A hybrid approach for ipfc location and parameters optimization for congestion relief in competitive electricity market environment

IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 04 Issue: 02 | Feb-2015, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 706
A HYBRID APPROACH FOR IPFC LOCATION AND PARAMETERS
OPTIMIZATION FOR CONGESTION RELIEF IN COMPETITIVE
ELECTRICITY MARKET ENVIRONMENT
Konduru VM ManoharVarma1
, Varaprasad J2
1
Student, Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Christ University, Karnataka, India
2
Faculty, Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Christ University, Karnataka, India
Abstract
The deregulated power system operation with competitive electricity market environment has been created many challenging
tasks to the system operator. The competition with strategic bidding has been resulted for randomness in generation schedule,
load withdrawal and power flows across the network. The economic efficiency of electricity market is mainly dependent on
network support. In the event of congestion, it is required to alter the base case market settlement and hence the economic
inefficiency in terms of congestion cost can occur. In order to anticipate congestion and its consequences in operation, this paper
has been considered Interline Power Flow Controller (IPFC).This article proposed a tactical approach for optimal location and
then its parameters in Decoupled Power Injection Modeling (DPIM) are optimized using Gravitational Search Algorithm (GSA).
The case studies are performed on IEEE 30-bus test system and the results obtained are validating the proposed approach for
practical implementations.
Keywords: Deregulated power system, competitive electricity market, congestion management, IPFC, Gravitational
Search Algorithm (GSA)
--------------------------------------------------------------------***----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. INTRODUCTION
Due to the insecurity operations in interconnected systems
so many blackouts have been occurred in recent times. In
deregulated power system operational security plays a vital
role and execution is tough task due to variations in loads
and instability environment. Any changes in the system
operations will impact on the market economics due to the
power system network and markets are strongly coupled.
Based on the qualitative understanding on interactions of
both power system security and market operations, the
quantification of impacts on market economics due to
operational security is not performed. This article proposed
an approach to quantify the impacts of market economics
based on operational security in the presence of strategic
bidding and load variations. We illustrate the application of
strategic bidding to the IEEE-30 bus system for the study of
its impacts of variation in load periodically in a day-ahead
energy market.
We also planned to mitigate congestion by the integration of
Flexible AC Transmission Systems (FACTS) devices in the
network. The congestion can be alleviated through system
reconfiguration and re-dispatch of the system load. This has
not much before or after the deregulation and is proved a
security constrained economic dispatch. Financial settlement
is a major difference of before and after deregulation. In the
present competitive market congestion is a major concern
due to it will block the competition between the markets.
The present trend in congestion management is to use
pricing tools in the form of nodal and zonal pricing. Despite
these tools, the congestion is still in the place and it is
increasing alarmingly. Congestion management includes
both the congestion relief actions and the associated pricing
mechanisms [1]. Congestion relief by re-dispatch will
causes to increase generation cost and hence by means of
reconfiguration, erection of new transmission lines or
integration of FACTS device can adopt. But due to Right of
Way (RoW) and cost concerns, instead of erection of new
transmission lines FACTS devices can be the better option.
Since congestion is uneconomical and undesirable in market
operation as well as system security, the validation of
FACTS devices should address technical as well as
economical benefits. Among all the FACTS devices
Interline Power Flow Controller (IPFC) is a versatile device
to control power flow in many transmission lines
simultaneously. Several references in technical literature can
be found on application of IPFC for congestion
management. In [2], the IPFC is applied for congestion
relief, power flow control and to minimize the transmission
losses. In [3], the congestion relief has been achieved by the
application of IPFC and GUPFC in strategic bidding
environment. The impact of these FACTS devices as shown
economically via reduction in transmission congestion cost.
In [4], the voltage security improvement and congestion
alleviation have done by placing Static Synchronous
Compensator (STATCOM) and IPFC using artificial
intelligence. In [5], both real and reactive power flow has
been equalized by using IPFC and Unified Power Flow
Controller (UPFC). In [6], optimizing production cost and
congestion alleviation has done by locating IPFC in

_______________________________________________________________________________________
deregulated power system using PSO algorithm. In this
article the parameters have been optimized using
Gravitational Search Algorithm (GSA). In [7], new
optimization algorithm is introduced, which is based on law
of gravity and mass interaction and also compared new
algorithm with other popular algorithms. In [8], gives
detailed review on GSA and future possibilities and
applications with GSA. The GSA has been used in so many
applications of power system [9][10][11][12].
This paper is outlined as follows: After introduction, section
2 describes the market settlement mechanism in competitive
electricity market. In section 3, the power injection
modeling (PIM) of IPFC, strategy for its location are
explained. In section 4, the heuristic optimization technique
GSA application for optimization of IPFC parameters is
explained. In section 5, the case studies and discussions are
illustrated with IEEE-30 bus system network. After section
5, the comprehensive conclusions are given.
2. COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET
The strategic bidding is a process of change in bid functions
to maximize GENCOs’ profit. In a perfect competitive
market, the supply curve is drawn by consolidating
generator offers should closely approximate the system
marginal production cost of generation [13]. Hence the
bidding cost function treated as a continuous function and is
given by a power producer i (or supply curve) is:
  2
bi gi bi gi bi gi biC P a P b P c   (1)
Where ( bia , bib and bic ) are the bid coefficients and related
with the actual cost function coefficients ( ia , ib and ic ) as
follows:
bi bi
i
i i
a b
a b
   and bi ic c (2)
Where i is the bidding parameter and represents mark-up
above or below the marginal cost that a generator i decide to
set its marginal bid in competitive market. Now, the
marginal cost function will become as:
  2
bi gi i i gi i i gi iC P a P b P c   
(3)
Then the equations for giP and MCP will change as follows
and the rest of procedure is as economic dispatch problem.
2
1
2
i
D
i NG i i
MCP
i NG i i
b
P
a
a









(4)
2
MCP i i
gi
i i
b
P
a
 


 (5)
Now considered the effect of generator limits given by the
inequality constraint:
max
0 gi giP P  i NG  (6)
If a particular generator loading giP reaches the maximum
limit
max
giP , its loading is fixed and remaining demand will
be shared by other generators participating in the network on
an equal incremental cost.
3. INTERLINE POWER FLOW CONTROLLER
The Interline Power Flow Controller (IPFC) main objective
is to offer a complete power flow control scheme for a
power transmission system, in which multiple lines are
employed with a Static Synchronous Series Compensator
(SSSC) for series compensation as shown in Fig. 1. The
IPFC scheme has the tendency to transfer real power and
separate control of reactive power in each line. The IPFC
will be made both real power and reactive power equal
between the lines, so that the power transfer capability will
be increased and the lines which are over loaded come down
to under loaded. The IPFC will decrease the stability
problems in power system network [14].
Fig.1 Schematic representation of IPFC
Fig.2 represents the equivalent circuit of the IPFC. This
arrangement has two voltage sources V1pq and V2pq in
series with transmission Lines 1 and 2, represent the two
back to back converters. The common dc link is represented
by a bidirectional link (P12=P1pq=P2pq) for real power
exchange between the two voltage sources. V1S and V1R are
the sending and receiving end voltages of transmission line-
1 and X1 is the line-1 reactance. V2S and V2R are sending and

_______________________________________________________________________________________
receiving end voltages of transmission line-2 and X2 is the
line-2 reactance.
Fig.2 equivalent circuit of IPFC
3.1 Injection Model of IPFC
Fig.3 shows the equivalent circuit of two converter IPFC. Vi
, Vj and Vk are the complex bus voltages at the buses i, j
and k respectively.
Fig.3 Equivalent circuit of two converter IPFC
The current source from the equivalent circuit is represented
as follows
I in in inse se sejb V  (7)
Now, the current source can be modeled as injection powers
at the buses i, j and k. the complex power injected at ith
bus
is
*
,
,
( )ininj i i se
n j k
S V I

  (8)
*
,
,
( )in ininj i i se se
n j k
S V jb V

  (9)
After simplification, the active power and reactive power
injections at ith
bus are
, ,
,
Re( ) ( sin( ))in in ininj i inj i i se se i se
n j k
P S Vb V  

   (10)
, ,
,
Im( ) ( cos( ))in in ininj i inj i i se se i se
n j k
Q S Vb V  

   (11)
The complex power injected at nth
bus (n=j,k) is
*
,n
,
( )ininj n se
n j k
S V I

  (12)
*
,n
,
( )in ininj n se se
n j k
S V jb V

  (13)
After simplification, the active power and reactive power
injections at nth
bus are
,n ,n
,
Re( ) ( sin( ))in in ininj inj n se se n se
n j k
P S V b V  

   (14)
,n ,n
,
Im( ) ( cos( ))in in ininj inj n se se n se
n j k
Q S V b V  

   (15)
The placement of IPFC plays a vital role for congestion
management. Placement of IPFC can be done with different
optimization techniques, among all optimization techniques
Particle Swarm Optimization gives precise and quick
results. So, in this paper optimal location of IPFC is done by
using PSO. After placement, parameters of IPFC are very
important, optimal parameters can be chosen based on the
location. In this paper for optimal parameters are done by
using GSA.
4. PROPOSED HYBRID APPROACH
The placement of IPFC plays a vital role for congestion
management. Placement of IPFC can be done with different
optimization techniques, among all optimization techniques
Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) gives precise and quick
results. So, in this paper optimal location of IPFC is done by
using PSO with an objective of voltage profile
improvement. After placement, the IPFC parameters are
optimized by using GSA technique.
4.1 PSO for Voltage Improvement
According to computer science technology, particle swarm
optimization (PSO) is a computational method that gives
optimized solution for a given problem in iterative way for
required output [22]. PSO having the dubbed particles,
which are having the required solutions and these particles
are searched in the search space according to the
mathematical formulae over the particle position and
velocity.
General algorithm is proposed by Kennedy and Eberhart
- Particle position
- Particle velocity
- Best individual particle position
- Global best particle position

_______________________________________________________________________________________
C1, C2 - cognitive and social parameters
r1, r2 - arbitrary numbers between 0 and 1
Position of individual particles represented as follows
1 1k k k
i i ix x v 
  (16)
With the velocity calculated using below mathematical
formulae
1
1 1 2 2( ) ( )k k k k g k
i i i i k iv v c r p x c r p x
     (17)
Algorithm of particle swarm optimization
Step by step algorithms as follows:
1. Initialize
a. Set constants .
b. Arbitrarily initialize particle positions ϵ D in
for i =1,…..,p.
c. Arbitrarily initialize particle velocities
0 ϵ D in for i =1,…..,p.
d. Set k =1.
2. Optimize
a. Evaluate using design space coordinates .
b. If ≤ then , =
c. If ≤ then , =
d. If stopping condition is satisfied then go to step 3.
e. Update particle velocities for i =1,…..,p.
f. Update particle positions for i =1,…..,p.
g. Increment k.
h. go to 2(a).
3. Stop
4.2 GSA for Optimizing Parameters of IPFC
In GSA algorithm all agents are contemplated as objects. All
the objects are attracting each other based on the
gravitational force of particular object. The low mass objects
will move towards the heavier mass objects. The heavier
mass objects which are having candidate solution will move
very slow compare to the other objects [20].
In GSA, each agent has four specifications: position, inertial
mass, active gravitational mass, and passive gravitational
mass. The position of the agent correlate with panacea of the
problem, and its gravitational and inertial masses are
determined by using a fitness function.
The GSA could be treated as a separate system of masses. It
is like a small synthetic world of masses obeying the
Newton laws of gravitation and motion.
Algorithm of gravitational search algorithms as follows
Step1. Identification of search space.
Step2. Initial popular generation between maximum and
minimum .
Step3. Fitness evaluation of objects.
Step4. Update G(t), best(t), worst(t) and Mi(t) for i = 1...m
Step5. Total force calculation in different directions.
Step6. Velocity and acceleration calculations.
Step7. Updating objects’ position.
Step8. Repeat step 3 to step 7 until the stop criteria is
reached.
Step9. Stop.
Fig.4 Gravitational search algorithm flow chart
5. CASE STUDIES
The proposed is approached is applied for IEEE-30 bus
system. The cost coefficients are manipulated according to
according to strategic bidding parameter. The total system
has been divided into two areas in which area1 has generator
buses 1 and 2, area2 has generator buses 13, 22, 23 and 27.
With normal bidding parameter and for base case load, the
generation schedule has been determined as explained in
section II. In area 1, The market is cleared at 3.5233 $/MWh
and the total cost is 243.2242 $. Similarly, in area 2 the
market is cleared at 3.9605 $/MWh and the total cost is
396.4005 $. In order to optimize economics in both areas
simultaneously, the system is considered as one grid
consisting of two areas. Under this consideration, the total
load is 193.451 MW. For this load the market schedule is
cleared at 3.8155 $/MWh and total cost is 630.3476 $. The
market schedules for area1 and area2 when they are not
interconnected are given in Table I and Table II

_______________________________________________________________________________________
respectively. When they are interconnected, the schedule is
given in Table III. By observing market schedules in both
cases, there is a economic benefit with MW interchange
between two areas. Since area1 has producing more
generation than its own load of 88.751 MW, area 2
importing power from area 1 about 17.5935 MW. If the
network supports for this economic interchange, system
operator can reduce a total operating cost of 9.277 $. With
this schedule the load flow is performed and we have
observed the line 10 is overloaded. If a network subject to
congestion, the IPFC has to control the power flow in such a
way that all transmission lines are below their specified
power ratings and so congestion impact on economic
interchange can avoid. By placing IPFC in the lines
connected between buses 10, 16 and 22. The congestion has
been relieved and so market economic inefficiency situation
is avoided. In addition to this the voltage profile has been
improved and it can observe in Fig.5 and also the losses
have been reduced from 9.7146 MW to 7.7402 MW.
Table-1: Area 1 generation and cost details
Load
(MW)
PG1 (MW) PG2
(MW)
MCP
($/MWh)
Total
Cost ($)
88.751 38.3395 50.6672 3.5233 243.2242
Table-2: Area 2 generation and cost details
Load
(MW)
PG1
(MW
)
PG2
(MW
)
PG3
(MW
)
PG4
(MW
)
MCP
($/MW
h)
Tot
al
Cos
t ($)
104.7 22.58 23.68 19.21 42.59 3.96 396.
4
Table-3: Interconnected system details
Load
MW
PG
1
M
W
PG
2
M
W
PG
3
M
W
PG
4
M
W
PG
5
M
W
PG
6M
W
MC
P
$/M
Wh
Tot
al
cost
($)
193 48.5 59.0 16.3 22.5 16.3 33.9 3.81 630
Fig. 5 Changes in voltage profile at base case
The similar procedure is carried out for various loading level at various trading hours with different bidding parameters in different
areas. The changes in load for 24 hours span in the form of a load curve are given in Fig.6.
5 10 15 20 25 30
0.92
0.94
0.96
0.98
1
1.02
1.04
1.06
1.08
1.1
Bus number
Voltage(pu)
Without IPFC
WithIPFC

_______________________________________________________________________________________
Fig.6 Load curve over 24 hours
The economic and power interchanges for different bidding parameters are shown in Fig.7 and Fig.8. Fig.7 shows when bidding
parameters (Area1, Area2) = (0.5, 0.5) = (1, 1) = (2, 2). Fig.8 shows when bidding parameters (Area1, Area2) = (1, 0.5) = (2, 1).
Fig.7 Financial and Power Interchanges
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
0.75
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.95
1
Load variation over 24 hour duration
Hour
loadscalingfactor
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Hour
Bidding parameters (Area1, Area2)=(2, 2)=(1, 1)=(0.5, 0.5)
Financial flow ($) (Area2 to Area1) when (2, 2)
Financial flow ($) (Area2 to Area1) when (0.5, 0.5)
Power flow (MW) (Area1 to Area2)for all bidding parameters

_______________________________________________________________________________________
Fig.8 Financial and Power Interchanges
The congestion alleviation is occurred after connected the IPFC. These results are shown in Fig.9 and Fig.10.
Fig.9 shows the congestion alleviation when bidding parameters (Area1, Area2) = (0.5, 0.5) = (1, 1) = (2, 2). During this strategic
bidding congestion is occurred in 10th
line, when the load at 8, 9 and 10th
hours. This congestion is mitigated by installing IPFC.
Fig.10 shows the congestion alleviation when bidding parameters (Area1, Area2) = (1, 0.5) = (2, 1). During this strategic bidding
congestion is occurred in 30th
line, except the load at 5th
hour. This congestion is mitigated by installing IPFC.
In both Fig.9 and Fig.10 the difference of loading on the lines without and with IPFC are shown.
Fig.9 congestion relief in line 10 with IPFC
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Hour
Bidding parameters (Area1, Area2)=(1, 0.5)=(2, 1)
Financial flow ($) (Area1 to Area2) when (1, 0.5)
Power flow (MW) (Area2 to Area1)for all bidding parameters
8 9 10
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
Hour
%loadingon10thline
Bidding parameters (Area1, Area2)=(0.5, 0.5)=(1, 1)=(2, 2
Without IPFC
With IPFC

_______________________________________________________________________________________
Fig.10 congestion relief in line 30 with IPFC
6. CONCLUSION
This paper reviews the competition with strategic bidding in
interconnected systems. In addition to this, the stress due to
strategic bidding is increased; it leads to congestion in the
system. This congestion is alleviated by installing IPFC in
proposed IEEE 30-bus system. The case studies are
performed on IEEE 30-bus test system and the results
obtained are validated the proposed approach for practical
implementation. This paper includes only generation side
bidding, it will be useful for further study on both generation
side and distribution side biddings.
REFERENCES
[1]. Lommerdal, M. Soder, L., “simulation of congestion
management Methods”, IEEE Power Tech, Bologna,
Volume 2, 23-26 June 2003.
[2]. Zhang, J., "Optimal Power Flow Control for Congestion
Management by Interline Power Flow Controller (IPFC),"
Power System Technology, 2006. PowerCon 2006.
International Conference on , vol.,no., pp.1,6, 22-26 Oct.
2006.
[3]. Kumar, Ashwani, "Comparison of IPFC and GUPFC for
Congestion management in deregulated electricity markets,"
Industrial and Information Systems (ICIIS), 2014 9th
International Conference on , vol., no., pp.1,7, 15-17 Dec.
2014.
[4]. A.Karami, M.Rashidinejad and A.A.Gharaveisi,
“Voltage security enhancement and congestion
management via STATCOM & IPFC artificial intelligence”,
Iranian Journal of Science & Technology, Transaction B,
Engineering, Vol.31, No.B3, PP 289-301.
[5]. A.Murugan, S.Thamizmani, “Anew approach for
voltage control of IPFC and UPFC for power flow
management”, IEEE Transc, PP. 1376-1381.
[6]. Masoud Mohammad Rahimi Fard, Aref Jalili Irani, “
Location of IPFC for congestion management lines in
electricity market restructured using PSO algorithm”,
Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, pp.3188-
3196, 2011.
[7]. Esmat Rashedi, Hossein Nezamabadi-por, Saeid
Saryazdi, “GSA: A Gravitational Search Algorithm”,
Elsevier, Information Sciences, pp.2232-2248, 2009.
[8]. Norlina Mohd Sabri, Mazidah Puteh, and Mohamad
Rusop Mahmood, “A Review of Gravitational Search
Algorithm”, Int. J. Advance, Soft Comput, Appl., Vol.5,
2013.
[9]. R. Suresh, C. Kumar, S.Sakthivel and S. Jaisiva,
“Applicationa of gravitational search algorithm for real
power loss and voltage deviation optimization”, IJESIT, Vol
2, 2013.
[10]. N. V. Subba Rao, G. Kesava Rao, S. Sivanagaraju,
“Transmission loss allocation with optimal power flow
using gravitational search algorithm”, IJIRE, Vol 2, 2014.
[11]. Mani Ashouri, Seyed Mehdi Hosseini, “ Application of
new hybrid particle swarm optimization and gravitational
search algorithm for non convex economic load dispatch
problem”, Journal of Advances in computer research, Vol.4,
pp.41-51, 2013.
[12]. Serhat Duman, Ugur Guvenc, Yusuf Sonmez, Nuran
Yorukeren, “Optimal power flow using gravitational search
algorithm”, Elsevier, Energy conservation and management,
pp.86-95, 2012.
[13]. J. Vara Prasad, K Chandra Sekhar, “ Evaluation of
available transfer capability in a competitive energy
market”, IEEE Transc.
[14]. Narain G. Hingorani, Laszlo Gyugyi, “Understanding
FACTS: Concepts and Technology of Flexible AC
Transmission Systems”, IEEE press, New-York, 2000.
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
Hour
%loadingon30thline
Bidding parameters (Area1, Area2)=(1, 0.5)=(2, 1)
Without IPFC
With IPFC

_______________________________________________________________________________________
[15]. S.C.Srivastava, R.K.Verma, “Impact of FACTS
devices on Transmission pricing in a de-regulated
electricitymarket”, IEEE Trans. 2000,pp. 642-648.
[16]. Gyugyi, L.Sen, K.K. and Schauder, C.D, “ The
interline power flow controller concept a new approach to
power flow management in transmission systems”, IEEE
Trans. Power Del..14(3), pp. 1115-1123.
[17]. A. Karami, M. Rashidinejad and A.A. Gharaveisi,
“Voltage security enhancement and congestion management
via STATCOM & IPFC using artificial intelligence”,
Iranian Journal of Science & technology,
Trans.B,Engineering, Vol.31, No.B3, PP 289-301.
[18]. Kennedy Mwanza, You Shi, “Congestion
Management: Re-dispatch And application of FACTS”,
Chalimers university of technology, Goteborg, Sweden,
2006.
[19]. Charles A. Gibson, Harold Zuniga, “ Interchange
evaluation for electric power utilities”, IEEE Transc.,
session. 11D3, pp. 820-825.1989.
[20]. I.Sai ram, J. Amarnath, “Optimal setting of IPFC for
voltage stability improvement using (GA-GSA) hybrid
algorithm”, IEEE Conference, 2013.
[21]. William W. Hogan, “Independent system operator
(ISO) for a competitive electricity market”, Harvard
University, June 1998.
[22]. James Kennedy, Russell Eberhart, “Particle Swarm
Optimization”, IEEE Transc., pp. 1942-1948, 1995.
[23]. A.R. Abhyankar, prof.S.A.Khaparde, “Introduction to
deregulation in power industry”, IIT Bombay.
BIOGRAPHIES
Konduru VM ManoharVarma is an
M.Tech candidate in the department of
Electrical & Electronics Engineering at the
Christ University, Bengaluru. He has done
B.Tech in Electrical & Electronics
Engineering from Jawaharlal Nehru
Technological University, Anantapur. His areas of interests
are power systems stability and FACTS.
J.VaraPrasad is a Ph.D. Candidate in the
department of Electrical & Electronics
Engineering at the University of Acharya
Nagarjuna at Guntur (India). He has
received his M. Tech in Power System
Engineering from the University of
Acharya Nagarjuna at Guntur and B. Tech in Electrical &
Electronics Engineering from Jawaharlal Nehru
Technological University, Hyderabad. His research interest
includes power systems operational and control, FACTS
applications in deregulated power systems, and voltage
stability. He is a member of IEEE and AMIE (India).

A hybrid approach for ipfc location and parameters optimization for congestion relief in competitive electricity market environment

More Related Content

What's hot (18)

Viewers also liked (18)

Similar to A hybrid approach for ipfc location and parameters optimization for congestion relief in competitive electricity market environment (20)

More from eSAT Journals (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

A hybrid approach for ipfc location and parameters optimization for congestion relief in competitive electricity market environment