*5.2. IEEE*−*34 Bus URDN*

The date for the IEEE−34 bus URDN is taken from [31]. The base values selected for the system are 2500 kVA and 24.9 kV. The load composition at spot loads for harmonic analysis is presented in Table 10. The data for the current spectra of harmonic loads aretaken from [32]. The convergence tolerance for both fundamental and harmonic power flows is 10−<sup>4</sup> . The case studies on the network are presented in Table 11. The rating and location of the D-STATCOM device for Case2 is presented in Table 11. Table 12 presents the fundamental r.m.s voltage profile, the total r.m.s voltage profile, and the THD % for Case1. The test results of Case1 are used as a benchmark to see the fundamental and harmonic impacts of D-STATCOM on the network. The summary of results for the case studies is presented in Table 13. In Case2, which has integrations of two D-STATCOM devices, the maximum THD% is observed to be 5.2567 which is less than in Case 1. The number of phases effected with a THD% more than fiveis reduced from fourto twofrom Case 1 to Case 2. From Case 1 to Case 2, it is found that the minimum fundamental voltage on the network is improved from 0.7641 p.u to 0.8137 p.u at bus 890 for the a-phase.The fundamental power loss and the total power loss including harmonic loss of the network reduced in Case 2 in comparison with Case 1. Figure 10 shows the comparison of THD % with and without the integration of the D-STATCOM. Figure 11 shows the comparison of the fundamental r.m.s voltages on the network for the two case studies.

**Table 10.** Load composition of spot loads in IEEE−34 bus URDN.



**Table 11.** Case studies on IEEE−34 bus URDN.

**Table 12.** Fundamental r.m.s voltages, total r.m.s voltages, and THD % in the IEEE−34 bus URDN for Case 1.



**Table 13.** Summary of results for the case studies on IEEE−34 bus URDN.

**Figure 10.** Comparison of THD% for case studies on IEEE−34 URDN.

**Figure 11.** Comparison of fundamental r.m.svoltages for case studies on IEEE−34 URDN.
