Paper accepted for presentation at 2003 IEEE Bologna Power Tech Conference, June 23th-26th, Bologna, Italy

Voltage Compensation in Weak Distribution Networks using Multiple Shunt Connected Voltage Source Inverters
E. Twining, Student Member, IEEE, and D. G. Holmes, Member, IEEE1
AbstractVoltage regulation of long weak distribution lines is a challenging problem, particularly when it is not economic to upgrade the entire feeder system. Power electronic converter systems offer an attractive alternative, with their potential to provide both steady state and transient voltage compensation for a limited capital investment. However, operation of these systems with weak networks and/or with multiple distributed installations needs careful attention to avoid unexpected interactions and to achieve optimum regulation performance. This paper explores the use of distributed D-STATCOM compensators to achieve stable steady state and dynamic compensation of the voltage profile along a radial distribution network under widely varying load conditions. Both simulation and experimental results are presented. Index TermsD-STATCOM, distribution network, steady state response, transient stability, voltage compensation, voltage profile.

I. INTRODUCTION The distribution networks supplying rural Australia are often quite weak because of the long distances involved and the high R/X ratio of the lines that are used. Hence, as demand increases on these networks, power quality issues such as poor voltage regulation and voltage sags often become a significant problem. The potential of power electronic converter systems (e.g. D-STATCOMs and distributed generation systems with active grid interfaces) to improve supply quality and increase line utilisation in weak distribution networks is well documented [1,2]. However, much of this work has focused on the operation of single site compensation systems, with less attention being given to the interactive operation of multiple site compensation systems across a distribution network. Also, many of the control strategies proposed assume a stiff grid source, and this is often not the case in practice. This paper reports developments from an ongoing investigation into the control and operation of multiple shunt connected Voltage Source Inverter (VSI) systems distributed across a radial distribution network. The focus of this paper is the use of D-STATCOM type devices to inject reactive power to compensate for feeder voltage perturbations. Typically, the algorithms used to control these devices calculate demanded reactive power injection levels using local voltage measurements. While this can achieve an acceptable voltage level at the point of injection, it is usually unclear how the
1 The authors acknowledge and appreciate the support of the Australian Research Council in funding this research. E. Twining and D. G. Holmes are with the Department of Electrical and Computer Systems Engineering, Monash University, Vic 3800 Australia (email: Erika.Twining@eng.monash.edu.au)

injection will affect the voltage profile of the rest of the distribution network or how it will interact with other converter based network connected devices. This concern is addressed here by studying the performances of grid connected converter based compensators at both a system level and at a local level, to explore fully the issues associated with voltage compensation in weak distribution networks. Two voltage compensation strategies are compared throughout the paper, being: (a) Single Point Injection where a single compensation device, D-STAT1, is connected at a single feeder node, and (b) Multiple Point Injection where two compensation devices, D-STAT1 and D-STAT2, are connected at two separate locations along a radial feeder. The paper initially considers steady-state results for a 10MVA distribution network model operating under the two compensation strategies described above. These results demonstrate the significant voltage profile improvement that can be achieved using reactive power compensation. Transient performance of the system is investigated by exploring the response of improved D-STATCOM devices based on a PWM controlled voltage source inverter (VSI) connected to the distribution network through a LCL filter, and controlled by a cascaded loop voltage control strategy. A linearised dynamic model of this compensator is developed to facilitate the transient performance analysis. A scaled distribution network is then integrated with scaled DSTATCOM models to investigate the stability of the proposed control algorithm under transient conditions, and the results are confirmed by comparison with an experimental system based on a DSP control platform. This also verifies the robustness of the controller at a practical level. Finally, transient step results are presented for the full 10MVA distribution network model developed in the first part of the paper. II. ANALYSIS OF STEADY STATE PERFORMANCE The Victorian Electricity Distribution Code (EDC) [3] states that the steady state voltage at the distribution level should be maintained within 6% of nominal. This is a nontrivial requirement in rural distribution networks, which are prone to large swings in steady-state voltage because of the variable nature of the load. The analysis approach presented in this paper is to use a load flow program to quantify the steady-state voltage profile improvement achieved across a radial distribution network when specific node voltages are regulated by D-STATCOM devices which are controlled by localized control strategies.

0-7803-7967-5/03/$17.00 2003 IEEE

Two performance factors are used to compare results for various compensation strategies and load profiles, being:

0.194+j0.33 /km Loads at 5km spacing 66kV/22kV X1 1.23+j6.19

Vnom Vi
Average Voltage Deviation ( AVD) =
i =1 n

X2

X3

X4

X5

X6

X7

X8

X9

X10 22kV/415V 1MVA 5%X, 2%R

(1)

(V peak,i Vlight,i )
Average Voltage Variation ( AVV ) = where
i =1

L1

L2

L3

L4

L5

L6

L7

L8

L9

L10

(2)

Fig.2 Distribution system used in case study.

25

Vnom is the nominal bus voltage i.e. 1p.u. Vi voltage at Bus i; Vpeak,i is the bus voltage during peak load and Vlight,i is the bus voltage during light load.

% of Total Feeder Load

20

15

10

A. System Modelling Fig. 1 shows the load profile of a typical three-phase rural 22 kV feeder located in western Victoria, Australia. The load on this feeder is predominantly dairy farming and residential which explains the large load variation over a 24 hour period. The backbone of this feeder is approximately 50 km in length and has an impedance of 0.194+j0.33 /km (0.004+j0.0068 p.u./km.). At present, only static forms of voltage compensation such as fixed tapped transformers are installed on this feeder and therefore consumers have no protection against dynamic voltage variations caused by changing loads. For this paper, a simplified system model has been developed based on this feeder, as shown in Fig. 2. The peak load condition is taken as 4.5 MW and the light load condition is taken as 1 MW. The distribution transformer taps are adjustable over 5% in 2.5% increments, and are preset based on average loading conditions. A constant power model with a power factor of 0.8 is used to represent all loads. Fig. 3 presents the two load profiles used for the investigations, being a uniform profile, and a non-uniform load profile that is more representative of a typical rural feeder, which is likely to have a small number of medium sized load centers (e.g. small towns or large farming operations) as well as a number of small load centers (e.g. small farming operations). A D-STATCOM operating in steady state injects a constant
5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Uniform Load Distribution

Load Bus Non-Uniform Load Distribution

Fig. 3. Distribution Feeder Load profiles.

amount of reactive power injection and hence can be readily incorporated into standard load flow algorithms. While it regulates the voltage to which it is connected, its operation is analogous to that of a synchronous machine and the device bus can be modeled as a PV bus. However, when the reactive power being generated (or absorbed) reaches the DSTATCOM ratings the injected reactive power becomes fixed, and the device bus changes to be treated as a PQ bus [4]. Using this approach, the performance of the various compensation alternatives can be readily evaluated for the two load profiles considered, and are summarized in Table I below. B. Uniform Load Profile 1) No Compensation The feeder voltage profile during both peak and light loads without compensation is shown in Fig. 4a. For these conditions, the AVD at peak load is 0.12 p.u. and the AVV is 0.16 p.u., well outside the EDC limits. Hence voltage profile compensation is clearly required for this system. 2) Single Point Injection Fig. 4b shows the case where a single compensator, DSTAT1, is installed to regulate the voltage at L10. This bus
TABLE I: STEADY-STATE PERFORMANCE FOR UNIFORM AND NON-UNIFORM
LOAD DISTRIBUTIONS

Feeder Load (MW, MVAR)

Uniform Load No compensation AVD @ peak load (p.u.) AVV (p.u.) Single Point Injection AVD @ peak load (p.u.) AVV (p.u.) Qinj1 (MVar) Multiple Point Injection D-STAT2 location AVD @ peak load (p.u.) AVV (p.u.) Qinj1 (MVar) Qinj2 (MVar) 0.12 0.16 0.06 0.08 1.26 L6 0.04 0.05 1.13 0.77

Non-Uniform Load 0.13 0.17 0.04 0.07 1.61 L5 0.02 0.03 1.25 0.96

Fig. 1. Case Study Rural Feeder Load Profile

0:00

4:00

Real Power

8:00

Time

12:00

16:00

Reactive Power

20:00

(a) No compensation

(a) No compensation

(b) Bus 10 voltage regulated to 1pu.

(b) Bus 10 voltage regulated to 1pu

(c) Bus 10 and Bus 6 voltages regulated to 1pu. Fig. 4. Voltage profiles for uniform load distribution.

(c) Bus 10 and Bus 5 voltages regulated to 1pu. Fig. 6. Voltage profiles for non-uniform load distribution.

was chosen because it is furthest from the supply and therefore subject to greatest voltage variation. There is a clear improvement in voltage profile along the feeder with an AVD at peak load of 0.06 p.u. and an AVV of 0.08 p.u. However, a number of bus voltages remain outside acceptable limits at peak load and a large reactive power injection is required to regulate the end bus voltage (1.26 MVar at peak load) since DSTAT1 must compensate for the entire feeder voltage drop. 3) Multiple Point Injection The optimum location for installing a second compensator, D-STAT2, was determined by comparing the AVD at peak load and the AVV, for D-STAT2 connected alternatively to buses L1 through L9, as shown in Fig. 5. From this analysis,

Bus 6 was selected as the best location to connect the second compensation system. (Note: L7 would have also been a valid choice as a similar performance is achieved). The resulting voltage profiles are shown in Fig. 4c. The AVD at peak load is 0.04 p.u. and the AVV is 0.05 p.u. - a significant improvement over single point injection. C. Non-Uniform Load Distribution Fig. 6 shows the feeder voltage profiles under the nonuniform load distribution for the three alternatives of no compensation, Single Point Injection and Multiple Point Injection. The calculated performance factors for these cases are included in Table I. It can be seen that the required reactive power injection is significantly greater than for a uniform load distribution, for both compensation strategies. This is because a significant load is located at the end of the line and therefore the associated steady state voltage drop is larger. Also, for the case of Multiple Point Injection, the optimal location for the D-STAT2 was found to be L5, which corresponds to one of the larger load centers. These results show that for both uniform and non-uniform load distributions, the optimal location and rating for compensation devices for a weak distribution feeder is system specific, and varies with load distribution as well as with feeder configuration. However, in general, the optimal voltage

Fig. 5. Variation of AVD and AVV with location of D-STAT2 for Multiple Point Injection Strategy

profile will be achieved with Single Point Injection by locating the compensator at the far end of the feeder, because the compensation is required to overcome the steady-state voltage drop across the entire feeder. Also, Multiple Point Injection will always achieve a better load profile across the feeder than Single Point Injection, but the location of the additional compensation devices must be carefully analysed. And as well, the benefits of multiple point injection must be weighed against the increased cost of installing multiple compensation systems. Note that in the studies described above, it was assumed that the D-STATCOMs are controlled to try to regulate the bus voltage to exactly 1 p.u. However if the control algorithm allows voltage variation within defined limits, the required converter rating, (and consequently system costs), can be significantly reduced. It is also possible that a hybrid compensation system (i.e. one which combines both passive and active compensation), could meet the steady-state performance requirements at reduced costs. However, consideration of these issues is beyond the scope of this paper. III. D-STATCOM TRANSIENT PERFORMANCE The topology of the PWM controlled D-STATCOM considered in this paper is shown in Fig. 7. It can be seen from this diagram that the VSI interfaces to the grid through a LCL filter, which offers the potential of improved harmonic performance compared to the more commonly used inductive filter. But it also requires a more complex control strategy to maintain system stability [5] as discussed below. For the transient studies presented in this paper, it is also assumed that the VSI switching frequency is high enough to have negligible effect on the inverter control loop dynamics, and that the DC bus voltage within the VSI is constant. With these assumptions, the VSI can be represented by a linearised average switching model (ASM) where the inverter switched output is replaced by a function representing its averaged value across each carrier interval. Provided the VSI is operating in its linear range (i.e. not saturating the VSI output) this ASM approach has been shown to achieve very accurate results in this type of application [5]. Furthermore, it is easily implemented in a simulation package such as Matlab Simulink with greatly reduced simulation times compared to full switched inverter models.
i1 L1 Vdc Cdc PWM Inverter ic Cf System Measurements Controller Vpcc Vc i2 L2

A. D-STATCOM Closed Loop Control Structure Regulating the reactive power injected by a D-STATCOM to achieve a constant voltage at its local bus is a Multi-Input, Multi-Output (MIMO) control problem. Cascaded loop controllers are commonly used in MIMO situations since they are relatively simple to implement, and are less sensitive to parameter variation than multi-variable control strategies [6]. Based on these considerations, a cascaded loop control strategy has been developed for this work which has an outer voltage regulation loop feeding to an inner current regulation loop, as shown in Fig. 8a. It is noted that by maintaining a current regulation loop, the controller also provides inherent over-current protection. The inner current regulator uses a Synchronous Frame PI controller as shown in Fig. 8b. This controller has been designed specifically for applications with a LCL filter interface [5]. The commanded real power current Id* supplied to the inner loop controller is determined by a conventional PI controller which regulates the inverter DC link voltage. This controller has a much longer time constant than the current regulator, to decouple its operation from the compensation functions. The commanded reactive power current Iq* is determined by an outer PI controller, which regulates the magnitude of the local bus voltage, |Vpcc|. This control loop includes a droop characteristic (=0.02 p.u.) so that the voltage sags below 1pu as the reactive current increases. This characteristic prevents adverse interactions between inverters located in close proximity to each other. Ideally, the bus voltage controller should have a fast response (i.e. < 1 cycle) to minimise supply transients, but it must also be tuned to maintain a stable response under all conditions, as discussed in the following section. Both control loops require synchronisation to the ac supply to operate in the synchronous dq reference frame. This presents significant challenges for weak grids where load
Vdc
I d* Vi*
Vi

Vdc*
|Vpcc|
|Vpcc|*

PI

Synch. Frame PI Current Reg.

PWM Modulator

PI
I q*

Vi

.
System Measurements
i2,d
i2,abc

Id Iq

Current Measurements

Fig. 8a. D-STATCOM cascaded loop control scheme

To PWM Modulator
Kp+ Ki s
* ic,abc

i* 2,d

abc

dq

dq

abc

* vi,abc

Vi*

i2,q ic,abc

i1,abc

i* 2,q

Kp+ Ki s

ic,abc

PWM Modulator

vsa

Synch.

Fig. 7. D-STATCOM inverter and filter topology

Fig. 8b. Synchronous Frame PI Current Regulation

changes and disturbances can cause phase jumps and instantaneous frequency variations. This problem has been resolved for this system by de-tuning the synchronisation algorithm response so that sudden variations in the reference voltage do not affect the control loop stability. B. Linear StabilityAnalysis The basic principle of cascaded loop control is that the loops are decoupled i.e. the inner loops have a faster response than the outer loops and therefore the dynamic interaction between them is negligible [6]. Tuning the controller is then a sequential process starting from the innermost loop and working outwards. Once a loop has been tuned, its operation can be represented by a simple delay function, providing the assumption of decoupled operation holds. To tune the D-STATCOM using this concept, it can be regarded as a controllable reactive current source, iinj that is connected to an equivalent system impedance, as shown in Figure 9. Using the principles of linear superposition, the change in the voltage at the point of coupling between the device and the network, vpcc, caused by a step change in DSTATCOM current, iinj, is defined by (3). (This does assume the load current does not change, a reasonable assumption for small changes in vpcc). v pcc = (R s + sL s )i inj (3) Transforming (3) into the synchronous dq reference frame gives v pcc,d R s + sL s 0 L s i pcc,d (4) v = R s + sL s i pcc, q pcc,q 0 L s The outer loop control algorithm controls the magnitude of the instantaneous voltage, which is defined by

Vs

Vpcc
Load

Ls

Rs

iinj

D-STATCOM

Fig. 9. Lumped system model for tuning D-STATCOM

v pcc = v 2 ,d + v 2 ,q pcc pcc

(5)

By applying small signal analysis to (5) and substituting back into (4) it can be shown that: v pcc = 0 Ls i pcc,q (6) This allows the voltage regulation loop to be represented by the decoupled closed loop system shown in Fig. 10, where the inverter and its inner current regulation loop have been modelled by a simple linear delay function (T1=2 ms), as has the measurement feedback block (T2=100s). Fig. 11 shows how the closed loop poles for this system vary with proportional gain, Kp,v.. This result predicts stable operation for all values of Kp,v, but with an increasingly oscillatory response as Kp,v increases. As Kp,v increases, the voltage control loop begins to interact with the current regulation loop, and the decoupled representation of Fig 10 is no longer adequate. To determine the D-STATCOM response under these conditions, a dynamic model of the current regulation loop, including the LCL filter must be integrated with the voltage regulation model to create a complete D-STATCOM dynamic model [5]. Fig. 12 compares the performance of the decoupled and the complete models for a step change in reference voltage, |Vpcc|* operating under three different tuning conditions for the outer

voltage control loop. For all three cases, the current regulation loop parameters are held constant at values obtained using the tuning techniques described in [5]. It can be seen that when the voltage regulation loop is tuned for slow response (Fig. 12a), the decoupled model accurately predicts the dynamic performance of the D-STATCOM. However, as the voltage loop gain is increased, the decoupled model no longer reflects the dynamic operation of the D-STATCOM, which becomes increasingly oscillatory (Fig 12b and 12c). This increased oscillatory response is caused by a developing interaction between the voltage and current regulation loops. These results show that taking the conservative approach of tuning the voltage regulation loop to maintain decoupled operation means that the response time of the controller is slow (several cycles) and it therefore will be unable to respond adequately for many system disturbances such as voltage sags. Fig. 12b shows that if the voltage regulation loop is tuned to the point where its dynamic response starts to interact with the current loop, it is possible to achieve fast response times (< 1cycle) whilst maintaining stable operation. However, the controller performance is sensitive to supply impedance, as well as the interaction between the control loops. Hence tuning this controller to achieve good performance under varying system conditions whilst maintaining a stable response requires careful design and investigation for each specific installation.

|Vpcc|*

Kp,v+Ki,v s Control

1 T1s+1 Inverter

Iinj,q

Ls Supply

|Vpcc|

1 T2s+1 Measurement

Fig.10. Decoupled block diagram for voltage regulation loop.

Fig 11. Root Locus for complete Analysis

L2
Ld
Rd

L2
Ld
Rd

L3
Ld
Rd

L4
Ld
Rd

L5
Ld
Rd

Lload1

Vs
Rload1

Lload2 Rload2

Lload2 Rload2

Lload2 Rload2

Lload1 Rload1

Fig.13. Scaled distribution network model

(a) Vkp = 0.1 Vki=50

(b) Vkp = 0.5 Vki=500

in Fig. 13. The total load on the system is approximately 5 kVA and is divided into five load nodes (L1-L5), separated by equal line segments made up of a series RL impedance (Rd + jLd). Similarly, each load is a series RL impedance connected in a star configuration. A step load loss is created at bus L5 by opening a switch, to create the system disturbance. Two DSP controlled VSIs with LCL filter interfaces are programmed to act as D-STATCOM devices, D-STAT1 and D-STAT2, and are connected to buses L2 and L5 respectively. Details of the system parameters are given in Table II. To investigate the system dynamic performance, the distribution network model shown in Fig. 13 has been implemented in MATLAB Simulink using the Power System Blockset, with the complete D-STATCOM models described in the previous section implemented using standard Simulink blocks. These blocks are interfaced into the power system network model using Blockset controlled current sources.

(c) Vkp = 1 Vki=1000 Fig. 12. Comparison of performance for decoupled and complete DSTATCOM models.

IV. SYSTEM TRANSIENT PERFORMANCE

A. Scaled Model Study An essential concern for any closed loop compensator is its stability during system disturbances. This is especially important for multiple compensators, which can interact unstably following a system disturbance. In order to investigate the transient stability and performance of DSTATCOMs operating under the control algorithm described above, a scaled system model has been developed based on an approximate p.u. representation of the practical system described in Section II. The use of a scaled model allows comparisons to be made with the laboratory experimental system that has been developed, so the accuracy of the models developed for transient analysis and simulation studies can be verified. Once this is done, the models can be re-scaled upwards to investigate the performance of a full size DSTATCOM operating into a practical distribution network. A single-phase equivalent of the three phase scaled distribution network model developed for this work is shown

B. Simulation Results Fig. 14 shows that without any compensation, the voltage at L5 increases by approximately 6% from 167 V to 174 V when the load at L5 reduces. Also, pre and post disturbance steady state voltages are significantly below the 1 p.u. nominal value of 190 V. Fig. 15 shows the system response and injected current when D-STAT1 is connected to L5. It can be seen that the device responds within 1 cycle of the switch at L5 opening. The voltage |V5|, before and after the disturbance, is maintained just below the 1pu nominal value because of the droop characteristic incorporated into the voltage control loop. Fig. 16 shows the results at L2 and L5 when D-STAT2 is connected to L2. While both devices are stable and have a fast
TABLE II: SCALED MODEL SYSTEM PARAMETERS System Parameter Supply Voltage, Vs (l-1) Inductance, Ls Distribution Network Line segments: Ld Rd Loads: Lload1 Lload2 Rload1 = Rload2 Inverter Switching frequency, fsw DC Voltage, VDC DC capacitance, Cdc Filter inductance, L1 Filter Capacitance, Cf Value 190 V ~1mH 0.8 mH 0.1 60 mH 43 mH 28 5 kHz 300V 2200 F 5 mH 15 F

||V

I in v ( 5 A /d iv )

Fig. 14. Scale model simulation, no compensation

Fig. 17. Experimental results for Single Point Injection (L5)

|V
5

I in v 1 ( 5 A /d iv )

Fig. 15. Scale model simulation, Single Point Injection (L5) (a) D-STAT1 (L5)
|V
2

I in v 2 ( 5 A /d iv )

(a) D-STAT1 (L5) (b) D-STAT2 (L2) Fig. 18. Experimental results for Multiple Point Injection (L2 & L5)

(b) D-STAT2 (L2) Fig. 16. Scale model simulation, Multiple Point Injection (L2&L5)

response, the bus voltages oscillations now take longer to decay than for single point injection case. This indicates some degree of dynamic interaction has occurred between the inverters, which is only to be expected given the tuning conditions used. It should also be noted that the steady state current from D-STAT1 changes much more than D-STAT2 after the disturbance. This is because the current drawn by load 5 contributes only a small amount to the voltage drop at L2, but it contributes a large amount to the voltage drop at L5.

similar transient characteristics to the linear controller, providing the gain constants are scaled appropriately. The experimental results, shown in Fig. 17 for Single Point Injection, and Fig. 18 for Multiple Point Injection, demonstrate a close agreement with the simulation results and confirm the validity of the modeling strategy. The major difference is some harmonic distortion in the injected currents, which is caused by harmonic voltages in the experimental laboratory supply as discussed in [5].

C. Experimental Verification For the experimental system, the square of the voltage magnitude was used as the control variable, to reduce the computational load on the fixed point DSP controllers. Simulation studies were used to show that this controller has

D. 10MVA system performance Once the modeling strategy has been confirmed, it can be applied to the 10 MVA full scale system described in Section II. A major source of transient voltage fluctuations in weak distribution networks is the startup of a large motor. The performance of the new compensators under this transient disturbance was investigated by modeling a 100 kW induction motor started direct on line at bus L10, with a uniform steady state system load of 3 MW. 1 MVA D-STATCOMs (appropriately scaled up from the experimental system) are required to provide compensation under these load conditions. 1) No Compensation Fig. 19 shows the uncompensated transient voltage

voltage control loops, tuned to achieve less than one cycle transient performance without significant interaction between the control loops. The compensators are located along the network feeder to provide maximum steady state compensation benefit. The control strategies proposed have been verified using scale simulation and experimental network systems, and have then been applied to full scale system simulations to investigate their response to various system disturbances.
Fig. 19. Transient response to motor starting without voltage compensation.

VI. REFERENCES
[1] Z. Saad-Saoud, M. L. Lisboa, J. B. Ekanayake, N. Jenkins, and G. Strbac, "Application of STATCOMs to wind farms," IEE Proceedings. Generation, Transmission & Distribution, vol. 145, pp. 511-518, 1998. P. S. Sensarma, K. R. Padiayar and V. Ramanarayanan, Analysis and Performance Evaluation of a Distribution STATCOM for Compensating Voltage Fluctuations, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol 16. No. 2, April 2001.. Electricity Distribution Code, Office of the Regulator-General, Victoria, Aug. 2001. E. Twining and D. G Holmes, "Voltage Profile Optimisation for Weak Distribution Networks," in CD Proc. AUPEC2002 Conf E. Twining and D.G.Holmes, Grid Current Regulation of a ThreePhase Voltage Source Inverter with an LCL Input Filter in Proc. of Power Electronics Specialist Conference - PESC'02 Cairns, Australia, 2002 pp. 1189-1194. T. K. Kiong, W. Qing-Guo and H. C. Chieh, Advances in PID Control. Springer-Verlag London Limited, 1999.

[2]

[3] [4] Fig. 20: Transient response to motor starting with D-STAT1 connected to L10. [5]

[6]

Fig. 21: Transient response to motor starting with D-STAT1 connected to L10 and D-STAT2 connected to L6.

responses at L10 and L6 of the system. It can be seen that the motor start causes a significant voltage sag at its local bus for approximately 0.4 sec. L6 also experiences a 0.4 sec. sag caused by the motor starting, with a smaller magnitude because of the line impedance between the two buses. 2) Single Point Injection Fig. 20 shows the transient voltage responses at L10 and L6 when D-STAT1 is connected to L10, where the sag severity has been significantly reduced at both locations. Note also that the steady state voltage at L10 is a little less than 1 p.u., because of the controller droop characteristic. 3) Multiple Point Injection Fig. 21 shows the transient voltage responses at L10 and L6 when D-STAT1 is connected to L10 and D-STAT2 is connected to L6. Under these conditions, there is a slight further improvement for the voltage at L6, and no adverse transient interaction between the two compensators. V. SUMMARY This paper has presented a methodology for using multiple voltage source inverters configured to operate as DSTATCOM devices, to provide steady state and transient voltage support for weak grid distribution feeders. The inverters are operated using cascaded inner current and outer

Erika Twining received the B.Eng. (electrical) degree and the M. Eng. Sc. Degree from the University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia, in 1995 and 2000 respectively. She is currently working toward the Ph.D. degree in the Department of Electrical and Computer Systems Engineering at Monash University, Clayton, Australia. She was employed as a graduate Electrical / Instrument Engineer at Orica Pty. Ltd. between 1996 and 1998. During this time she worked at a number of manufacturing sites in Victoria and NSW, Australia where she was involved in the design and maintenance of power distribution and process control systems. Her major research interests include grid connected PWM converters, distributed generation, power quality and voltage compensation in weak distribution networks. Prof. Holmes graduated from the University of Melbourne in Australia in 1974 and worked for six years with the local power company developing SCADA systems for power transmission networks, before returning to the University of Melbourne as a faculty member. In 1984 he moved to Monash University and he is now an Associate Professor at this university in the area of Power Electronics. Prof. Holmes has a Masters degree in power systems engineering from the University of Melbourne (1979), and a PhD in PWM theory for power electronic converters from Monash University (1998). He currently heads the Power Electronics Research Group at Monash University, where he manages graduate students and research engineers working together on a mixture of theoretical and practical R&D projects. The present interests of the group include modulation theory, current regulators for drive systems and PWM rectifiers, active filter systems for quality of supply improvement, resonant converters, current source inverters for drive systems, and multilevel converters. Prof. Holmes has a strong commitment and interest in the control and operation of electrical power converters. He has been a member of the IEEE since 1987, has published over 100 papers at international conferences and in professional journals, and regularly reviews papers for all major IEEE transactions in his area. He is an active member of the IPC and IDC committees of the Industrial Applications Society of the IEEE.