OSCILLATIONS IN
MULTI-MACHINE POWER SYSTEMS
1 2 3
DAKKA OBULESU, Dr. S.F. KODAD, Dr. B.V. SANKAR RAM
1
Research Scholar, EEE Dept., JNTU, Hyderabad-85, Andhra Pradesh, India,
Associate Professor, MITS, Madanapalli, Chittor Dist, AP, India.
Phone : +91 09441078630, Email : obulesh_d@yahoo.co.in, dakkaobulesh@gmail.com
2
Professor & HOD, Dept. of EEE, Aurora Engg College, Bhongir-508116.
Phone: +91 09866666660, Email : kodadsf@rediffmail.com
3
Professor, Dept. of EEE, JNTUCE, Kukatpally, Hydarabad-85.
Phone: +91 09849303342, Email : bvsram4321@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

This paper presents a novel development of a fuzzy logic controlled power system using UPFCs to damp
the oscillations in a FACTS based integrated multi-machine power system consisting of 3 generators, 3
transformers, 9 buses, 4 loads & 2 UPFCs. Oscillations in power systems have to be taken a serious note
of when the fault takes place in any part of the system, else this might lead to the instability mode &
shutting down of the power system. UPFC based POD controllers can be used to suppress the oscillations
upon the occurrence of a fault at the generator side or near the bus side. In order to improve the dynamic
performance of the multi-machine power system, the behavior of the UPFC based POD controller should be
coordinated, otherwise the power system performance might be deteriorated. In order to keep the
advantages of the existing POD controller and to improve the UPFC-POD performance, a hybrid fuzzy
coordination based controller can be used ahead of a UPFC based POD controller to increase the system
dynamical performance & to coordinate the UPFC-POD combination. This paper depicts about this hybrid
combination of a fuzzy with a UPFC & POD control strategy to damp the electro-mechanical oscillations.
The amplification part of the conventional controller is modified by the fuzzy coordination controller.
Simulink models are developed with & without the hybrid controller. The 3 phase to ground symmetrical
fault is made to occur near the first generator for 200 ms. Simulations are performed with & without the
controller. The digital simulation results show the effectiveness of the method presented in this paper.

Keywords : UPFC, POD, Fuzzy logic, Coordination, Controller, Oscillations, Damping, Stability,
Simulink, State space model.

1. INTRODUCTION angles. One of the controllers being used in the

work presented in this paper is the UPFC based
Applications of ANN to power systems are a fuzzy coordination scheme for the damping of
growing area of interest. In the modern day power power system oscillations [1].
system stability, operation & control (PSOC),
The FACTS initiative was originally launched
FACTS (Flexible AC Transmission Systems) plays
in 1980’s to solve the emerging problems faced due
a very important role. Usage of FACTS in the
to restrictions on transmission line construction,
power systems not only enhances the dynamic
and to facilitate growing power export / import and
performance, but also increases the stability of the
wheeling transactions among utilities. The two
power systems, enhances the controllability &
basic objectives behind the development of FACTS
increases its power transfer capability. Some of the
technology; is to increase power transfer capability
devices used in the control of FACTS are the SVC,
of transmission systems, and to keep power flow
TCSC, STATCOM, UPFC, and the IPFC. The
over designated routes, significantly increase the
FACTS controllers utilize power electronics based
utilization of existing (and new) transmission
technology and can provide dynamic control on line
assets, and play a major role in facilitating
power flows, bus voltages, line impedance & phase

25
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved. IJRIC
www.ijric.org E-ISSN: 2076-3336

contractual power flow in electricity markets with [17-19]. A unified power flow controller (UPFC) is
minimal requirements for new transmission lines. the most promising device in the FACTS concept.
Several trials have been reported in the literature to
According to IEEE, FACTS - which is the
model a UPFC for steady-state and transient
abbreviation of Flexible AC Transmission Systems,
studies. Based on Nabavi–Iravani model [20],
is defined as “alternating current transmission
Wang developed two UPFC models [21-23] which
systems incorporating power electronics based and
have been linearized and incorporated into the
other static controllers to enhance controllability
Heffron-Phillips model [3].
and power transfer capability”. Dynamic reactive
power compensation and damping power system FACTS devices enhance the stability of the
oscillations can also be achieved using FACTS power system with its fast control characteristics
controllers. Injecting the series voltage phasor, and continuous compensating capability. The
with desirable voltage magnitude and phase angle controlling of the power flow and increasing the
in a line can provide a powerful means of precisely transmission capacity of the existing transmission
controlling the active and reactive power flows, by lines are the two main objectives of FACTS
which system stability can be improved, system technology [25]. Thus, the utilization of the existing
reliability can be enhanced while operating and power system comes into optimal condition and the
transmission investment cost can be reduced. controllability of the power system is increased
with these objectives. Gyugyi proposed the Unified
It is possible to vary the impedance of specific
Power Flow Controller which is the new type
transmission line to force power flow along a
generation of FACTS devices in the year 1991 [26].
desired “contract path” in the emerging power
Unified Power Flow Controller (UPFC), being one
systems, and to regulate the unwanted loop power
the member of the FACTS device thus emerged as
flows and parallel power flows in the
one of the effective controllers for controlling and
interconnected system. The FACTS controllers
optimization of the power flow in the electrical
have been broadly developed on two different
power transmission systems [7]. This device was
principles, one that alters the line series reactance
formed due to the combination of the two other
or bus shunt reactance or voltage phase difference
FACTS devices, namely Static Synchronous
across a line and utilizes conventional thyristor
Compensator (STATCOM) and the Static
switches for control. In general, FACTS controllers
Synchronous Series Compensator (SSSC). These
can be divided into four categories based on their
are connected to each other by a common DC link,
connection in the network, viz., series, shunt,
which is a typical a storage capacitor. The all
combined series-series, and combined series-shunt.
parameters of the power transmission line
In our work, we have used the series-shunt
(impedance, voltage and phase angle) can be
combination [2].
control simultaneously by UPFC [28]. In addition,
FACTS devices have shown very promising it can perform the control function of the
results when used to improve the power system transmission line real / reactive power flow, UPFC
steady state performance. In addition, because of bus voltage and the shunt-reactive-power flow
the extremely fast control action associated with control [29].
FACTS-device operations, they have been very
The control mechanism and the controller have
promising candidates for utilization in power
an important effect on the performance of UPFC. In
system damping enhancement. The first generation
the literature, several control mechanisms are used
FACTS devices include SVC, TCPS, and TCSC. It
in UPFC models. A novel fuzzy inference system
has been found that SVCs can be effective in
described in matrix form was proposed and used to
damping power system oscillations if a
improve the dynamic control of real and reactive
supplementary feedback signal is applied [11-12].
power [30]. Two fuzzy logic controllers based on
Compared with other FACTS devices, little
Mamdani type fuzzy logic were used. In our work
attention has been paid to TCPS modeling and
considered, we have used the Mamdani type fuzzy
control. Based on the equal area criterion, the TCPS
logic scheme for the control purposes [3].
control problem has also investigated using linear
control techniques [13-15]. The selection of suitable location for UPFC was
studied and composite-criteria based fuzzy logic
Many research efforts have been devoted to the
was used to evaluate the network contingency
control of TCSC. Chen et. al. designed a state
ranking [31]. The power-feedback control scheme
feedback TCSC controller based on the pole
is used in the control mechanism of UPFC [32].
placement technique [16]. Other TCSC optimal and
The power fluctuation is damped readily and the
nonlinear control schemes proposed in the literature

26
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved.
www.ijric.org
value of reactive power is minimized as possible by
using several time constants. However, there is no
change in the value of the real power. The control
method of variable interval-fuzzy-mutual is used in
the control mechanism of UPFC [33]. The
performance of UPFCs is observed by using three
different controllers comparisons in [34-35].
In recent years, the fast progress in the field of
power electronics has opened new opportunities for
the power industry via utilization of the controllable
Flexible AC Transmission System devices like
Unified Power Flow Controller which offer an
alternative means to mitigate power system
oscillations [5]. Oscillation Stability analysis and
control has been an important subject in power
system research and applications. The deregulation
and competitive environment in the contemporary
power networks [1, 2] will imply a new scenario in
terms of load and power flow condition and so
causing problems of line transmission capacity.
But, nowadays, some problems exist like power
system oscillation stability & refers to the damping
of electromechanical oscillations occurring in
power systems with oscillation frequency in the
range of 0.2 Hz. to 2 Hz. These low-frequency
oscillations are the consequence of the development
of interconnection of large power systems. A low
frequency oscillation in a power system constrains
the capability of power transmission, threatens
system security and damages the efficient operation
of the power system [4].
Damping of electromechanical oscillations
between interconnected machines in a integrated
power system is always necessary for a secured
system operation. A FACTS controller always
increases the transmission capability and the
stability. Researchers have developed a number of
methods for damping of power system oscillations
using FACTS devices. However, majority of them
are confined to single machine infinite bus systems.
Very few researchers have worked on multi-
machine control of FACTS systems. Of course,
this yields satisfactory results [6]. But, excellent
results can be obtained using the fuzzy logic
concepts, neural network concepts & the genetic
algorithms. This has been showed by few
researchers in their papers [10], [36]. In this paper,
we make a modest attempt to simulate a fuzzy logic
control scheme with a UPFC for a FACTS power
system to dampen the power system oscillations
[7].
The fuzzy logic control technique has been an
active research topic in automation and control
theory since the work of Mamdani proposed in
27
IJRIC
E-ISSN: 2076-3336
1974 based on the fuzzy sets theory of Zadeh
proposed in 1965 to deal with the system control
problems which are not easy to be modeled [36].
The concept of FLC is to utilize the qualitative
knowledge of a system to design a practical
controller. For a process control system, a fuzzy
control algorithm embeds the intuition and
experience of an operator designer and researcher.
The control doesn’t need accurate mathematical
model of a plant, and therefore, it suits well to a
process where the systems with uncertain or
complex dynamics. Of course, fuzzy control
algorithm can be developed by adaptation based on
learning and fuzzy model of the plant [14]. The
fuzzy control is basically non-linear and adaptive in
nature, giving robust performance under parameter
variation and load disturbance effect [8].
In general, a fuzzy control algorithm consists of a
set of heuristic decision rules and can be regarded
as an adaptive and non-mathematical control
algorithm based on a linguistic process, in contrast
to a conventional feedback control algorithm [3],
[4]. Controlled Series Compensation for Improving
Stability of Multi-Machine Power Systems in [17].
Fuzzy control using linguistic information
possesses several advantages such as robustness,
model-free, universal approximation theorem and
rules-based algorithm [5], [6]. Recent literature has
explored the potentials of fuzzy control for machine
drive application [7], [8]. It has been shown that a
properly designed direct fuzzy controller can out-
perform conventional proportional integral
derivative (PID) controllers [8]. Note that fuzzy
logic controllers are nothing but rule-based
controllers in which a set of rules representing a
control decision mechanism to adjust the effect of
certain cases coming from power system is
considered. Further, these FLCs do not require a
mathematical model of the system & can cover a
wide range of operating conditions with much
robustness inherency. FLCs combined with UPFC
can definitely reduce the POD in multi-machine
systems [9].
In an interconnected power system, the
synchronous generators should rotate at the same
speed and power flows over tie-lines should remain
constant under normal operating conditions.
However, low frequency electromechanical
oscillations may occur when a disturbance is
applied to the power system. These oscillations can
be observed in most power system variables like
bus voltage, line current, generator rate and power.
Power system oscillations were first observed as
soon as synchronous generators were
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved. IJRIC
www.ijric.org E-ISSN: 2076-3336

interconnected to provide more generation capacity
and more reliability to a power system [10].
Originally, the fairly closely connected
generators were observed to swing against each
other at frequencies of around 1 – 2 Hz. Damper
windings on the generator’s rotor were used to
prevent the amplitude of oscillations from
increasing. After fast excitation systems were
introduced to prevent the generators from loosing
synchronism following a system is fault, it was
noticed that this kind of excitation system always
tends to reduce the damping of the system
oscillations. Advanced tuning of POD controllers
for EPS using FACTS to damp the oscillations was
presented by Korba et.al. [37].
The organization of the paper is as follows.
Firstly, a brief introduction to the FACTS, its
evolutions, applications, the UPFC controller & the
fuzzy logic controller was presented in the previous
paragraphs. Section 2 presents the mathematical
modeling of the multi-machine system along with
the parameters. In section 3, the control strategy,
the design of the controller is presented. Section 4
presents the development of the Simulink model for
the damping of the power system oscillations.
Simulation results are presented in section 5.
Conclusions are finally presented at the end in
section 6. This is followed by the acronyms & the
the total linearized power system model (the plant
model) is represented finally in the state space form
as [10]
∆x& = A ∆x + B ∆u, (1)
∆y = C ∆x + D ∆u,
where, ∆x is the state vector of length equal to the
number of states n, ∆y is the output vector of length
m, ∆u is the input vector of length r, A is the
system state matrix of size (n × n), B is the control
input vector of size (n × r), C is the control input
vector of size (m × n), D is the feed-forward matrix
of size (m × r).
Note that for this linearized power system
model, controllers are designed and put in loop with
the plant model so that when there are any
disturbances taking place like the faults, the
oscillations are reduced quickly in no time, thus
becoming a closed loop feedback control system
[12]. The simulation parameters of the 3-machine,
9-bus interconnected power system model with 4
loads L1 to L4 & 2 UPFCs is given in table I.
Bus 1 Transformer Bus 3 Bus 4 Transformer
1 3
Gen 3
Gen 1
Bus 5
Bus 2

references. Bus 9
Load 1 Load 3
Load 4
2. MODELING OF THE 3-MACHINE, 9-BUS Bus 8 Transformer
2
INTEGRATED POWER SYSTEM
The integrated multi-machine power system Gen 2
model consisting of 3 generators used for the Bus 7 Bus 6

simulation purposes is shown in the form of a one- Load 2

line diagram (single line diagram) with & without
the controllers in the Figs. 1 & 2 respectively [10]. Fig. 1 : A 3-machine, 9-bus interconnected power system
The generators 1, 2 and 3 are connected to buses 1, model with 4-loads without the controllers
5 and 8. Two UPFC’s are used for controlling &
damping the power system oscillations in the UPFC
integrated plant [10]. One is connected between Bus 1 Transformer
1
1 Bus 3 Bus 4 Transformer
3
bus 2 & 3 and the other is connected between buses Fuzzy Gen 3
Logic
6 and 7. Controller
Gen 1
Bus 5
Bus 2

Three transformers T1 to T3 are also used in

Bus 9

POD 1

the integrated power system near the generator Load 1 Load 3

UPFC
buses for the power transmission purposes, i.e., for Bus 8 Transformer 2
Load 4

stepping up & stepping down purposes. 2

Fuzzy
Transmission lines are connected between the buses Logic
Controller
3-9-4-6. Since, we know that the power system is a Gen 2
Bus 7 Bus 6
dynamic one, definitely, it is a non-linear system. POD 2

For modeling & simulation purposes in the Matlab- Load 2

Simulink environment, a numerical model is
needed. By linearizing about an operating point,

28
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved.
www.ijric.org
Fig. 2 : A 3-machine, 9-bus interconnected power system
model with 4-loads & 2 POD-UPFC & the fuzzy
controller
Base value VB = 220 KV , S B = 100 MVA
Generators 2 H1 = 2 H 2 = 8 s, 2 H 3 = 10
D1 = D2 = D3 = 0.0,
Td 01 = Td 02 = 4.49 s,
Td 03 = 6 s
X d 1 = X d 2 = 1.56 ( p.u.),
X d 3 = 2 ( p.u.)
X q1 = X q 2 = 1.06 ( p.u.),
X q 3 = 1.9 ( p.u.)
X d 1 = X d 2 = 0.17 ( p.u.),
X d 3 = 0.25 ( p.u.)
Transformers X T 1 = X T 2 = X T 3 = j 0.305 ( p.u.)
Transmission Z l1 = Z l 2 = Z l 3 = 0.0 + j 0.25 ( p.u.)
lines
UPFCs VOper = 220 KV , Vse max = 0.1VOper ,
Vse min = −0.1VOper
Loads L1 = L2 = L3 = 0.05 ( p.u.),
L4 = 0.65 ( p.u.)
Table I : Machine parameter details
3. DEVELOPMENT OF THE
CONTROL STRATEGY
A controller is a device which controls each &
every operation in the system making decisions.
From the control system point of view, it is
bringing stability to the system when there is a
disturbance or a noise or a fault, thus safeguarding
the equipment from further damages. It may be
hardware based controller or a software based
controller or a combination of both. In this section,
the development of the control strategy for damping
the oscillations in FACTS based power systems is
presented.
The unified power flow controller (UPFC) is
one of the most promising device & most versatile
controller device used in the FACTS family [1] -
[4]. It is an electrical device for providing fast-
acting reactive power compensation on high-
voltage transmission networks & is generally used
as a controller in loop with the plant. It has the
capability to control voltage magnitude, line
impedance and phase angle, and can also
independently provide (positive or negative)
reactive power injections, thus providing the
voltage support, control of power flow, & can be
29
IJRIC
E-ISSN: 2076-3336
used to control active and reactive power flows in a
transmission line. [5].
The concept of UPFC makes it possible to
handle practically all power flow control and
transmission line compensation problems, using
solid state controllers, which provide functional
flexibility, generally not attainable by conventional
thyristor controlled systems [13]. It has a capability
of improving both steady-state and dynamic
performances of a power system as they allow more
accurate control of the power flow, better and faster
control of voltage and system stability. [6].
It can be connected in series with a
transmission line inside a system or in a tie-line
connecting sub-systems in a large interconnected
power system [7]. Moreover, UPFC further
improves the dynamic performance of the power
system in coordination with damping controllers
[8]. As a result, one of their applications is the
damping of power system oscillations using Power
Oscillation Damping (POD), which recently has
been attracting the interest of many researchers,
including ours [10].
The heart of the UPFC is the power electronic
devices, i.e., the silicon controlled rectifiers. It
consists of two solid-state synchronous voltage
source converters coupled through a common DC
link capacitor as shown in Fig. 3, i.e., 2 voltage
source inverters sharing a common DC storage
capacitor. Two coupling transformers are used. As
shown in Fig. 3, the UPFC consists of a boosting
transformer and an excitation transformer linked by
back-to-back converters 1 and 2. The first
converter 1 is connected in shunt and the second
one 2 in series with the line. The shunt converter is
primarily used to provide active power demand of
the series converter through a common DC link [1],
[2].
Converter 1 can also generate or absorb
reactive power and thereby provide independent
shunt reactive compensation for the line. Converter
2 provides the main function of the UPFC by
injecting additional voltage with controllable
magnitude and phase angle in series with the
transmission line through series transformer [26].
The main task of the UPFC is to control the flow of
power in steady-state conditions. In addition, high
speed of operation of thyristor devices makes it
possible to control real and reactive power flow.
The UPFC can be employed to enhance power
system damping by modulating the converter
voltages. The UPFCs are used at certain locations
in a integrated power system in between some
buses [3].
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
The expanded model of the UPFC with its
inner details used for the dynamic simualtion in the
Simulink is shown in the Fig. 4. In the Fig. 3
shown, the i and j represents the buses in the
integrated power system model. In our work
considered, we have taken the total number of
buses to be 9 & Two UPFCs connected between
bus 2, 3 and 6, 7.
i j
Shunt
side
Converter
1
Transformer
Shunt
C
DC
Link
Capacitor
Fig. 3 : A block diagram of the UPFC scheme used in
FACTS (single line diagram)
S h u n t Tra n sfo rm e r
T r a n s m is s io n lin e
D C C o n tr o lle r 2
C o n tr o lle r 1
C effects may be more. But, by the usage of POD &
A C
Inputs
U P F C C o n tr o lle r
Fig. 4 : Expanded view of the UPFC scheme used in
FACTS
UPFCs can be operated in a number of modes.
Some of them are just mentioned here for the sake
of convenience. 2 control modes are used for the
shunt control, viz., the VAR control mode and the
automatic voltage control mode. 4 control modes
are used for the series control, viz., the direct
voltage injection mode, phase angle shifter
emulation mode, the line impedance emulation
mode & the automatic power flow control mode.
Wang et.al. [9] has used the 3 control scheme
concept in his paper, viz., the uncontrolled mode,
the inductive mode & the capacitive mode [17]. In
the work considered in this paper for the damping
of the power system oscillations, UPFC is operated
in the direct voltage injection mode. Since the
UPFC output is in the series compensation mode
(Vse), the voltage is perpendicular to the line current
(Iline) and the phase angle of the line current is
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved. IJRIC
www.ijric.org E-ISSN: 2076-3336
ahead of Vse. By the control of the Vse, the series
compensating damping control can be achieved in a
coordinated manner [18].
There are a lot of advantages of UPFC schemes
used in FACTS. In the conventional methods -
FACTS + POD controller + UPFC, the settling time
may be more, oscillations may be more, ringing
effects may be more. But, by the usage of POD &
Series
Transformer UPFC in coordiantion with a fuzzy controller in the
FACTS based power systems, the settling time, the
Series oscillations, the ringing effects of various power
side
system parameters would be still less then the
previous counter-part (still improved with accurate
damping). But, still accurate results can be
obtained when the POD based UPFC scheme is
coordinated with a fuzzy scheme. Hence, this
Converter
concept, i.e., the control of power system
2 oscillations with fuzzy scheme & POD - UPFC is
used in our paper. This trio concept not only
improves the dynamics & the characteristics of the
power system, but also increases the stability. This
can be observed in the simulation results presented
Series Transformer in section 5 in this paper [19].
There are a lot of advantages of UPFC schemes
used in FACTS. In the conventional methods -
FACTS + POD controller + UPFC, the settling time
may be more, oscillations may be more, ringing
A C
UPFC in coordiantion with a fuzzy controller in the
FACTS based power systems, the settling time, the
oscillations, the ringing effects of various power
system parameters would be still less then the
Inputs
previous counter-part (still improved with accurate
damping). But, still accurate results can be
obtained when the POD based UPFC scheme is
coordinated with a fuzzy scheme. Hence, this
concept, i.e., the control of power system
oscillations with fuzzy scheme & POD - UPFC is
used in our paper. This trio concept not only
improves the dynamics & the characteristics of the
power system, but also increases the stability. This
can be observed in the simulation results presented
in section 5 in this paper [19].
In the POD-UPFC base controllers for the
FACTS systems, performance is very good for
single machine infinite bus problems; the damping
of the power system oscillations may be perfectly
achieved. But, for the multi-machine problems,
using POD based UPFC controllers; the
performance characteristics may be deteriorated &
it may swing into the instability mode, especially
when large faults & disturbances takes place. In
this case, in order to achieve desired performance
of the multi-model system using the POD based
30
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved. IJRIC
www.ijric.org E-ISSN: 2076-3336

UPFC controller, one has to take the coordination in the power system consists of 3 important parts,
between the POD-UPFC controllers. This is very viz., fuzzification, knowledge base - decision
much essential, because a single POD-UPFC making logic (inference system) and the de-
controller is used for the control of different fuzzification, which are explained in brief as
parameters in a single machine. For multi-machine follows [23].
system, definitely, one has to use multiple POD- (Power angle)
UPFC controllers for controlling the oscillations. Actual output
Then, the coordination between the different POD
based UPFC controllers plays a very important role

System
(Plant)
Power
in the stability of the power systems [20]. To
achieve excellent coordination between the various
parameters of the POD based UPFC controllers in
FACTS, the fuzzy logics can be used along with the

UPFC
POD-UPFC controller, which yields excellent
performance. This type of hybrid controller
concept is considered in order to keep the existing
POD based UPFC controller performance and

POD
further improve its control performance using the
fuzzy scheme [21].
In the research work considered in this paper,

De-fuzzification
fuzzy logic controller is used to coordinate between
the various parameters of the multi-machine based

Unit
FACTS power system along with the POD-UPFC
as shown in the block diagram in the Fig. 5. These
Fuzzy coordination controller

fuzzy controllers have got a lot of advantages

compared to the classical (P, PI, PID) & the
conventional controllers (POD-UPFC), such as the

Data base
Rule base

Decision
Making
simplicity of control, low cost, high reliability,

Unit
compactness of the hardware (since fuzzy logic
controller just makes use of fuzzy rules) and the
possibility to design without knowing the exact
mathematical model of the process [22].
Fuzzification

Fuzzy logic is one of the successful

Unit

applications of fuzzy set in which the variables are

linguistic rather than the numeric variables &
emerged as a consequence of the 1965 proposal of
fuzzy set theory by Lotfi Zadeh. Linguistic
variables, defined as variables whose values are
sentences in a natural language (such as large or
Refer
ence

small), may be represented by the fuzzy sets.

Fuzzy set is an extension of a ‘crisp’ set where an
element can only belong to a set (full membership)
or not belong at all (no membership). Fuzzy sets
allow partial membership, which means that an
element may partially belong to more than one set.
A fuzzy set A of a universe of discourse X is
represented by a collection of ordered pairs of
generic element x ∈ X and its membership function
µ : X → [ 0 1], which associates a number µA(x) :
X → [ 0 1], to each element x of X. A fuzzy logic
controller is based on a set of control rules called as
the fuzzy rules among the linguistic variables [27].
These rules are expressed in the form of conditional
statements. Our basic structure of the fuzzy logic
coordination controller to damp out the oscillations
Fig. 5 : A diagrammatic view of a typical fuzzy logic
controller used along with POD-UPFC for controlling the
oscillations in a power system
The internal structure of the fuzzy coordination
unit is shown in the Fig. 5. The necessary inputs to
the decision-making unit blocks are the rule-based
units and the data based block units. The
fuzzification unit converts the crisp data into
linguistic variables. The decision making unit
decides in the linguistic variables with the help of
logical linguistic rules supplied by the rule base
unit and the relevant data supplied by the data base
[8[, [5]. The output of the decision-making unit is

31
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved. IJRIC
www.ijric.org E-ISSN: 2076-3336

given as input to the de-fuzzification unit and the ⎧ 0 x< p

linguistic variables of the signal are converted back ⎪( x − p ) (3)
into the numeric form of data in the crisp form [5]. µ Big ( x) = ⎨ N
p ≤ x ≤ ( p + N)
The decision-making unit uses the conditional rules ⎪ 1 x > ( p + N)
⎩
of ‘IF-THEN-ELSE’, which can be observed from
the algorithm mentioned below [24]. In the The membership function of the medium set is
fuzzification process, i.e., in the first stage, the crisp given by the Eqn. (4) as [10]
variables PUPFC-1 and PUPFC-2 are converted into
fuzzy variables or the linguistics variables [7]. ⎧ 0 x < ( p − N)
⎪ ( x + N − p)
The fuzzification maps the 2 input variables to ⎪ ( p − N ) ≤ x ≤ p (4)
µ Big ( x) = ⎨ N
linguistic labels of the fuzzy sets. The fuzzy (− x + N + p ) p ≤ x ≤ (p + N)
⎪ N
coordinated controller uses the linguistic labels : ⎪
{(Small S mf1), (Medium M mf1), (Big B mf2)}. ⎩ 1 x > ( p + N)
Each fuzzy label has an associated membership
function. The membership function of triangular Note that p is the parameter which can be
type is used in our work & is shown in the Fig. 6. determined on the basis of the rated values of the
The inputs are fuzzified using the 3-fuzzy sets (S, controllers [27]. The whole concept of the
M, B). Power inputs of UPFC 1 and UPFC 2 are membership functions as mentioned in the above
given to fuzzy controller. The output of the fuzzy- Eqns. (2) to (4) which are used in generating the
converter will genarate the pulses, which are further rule base for the fuzzification process is explained
given as inputs to the POD [25]. graphically in the form of a diagram in the Fig. 7.
µ(x)
Small Medium Big
mf1 mf2 mf3
1
PUPFC-1 FUZZYSVPWM

(Mandani)
Ouput 0 p−n p p+n 1 x
PUPFC-2
Fig. 6 : FIS Fuzzy editor with 2 inputs and 1 outputs Fig. 7 : Membership function used in the
fuzzification process.

The output of the fuzzy-converter will genarate The developed fuzzy rules included in the
the pulses, which are further given as inputs to the fuzzy coordinated controller is given below in the
POD [25]. The membership function of the small form of an algorithm as follows :
set is given by the Eqn. (2) as [10] 1. If (input_1 is mf1) and (input_2 is mf1) then
(output_1 is mf3)(1)
⎧ 1 x < (p − N) 2. If (input_1 is mf1) and (input_2 is mf2) then
⎪− x + p
µ small ( x) = ⎨ N
( p − N) ≤ x ≤ p (2) (output_1 is mf2)(1)
⎪ 3. If (input_1 is mf1) and (input_2 is mf3) then
⎩ 0 x> p (output_1 is s1)(1)
4. If (input_1 is mf2) and (input_2 is mf1) then
where x, is the inputs to the Fuzzy-POD-UPFC
(output_1 is mf3)(1)
controllers, namely the PUPFC-1 and PUPFC-2. From
5. If (input_1 is mf2) and (input_2 is mf2) then
this equation, we see that when x is less than (p− (output_1 is mf2)(1)
N), the value of the function is 1, when it is greater 6. If (input_1 is mf2) and (input_2 is mf3) then
than p, the value is zero. In between the 2 (output_1 is s1)(1)
inequalities, the value of the function is having a 7. If (input_1 is mf3) and (input_2 is mf1) then
decreasing slope of −1 [26]. (output_1 is mf3)(1)
The membership function of the big set is 8. If (input_1 is mf3) and (input_2 is mf2) then
given by the Eqn. (3) as [10] (output_1 is mf2)(1)
9. If (input_1 is mf3) and (input_2 is mf3) then
(output_1 is s1)(1)

32
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved. IJRIC
www.ijric.org E-ISSN: 2076-3336

The control decisions are made based on the The output of the fuzzy-coordination unit is
fuzzified variables. The inference involves a set of further given as the input to the POD, which in turn
rules for determining the output decisions [28]. As is given as input to the UPFC controller. The POD
there are 2 input variables PUPFC-1 and PUPFC-2 & (Power Oscillation Damping) uses 5 individual
three fuzzified variables (S, M, B), the fuzzy logic blocks, viz., the amplification block, the wash out
coordination controller has a set of 9 rules for each link, 2 stage of lag-lead blocks and a limiter.
POD based UPFC controller. To determine the
The modeling of this is done in Simulink and is
degree of memberships for the output variables, the
shown in the Fig. 9. Note that the inputs to
concept of min-max inference is used. Note that
controller (PUPFC-1 and PUPFC-2) are the active power
both the controllers use the same rule base system
flow through the UPFCs. The output signal of the
[29]. Only the input is exchanged. The rule base
fuzzy-POD combination is the command signals to
for the decision-making unit is written as shown in
the UPFCs [33]. Thus, in this way, the
the table II as follows :
conventional POD controllers are tuned by making
PUPFC1 → Small Medium Big Set use of the fuzzy-coordination controllers.
set S set M B
PUPFC2 ↓ mf1 mf2 mf3 The control signal generated from this
combined fuzzy-POD-UPFC is given to the multi-
Small set S mf1 B M S
machine model which is further used to dampen the
Medium set M mf2 B M S oscillations [34]. The main advantage of putting
Big set B mf3 M S S the fuzzy coordination controller before the UPFC-
POD in modeling is the amplification part of the
Table II : The 9-fuzzy rules used for determining the conventional controller being modified by the fuzzy
output decisions (Inference table) rule base used for the coordination unit, thus increasing the power system
control purposes
stability. The overall structure of the fuzzy-
Now, the 9 output variables of the inference coordination controller used in the work is shown
system are the linguistic variables and they must be in the block-diagram in the Fig. 8.
converted into numerical output, i.e., they have to
be de-fuzzified [30]. This process is what is called
as de-fuzzification.
Defuzzification is the process of producing a
quantifiable result in fuzzy logic. The
defuzzifcation transforms a fuzzy set information
into a numeric data information. This operation
along with the operation of fuzzification is critical
to the design of fuzzy systems as both of these
operations provide nexus between the fuzzy set
domain and the real valued scalar domain [31].
There are so many methods to perform the
deffuzification, viz., centre of gravity method,
centre of singleton method, maximum methods, the
marginal properties of the centroid methods & so
on. In our work, we use the centre of gravity
method. The output of the fuzzy-coordination
controller according to the centre of gravity method
is given by the Eqn. (5) as
9

∑ µ (u ). uc i i
u= i =1 , (5)
9

∑ µ (u )
i =1
c i

where ui corresponds to the value of the control

output for which the membership values in the
output sets are equal to unity [32].

33
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved. IJRIC
www.ijric.org E-ISSN: 2076-3336

Final control
Fig. 8 : The Fuzzy coordinated-POD-UPFC controller

the plant
signal to
Controller

Controller
UPFC

UPFC
1

2
Vmax
Vmax

Limiter Limiter

V min
V min

Control signal to UPFC-2

1 + sT3
1 + s T4
1 + sT3
1 + s T4
Control signal to UPFC-1

POD Controller - 1

POD Controller - 2

1 + s T2
1 + s T2

1 + sT1
1 + sT1

1 + s Tw
1 + s Tw

s Tw
s Tw
Coordinator

Coordinator
Controller

Controller
Fuzzy

Fuzzy
1

2
PUPFC-1

PUPFC-2

1 0.7 tf([3 0],[3 1]) tf([0.05 1],[0.05 1]) tf([0.05 1],[0.05 1]) 1
In1 Out1
Gain
Amplification Wash-out link Two lag-lead blocks in cascade Limiter
Block
Fig. 9 : Transfer function model of one of the 2 POD controllers used for simulation
purposes with the numerical values

3. DEVELOPMENT OF THE SIMULINK systems, transformers, the output sinks (scopes) &
MODEL the input sources [39].
The Simulink model is developed from the
In this section, we present the development of basic functions available in the Simulink library &
the Simulink model for the multi-machine power from the various tool-boxes available. Transformers
system with and without the controller. The Fig. 10 are used for voltage step up & step down purposes.
shows the simulation model of 3-generator, 9-bus The sub-system shown in the Simulink model
system installed with two Fuzzy-POD-UPFC consists of FACTS POD controller and it involves a
controllers, i.e., first one between 2nd and the 3rd bus 3-stage first order transfer functions consisting of an
and second one is at 6th and 7th bus. The entire amplification block, a wash-out block and mc stages
system modeled in Simulink is a closed loop of lead-lag blocks & the limiters [35].
feedback control system consisting of the plants, The output signal of the Fuzzy coordinated
controllers, comparators, feedback systems, the POD is amplification signal adjusted to the UPFC
mux, de-mux, integrators, state-space models, sub- POD controller & given as input to the UPFC. In
this way, the conventional POD controllers are

34
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved. IJRIC
www.ijric.org E-ISSN: 2076-3336

coordinated dynamically by means of fuzzy-logic & controller. The step size for the simulation was
the amplification part of the conventional controller taken to be very small so that we get very accurate
is modified by the fuzzy coordination controllers, results. For the software implementation purposes,
thus acting as a pre-amplifier [38]. Fuzzy we had taken a 3-generator nine bus system with
coordinated controller consists of 3 basic blocks 220 KV line and 100 MW generators. The 3 phase
viz., fuzzification, inference, and the de- to ground symmetrical fault is made to occur near
fuzzification blocks. A set of 9 fuzzy rules are the first generator for 200 ms from the first cycle to
written and called in the form of a file in the the tenth cycle & is also simulated in the Simulink
developed Simulink model with the controller. model. Due to the occurrence of the fault, the
The 3 phase to ground symmetrical fault is simulation results were observed with & without the
made to occur near the first generator for 200 ms controller. The fuzzy editor with 2 inputs & 1
from the first cycle to the tenth cycle. In the work output is shown in the Fig. 12. Further, the
considered shown in the Fig. 10, the combined effect membership function is shown in the Fig. 13. The 9
of Fuzzy-POD-UPFC is mainly used for power fuzzy rules used in the development of fuzzy logic
system oscillation damping [37]. The Fig. 11 shows coordination scheme is shown in the Fig. 14. The
the simulation model of 3-generator, 9-bus system rule viewer for the same is presented in the Fig. 15.
installed without the controllers. The response curve of power angle in degrees
This system is thus, an open loop control system vs. time is obtained without & with the controller
because of the absence of the controller [40]. The 3 and is shown in the Figs. 16 and 17 respectively.
phase to ground symmetrical fault is also made to The comparative response curves with & without the
occur near the first generator for 200 ms from the controller both is shown in the Fig. 18. It is clearly
first cycle to the tenth cycle like in the model with observed from the simulation results that with the
the controller. This is done in order to compare the developed controller, the dynamic performance of
effectiveness of the incorporated controller in the the power system is quite improved with the
model when the fault takes place with the model incorporation of the fuzzy coordination scheme. It
without the controller when the fault takes place is also observed that with the controller, the power
[36]. angle characteristics curves exhibit very less
overshoots & undershoots, The oscillations are also
damped out in a lesser time. The response
5. SIMULATION RESULTS
characteristics take less time to settle & reach the
Simulations are carried out in Matlab 7. The final steady state value.
simulation was run for 2 secs with & without the
To Workspace
Vabc
Continuous x1
PQ
pow ergui Iabc
timefuzzy To Workspace1
Clock 3-phase
To Workspace4 x2 Instantaneous
Vabc
deltafuzzy Active & Reactive Power
m Delta PQ
Iabc
To Workspace3
3-phase
A a
Out1
Vabc Vabc
A A A Power Plant #1
B Iabc Iabc Pnom=1000 MW3
B b
C Aa
B a B a
a A Out1
Power Plant #1 Bb
b b A
C c
Pnom=1000 MW2 C C Cc B
c c
A b B C
C
A
B

T hree-Phase Three-Phase B4
B V-I Measurement V-I Measurement1
c C
C
A
B

C
Three-Phase 1
C
A
B

Series RLC Load1 z

Three-Phase Unit Delay
Series RLC Load2

y
Conn1

To Workspace2 Current Regulator Conn2

1
Iabc* Conn3 1
z Pulses Subsystem1
Unit Delay2
Conn4
Conn1 z
In1Out1 V* Iabc
In1 Conn5 Unit Delay1
I* Conn2
V
Fuzzy Logic Conn6
Subsystem 1 Conn3
Controller Conn7
z Conn4 Current Regulator2
In1Out1 V*
Unit Delay3 Conn8
Conn5 In1 I* Iabc*
V
Conn9 Fuzzy Logic Pulses
Conn6 Subsystem4
Subsystem2 Controller2 Iabc
Conn7
a

Conn8

Conn9
C
A

C
A
B

Out1
A
B
C
Power Plant #1
Pnom=1000 MW1

Fig. 10 : The developed Simulink model of a 3-machine, 9-bus system with Fuzzy-POD-UPFC (with controller)

35
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved. IJRIC
www.ijric.org E-ISSN: 2076-3336

Continuous B3 B9

pow ergui m Delta

Va bc
A A
Out1
Scope3 Iab bc Out1
B5
A
A a Aa Ba aB Aa a A A
Aa Aa
B Bb B b Bb b b Bb b B B
Bb
Cc C C
C c Cc c c Cc c C C
C Cc
B1
B2 B4
Generator 2

C
A
B
C
Generator 1 A

A
B

cC
B6

aA

bB

C
A
B
B
C
timewithout

c
Load 1 Load 4
To Workspace
Clock Load 3

C
A

B
Generator side 1 system

1 Generator side 3 system

cC
B3

aA

bB
m A 4
Pm
m Pm
A A a m A1
Pm
B B b 2 A A a
m Pm
0.5 Vf _
5
C C c B B B b
1000 MVA Out1 0.5 Vf _
1000 MVA C C c B3
3

C
A
B
Pref Vf A Aa
13.8 kV/230 kV 1000 MVA1 1000 MVA
13.8kV 1000 MVA C B Bb Pref Vf
13.8 kV/230 kV1 6
C Cc 13.8kV 1000 MVA C1
Reg_M1
B8
Reg_M2
1 Generator 3
Load 2
Out1 2
Out2

Fig. 11 : The developed Simulink model of a 3-machine, 9-bus system without Fuzzy based UPFC-P OD
(without controller)

Fig. 14 : 9-Fuzzy rules used in the development of the

fuzzy logic coordination scheme
Fig. 12 : FIS Fuzzy editor with 2 inputs & 1 output

Fig. 15 : Rule viewer for 2 inputs & one output

Fig. 13 : Developed membership functions using the

Simulink

36
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved.
www.ijric.org
Fig. 16 : Simulation result of power angle v/s time
(without Fuzzy-POD-UPFC)
Fig. 17 : Simulation result of power angle v/s time (with
UPFC & fuzzy control)
Fig. 18 : Comparison of the simulation results of
power angle v/s time
(without UPFC & with UPFC & fuzzy control)
6. CONCLUSIONS
A FACTS based multi-machine power system
comprising of 3 generators, 9 buses, 3 loads with
and without the 2 Fuzzy-POD-UPFC controllers was
considered in this paper. Simulink models were
developed in Matlab 7 with & without the Fuzzy-
POD-UPFC controllers for the considered multi-
machine model in order to damp out the oscillations.
The control strategy was also developed by writing a
set of fuzzy rules. The fuzzy control strategy was
designed based on the conventional POD-UPFC
controller & put before the POD-UPFC in the
modeling.
The main advantage of putting the fuzzy
coordination controller before the POD-UPFC in
modeling is the amplification part of the
conventional controller being modified by the fuzzy
coordination unit, thus increasing the power system
stability. Simulations were run in Matlab 7 & the
results were observed on the scope. Graphs of
power angle vs. time were observed with and
without the controller. From the simulation results,
it was observed that without the Fuzzy-POD-UPFC
37
IJRIC
E-ISSN: 2076-3336
controller, the nine bus system will be having more
disturbances, while we check the power angle on the
first generator.
There are lot of ringing oscillations (overshoots
/ undershoots) & the output takes a lot of time to
stabilize, which can be observed from the simulation
results. But, from the incorporation of the Fuzzy-
POD-UPFC coordination system in loop with the
plant gave better results there by reducing the
disturbances in the power angle and also the post
fault settling time also got reduced a lot. The system
stabilizes quickly, thus damping the local mode
oscillations and reducing the settling time
immediately after the occurrence of the fault.
The developed control strategy is not only
simple, reliable, and may be easy to implement in
real time applications. The performance of the
developed method in this paper thus demonstrates
the damping of the power system oscillations using
the effectiveness of Fuzzy-POD-UPFC coordination
concepts over the damping of power system
oscillations without the Fuzzy-POD-UPFC
coordination scheme.
NOMENCLATURE
UPFC Unified Power Flow Controller
FACTS Flexible AC Transmission System
POD Power Oscillation Damping
PSOC Power System Operation & Control
IEEE Institute of Electrical & Electronics
SVC Static Var Compensator
TCSC Thyristor Controlled Series Compensator
TCPS Thyristor Controlled Phase Shifter
SSSC Static Synchronous Series Compensator
STATCOM Static Synchronous Compensator
DC Direct Current
AC Alternating Current
FLC Fuzzy Logic Control
PD Proportional Derivative
PID Proportional Integrator Derivative
REFERENCES
[1]. L. Gyugi, “Unified Power flow concept for
flexible AC transmission systems”, IEE
Proc., Vol. 139, No. 4, pp. 323–332, 1992.
[2]. M. Noroozian, L. Angquist, M. Ghandari, and
G. Anderson, “Use of UPFC for optimal
power flow control”, IEEE Trans. on Power
Systems, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 1629–1634,
1997.
[3]. Nabavi-Niaki and M.R. Iravani, “Steady-state
and dynamic models of unified power flow
controller (UPFC) for power system studies”,
IEEE’96 Winter Meeting, Paper 96, 1996.
[4]. C.D. Schauder, D.M. Hamai, and A. Edris.
“Operation of the Unified Power Flow
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved.
www.ijric.org
Controller (UPFC) under Practical
constraints”, IEEE Trans. On Power
Delivery, Vol. 13, No. 2. pp. 630~639, Apr. [16].
1998.
[5]. Gyugyi, L., “Unified power flow controller
concept for flexible AC transmission
systems”, IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib.,
No.139, pp. 323-331, 1992
[6]. S.N. Dhurvey and V.K. Chandrakar: [17].
“Performance Comparsion of UPFC in
Coordination with Optimized POD and PSS
On Damping of Power System Oscillations”,
WSEAS Transactions on Power Systems,
Issue 5 , Vol. 3 , pp. 287-299, May 2008.
[7]. V.K.Chandrakar, A.G.Kothari, “RBFN Based [18].
UPFC for Improving transient stability
Performance”, WSEAS Transactions on
Power Systems, Issue 1 , Vol. 2 , pp.1-6 , Jan
2007.
[8]. K.R. Padiyar , K. Uma Rao, “Modeling and [19].
Control of UPFC for Transient Stability”,
Elsevier Journal of Electrical Power Energy
Systems, N0. 21, pp. 1- 11, 1999.
[9]. H.F. Wang, M. Jazaeri, Y.J. Cao, “Operating
modes and control interaction analysis of [20].
unified power flow controllers”, IEE Proc.,
Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 152, Issue 2,
pp. 264–270, Mar. 2005.
[10]. Lijun Cai, Istvan Erlich, “Fuzzy coordination
of FACTS controllers for damping power [21].
system oscillations”, Proc. Of the Int. Symp.
On Modern Electronic Power Systems,
Wroclaw, pp. 251-256, Sept. 11-13, 2002.
[11]. A. E. Hammad, “Analysis of Power System
Stability Enhancement by Static VAR [22].
Compensators”, IEEE Trans. PWRS, Vol. 1,
No. 4, pp. 222–227, 1986.
[12]. S. Lee and C. C. Liu, “An Output Feedback
Static VAR Controller for the Damping of [23].
Generator Oscillations”, Electric Power
System Research, Vol. 29, pp. 9–16, 1994.
[13]. A. Hasanovic and A. Feliachi, “Genetic
Algorithm Based Inter-Area Oscillation [24].
Damping Controller Design Using
MATLAB”, Power Eng. Society Summer
Meeting 2002 IEEE, Vol. 3, pp. 1136 –1141, [25].
21-25 Jul 2002.
[14]. M.R. Iravani, P.L. Dandeno, K.H. Nguyen,
D. Zhu, and D. Maratukulam, “Applications
of Static Phase Shifters in Power Systems”,
IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, Vol. 9, No.3, [26].
pp. 1600–1608, 1994.
[15]. M.A. Abido, “Thyristor Controlled Phase
Shifter Based Stabilizer Design Using
Simulated Annealing Algorithm”, Intl. Conf.
Electric Power Engineering, PowerTech,
38
IJRIC
E-ISSN: 2076-3336
Budapest, Paper 99, pp. 307, 29 Aug.–2 Sept.
1999.
A. A. Hashmani, Youyi Wang, and T. Lie,
“Design and Application of a Nonlinear
Coordinated Excitation and TCPS Controller
in Power Systems”, Proc. the 2001 American
Control Conf., Vol. 2, pp. 811–816, 25–27
Jun. 2001.
X.R. Chen, N.C. Pahalawaththa, U.D.
Annakkage, and C. Kumble, “Controlled
Series Compensation for Improving Stability
of Multi-Machine Power Systems”, IEE Proc.
Gen. Trans. and Distrib., Vol. 142, No. 4, pp.
361–366, 1995.
J. Chang and J.H. Chow, “Time-Optimal
Control of Power Systems Requiring Multiple
Switchings of Series Capacitors”, IEEE
Trans. Power Systems, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp.
367–373, 1998.
Y. Wang, R.R. Mohler, R. Spee, and W.
Mittelstadt, “Variable-Structure Facts
Controllers for Power System Transient
Stability”, IEEE Trans. Power Systems,
7(1)(1992), pp. 307–313.
M.A. Abido, “Genetic-Based TCSC Damping
Controller Design for Power System Stability
Enhancement”, Intl. Conf. Electric Power
Engineering - 1999, PowerTech Budapest 99,
pp. 165, 29 Aug.–2 Sep. 1999.
A. Nabavi-Niaki, and M.R. Iravani, “Steady-
State and Dynamic Models of Unified Power
Flow Controller (UPFC) for Power System
Studies”, IEEE Trans. Power Systems, Vol.
11, No. 4, pp. 1937–1943, 1996.
H.F. Wang, “Damping Function of Unified
Power Flow Controller”, IEE Proc. Gen.
Trans. and Distrib., Vol. 146, No. 1, pp. 81–
87, 1999.
H.F. Wang, “Application of Modeling UPFC
Into Multi-Machine Power Systems”, IEE
Proc. Gen. Trans. and Distrib., Vol. 146, No.
3, pp. 306–312, 1999.
Y. H. Song, A. T. Jons, “Flexible AC
Transmission Systems (FACTS)”, IEE Power
and Energy Series, pp. 30, 1999.
S. Hongbo, D.C Yu. Luo Chunlei, “A novel
method of power flow analysis with unified
power flow controller (UPFC)”, Power
Engineering Society Winter Meeting, 2000,
pp. 2800 – 2805, Vol. 4, 23-27 Jan. 2000.
Narain G. Hingorani, Laszlo Gyugyi
“Understanding FACTS: Conceptsand
Technology of Flexible AC Transmission
Systems”, Power electronics sponsored by
the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved.
www.ijric.org
Engineers, Inc. 3 Park Avenue, New York,
NY 10016-5997, 2000.
[27]. A. A. Eldamaty, S. O. Faried, S. Aboreshaid,
“Damping Power System Oscillations Using
a Fuzzy Logic Based Unified Power Flow
Controller”, J. Electrical and Computer
Engineering, pp. 1950 –1953, 2005.
[28]. R.P Kalyani, G.K. Venayagamoorthy, M.
Crow, “Neuroidentification of system
parameters for the shunt & series branch
control of UPFC”, Power Engineering
Society General Meeting, 2003, IEEE Vol. 4,
13-17 Jul. 2003.
[29]. S. Kannan, S. Jayaram, M. M. A. Salama,
“Real and Reactive Power Coordination for a
Unified Power Flow Controller”, IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 19,
Issue 3, pp. 1454 – 1461, 2004.
[30]. R. Orizondo, R. Alves, “UPFC Simulation
and Control Using the ATP/EMTP and
MATLAB/Simulink Programs”,
Transmission & Distribution Conference and
Exposition, IEEE/PES, pp. 1 – 7, 2006.
[31]. D. Thukaram, L. Jenkins, K. Visakha,
“Improvement of System Security with
Unified Power Flow Controller at Suitable
Locations under Network Contingencies of
Interconnected Systems”, IEE Proceedings
Generation, Transmission and Distribution,
Vol. 152, Issue 5, pp. 682 – 690, 2005.
[32]. H. Fujita, Y. Watanabe, H. Akagi, “Control
and Analysis of a Unified Power Flow
Controller”, IEEE Transactions on Power
Electronics, Vol. 14, Issue 6, pp. 1021 –
1027, 1999.
[33]. B. Lu, L. Hou, B. Li, Y. Liu, “A New Unified
Power Flow Fuzzy Control Method”, Jr.
Innovative Computing, Information and
Control, Second International Conference,
pp. 479 – 479, 2007.
[34]. Y. Qing, L. Norum, T. Undeland, S. Round,
“Investigation of Dynamic Controllers for a
Unified Power Flow Controller”, Trans. On
Industrial Electronics, Control, and
Instrumentation, Vol. 3, pp. 1764-1769, 1996.
[35]. M. W. Mustafa, A. A. Zin, A.F. Kadir,
“Steady State Analysis of Power
Transmission Using Unified Power Flow
Controller”, Transmission and Distribution
Conference and Exhibition, Vol. 3, pp. 2049
– 2053.
[36]. P. K. Dash, S. Mishra, and G. Panda,
“Damping Multi-modal Power System
Oscillation Using a Hybrid Fuzzy Controller
for Series Connected FACTS Devices”, IEEE
39
IJRIC
E-ISSN: 2076-3336
Trans. on Power Systems, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp.
1360–1366, Nov. 2000.
[37]. P. Korba, F.R. Segundo, B. Chaudhuri,
“Advanced tuning of POD controllers for
EPS using FACTS”, Proc. of the 17th World
Congress, IFAC, Seoul, Korea, , pp. 11076-
11077, Jul. 6-11, 2008.
[38]. Rusejla Sadikovi´C, “Use of FACTS Devices
for Power Flow Control and Damping of
Oscillations in Power Systems”, Doctoral
Thesis, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology,
Zurich, 2006.
[39]. Lutfu Saribulut, Mehmet Tumay, and Đlyas
Eker, “Performance Analysis of Fuzzy Logic
Based Unified Power Flow Controller”, Proc.
World Academy of Science, Engineering and
Technology, Vol. 35, ISSN 2070-3740, pp.
321-327, Nov. 2008.
[40]. P.K. Dasha, S. Mishra, “Damping of
multimodal power system oscillations by
FACTS devices using non-linear Takagi-
Sugeno fuzzy controller”, Proc. Electrical
Power and Energy Systems, Vol. 25, pp.
481–490, 2003.
D. Obulesu received the B.E.
degree in EEE from STJ
Institute of Technology,
Ranebennur, Karnataka, India
from Karnataka University
and M.Tech. in Power
Electronics from Dr. M.G.R.
University in the year 2000
and 2005 respectively. He has got a teaching
experience of nearly 08 years. Currently, he is
working as Associate Professor in Madanapalli
Institute of Technology & Sciences, Madanapally,
Chittoor Dist, Andhra Pradesh, India in the Dept. of
Electrical & Electronics Engg. & simultaneously
doing his Ph.D. (Research Scholar) in Electrical &
Electronics Engg. from the prestigious Jawaharlal
Nehru Technological University (JNTU),
Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India. He has
published a number of research papers in various
national & international journals & conferences.
His area of interests are neural networks, fuzzy
logic, artificial intelligence, power electronics,
Matlab, FACTS, etc.
 International Journal of Reviews in Computing
© 2009 IJRIC. All rights reserved.
www.ijric.org
Dr. S. F. Kodad received the
B.E. degree in EEE from STJ
Institute of Technology,
Ranebennur, Karnataka, India
from Karnataka University and
the M.Tech. degree in Energy
Systems Engg. from JNTU,
Hyderabad, India in the year
1992. He received his Ph.D. degree in Electrical
Engg. from JNTU, Hyderabad, India in the year
2004. He has got a teaching experience of nearly
21 years. Currently, he is working as Professor &
Head in Aurora College of Engg., Hyderabad,
Andhra Pradesh, India in the Dept. of Electrical &
Electronics Engg. He has published a number of
papers in various national & international journals
& conferences & done a number of in-house &
industry projects. He has also presented a number
of guest lectures and various seminars and
participated in a number of courses, seminars,
workshops, symposiums in the various parts of the
country in different institutions and also conducted
a few courses. He is also guiding a number of Ph.D.
students. His area of interests are neural networks,
fuzzy logic, power electronics, power systems,
artificial intelligence, Matlab, Renewable energy
sources, etc.
40
IJRIC
E-ISSN: 2076-3336
Dr. B. V. Sankar Ram
received the B.E. degree in
Electrical Engg. from
Osmania University & M.E.
degree in Power Systems
from Osmania University,
Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh,
India. He received his Ph.D.
degree in Electrical Engg. from JNTU, Hyderabad,
India. He obtained Diploma in Candidate
Management Finance. He has got a teaching
experience of more than 20 years. Currently, he is
working as Professor in JNTU College of Engg.
Hyderabad, India in the Dept. of Electrical Engg.
He has published a number of papers in various
national & international journals & conferences &
done a number of in-house & industry projects. He
is also guiding a number of research scholars in
various topics of engg. He has specialized in power
systems. His research interests include power
system reliability and Flexible AC Transmission
systems, power electronics & it is applications.