IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 20, NO.
4, NOVEMBER 2005
Analysis of Radial Distribution Systems With
Embedded Series FACTS Devices Using a
Fast Line Flow-Based Algorithm
Ping Yan, Member, IEEE, and Arun Sekar, Senior Member, IEEE
Abstract—Analysis of radial distribution systems with em-
bedded series Flexible AC Transmission System (FACTS) devices
is facilitated by a formulation of power flow equations with bus
voltage magnitudes and line flows as independent variables. Since
control variables such as the line and bus reactive powers figure
directly in the formulation, handling the control action of FACTS
devices in distribution systems is direct and easily implemented.
Using the Breadth-First-Search (BFS), the bus incidence matrix
of a radial distribution system is first rendered strictly upper di-
agonal, leading to reduced computational effort. All the common
FACTS device models under steady-state conditions are easily
incorporated in the new framework by a simple process of “vari-
able swapping.” Using IEEE standard systems, the line flow-based
(LFB) formulation is shown to provide easy implementation with
multiple series and shunt FACTS devices in the system and enable
direct evaluation of the FACTS device ratings.
Index Terms—Distribution power flow analysis, flexible AC
transmission system (FACTS), power system planning and mod-
eling, voltage controls.
I. INTRODUCTION
F LEXIBLE AC Transmission System (FACTS) devices are
playing a leading role in efficiently controlling the line
power flow and improving voltage profiles of the power system
network. These new devices can increase the reliability and
efficiency of transmission and distribution systems. They offer
greater flexibility and control in operation. Conventional power
flow analyses such as Newton–Raphson [1] and Fast Decou-
pled Algorithm [2] have been adapted to include the FACTS
device models [3] in transmission systems. Peterson and Meyer
[4] first proposed an efficient method, which combines the
state variables of the load tap change (LTC) transformers and
phase shifters with the bus voltages and their phase angles in
Newton–Raphson load flow algorithm. The method requires the
Jacobian matrix to be modified for incorporation of the LTCs
and phase shifters. Fuerte-Esquivel and Acha [5], [6] derived
general admittance-based models for typical FACTS devices
and developed a reliable Newton–Raphson load flow algorithm
with embedded FACTS device models. Since FACTS devices
are both series and shunt connected in the power system,
Manuscript received November 1, 2004; revised May 16, 2005. Paper no.
TPWRS-00577-2004.
P. Yan is with American Electric Power, Columbus, OH 43215 USA (e-mail:
pyan@AEP.com).
A. Sekar is with the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department,
Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville, TN 38505 USA (e-mail:
arunsekar@tntech.edu).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRS.2005.856986
0885-8950/$20.00 © 2005 IEEE
1775
modifications to conventional bus-oriented algorithms result in
additional iterative loops, since the control variables need to be
indirectly calculated.
The major objectives of FACTS devices installed on a dis-
tribution feeder are to improve voltage profiles, correct power
factor, and reduce line losses. Distribution lines have high
R/X ratios, leading to convergence problems in traditional
approaches. Modifications and extensions to standard load
flow algorithms with FACTS devices are reported. Salem
et al. [7] have exploited the analogous model of thyristor-con-
trolled-series-capacitor (TCSC) to improve voltage control in a
radial distribution system. Garcia et al. [8] derived a modified
Newton method in rectangular coordinates by requiring an
augmented Jacobian matrix to incorporate the additional series
FACTS devices relationships between each control action and
controlled variable. Most of these contributions on FACTS
device applications to distribution systems focus on using the
Newton–Raphson formulation. The difficulties encountered in
convergence in such formulations due to the ill-conditioned
nature of the radial system and the high R/X ratios of the
distribution line sections are well documented [9].
Distribution power flow methods reported in the literature and
actually implemented prefer to calculate line flows and voltage
magnitudes using forward and reverse sweeps along a radial line
[10], [11]. Line current and bus voltage phasors with simple
voltage drop calculations in the section impedances enable easy
handling of the highly unbalanced nature of the distribution
networks. Luo and Semlyen [12] used branch power variables
rather than complex current injections and applied tree-labeling
technique in a radial distribution network. Cheng and Shirmo-
hammadi [13] extended the method to three-phase load flow so-
lution with real-time radial distribution system functions. Baran
and Wu [14] presented power flow equations for the radial distri-
bution system, called Dist-Flow, for determining optimal capac-
itor sizing and location. Exposito and Ramos [15] use a linear
framework embedded in a nonlinear outer loop and show that
the convergence rate is enhanced due to the “intuitive idea that
the more linear an equation system, the better its convergence
rate.” The results in their paper show how the Newton–Raphson
algorithm fails to converge in a number of cases. Analysis of
embedded FACTS devices in line-flow-based (LFB) algorithms
should be advantageous since the control variables are directly
available for determination.
The main objective of this paper is to develop an LFB
formulation of power balance equations for analyzing a radial
distribution system that will efficiently incorporate embedded
1776
series and shunt FACTS devices. The LFB equations use
bus voltage magnitudes and line power flows as independent
variables and directly relate the FACTS device variables with
system operating conditions. The line loss terms are the only
nonlinear terms in the formulation. By adding them to bus
power injections, the coefficient matrix of LFB equations is
rendered linear. A preliminary Breadth-First-Search (BFS)
ordering of the branches transforms the coefficient matrix
structure to strictly upper/lower diagonal and leads to simple
backward/forward substitution for calculating real and reactive
line power in each branch and voltage at each bus.
The FACTS device models are described first, and the de-
velopment of LFB equations follows. Numerical examples, in-
cluding multiple FACTS devices in the standard IEEE systems,
illustrate the power of the new approach. The procedure exhibits
good convergence characteristics, high reliability, and compu-
tational efficiency. A balanced distribution feeder modeled by
the positive sequence impedance is used in the paper, since the
aim of this paper is to demonstrate the advantages of the LFB
formulation in handling the embedded FACTS devices. FACTS
devices can be assumed to be cost-effective when deployed on
the main distribution feeder.
II. STATIC MODELING OF FACTS DEVICES
The concept of FACTS first proposed in 1978 is finding
increasing appeal in power system planning and operation.
FACTS devices [16] initiative launched by EPRI resulted in
the development of series and shunt devices: series compen-
sators such as Thyristor Controlled Series Capacitor (TCSC),
Thyristor Controlled Voltage Regulator (TCVR), Thyristor
Controlled Series Reactor (TCSR), and Thyristor Controlled
Phase Angle Regulator (TCPAR) and shunt compensators such
as Static Var Compensator (SVC) and STATCON. The com-
bined series and shunt FACTS’s sample is Unified Power Flow
Controller (UPFC) [17]. To develop the static models of most
FACTS devices, TCSC, TCVR, SVC, and UPFC are specially
discussed in this section and summarized into an integrated
FACTS model.
A. TCSC
TCSC is defined as a capacitive reactance compensator,
which consists of a series capacitor bank shunted by a
thyristor-controlled reactor in order to provide a smoothly
variable series capacitive reactance. In the steady-state power
flow study, the TCSC can be considered as a static capacitor or
reactor offering a reactance with a series compensated
branch represented by lumped equivalent series parameters
connected. In most cases, the shunt susceptances of a branch
usually are neglected. Therefore, the TCSC’s static capacitor
will be directly in series with the line impedance.
B. TCVR
TCVR is considered as the common voltage regulator. It is
able to smoothly vary voltage magnitude with a tap changing in
the control range of . A static model of
TCVR with a tap ratio is connected in a series impedance
of the distribution line.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 20, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 2005
Fig. 1. Generic line segment with FACTS parameters.
C. SVC
SVC based on thyristors without the gate turn-off capability
is considered as a shunt-connected static VAR generator or ab-
sorber. Their output is adjusted to exchange capacitive or induc-
tive current. As an important component for voltage control, it
is usually installed at the receiving bus. In the formulation, the
SVC has been considered a shunt branch with a compensated
reactive power setting by available inductive and capaci-
tive susceptances.
D. UPFC
The UPFC can fulfill the multiple functions of power flow
control, including reactive shunt compensation, series compen-
sation, and phase shifting. It can independently control real
power flow, reactive power flow, and voltage magnitude by
being integrated into a generalized power controller combining
the functions of TCSC, TCPAR, and SVC, so that the UPFC
controls the magnitude and angular position and injection
voltage in real time. The aim is to maintain or vary the real
and reactive power flow in the line to satisfy load demand and
system operating conditions. The steady-state model of the
UPFC is made from the basic series and shunt FACTS models.
E. Generic Line Segment With FACTS Parameters
Fig. 1 shows the generic model of a line segment embedded
with series-class and shunt-class FACTS devices. Depending
upon the FACTS device type, its function in the generic model
can be easily implemented. Although designation of sending
and receiving ends is arbitrary, line flow directions are indi-
cated close to the receiving end. A transformer with tap and
phase angle parameters is located at the sending end. Addition-
ally, and are resistance and reactance of branch ; and
are sending and receiving bus numbers of branch ; and
and are active and reactive power flow at the receiving end of
branch . The generic line model is used to derive line voltage
drop equations in the LFB formulation. The phase angle param-
eter is ignored since it is has no significance in radial distribution
systems.
III. LFB RADIAL DISTRIBUTION POWER FLOW MODEL
Since line flows and bus voltage magnitudes are of practical
importance in the operation of a distribution system, and the
FACTS devices control these quantities, a power flow model
based on real and reactive line power flows and bus voltage mag-
nitudes will enable easy handling of series and shunt devices.
YAN AND SEKAR: ANALYSIS OF RADIAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 1777

Real and reactive power balance equations at all buses except Taking the magnitude of both sides of (6) and rearranging, we
the slack bus can be written using the incidence matrix of the get the following:
network graph [18]. Since all shunt connections are excluded
in the incidence matrix, their real and reactive power contribu-
tions are accounted for separately in the power balance equa-
tions. Real and reactive power loads, shunt capacitors, and line (7)
charging susceptances can be treated as shunt branches. Fol-
lowing the traditional classification of slack, voltage-controlled, Dividing (7) and setting and
and load buses, the LFB equations are formulated as three sets of
, we get
equations viz., bus real and reactive power balance and branch
voltage equations.
(8)
A. General Power Balance Equations
Using a bus incidence matrix with rows corresponding to The right side of (8) is written with .
all busses other than the slack, the bus real and reactive power There are a total of line voltage equations. The total number of
balance can be written as follows: unknown voltage magnitudes will drop to when
dispersed generators are specified as voltage-controlled buses.
(1) Because the voltage of a PV bus is known, the value is shifted
(2) to the right-hand side of (8). Equation (8) can be written in a
matrix form as
is defined as a modified bus incidence matrix with all
“ ” in set to zero, which makes it easy to include the line (9)
losses in the power balance equations by using the vectors of
branch real and reactive power losses and . is a diag- where is a bus incidence matrix corresponding to the PV
onal matrix, whose diagonal elements are sums of charging and buses. is a vector of square of voltage of PV buses and
compensating susceptances at each bus. and are the the slack bus. is a diagonal matrix of order equal to with
bus injection power vectors defined as and the values of a tapped transformer equal to the square of the tap
, where , , and are ac- value. and are obtained from by setting, respec-
tive and reactive generator and load powers at bus , and tively, the negative and positive values in to zero. and
are active and reactive power losses in line . and are real are diagonal line resistance and reactance matrices. The vector
and reactive line flow vectors at the receiving end. is the un- represents the term on the right side of (8) for all the lines.
known voltage vector except at the slack bus. is the square
of voltage magnitude at bus . C. LFB Power Flow Equations
If dispersed generators exist in the distribution system, the
Equations (1), (2), and (9) are put in matrix form as follows:
corresponding generator buses are classified into two kinds
viz., constant injected power PQ buses or voltage-controlled
PV buses. Let be the total number of buses and and
the number of voltage-controlled and load buses, respectively.
Allowing for one slack bus, the total number of various buses is

(3) (10)

The number of unknowns in (2) is reduced from to

, and the equation is rewritten as This is the LFB power flow equation. The total number of
unknowns is
(4)
(11)
where all symbols with subscript 1 are the relevant matrices or
vectors containing PQ buses only. Equation (10) is written in symbolic form as follows:

B. Branch Voltage Equations (12)

Referring to Fig. 1, the branch voltage drop equation can be
written as The coefficient matrix is a constant matrix that needs
to be factorized only once during the solution process. The co-
efficient matrix is nonsingular since the radial network is of tree
(5)
structure with all the branches connected, and the rows cor-
responding to tree branches in a network graph are indepen-
(6) dent [18]. is the variable vector of active, reactive line flows
1778 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 20, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 2005

Fig. 2. IEEE 13-node test feeder.

, and square of bus voltage magnitudes ; is a con-

stant vector of the injection powers and PV bus voltages;
is a variable vector of branch losses and charging and compen-
sating powers. An iterative power flow analysis is started with Fig. 3. Graph of the IEEE 13-node feeder.
the vector set to zero. Using the solution vector in an itera-
tion, the right-hand side of (12) is updated by calculating vector
and adding to vector . Patel [19] has documented exten-
sive testing of the LFB formulation for interconnected systems
showing good convergence behavior of such an iterative proce-
dure, even in highly ill-conditioned systems.

IV. NATURE OF RADIAL DISTRIBUTION NETWORK GRAPH

The radial distribution network graph has a tree structure with
no loops. The total number of lines equals the number of buses
minus one. Since the pattern of incidence matrix depends on the
order of lines and nodes, the incidence matrices in (10) have a
structure that depends on the order in which the lines are read
from the data. Further, the incidence matrices are square and
nonsingular. By reordering the lines appropriately, the incidence
matrix can be made purely upper-diagonal. Cheng and Shirmo-
hammadi [13] demonstrate this by “ordering layers away from
the root node (source bus).” Zhang and Cheng [20] show that this
results in an upper triangular incidence matrix. This will lead
to gain in computation time in power flow solution, as shown
later. The BFS algorithm used to achieve this is explained in
this section.
Although BFS and Depth-First Search [21] are two different
patterns of tree search methods of graph in widespread use, here
BFS is selected to search radial distribution network graph in
the LFB model. The basic idea of BFS is to point out to as
many buses as possible before penetrating deep into a tree. This
means that we visit all the buses adjacent to the current level
before going on to another one. The brief description of BFS
to renumber buses and branches may be summarized in the fol-
lowing three steps for building an optimal BFS tree.
1) Start at source bus as the first level and fan out to the
“downstream” buses as the next levels.
2) On the same level, all bus numbers are ordered consecu-
tively.
3) Branch renumbering is similar to that of the bus renum-
bering. At any level, a branch number is one less than the
“upstream” bus number.
Fig. 4. Arbitrary order incidence matrix.
An example of using the BFS algorithm is illustrated using
the radial distribution system with thirteen nodes and twelve
lines of [22] and [23] shown in Fig. 2. Lines have only series
impedances. The nodes are numbered arbitrarily. This example
distribution network graph is redrawn in Fig. 3 with bus num-
bers in sequence starting from 1. Although no. 1 is given to the
only source bus here, the others encircled are arbitrary num-
bers as given in the original data list. This is useful when the
network is reconfigured to meet the demand under different
load and feeder scenarios. The flows in the branches are al-
ways oriented away from the source node, and so the direction
arrows are ignored.
The incidence matrix in Fig. 3, including the source node (at
root, originally named as 650) called Bus 1, is shown in Fig. 4.
To conform to LFB load flow equations of the later section,
the rows of the matrix are related to buses and its columns to
branches. The BFS renumbering is applied to the 13-node test
feeder. The optimal BFS tree of the IEEE 13-node feeder is
shown in Fig. 5. Its reordered incidence matrix, including the
source node, is shown in Fig. 6. After the row corresponding to
the source node is deleted from Fig. 6, bus incidence matrix
YAN AND SEKAR: ANALYSIS OF RADIAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
Fig. 5. BFS numbering tree of the IEEE 13-node system.
Fig. 6. Reorder incidence matrix for Fig. 5. BFS optimal tree.
becomes the upper triangle matrix in (13). This sparse upper tri-
angle incidence matrix results in reducing computational effort
during the iterative process, shown in (13) at the bottom of the
page.
1779
V. DECOUPLED LFB MODEL OF RADIAL
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
The matrix (10) may be split into three “decoupled” equation
sets and rewritten as follows:
(14)
(15)
(16)
With BFS ordered lines, the bus incidence matrix as (13)
and are upper triangle matrixes and is a lower triangle
matrix in nature. Using flat voltage profile as starting value, the
line flows and may be directly obtained by its backward
substitution of (14) and (15). Using the updated and into
(16), the square voltage magnitudes can be calculated by
the forward substitution. There is no need for factorization of
the coefficient matrix. The decoupled set of equations is easier
to code in a program.
The convergence behavior and computation time required
of the LFB formulation are studied and compared with the
Newton–Raphson algorithm. IEEE 13-, 34-, and 123-node sys-
tems are calculated using the Newton–Raphson algorithm and
four variations of the LFB formulation. Neglecting the loss
term on the right side of (12) results in an approximate
linear model. The solution is obtained without iterations. This
model is called linear LFB. The other variations are the LFB
model, including the loss term and the decoupled formulation
(D-LFB). Calculations are carried out with a PC. For a con-
vergence criterion of , all three iterative methods took
four iterations in each case. Table I shows the computation
time in the various cases. For comparing the accuracy of the
results, the maximum absolute error and the mean square de-
viation of the bus voltage values are calculated in the new
formulations using the Newton–Raphson results as accurate
ones. Table II shows the results from the three variations for
the various cases studied. The conclusion is that the proposed
LFB formulation is computationally superior and acceptably
accurate.
(13)
1780
TABLE I
COMPARISON OF CONVERGENCE COMPUTATION TIMES
TABLE II
ACCURACY COMPARISONS BASED ON THE FULL AC METHOD
VI. LFB-BASED FORMULATION WITH
EMBEDDED FACTS DEVICES
FACTS devices use shunt Q injections, tap changing, and se-
ries capacitors as control variables to control the bus voltages
and line reactive power flows. In the proposed LFB-based de-
coupled power flow, the unknown vectors are , , and . The
known vectors include bus injections, tap values, and square of
generator bus voltages. Depending upon the type of FACTS de-
vice, the formulation permits “swapping” or exchanging an un-
known variable with a known value and enables the calculation
of FACTS device settings. Three representative case studies are
made with different types of FACTS devices included in line
between bus and in a distribution system. The method of
“variable swap or exchange” is used in each case. SVC and
UPFC functions can be accomplished by integrating the three
individual formulations.
A. Line Flow Control Using Series Capacitor in TCSC
In this case, the voltage magnitude at bus will be fixed as
the controlled voltage and the controlling capacitor added to the
reactance matrix in (16). Equation (8) corresponding to line
will be rearranged as follows:
(17)
and become the unknown variables in this equation,
which is rewritten as follows:
(18)
Equation (18) replaces the original equation for line in (16).
The product can be treated as the new variable replacing
in the unknown vector . As can be seen, there is no change
in the overall structure of the equations. The right-hand side is
to be computed using (18) for the line with the series capacitor.
The solution corresponding to in the original equation is to
be interpreted as the product . [23]. All convergence tolerances are selected as
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 20, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 2005
Fig. 7. Voltage profiles after and before FACTS installed on the IEEE 13-node
test feeder.
TABLE III
SUMMARY OF FACTS TYPE AND IMPLEMENT IN IEEE 13-NODE FEEDER
B. Bus Voltage Control Using Transformer Tap or TCVR
The objective of changing the transformer tap is to achieve bus
voltage control. In the generic model in Fig. 1, the transformer is
usually inserted into a branch close to the sending end. Equation
(8) corresponding to line will be rearranged as follows:
(19)
and become the unknown variables in this equation.
Equation (19) replaces the original equation for line in (16).
The value can be treated as the new variable replacing
in the unknown vector . There is no change in the overall
structure of the equations. The right-hand side is to be computed
using (19) for the line with the transformer tap, and the solution
corresponding to in the original equation is interpreted as
the product .
C. Bus Voltage Control With Q Injection in SVC
In SVC, changing the reactive power Q injection at a bus con-
trols the bus voltage magnitude. Equation (16) will have one less
unknown, since bus voltage is controlled to a specified value.
The bus will now be treated as a PV bus, and the Q injection can
be calculated using the line flows coming into the controlled bus.
VII. TEST RESULTS
IEEE 13- and 34-bus test systems form the basis for testing the
LFB formulation. The decoupled LFB procedure is applied to the
IEEE 13-node test feeder of Fig. 2 with the addition of a single
series FACTS device and the IEEE 34-node test feeder modified
with multiple FACTS devices. All lines have only resistance and
reactance values. Base load flow studies of the example systems
without any FACTS devices are calculated. By including the
FACTS devices, the effect on the voltage profiles is then studied.
All parameters of the modified systems come from [22] and
.
YAN AND SEKAR: ANALYSIS OF RADIAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 1781

Fig. 8. IEEE 34-node test feeder.

TABLE IV
IEEE 34 -NODE NUMBERINGS DEFINED BY BFS AND THE ORIGINAL

TABLE V
DEVICES IMPLEMENT AND LOCATIONS

To control the voltage at bus 2 of the IEEE 13-node feeder to

1.05 p.u., a single series FACTS device, either TCSC or TCVR,
is considered in line 1–2 on Fig. 5 to realize this control objec-
tive. The solution converged in four iterations. Table III summa-
rizes the resulting FACTS device parameters to realize the con-
trol objectives. The investigation for these two type FACTS to
realize the same control objective shows almost the same values
of their voltages of each bus. In addition, their max voltage dif-
ference at the same bus is below 0.005(p.u.). The voltage pro-
files in Fig. 7 demonstrate the effect of the FACTS device on
improving the voltage profile.
The LFB approach presented in this paper handles multiple
FACTS devices in a system with equal ease. The IEEE 34-bus
radial distribution system configuration of Fig. 8 is used to study
the effect of multiple FACTS devices embedded in the system.
BFS numbering is listed in Table IV along with the original
numbering in the diagram. The IEEE 34-bus system is modi-
fied with two FACTS controllers with both of TCSC, TCVR,
or one TCSC and another TCVR. The results of FACTS device
parameters are summarized in Table V, which lists FACTS in-
stallation locations and control objectives. The LFB approach
easily converged as long as the equivalent reactance of the line
Fig. 9. Comparison of FACTS’ effect on voltage profiles.
with a TCSC controlled by series capacitor is not close to zero.
The effects on the specified voltage profiles are shown in Fig. 9.
VIII. CONCLUSIONS
FACTS devices offer a flexible and comprehensive solution
to voltage profile control in distribution systems. Traditional
methods such as voltage regulators, series, and parallel capacitor
switching can be adapted to work more effectively with FACTS
control.
Methods of power flow analysis of distribution networks are
generally different from the Newton–Raphson algorithm used
in interconnected system analysis. This paper proposes a line
flow-based formulation, which uses line power flows as vari-
ables instead of line currents. Since line reactive flows and bus
voltage magnitudes are of interest in controlling voltage pro-
files, the line flow-based algorithm provides a direct and simple
1782
approach to handle single or multiple devices. This will enable
easy determination of size and placement of such devices.
The line flow-based equations have constant coefficient
matrices and need no updating during the iterative procedure.
Breadth first search of the topology of the radial network
leads to a coefficient matrix structure of LFB equations that is
already in a triangular form, which results in just one forward
or backward substitution in each iteration. The BFS algorithm
can handle very large systems at high speed and is the preferred
method used in web search engines [24]. This paper proposes a
decoupling of the LFB equations, which reduces the computa-
tion time. The new formulation is shown to be equally accurate
as the full AC analysis from test runs on IEEE standard systems.
The convergence behavior is same as the full AC analysis.
This paper demonstrates the ease with which single or mul-
tiple FACTS devices can be handled by the LFB formulation.
Simple “variable exchange or swap” requiring little change to
the overall solution methodology enables the evaluation of the
control parameters.
IEEE 13- and 34-node standard distribution systems are used
to illustrate the method of evaluating the FACTS device param-
eters. Single and multiple FACTS devices are considered. Both
series and shunt devices are employed to improve the voltage
profile. The required device parameters, such as the series ca-
pacitance and the shunt VARs, are directly determined.
Commercially available distribution analysis software using
line currents as variables can be easily modified for LFB formu-
lation since the data structure is the same in both cases.
Work is in progress in formulating the optimization problem
for determining the “best” manner of deploying the FACTS de-
vices to achieve the desired results in practical situations. This
paper assumes balanced distribution feeder for developing the
procedure. The authors are working on extending the procedure
to unbalanced feeders.
REFERENCES
[1] W. F. Tinney and C. Z. Hart, “Power flow solution by Newton’s method,”
IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. 86, no. 11, pp. 1449–1456, Nov.
1967.
[2] B. Stott and O. Alsac, “Fast decoupled load flow,” IEEE Trans. Power
App. Syst., vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 859–869, May/Jun. 1974.
[3] N. G. Hingorani and L. Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS: Concept and
Technology of Flexible AC Transmission Systems. New York: IEEE
Press, 1999.
[4] N. M. Peterson and W. Meyer, “Automatic adjustment of transformer
and phase-shifter taps in the Newton power flow,” IEEE Trans. Power
App. Syst., vol. PAS-90, no. 3, pp. 103–108, Jan./Feb. 1971.
[5] C. R. Fuerte-Esquivel and E. Acha, “Newton–Raphson algorithm for
the reliable solution of large power networks with embedded FACTS
devices,” in Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., Gener., Transm., Distrib., vol. 143,
Sep. 1996, pp. 447–454.
[6] , “A Newton-type algorithm for the control of power flow in elec-
trical power networks,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 12, no. 4, pp.
1474–1480, Nov. 1997.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 20, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 2005
[7] M. R. Salem, L. A. Talat, and H. M. Soliman, “Voltage control by tap-
changing transformers for a radial distribution network,” in Proc. Inst.
Elect. Eng., Gener., Transm., Distrib., vol. 144, Nov. 1997, pp. 517–520.
[8] P. A. N. Garcia, J. L. R. Pereira, and S. Carneiro, “Voltage control de-
vices models for distribution power flow analysis,” IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 586–593, Nov. 2001.
[9] C. Trevino, “Cases of difficult convergence in load flow studies,” in Proc.
IEEE Paper 71-62-PWR, Summer Meeting, Los Angeles, 1970.
[10] W. H. Kersting, Distribution System Modeling and Analysis. Boca
Raton, FL: CRC, 2002.
[11] DEWorkstation, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA.
[12] G. X. Luo and A. Semlyen, “Efficient load flow for large weakly meshed
networks,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1309–1316, Nov.
1990.
[13] S. Cheng and D. Shirmohammadi, “A three phase power flow method
for real time distribution system analysis,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol.
10, no. 2, pp. 671–679, May 1995.
[14] M. E. Baran and F. F. Fu, “Optimal sizing of capacitors placed on a radial
distribution system,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 735–742,
Jan. 1989.
[15] A. G. Exposito and E. R. Ramos, “Reliable load flow technique for radial
distribution networks,” in Proc. IEEE PE-344-PWRS-0-12, 1996.
[16] J. Gotham and G. T. Geydt, “FACTS device models for power studies,”
in Proc. 27th NAPS, Bozeman, MT, Oct. 2–3, 1995, pp. 514–519.
[17] L. Gyugyi, T. R. Rietman, S. L. Willians, T. R. Rietman, D. R. Torgerson,
and A. Edris, “The unified power flow controller: A new approach to
power transmission control,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 10, no. 2, pp.
1085–1097, Apr. 1995.
[18] G. W. Stagg and A. H. El_Abiad, Computer Methods for Power System
Analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971.
[19] J. R. Patel, “Power flow analysis using modified tableau formulation
of circuit equations,” Master’s thesis, Tennessee Technological Univ.,
Cookeville, TN, 1992.
[20] F. Zhang and C. S. Cheng, “A modified newton method for radial distri-
bution system power flow analysis,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 12,
no. 1, pp. 389–397, Feb. 1997.
[21] R. J. Wilson and J. J. Watkins, Graphs: An Introductory Ap-
proach. New York: Wiley, 1990.
[22] W. M. Kersting and L. Willis, “Radial distribution test systems,” IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 975–985, Aug. 1991.
[23] IEEE Distribution Feeder Test Result. IEEE Distribution System Anal-
ysis Subcommittee. [Online]. Available: http//ewh.ieee.org/soc/pes/
dsacom/testfeeders.html
[24] M. Najork and J. L. Wiener, “Breadth-first search crawling yields high-
quality pages,” in Proc. ACM 1-58 113-348-0/01/0005, WWW10, Hong
Kong, May 2–5, 2001.
Ping Yan (S’98–M’01) received the Ph.D. degree from the Electrical and
Computer Engineering Department, Tennessee Technological University,
Cookeville, and holds a PE license from the state of Ohio.
She is now with American Electric Power, Columbus, OH. She was with Elec-
tric Power System Management, Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thai-
land, as a Research Associate and Zhejiang Power System Bureau, Hangzhou,
China, as a Power System Engineer and Lecturer.
Arun Sekar (M’84–SM’88) is a Professor of electrical and computer engi-
neering at the Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville.