STATIC-SYNCHRONOUS COMPENSATORS and
SUPERCONDUCTING MAGNETIC ENERGY STORAGE
SYSTEMS in controlling power system dynamics.
BY A.B. ARSOY, Y. LIU,
P.F. RIBEIRO, & F. WANG
S
UPERCONDUCTING MAGNETIC
energy storage (SMES) systems for power
utility applications have received consider-
able attention due to their characteristics,
such as rapid response (milliseconds), high power
(multimegawatts), high efficiency, and four-quadrant con-
trol. SMES systems can provide improved system reliability,
dynamic stability, enhanced power quality, and area protec-
tion [1]-[7], as its potential applications are summarized in
Fig. 1 [7]. The squared area indicates the possible cost-effec-
tiveness of SMES applications. Advances in both supercon-
ducting technologies and the necessary power electronics
interface have made SMES a viable technology that can offer
flexible, reliable, and fast-acting power compensation.
A SMES coil requires an ac/dc power conversion unit to be
connected to an ac system. This unit could be either a current
source inverter (CSI) or a voltage source inverter (VSI) to-
gether with a dc-dc chopper. A static-synchronous compensa-
tor (StatCom), based on a self-commutated VSI, could be a
power conversion unit for SMES. Currently, there are
StatCom controllers installed in two substations: one at the
Sullivan substation of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
and the other at the Inez substation of American Electric
1077-2618/03/$17.00©2003 IEEE
Power (AEP) [9], [10], to provide reactive power/voltage
I EEE I NDUSTRY A PPLI CA TI ONS MA GA ZI NE • MA R|A PR 2003 • WWW.I EEE.ORG/I A S
control and transient stability enhancement.
A StatCom, however, can only absorb/inject reactive
power and, consequently, is limited in the degree of free-
dom and sustained action in which it can help the power
grid. The addition of energy storage allows the StatCom to
inject and/or absorb active and reactive power simulta-
neously, providing additional benefits and improvements
in the system. The voltage source inverter front-end of a
StatCom can be easily interconnected with an energy stor-
age source, such as a SMES coil via a dc-dc chopper.
As expected and demonstrated in the past [3], the mod-
ulation of real power can have a more significant influence
on damping power swings than reactive power alone [11].
Even without much energy storage, static compensators
with the ability to control both reactive and real power can
enhance the performance of a transmission grid.
The work described here intends to model and simulate
the dynamics of the integration of a ±160-Mvar StatCom
and a 100-MJ SMES coil (96-MW peak power and 24-kV
dc interface) that has been designed for a utility applica-
tion. In this article, modeling and control schemes utilized
for the StatCom-SMES are described first. Then, the
21
 impact of the combined compensator on dynamic system tion of the StatCom, dc-dc chopper, and SMES coil is de-
response is discussed. The effective locations of the com- picted in Figure 3. In the figures, the units of resistance,
pensator are compared for a generic power system. inductance, and capacitance values are ohms, henry, and
microfarad, respectively.
Modeling and Control Description
A typical ac system equivalent was used in this study to The AC Power System
show the dynamic performance of the StatCom with a The ac system equivalent used in this study corresponds to a
SMES coil. The simulated circuitry representing this in- two-machine system, where one machine is dynamically
tegration is shown in Figure 2. The detailed representa- modeled (including generator, exciter, and governor) to be
able to demonstrate dynamic oscil-
lations. Dynamic oscillations are
simulated by creating a three-phase
Power (MW) fault in the middle of one of the par-
allel lines at Bus D (Figure 2). A bus
Dynamic Response that connects the StatCom-SMES to
10,000 Generation the ac power system is named a
Frequency Spinning
Control Reserve StatCom terminal bus. The location
1,000 of this bus is selected to be either
ds
Voltage/VAR con bus A or B.
Transmission Se tes rsu
s nu Ho rs
100 cle ds Mi u
Cy n Ho StatCom
S eco s to Load Leveling
ute
Stability Min ours Generation As can be seen from Figure 3, two
H
10 Custom Transmission Load-Leveling gate turn-off (GTO) based six-pulse
Power s Transmission voltage source inverters represent
les
Cyc ds our
to H the StatCom used in this particular
1 c on ute
s
Se Power Min Load-Leveling study. The voltage source inverters
Quality Distribution are connected to the ac system
through two 80-MVA coupling
I EEE I NDUSTRY A PPLI CA TI ONS MA GA ZI NE • MA R|A PR 2003 • WWW.I EEE.ORG/I A S

0.1 1 10 100 1,000 1 10 100 1,000 10,000 transformers and linked to a dc ca-
pacitor in the dc side. The value of
MWs MWh
the dc link capacitor has been se-
Energy
1
lected as 10 mF in order to obtain
smooth voltage at the StatCom ter-
SMES power and energy requirements for potential electric utility applications. minal bus.

Bus A Bus B Bus C

Machine II - 100 MVA

Machine I - 700 MVA

(Dynamically Modeled)

Capacitor Bank
53 MVA Bus D

2
22 AC system equivalent.
 StatCom

DC-DC Chopper
Tmva = 80
Terminal Bus
StatCom

DC Capacitor

Tmva = 80

SMES Coil

3
Detailed representation of the StartCom, dc-dc chopper, and SMES coil.

As stated in [12] and [13], a GTO-based inverter con-
nected to a transmission line acts as an alternating voltage
source in phase with the line voltage, and, depending on the
voltage produced by the inverter, an operation of inductive
or capacitive mode can be achieved. It has also been empha-
To generate the gating signals for the inverters, line to
ground voltages are used for the inverter connected to the
Y-Y transformer, whereas line-to-line voltages are uti-
lized for the inverter connected to the Y-∆ transformer.
This model and control scheme is partly based on the

I EEE I NDUSTRY A PPLI CA TI ONS MA GA ZI NE • MA R|A PR 2003 • WWW.I EEE.ORG/I A S

sized that a dc link capacitor es-
tablishes equilibrium between Measured Voltage in p.u.
the instantaneous output and in- at StatCom Terminal
put power of the inverter.
The primary function of the
StatCom is to control reactive
power/voltage at the point of
connection to the ac system
[12]-[14]. Figure 4 shows the
control diagram of the StatCom
used in the simulation. The con-
trol inputs are the measured
StatCom-injected reactive
power (SQstat) and the three-
phase ac voltages (Va,Vb, and Vc) Injected Reactive
and their per-unit values mea- Power

sured at the StatCom terminal

bus. The per-unit voltage is
compared with base per-unit
Measured 3-p Voltages

voltage value (1 p.u.). The error

at Statcom Terminal

is amplified to obtain reference

reactive current that is translated
to the reference reactive power to Gate Signals to
Six-Pulse Inverter
be compared with SQstat. The
amplified reactive power-error
signal and phase-difference sig-
nal between measured and fed
three-phase system voltages are
passed through a phase-locked
loop control. The resultant 4
phase angle is used to create syn-
chronized square waves. StatCom control. 23
 example case given in the EMTDC/
PSCAD simulation package, though
some modifications have been made to
meet the system characteristics. These
modifications include change in trans-
former ratings and dc capacitor rating,
tuning in control parameters and add-
ing voltage loop control to obtain refer-
ence reactive power. It should be noted
that StatCom control does not make use
of signals, such as deviation in speed or
power to damp oscillations, rather it
maintains a desired voltage level at the
terminal bus to which the StatCom is
connected.
The DC-DC Chopper and SMES Coil
A SMES coil is connected to a voltage
source inverter through a dc-dc chopper.
It controls dc current and voltage levels
by converting the inverter dc output
voltage to the adjustable voltage re-
quired across the SMES coil terminal.
The purpose of having interphase inductors is to allow bal- that the coil enters in charging (absorbing) or discharging
anced current sharing for each chopper phase.
SMES Current
I EEE I NDUSTRY A PPLI CA TI ONS MA GA ZI NE • MA R|A PR 2003 • WWW.I EEE.ORG/I A S
Hard Limit
Porder
SMES Current
Icharging
Hard Limit
DC Cap.
Voltage
chargduty
Duty Cycle
Gate Signals
to DC-DC Chopper
24 SMES and chopper control.
A two-level, three-phase dc-dc chop-
per used in the simulation has been mod-
SIMULTANEOUS eled and controlled according to [15].
CONTROL OF The phase delay was kept at 180° to re-
duce transient overvoltages. The chop-
REAL AND per’s GTO gate signals are square
waveforms with a controlled duty cycle.
REACTIVE The average voltage of the SMES coil is
related to the StatCom output dc voltage
POWER CAN with the following equation [16]:
SIGNIFICANTLY VSMES_ av = (1 − 2d )Vdc_ av ,
ENHANCE THE where VSMES_av is the average voltage across
PERFORMANCE the SMES coil, Vdc_av is the average
StatCom output dc voltage, and d is the
OF A duty cycle of the chopper (GTO conduc-
tion time/period of one switching cycle).
TRANSMISSION This relationship states that there is no
energy transferring (standby mode) at a
GRID. duty cycle of 0.5 where the average SMES
coil voltage is equal to zero and the SMES
coil current is constant. It is also apparent
(injecting) mode when the duty cycle is larger or less than
0.5, respectively. Adjusting the
duty cycle of the GTO firing sig-
nals controls the rate of charg-
Measured Real
ing/discharging.
Power at StatCom
Terminal As shown in Figure 5, the
1 = Ctrl duty cycle is controlled in two
ways. Three measurements are
Ctrl used in this chopper-SMES con-
trol: SMES coil current (CISMES),
ac real power (SPmeas) measured
trigstab
at the StatCom terminal bus,
and dc voltage (dcvolt) measured
Rate Limited to
10,000/sec across the dc-link capacitor.
The SMES coil is initially
charged with the first control
scheme, and the duty cycle is set
to 0.5 after reaching the desired
stabduty
charging level. The second con-
trigstab charduty trol is basically a stabilizer con-
trol that orders the SMES power
according to the changes that
may happen in the ac real
1 = Ctrl
power. This order is translated
into a new duty cycle that con-
trols the voltage across the
SMES coil, therefore, the real
power is exchanged through the
StatCom.
Case Studies
In order to demonstrate the ef-
fectiveness of the StatCom-
SMES combination, several cases
5 are simulated. A three- phase
fault is created at Bus D of Fig-
ure 2 to generate dynamic oscil-
lations in each case. The plot 388 388
time step is 0.001 s for all the
figures given in these cases. 384 384

Machine Speed (rad/s)

Machine Speed (rad/s)

AC Oscillations and 380 380
StatCom-Only Mode
376 376
A two-machine ac system is
simulated. The inertia of Ma- 372 372
chine I was adjusted to obtain
approximately 3-Hz oscilla- 368 368
tions from a three- phase fault
created at 3.1 s and cleared at 364 364
3.25 s. When there is no 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5
Time (s) Time (s)
StatCom- SMES connected to
the ac power system, the sys- 1.2 1.2
tem response is depicted in
the first column of Figure 6 1.1 1.1
Voltage at Bus B (p.u.)

Voltage at Bus B (p.u.)

in the interval of 3-5 s where
1 1
first and second rows corre-
spond to the speed of Ma- 0.9 0.9
chine I and ac voltage at Bus
B, respectively. When a 0.8 0.8
StatCom-only is connected,
the response is given in 0.7 0.7
Figure 6(b). Since the
StatCom is used for voltage 0.6 0.6
3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5
support, it may not be as ef- Time (s) Time (s)
fective in damping oscilla- (a) (b)

I EEE I NDUSTRY A PPLI CA TI ONS MA GA ZI NE • MA R|A PR 2003 • WWW.I EEE.ORG/I A S

tions.

Compensator 388 388

Located at Bus B
384 384
Machine Speed (rad/s)

Machine Speed (rad/s)

Now, the 100-MJ/96-MW

SMES coil is attached to a 380 380
160-Mvar StatCom through
a dc-dc chopper at Bus B. 376 376
The SMES coil is charged by
making the voltage across its 372 372
terminal positive until the
coil current becomes 3.6 kA. 368 368
Once it reaches this charging 364 364
level, it is set at the standby 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5
mode. In order to see the ef- Time (s) Time (s)
fectiveness of the StatCom- 1.2 1.2
SMES combination, the
SMES activates right after 1.1 1.1
Voltage at Bus B (p.u.)

Voltage at Bus B (p.u.)

the three-phase fault is

cleared at 3.25 s. The dy- 1 1
namic response of the com-
bined device to ac system 0.9 0.9
oscillation is depicted in
0.8 0.8
Figure 6(c). The first plot
shows the machine fre- 0.7
0.7
quency, the next two give
the real and reactive power 0.6 0.6
injected or absorbed by the 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5
StatCom-SMES device, and Time (s) Time (s)
(c) (d)
the fourth gives the StatCom 6
terminal voltage per unit. In
these figures, negative, real, Dynamic response to ac system oscillations. (a) No StatCom-SMES. (b) StatCom-only at
and/or reactive power values Bus B. (c) StatCom-SMES at Bus B. (d) StatCom-SMES at Bus A. 25
 StatCom Real Power (MW)

StatCom Real Power (MW)

100 100

50 50

0 0

−50 −50

−100 −100
3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5
Time (s) Time (s)

StatCom Reactive Power (MVAR)

StatCom Reactive Power (MVAR)

200 200

100 100

0 0

−100 −100

−200 −200
3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5
Time (s) Time (s)
(a) (b)
7
Real and reactive power responses of the StatCom-SMES.

3.8 3.8
SMES Current (kA)

SMES Current (kA)

3.7 3.7

3.6 3.6
I EEE I NDUSTRY A PPLI CA TI ONS MA GA ZI NE • MA R|A PR 2003 • WWW.I EEE.ORG/I A S

3.5 3.5

3.4 3.4
3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5
Time (s) Time (s)
Average SMES Voltage (kV)
Average SMES Voltage (kV)

30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
−10 −10
−20 −20
−30 −30
3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5
Time (s) Time (s)

32 32
SMES Current (kA)
DC Voltage (kA)

28.5 28

25 24

21.5 20

18 16
3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5
Time (s) Time (s)

90 90
SMES Energy (MJ)

SMES Energy (MJ)

86 86
82 82
78 78
74 74
70 70
3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5
Time (s) Time (s)
(a) (b)
8
26 SMES operation. (a) StatCom-SMES at Bus B. (b) StatCom-SMES at Bus A.
represent the injected power from the when a 100-MVA load at power factor of
device to the ac system. When compared 0.85 is connected to Bus B. The existence
to no compensation and StatCom-only THE of the load forced the controller to be oper-
cases, shown in Figure 6, both frequency
and voltage oscillations were damped
MODULATION ated closer to its maximum rating. The
performance of the compensator to ac sys-
out faster. OF REAL POWER tem oscillations showed similar results, as
obtained in the previous two cases.
Compensator Located at Bus A CAN HAVE A Again, when the combined compen-
The StatCom-SMES combination is now sator is located at Bus A, it shows better
connected to the ac power system at a bus MORE damping performance.
near the generator bus. The same scenario
drawn in the previous section applies to SIGNIFICANT Reduced Rating in StatCom-SMES
this case. The results are shown in the
fourth column of Figure 6. Compared to INFLUENCE ON While keeping the compensator loca-
tion at Bus B, the performance of
other two cases, StatCom-SMES con-
nected to a bus near the generator shows
DAMPING StatCom-only at full rating is compared
to the performance of StatCom- SMES at
very effective results in damping electro- POWER SWINGS reduced rating. The power rating of the
mechanical transient oscillations caused SMES and StatCom were reduced to half
by a three-phase fault. THAN REACTIVE of their original ratings (80 Mvar,
50-MW peak). The energy level of the
Performance of the POWER ALONE. SMES was kept the same, however, the
StatCom-SMES at Different Locations real power capability of the SMES was
The real and reactive power responses of decreased. The SMES coil was charged
the compensator to oscillations are com- until it reached the desired charging
pared for different locations. Figure 7 compares the StatCom current level, which took twice the time since the termi-
real and reactive power responses for these previous cases nal voltage was lower. A three-phase fault is created at 5.6
(StatCom-SMES at Bus B and StatCom-SMES at Bus A). s for 0.15 s, and the responses of the StatCom-SMES ver-
When the StatCom-SMES is located at Bus B, it provides a sus StatCom-only to the power swings are compared in
voltage support by injecting approximately 50 MVA and Figure 9.

I EEE I NDUSTRY A PPLI CA TI ONS MA GA ZI NE • MA R|A PR 2003 • WWW.I EEE.ORG/I A S

damps the oscillations. When the combined compensator is
located at Bus A, no reactive power injection is necessary,
since Bus A voltage is fixed by the exciter of Machine I.
As a response to system oscillations, the operation of
SMES is also compared for different locations, as shown in
Figure 8. From top to bottom, SMES current, SMES termi-
nal voltage, dc capacitor voltage, and SMES energy are
plotted. SMES current
(hence, energy) does not
change abruptly, which is 388
Machine Speed (rad/s)
This comparison shows that a StatCom-SMES at the re-
duced rating can be as effective as a StatCom at the full rat-
ing in damping oscillations. On the other hand, the
terminal voltage has not been improved. This requires
higher reactive power support, but not as high as the full
rating. Therefore, adding energy storage can reduce the
MVA rating requirements of the StatCom operating alone.
388

Machine Speed (rad/s)

expected. Otherwise, tran- 384 384

sient overvoltages are ob- 380 380
served at the terminal of
376 376
SMES. SMES terminal volt-
372 372
age changes its polarity as
the coil charges or dis- 368 368
charges. The positive SMES 364 364
5.5 5.75 6 6.25 6.5 6.75 7 7.25 7.5 5.5 5.75 6 6.25 6.5 6.75 7 7.25 7.5
voltage charges the SMES Time (s) Time (s)
coil, which absorbs power
StatCom Terminal Voltage (p.u.)

StatCom Terminal Voltage (p.u.)

from the ac system. Any

1.2 1.2
variation on the StatCom ac
terminal voltage is reflected 1.1 1.1
to the voltage across the ca- 1 1
pacitor or the input voltage
0.9 0.9
to the dc-dc chopper, as
shown in the third row of 0.8 0.8
Figure 8. 0.7 0.7
5.5 5.75 6 6.25 6.5 6.75 7 7.25 7.5 5.5 5.75 6 6.25 6.5 6.75 7 7.25 7.5
Adding Load at Bus B Time (s) Time (s)
(a) (b)
In this case, the perfor- 9
mance of the combined
compensator was studied 160-MVA StatCom versus 80-MVA, 50-MW StatCom-SMES. 27
 Real Power Versus Reactive
Power in Damping Oscillations
Low-frequency oscillations following disturbances in
the ac system can be damped by either reactive power or
real power injection/absorption. However, the reactive
power injected to the system is dependent on the
StatCom terminal voltage. On the other hand, the SMES
is ordered according to the variation of the real power
flow in the system. Damping power oscillations with
real power is more effective than reactive power since it
does not effect the voltage quality of the system. Better
damping dynamic performance may be obtained if
SMES is connected to the ac system through a series-
connected voltage source inverter (static synchronous se-
ries compensator) [11] rather than a shunt-connected
voltage source inverter. However, this is not a justifiable
solution since it involves more cost.
Conclusion
This article presents the modeling and control of the inte-
gration of a StatCom with SMES and its dynamic response
to system oscillations caused by a three-phase fault. It has
been shown that the StatCom-SMES combination can be
very effective in damping power system oscillations. Add-
ing energy storage enhances the performance of a StatCom
and possibly reduces the MVA ratings requirements of the
StatCom operating alone. This is important for a cost/ben-
efit analysis of installing flexible ac transmission system
I EEE I NDUSTRY A PPLI CA TI ONS MA GA ZI NE • MA R|A PR 2003 • WWW.I EEE.ORG/I A S
controllers on utility systems.
It should be noted that, in this study, the StatCom pro-
vides a real power flow path for SMES, but the SMES con-
troller is independent of the StatCom controller. While the
StatCom is ordered to absorb or inject reactive power, the
SMES is ordered to absorb/inject real power.
It was also observed that the location where the com-
bined compensator is connected is important for improve-
ment of overall system dynamic performance. Although
the use of a reactive power controller seems more effective
in a load area, as stated in [11], this simulation study shows
that a StatCom with real power capability can damp the
power system oscillations more effectively, thereby stabi-
lizing the system faster if the StatCom-SMES controller is
located near a generation area rather than a load area.
Acknowledgments
This work is partly supported by the National Science
F o u n d a t i o n , De p a r t m e n t o f En e r g y ( G r a n t
DE-FG36-94GO10011) and BWX Technologies, Inc.—
Naval Nuclear Fuel Division. Any opinions, findings, con-
clusions, or recommendations expressed herein are those of
the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
sponsoring organizations.
References
[1] W.V. Hassenzahl, “Superconducting magnetic energy storage,”
Proc. IEEE, vol. 71, pp. 1089-1098, Sept. 1983.
[2] Y. Mitani, K. Tsuji, and Y Murakami, “Application of supercon-
ducting magnetic energy storage to improve power system dy-
namic performance,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 3, pp.
28 1418-1425, Nov. 1988.
[3] J.D. Rogers, R.I. Schermer, R.L. Miler, and J.F. Hauer, “30 MJ super-
conducting magnetic energy storage system for electric utility
transmission stabilization,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 71, pp. 1099-1107,
Sept. 1983.
[4] S. Bonerjee, J.K. Chatterjee, and S.C. Triphathy, “Application of
magnetic energy storage unit as load frequency stabilizer,” IEEE
Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 5, pp. 46-51, Mar. 1990.
[5] R.H. Lasseter and S.G. Jalali, “Dynamic response of power condi-
tioning systems for superconductive magnetic energy storage,”
IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 6, pp. 388-393, Sept. 1991.
[6] S.F. Kral, M. Aslam, P.F. Ribeiro, X. Huang, and M. Xu, “Supercon-
ducting power delivery systems for transmission and distribution
applications,” presented at the 57th American Power Conference,
Chicago, IL, 1995.
[7] R.F. Giese, “Progress toward high temperature superconducting
magnetic energy storage (SMES)—A second look,” Argonne Na-
tional Laboratory, Argonne, IL, 1998.
[8] V. Karasik, K. Dixon, C. Weber, B. Batchelder, and P. Ribeiro,
“SMES for power utility applications: A review of technical and cost
considerations,” IEEE Trans. Appl. Superconduct., vol. 9, pp.
541-546, June 1999.
[9] N.G. Hingorani and L. Gyugyi, Understanding Concepts and Technol-
ogy of Flexible AC Transmission Systems. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE
Press, 2000.
[10] C. Schauder, E. Stacey, M. Lund, L. Gyugyi, L. Kovalsky, A. Keri, A.
Mehraban, and A. Edris, “AEP UPFC project: Installation, commis-
sioning and operation of the 160MVA StatCom (Phase I),” IEEE
Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 13, pp. 1530-1535, Oct. 1998.
[11] E. Larsen, N. Miller, S. Nilsson, and S. Lindgren, “Benefits of
GTO-based compensation systems for electric utility applications,”
IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 7, pp. 2056-2062, Oct. 1992.
[12] K.K. Sen, “STATCOM-STATic synchronous COMpensator: The-
ory, modeling and applications,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol.
2, pp. 1177-1183, Feb. 1999.
[13] L. Gyugyi, “Dynamic compensation of ac transmission lines by
solid-state synchronous voltage sources,” IEEE Trans. Power Deliv-
ery, vol. 9, pp. 904-911, Apr. 1994.
[14] K.V. Patil, J. Senthil, J. Jiang, and R.M. Mathur, “Application of
statcom for damping torsional oscillations in series compensated ac
systems,” IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 13, pp. 237-243,
Sept. 1998.
[15] A.B. Arsoy, Z. Wang, Y.Liu, and P.F. Ribeiro, “Transient model-
ing and simulation of a SMES coil and its power electronics inter-
face,” IEEE Trans. Appl. Superconduct., vol. 9, pp. 4715-4724, Dec.
1999.
[16] D. Hassan, R.M. Bucci, and K.T. Swe, “400MW SMES power con-
ditioning system development and simulation,” IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol.8, pp.237-249, July 1993.
A.B. Arsoy (aysen@ieee.org) is with Kocaeli University in Izmit
Kocaeli, Turkey. Y. Liu (yilu@vt.edu) is with Virginia Tech in
Blacksburg, Virginia, USA. P.F. Ribeiro (pribeiro@cal-
vin.edu) is with Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan,
USA. F. Wang (f.wang@ieee.org) is with GE Industrial Sys-
tems in Salem, Virginia, USA. This article first appeared in its
original format at the 2000 IEEE IAS Annual Meeting.