2.9.

Example for NRLF (polar) technique

As an example, let us consider again the 5-bus system shown in Fig. 2.16. In this System, n = 5 and
m = 3 (as the number of generator in 3). Initially, let us assume that there is no violation of reactive
power limit at any generator. Therefore, the sizes of The Jacobian sub-matinees are as follows;
J1 (4 4), J2 (4 2), J3 (2 4) and J4 (2 2). Therefore, the size of the combined
Jacobian matrix J is (66). As before, the NRLF algorithm starts with flat voltage profile and with
this assumed voltage profile, the different quantities in the first iteration are calculated as shown in
Table 2.10:
Table 2.10: Initial calculation with NRLF (polar) in the 5 bus system

Pcal = [0.0444 0.1776 0.0333 0.0444] 1014 ;

T

Qcal = [0.143 0.143] ;

T

M = [0.5 1.0 1.15 0.85 0.457 0.257] ;

error = 1.15;

As the error is more than the tolerance value ( = 1012 p.u), the algorithm proceeds and in
the next few steps, the Jacobian matrix, correction vector and the updated values of the error are
calculated as shown in Table 2.11.
As the error is still more than the tolerance value, the algorithm continues and enters 2nd
iteration. The values of the relevant qualities in second iteration are shown in Table 2.12 below.
Since the error is still more than the tolerance value, the algorithm continues and finally converges
after 4 iterations. The final converged solution is shown in Table 2.13. Comparsion of Tables 2.13
and 2.4 (GSLF results) shows that the final results obtained by these two methods are identically
same. However, NRLF achieves this solution in 4 iterations as opposed at 69 iterations required by
GSLF. The convergence behavior of both GSLF and NRLF are shown in Fig. 2.17. From this figure
it can be observed that, NRLF has certainly much better convergence characteristics as compared
to GSLF.
Now let us consider the case where reactive power generation of generator 3 is limited to 50
MVAR. The algorithm again starts with a flat start and the initial calculation are same as shown
in Table 2.10 earlier. As Q3 calculated has not crossed the limit, the program proceeds in the same
way as shown in Table 2.11 till the end of first iteration. With the voltage magnitudes and angles
obtained at the end of first iteration, the reactive power generated by all the machines are again
calculated and the value of Q3 is found to be 53.42 MVAR (0.5342 p.u). Hence, bus 3 (generator
3) is converted to a PQ bus and hence, the PQ buses in the system now are (4, 5, 3). The vectors
of calculated injected real and reactive powers, mismatch vector and final mismatch at the end of
1st iteration are shown in Table 2.14. Note that without any generator reactive power violation, the
size of M vector was (6 1) and with generator limit violation in Q3 , the size has now increased
to (7 1).
At the end of 1st iteration, n = 5 and m = 2 (as the number of generator buses is 2). Hence,
the sizes of the various Jacobian sub-matrices are: J1 (4 4), J2 (4 3), J3 (3 4) and
46

Table 2.11: Calculation at 1st iteration with NRLF (polar) in the 5 bus system without any generator
Q limit violation

13.0858

7.4835

J1 =
0

J3 = [

7.4835
0
0

19.0911 7.1309 4.4768

;
7.1309 10.8657 3.7348

4.4768 3.7348 15.6951

0 1.2584 2.1921 0.9337

];
0 1.1298 0.9337 3.9047

13.0858

7.4835

J=
0

0
0

1.2584 1.12982

J2 =
2.1921 0.9337

0.9337 3.9047

10.5797 3.7348
J4 = [
];
3.7348 15.4091

7.4835
0
0
0
0

19.0911 7.1309 4.4768 1.2584 1.1298

7.1309 10.8657 3.7348 2.1921 0.9337

;
4.4768 3.7348 15.6951 0.9337 3.9047

1.2584 2.1921 0.9337 10.5797 3.7348

1.1298 0.9337 3.9047 3.7348 15.4091

T

X = [0.0331 0.0090 0.1275 0.0799 0.0783 0.0475] ;

T

= [0.0331 0.0090 0.1275 0.0799] ;

V = [0.0783 0.0475]

= [0 0.0331 0.0090 0.1275 0.0799] ;

T

V = [1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.9217 0.9525] ;

T

Pcal = [0.5023 0.9293 1.0413 0.8128] ;

Qcal = [0.5158 0.3472] ;

T

M = [0.0023 0.0707 0.1087 0.0372 0.0842 0.0528] ;

error = 0.1087;

J4 (3 3). Thus, the size of the Jacobian matrix increases to (7 7). The Jacobian matrix,
correction vector and the updated value of the mismatch as computed in the 2nd iteration are shown
in Table 2.15. As the mismatch is still more than the tolerance value, the algorithm proceeds further
and finally, the algorithm converges in 5 iterations. The final converged values are shown in Table
2.16. In this table also, the NRLF (polar) results without any reactive power limit (as shown in
Table 2.13) are also reproduced for comparison. Moreover, it is observed that the final converged
values are identically same as those calculated by the GSLF method (Table 2.7).
The results with IEEE - 14 bus system are shown in Table 2.17 with and without limit on
generator reactive power. For this case also, the limit on the generator at bus 6 has been maintained
at 30 MVAR. Comparison of Tables 2.8 and 2.17 shows that the results obtained by GSLF and NRLF
are identical, but due to quadratic convergence characteristics, the number of iteration required by
47

Table 2.12: Calculation at 2nd iteration with NRLF (polar) in the 5 bus system without any generator
Q limit violation

13.1998

7.3995

J1 =
0

J3 = [

7.5543
0
0

18.3929 6.6638 4.3296

;
6.3896 9.6258 3.2363

4.1771 3.3143 14.3457

0 1.9289 2.9037 0.9748

];
0 1.3756 0.6628 4.3554

13.1998

7.3995

J=
0

0
0

0.4065 0.8098

;
J2 =
0.8909 1.0234

0.7191 2.8658

9.3239 3.3977
J4 = [
];
3.5957 14.4487

7.5543
0
0
0
0

18.3929 6.6638 4.3296 0.4065 0.8098

6.3896 9.6258 3.2363 0.8909 1.0234

;
4.1771 3.3143 14.4567 0.7191 2.8658

1.9289 2.9037 0.9748 9.3239 3.3977

1.3756 0.6628 4.3554 3.5957 14.4487

T

X = [0.0041 0.0068 0.0179 0.0154 0.0783 0.0084] ;

T

= [0.0331 0.0090 0.1275 0.0799] ;

V = [0.0783 0.0475] ;
T

= [0 0.0290 0.0158 0.1453 0.0876] ;

T

V = [1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.9063 0.9441] ;

T

Pcal = [0.5000 0.9988 1.1474 0.8501] ;

Qcal = [0.5980 0.3990] ;

T

M = [0.0000 0.0012 0.0026 0.0001 0.0020 0.0010] ;

error = 0.0026 ;

NRLF to reach the same solution is much less compared to that taken by GSLF for a tolerance of
10e12 p.u.
The results for 30-bus system are shown in Table 2.18. Without any generator Q-limit, the results
obtained by GSLF and NRLF (polar) are identical, although NRLF (polar) takes only 4 iterations
against 851 iterations taken by GSLF. Also,as mentioned earlier, with a tolerance of 10e12 (p.u),
GSLF does not converge for Q limit on gen 11 and 13 (20 and 30 MVAR respectively). However,
NRLF (polar) does not face any such difficulty in convergence in this case and the algorithm converges
with 7 iterations in this case. The corresponding results are also shown in Table 2.18.
In the next lecture, we will discuss another version of NRLF, namely, the rectangular version,
in which, all the complex quantities are represented in the rectangular co-ordinates instead of polar
co-ordinates as is done in the case of NRLF (polar) technique.

48

Table 2.13: Final Results of the 5 bus system with NRLF (polar) without any generator Q limit
violation
Bus no.
1
2
3
4
5

Without generator Q limit

Pinj

Qinj

(p.u)
(deg)
(p.u)
(p.u)
1.0
0
0.56743 0.26505
1.0
1.65757
0.5
-0.18519
1.0
-0.91206
1.0
0.68875
0.90594 -8.35088
-1.15
-0.6
0.94397 -5.02735
-0.85
-0.4
Total iteration = 4

Figure 2.17: Convergence characteristics of GSLF and NRLF

Table 2.14: Calculations at the end of 1st iteration with NRLF (polar) in the 5 bus system for limit
on Q3
T

Pcal = [0.5023 0.9293 1.0413 0.8128] ;

Qcal = [0.5158 0.3472 0.5342] ;

T

M = [0.0023 0.0707 0.1087 0.0372 0.0842 0.0528 0.0342] ;

error = 0.1087 ;

49

Table 2.15: Calculations at 2nd iteration with NRLF (polar) in the 5 bus system for limit on Q3

0
0
1.5250
7.5543
0
0

0.4065 0.8098 5.1587

18.3929 6.6638 4.3296

;
; J2 =

6.3896 9.6258 3.2363

0.8909 1.0234 1.9289

0.7191 2.8658 1.3756

4.1771 3.3143 14.3457

9.3239 3.3977 6.3896

0
1.9289 2.9037 0.9748

1.3756 0.6628 4.3554 ; J4 = 3.5957 14.4487 4.1771;

J3 = 0

7.2296 4.5456 19.4614

2.1541 3.3002 0.3747 0.7713

13.1998 7.5543
0
0
0
0
1.5250

7.3995 18.3929 6.6638 4.3296 0.4065 0.8098 5.1587

0
6.3896 9.6258 3.2363 0.8909 1.0234 1.9289

4.1771 3.3143 14.4567 0.7191 2.8658 1.3756;

J= 0

1.9289
2.9037
0.9748
9.3239
3.3977
6.3896

1.3756
0.6628
4.3554
3.5957
14.4487
4.1771

2.1542 3.3002 0.3747 0.7713 7.2296 4.5456 19.4614

13.1998

7.3995

J1 =
0

X = [0.0033 0.0022 0.0174 0.0069 0.0310 0.0173 0.0167] ;

T

= [0.0033 0.0022 0.0174 0.0069] ;

V = [0.0310 0.0173 0.0167] ;

T

= [0 0.0297 0.0112 0.1449 0.0868] ;

T

V = [1.0000 1.0000 0.9833 0.8907 0.9352] ;

T

Pcal = [0.5002 0.9949 1.1421 0.8498] ;

Qcal = [0.5964 0.3984 0.5015] ;

T

M = [0.0002 0.0051 0.0073 0.0002 0.0036 0.0016 0.0015] ;

error = 0.0073;

50

Table 2.16: Final Results of the 5 bus system with NRLF (polar) with generator Q limit

Bus no.
1
2
3
4
5

Without generator Q limit

Pinj

Qinj

With generator Q limit

Pinj

Qinj

(p.u)
(deg)
(p.u)
(p.u)
(p.u)
(deg)
(p.u)
(p.u)
1.0
0
0.56743 0.26505
1.0
0
0.56979 0.33935
1.0
1.65757
0.5
-0.18519
1.0
1.69679
0.5
-0.04769
1.0
-0.91206
1.0
0.68875 0.9825 -0.63991
1.0
0.5
0.90594 -8.35088
-1.15
-0.6
0.88918 -8.35906
-1.15
-0.6
0.94397 -5.02735
-0.85
-0.4
0.93445 -4.98675
-0.85
-0.4
Total iteration = 4
Total iteration = 5

Table 2.17: Final Results of the 14 bus system with NRLF (Polar)
Without generator Q limit

Bus no.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

(p.u)
1.06
1.045
1.04932
1.03299
1.04015
1.07
1.02076
1.0224
1.0201
1.0211
1.04144
1.0526
1.04494
1.01249

Pinj

(deg)
(p.u)
0
2.37259
-5.17113
0.183
-14.54246
-1.19
-10.39269 -0.4779
-8.76418 -0.07599
-12.52265
0.112
-13.44781
0
-13.47154
0
-13.60908 -0.29499
-13.69541
-0.09
-13.22158 -0.03501
-13.42868 -0.06099
-13.50388 -0.135
-14.60128 -0.14901
Total iteration = 4

Qinj

(p.u)
-0.3308
-0.166
-0.08762
-0.039
-0.01599
0.37278
0
-0.129
-0.16599
-0.05799
-0.018
-0.01599
-0.05799
-0.05001

(p.u)
1.06
1.045
1.04697
1.02902
1.03615
1.05497
1.01266
1.01391
1.0118
1.01154
1.02915
1.03787
1.03063
1.00136

51

With generator Q limit

Pinj

(deg)
(p.u)
0
2.37188
-5.17845
0.183
-14.55556
-1.19
-10.35987 -0.4779
-8.71027 -0.07599
-12.45871
0.112
-13.49478
0
-13.5185
0
-13.66101 -0.29499
-13.73679
-0.09
-13.21814 -0.03501
-13.39145 -0.06099
-13.48166 -0.135
-14.64504 -0.14901
Total iteration = 6

Qinj
(p.u)
-0.31249
-0.1066
-0.08762
-0.039
-0.01599
0.3
0
-0.129
-0.16599
-0.05799
-0.018
-0.01599
-0.05799
-0.05001

Table 2.18: Final Results of the 30 bus system with NRLF (Polar)
Without generator Q limit

Bus no.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

(p.u)
1.05
1.0338
1.03128
1.02578
1.0058
1.02178
1.00111
1.023
1.04608
1.03606
1.0913
1.04859
1.0883
1.03346
1.02825
1.0359
1.0306
1.01873
1.01626
1.02041
1.02305
1.02343
1.0165
1.00939
1.00048
0.9825
1.00379
1.02049
0.98353
0.97181

Pinj

Qinj

With generator Q limit

Pinj

Qinj

(deg)
(p.u)
(p.u)
(p.u)
(deg)
(p.u)
(p.u)
0
2.38673 -0.29842
1.05
0
2.3865 -0.29386
-4.97945 0.3586 -0.05698 1.0338 -4.98084 0.35861 -0.04562
-7.96653
-0.024
-0.012 1.03045 -7.95523 -0.02399 -0.012
-9.58235
-0.076
-0.016 1.02477 -9.56929 -0.07598 -0.016
-13.60103 -0.6964 0.05042 1.0058 -13.60836 -0.6964 0.05532
-11.50296
0
0
1.02084 -11.49304 0.00003
0
-13.9994
-0.628
-0.109 1.00055 -13.99792 -0.628
-0.109
-12.56853
-0.45
0.12343
1.023 -12.57567
-0.45
0.15111
-13.04088
0
0
1.04006 -13.02865 0.00001
0
-14.88589 -0.058
-0.02
1.03117 -14.8866 -0.05797 -0.02001
-11.16876 0.1793 0.24018 1.07807 -11.12256 0.1793
0.2
-13.74947 -0.112
-0.075 1.04456 -13.75755 -0.11198 -0.075
-12.56078 0.1691 0.31043 1.08311 -12.55854 0.1691
0.3
-14.71704 -0.062
-0.016 1.02931 -14.73168 -0.062
-0.016
-14.86737 -0.082
-0.025 1.02403 -14.88097 -0.08199 -0.025
-14.50539 -0.035
-0.018 1.03148 -14.51198 -0.035
-0.018
-14.98291
-0.09
-0.058 1.02583 -14.98712
-0.09
-0.058
-15.58107 -0.032
-0.009 1.01422 -15.59618 -0.03199 -0.009
-15.81066 -0.095
-0.034 1.01159 -15.8251 -0.09499 -0.034
-15.63819 -0.022
-0.007 1.01568 -15.64961 -0.022
-0.007
-15.35955 -0.175
-0.112 1.01825 -15.36524 -0.17496 -0.11201
-15.35222
0
0
1.01867 -15.3581
0
0
-15.41998 -0.032
-0.016 1.01226 -15.43637 -0.032
-0.016
-15.81043 -0.087
-0.067 1.00517 -15.8277
-0.087
-0.067
-15.84004
0
0
0.99748 -15.86849
0
0
-16.27422 -0.035
-0.023 0.97944 -16.30534 -0.035
-0.023
-15.59587
0
0
1.00158 -15.62827
0
0
-12.1474
0
0
1.01959 -12.14235
0
0
-16.87497 -0.024
-0.009 0.98126 -16.91314 -0.024
-0.009
-17.79427 -0.106
-0.019 0.96951 -17.83675 -0.106
-0.019
Total iteration = 4
Total iteration = 7

52