539782

Power System Analysis and Design, 6e Glover, Overbye, Sarma
Chapter 6:
Power Flows
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible
0
website, in whole or in part.
Power Flow Analysis

 When analyzing power systems, we know neither the
complex bus voltages nor the complex current injections
 Rather, we know the complex power being consumed by
the load, and the power being injected by the generators
plus their voltage magnitudes
 Therefore, we can not directly use the Ybus equations, but
rather must use the power balance equations
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in
whole or in part. 1
Power Balance Equations

From KCL we know at each bus i in an n bus system
the current injection, I i , must be equal to the current
that flows into the network
n
I i  I Gi  I Di   Iik
k 1
Since I = Ybus V we also know
n
I i  I Gi  I Di   YikVk
k 1
The network power injection is then Si  Vi I i*

whole or in part. 2
Power Balance Equations, cont’d

*
  n n
Si  Vi I i*  Vi   YikVk   Vi  Yik*Vk*
 k 1  k 1
This is an equation with complex numbers.
Sometimes we would like an equivalent set of real
power equations. These can be derived by defining
Yik Gik  jBik
Vi Vi e ji  Vi  i
 ik i   k
Recall e j  cos  j sin 
whole or in part. 3
Real Power Balance Equations

n n
j ik
Si  Pi  jQi  Vi  Yik*Vk*   i k
V V e (Gik  jBik )
k 1 k 1
n
  Vi Vk (cos ik  j sin  ik )(Gik  jBik )
k 1
Resolving into the real and imaginary parts
n
Pi   Vi Vk (Gik cos ik  Bik sinik )  PGi  PDi
k 1
n
Qi   Vi Vk (Gik sin ik  Bik cos ik )  QGi  QDi
k 1
whole or in part. 4
Power Flow Requires Iterative Solution

In the power flow we assume we know Si and the
Ybus . We would like to solve for the V's. The problem
is the below equation has no closed form solution:
*
  n n
 k 1  k 1
Rather, we must pursue an iterative approach.
whole or in part. 5
Gauss Iteration
There are a number of different iterative methods
we can use. We'll consider two: Gauss and Newton.
With the Gauss method we need to rewrite our

equation in an implicit form: x = h(x)
To iterate we first make an initial guess of x, x (0) ,

and then iteratively solve x (v +1)  h( x ( v ) ) until we
ˆ such that xˆ  h(x).
find a "fixed point", x, ˆ
whole or in part. 6
Gauss Iteration Example

Example: Solve x - x  1  0
x ( v 1)  1  x ( v )
Let k = 0 and arbitrarily guess x (0)  1 and solve
k x(v) k x(v)
0 1 5 2.61185
1 2 6 2.61612
2 2.41421 7 2.61744
3 2.55538 8 2.61785
4 2.59805 9 2.61798
whole or in part. 7
Stopping Criteria
A key problem to address is when to stop the
iteration. With the Gauss iteration we stop when
x ( v )   with x ( v ) x ( v 1)  x ( v )
If x is a scalar this is clear, but if x is a vector we
need to generalize the absolute value by using a norm
x ( v ) 
j
Two common norms are the Euclidean & infinity
n
x 2   i
x 2
x   max i x i
i 1
whole or in part. 8
Gauss Power Flow

We first need to put the equation in the correct form
*
 
n n
 k 1  k 1
n n
S*i  Vi* I i  Vi*  YikVk  Vi*  YikVk
k 1 k 1
S*i n n
Vi*
  YikVk  YiiVi   YikVk
k 1 k 1,k i
1  S*i n 
Vi   *   YikVk 
Yii  V k 1,k i

 i
whole or in part. 9
Gauss Two Bus Power Flow Example

 A 100 MW, 50 Mvar load is connected to a generator
through a line with z = 0.02 + j0.06 p.u. and line
charging of 5 Mvar on each end (100 MVA base). Also,
there is a 25 Mvar capacitor at bus 2. If the generator
voltage is 1.0 p.u., what is V2?
SLoad = 1.0 + j0.5 p.u.

whole or in part. 10
Gauss Two Bus Example, cont’d

The unknown is the complex load voltage, V2 .
To determine V2 we need to know the Ybus .
1
 5  j15
0.02  j 0.06
5  j14.95 5  j15 
Hence Ybus   
  5  j15 5  j14.70 
( Note B22  - j15  j 0.05  j 0.25)

1  S*2 n 
V2   *   YikVk 
Y22  V2 k 1,k i 
1  -1  j 0.5 
V2    (5  j15)(1.00) 
5  j14.70  V2 *

Guess V2(0)  1.00 (this is known as a flat start)
v V2( v ) v V2( v )
0 1.000  j 0.000 3 0.9622  j 0.0556
1 0.9671  j 0.0568 4 0.9622  j 0.0556
2 0.9624  j 0.0553

V2  0.9622  j 0.0556  0.9638  3.3
Once the voltages are known all other values can
be determined, such as the generator powers and the
line flows
S1*  V1* (Y11V1  Y12V2 )  1.023  j 0.239
In actual units P1  102.3 MW, Q1  23.9 Mvar
2
The capacitor is supplying V2 25  23.2 Mvar
Slack Bus
 In the previous example we specified S2 and V1 and then
solved for S1 and V2.
 We can not arbitrarily specify S at all buses because total
generation must equal total load + total losses
 We also need an angle reference bus.
 To solve these problems we define one bus as the "slack"
bus. This bus has a fixed voltage magnitude and angle,
and a varying real/reactive power injection.
Gauss with Many Bus Systems

With multiple bus systems we could calculate
new Vi ' s as follows:
1  S*i n 
Vi( v 1)   ( v )*   YikVk( v ) 
Yii  V k 1, k  i 
 i 
 hi (V1( v ) ,V2( v ) ,...,Vn( v ) )
But after we've determined Vi( v 1) we have a better
estimate of its voltage, so it makes sense to use this
new value. This approach is known as the
Gauss-Seidel iteration.
Gauss-Seidel Iteration
Immediately use the new voltage estimates:
V2( v 1)  h2 (V1 ,V2( v ) ,V3( v ) ,,Vn( v ) )
V3( v 1)  h2 (V1 ,V2( v 1) ,V3( v ) ,,Vn( v ) )
V4( v 1)  h2 (V1 ,V2( v 1) ,V3( v 1) ,V4( v ) ,Vn( v ) )
Vn( v 1)  h2 (V1 ,V2( v 1) ,V3( v 1) ,V4( v 1) ,Vn( v ) )
The Gauss-Seidel works better than the Gauss, and
is actually easier to implement. It is used instead
of Gauss.
Three Types of Power Flow Buses

 There are three main types of power flow buses
– Load (PQ) at which P/Q are fixed; iteration solves for
voltage magnitude and angle.
– Slack at which the voltage magnitude and angle are
fixed; iteration solves for P/Q injections
– Generator (PV) at which P and |V| are fixed; iteration
solves for voltage angle and Q injection
special coding is needed to include PV buses in the
Gauss-Seidel iteration
Inclusion of PV Buses in G-S

To solve for Vi at a PV bus, we must first make a
guess of Qi :
n
Si*  Vi*  YikVk  Pi  jQi
k 1
 ( v )* n (v) 
Hence Qi( v )   Im Vi  YikV 
 k 1
k

In the iteration we use Si( v )  Pi  jQi( v )
Inclusion of PV Buses, cont'd

Tentatively solve for Vi( v 1)

1 Si ( v )* n 
Vi( v 1)   ( v )*   YikVk( v ) 
Yii  V   
 i k 1, k i 
But since Vi is specified, replace Vi( v 1) with Vi
Two Bus PV Example

Consider the same two bus system from the previous
example, except the load is replaced by a generator
z = 0.02 + j 0.06
Bus 1 Bus 2
V1 = 1.0 V2 = 1.05
(slack bus)
P2 = 0 MW
Two Bus PV Example, cont'd

1  S2* 
V2   *  Y21V1 
Y22  V2 
Q2   Im[Y21V1V2*  Y22V2V2* ]
Guess V2  1.050
v S2( v ) V2( v 1) V2( v 1)
0 0  j 0.457 1.045  0.83 1.050  0.83
1 0  j 0.535 1.049  0.93 1.050  0.93
2 0  j 0.545 1.050  0.96 1.050  0.96
Generator Reactive Power Limits

 The reactive power output of generators varies to
maintain the terminal voltage; on a real generator this
is done by the exciter
 To maintain higher voltages requires more reactive
power
 Generators have reactive power limits, which are
dependent upon the generator's MW output
 These limits must be considered during the power flow
solution.
Generator Reactive Limits, cont'd

 During power flow, once a solution is obtained check to
make sure generator reactive power output is within its
limits
 If the reactive power is outside of the limits, fix Q at the
max or min value, and resolve treating the generator as
a PQ bus
– this is known as "type-switching"
– also need to check if a PQ generator can again
regulate
 Rule of thumb: to raise system voltage, we need to
supply more vars
Accelerated G-S Convergence

Previously in the Gauss-Seidel method we were
calculating each value x as
x ( v 1)  h( x ( v ) )
To accelerate convergence we can rewrite this as
x ( v 1)  x ( v )  h( x ( v ) )  x ( v )
Now introduce acceleration parameter 
x ( v 1)  x ( v )   (h( x ( v ) )  x ( v ) )
With  = 1 this is identical to standard gauss-seidel.
Larger values of  may result in faster convergence.
Accelerated Convergence, cont’d

Consider the previous example: x- x 1  0
x ( v 1)  x ( v )   (1  x ( v )  x ( v ) )
Comparison of results with different values of 
k  1   1.2   1.5   2
0 1 1 1 1
1 2 2.20 2.5 3
2 2.4142 2.5399 2.6217 2.464
3 2.5554 2.6045 2.6179 2.675
4 2.5981 2.6157 2.6180 2.596
5 2.6118 2.6176 2.6180 2.626
Gauss-Seidel Advantages
 Each iteration is relatively fast (computational order is
proportional to number of branches + number of buses in
the system)
 Relatively easy to program
Gauss-Seidel Disadvantages
 Tends to converge relatively slowly, although this can be
improved with acceleration
 Has tendency to miss solutions, particularly on large
systems
 Tends to diverge on cases with negative branch reactances
(common with compensated lines)
 Need to program using complex numbers
Newton-Raphson Algorithm
 The second major power flow solution method is the
Newton-Raphson algorithm
 Key idea behind Newton-Raphson is to use sequential
linearization
General form of problem: Find an x such that

f ( xˆ )  0
Newton-Raphson Method (Scalar)

(v)
1. For each guess of xˆ , x , define
x ( v )  xˆ - x ( v )
2. Represent f ( xˆ ) by a Taylor series about f ( x )
(v)
df ( x ) (v)
f ( xˆ )  f ( x ) 
(v)
x 
dx
2 (v)
1 d f (x )
 
2
 x (v)
 higher order terms
2 dx 2
Newton-Raphson Method, cont’d

3. Approximate f ( xˆ ) by neglecting all terms
except the first two
(v )
df ( x ) (v)
f ( xˆ )  0  f ( x ) 
(v )
x
dx
4. Use this linear approximation to solve for x ( v )
1
 df ( x )  (v )
x   (v ) (v)
 f (x )
 dx 
5. Solve for a new estimate of x̂
( v 1)
x  x (v)
 x (v)
Newton-Raphson Example
Use Newton-Raphson to solve f ( x)  x 2 - 2  0
The equation we must iteratively solve is
1
 df ( x )  (v )
x (v)
   f ( x (v)
)
 dx 
x ( v )  1  (v) 2
   ( v )  (( x ) - 2)
2x 
x ( v 1)  x ( v )  x ( v )
x ( v 1)
 x (v)  1  (v) 2
  ( v )  (( x ) - 2)
2x 
Newton-Raphson Example, cont’d

x ( v 1)
 x (v)  1  (v) 2
  ( v )  (( x ) - 2)
2x 
Guess x (0)  1. Iteratively solving we get
v x(v) f ( x(v) ) x ( v )
0 1 1 0.5
1 1.5 0.25 0.08333
2 1.41667 6.953  103 2.454  103
3 1.41422 6.024  106
Sequential Linear Approximations
At each
iteration, the
N-R method
uses a linear
approximation
to determine
Function is f(x) = x2 - 2 = 0. the next value
Solutions are points where for x
f(x) intersects f(x) = 0 axis
Newton-Raphson Comments
 When close to the solution, the error decreases quite
quickly—method has quadratic convergence
 f(x(v)) is known as the mismatch, which we would like to
drive to zero
 Stopping criteria is when f(x(v)) < 
 Results are dependent upon the initial guess. What if we
had guessed x(0) = 0, or x (0) = -1?
 A solution’s region of attraction (ROA) is the set of initial
guesses that converge to the particular solution. The ROA is
often hard to determine
Multivariable Newton-Raphson
Next we generalize to the case where x is an n-
dimension vector, and f (x) is an n-dimension function
 x1   f1 (x) 
x   f ( x) 
x   2 f ( x)   2 
   
x   f ( x) 
 n  n 
Again define the solution xˆ so f (xˆ )  0 and
x  xˆ  x
Multivariable Case, cont’d

The Taylor series expansion is written for each fi (x)
f1 (x) f1 ( x)
f1 (xˆ )  f1 ( x)  x1  x2 
x1 x2
f1 ( x)
xn  higher order terms
xn
f n (x) f n ( x)
f n (xˆ )  f n ( x)  x1  x2 
x1 x2
f n (x)
xn  higher order terms
xn
Multivariable Case, cont’d

This can be written more compactly in matrix form
 f1 (x) f1 (x) f1 (x) 
 x x2 xn 
 1 
f ( x )  1
  x1 
 f (x)   f 2 (x) f 2 (x) f 2 (x)  
 x 
f (xˆ )   2    x1 x2 xn   2 
    
 f ( x)   
 
 n   f (x) f n (x) f n (x)   n 
x
 n 
 x1 x2 xn 
 higher order terms
Jacobian Matrix
The n by n matrix of partial derivatives is known
as the Jacobian matrix, J (x)
 f1 (x) f1 (x) f1 (x) 
 x x2 xn 
 1

 f 2 (x) f 2 (x) f 2 (x) 
J (x)   x1 x2 xn 
 
 
 f (x) f n (x) f n (x) 
 n 
 x1 x2 xn 
Multivariable N-R Procedure

Derivation of N-R method is similar to the scalar case
f (xˆ )  f (x)  J (x)x  higher order terms
f (xˆ )  0  f (x)  J (x)x
x  J (x) 1f (x)
x( v 1)  x( v )  x( v )
x( v 1)  x( v )  J (x( v ) ) 1 f (x( v ) )
Iterate until f (x( v ) )  
Multivariable Example
 x1 
Solve for x =   such that f (x)  0 where
x2 
f1 (x)  2 x12  x22  8  0
f 2 (x)  x12  x22  x1 x2  4  0
First symbolically determine the Jacobian
 f1 (x) f1 (x) 
 x x2 
J (x) =  1

 f 2 (x) f 2 (x) 
 x1 x2 
Multivariable Example, cont’d

 4 x1 2 x2 
J (x) = 
 2 x1  x2 x1  2 x2 
Then
1
 x1   4 x1 
2 x2  f1 ( x) 
 x     2 x  x x1  2 x2   f ( x) 
 2  1 2  2 
1
Arbitrarily guess x(0)  
1
1
1  4 2   5  2.1
x (1)
     3  1.3 
  
1 3 1    
Multivariable Example, cont’d

1
 2.1 8.40 2.60   2.51 1.8284 
x (2)
        
  
1.3 5.50  0.50   1.45  1.2122 
Each iteration we check f (x) to see if it is below our
specified tolerance 
0.1556 
f (x )  
(2)

 0.0900 
If  = 0.2 then we would be done. Otherwise we'd
continue iterating.
NR Application to Power Flow

We first need to rewrite complex power equations
as equations with real coefficients
*
  n n
Si   Vi   YikVk   Vi  Yik*Vk*
Vi I i*
 k 1  k 1
These can be derived by defining
Yik Gik  jBik
ji
Vi Vi e  Vi  i
 ik i   k
Recall e j  cos  j sin 
Real Power Balance Equations

n n
j ik
Si  Pi  jQi  Vi  Yik*Vk*   i k
V V e (Gik  jBik )
k 1 k 1
n
  Vi Vk (cos ik  j sin  ik )(Gik  jBik )
k 1
Resolving into the real and imaginary parts
n
Pi   Vi Vk (Gik cos ik  Bik sinik )  PGi  PDi
k 1
n
Qi   Vi Vk (Gik sin ik  Bik cos ik )  QGi  QDi
k 1
Newton-Raphson Power Flow

In the Newton-Raphson power flow we use Newton's
method to determine the voltage magnitude and angle
at each bus in the power system.
We need to solve the power balance equations
n
Pi   Vi Vk (Gik cos ik  Bik sin  ik )  PGi  PDi
k 1
n
Qi   Vi Vk (Gik sin  ik  Bik cos ik )  QGi  QDi
k 1
Power Flow Variables

Assume the slack bus is the first bus (with a fixed
voltage angle/magnitude). We then need to determine
the voltage angle/magnitude at the other buses.
 2   P2 (x)  PG 2  PD 2 
   
   
 n   Pn (x)  PGn  PDn 
x   f ( x)  
V2 Q (x)  QG 2  QD 2 
   2 
   
   
 n 
V  Qn (x)  QGn  QDn 
N-R Power Flow Solution

The power flow is solved using the same procedure
discussed last time:
Set v  0; make an initial guess of x, x( v )
While f (x( v ) )   Do
( v 1) ( v ) 1
x  x  J (x (v)
) f (x (v)
)
v  v 1
End While
Power Flow Jacobian Matrix

The most difficult part of the algorithm is determining
and inverting the n by n Jacobian matrix, J (x)
 f1 (x) f1 (x) f1 ( x) 
 x x2 xn 
 1

 f 2 (x) f 2 (x) f 2 (x) 
J (x)   x1 x2 xn 
 
 
 f (x) f n (x) f n ( x) 
 n 
 x1 x2 xn 
Power Flow Jacobian Matrix, cont’d

Jacobian elements are calculated by differentiating
each function, fi ( x), with respect to each variable.
For example, if fi ( x) is the bus i real power equation
n
fi ( x)   Vi Vk (Gik cos  ik  Bik sin  ik )  PGi  PDi
k 1
fi ( x) n
 i
  Vi Vk (Gik sin  ik  Bik cos ik )
k 1
k i
fi ( x)
 Vi V j (Gik sin  ik  Bik cos  ik ) ( j  i )
 j
PV Buses
 Since the voltage magnitude at PV buses is fixed, there
is no need to explicitly include these voltages in x or
write the reactive power balance equations
– the reactive power output of the generator varies to
maintain the fixed terminal voltage (within limits)
– optionally, these variations/equations can be included
by just writing the explicit voltage constraint for the
generator bus
|Vi | – Vi setpoint = 0
Two Bus Newton-Raphson Example

For the two bus power system shown below, use the
Newton-Raphson power flow to determine the voltage
magnitude and angle at bus two. Assume that bus one is the
slack and SBase = 100 MVA.
Line Z = 0.1j
One 1.000 pu Two 1.000 pu
0 MW 200 MW
0 MVR 100 MVR
2    j10 j10 

x    Ybus   
 V2   j10  j10 
Two Bus Example, cont’d

General power balance equations
n
Pi   Vi Vk (Gik cosik  Bik sin ik )  PGi  PDi
k 1
n
Qi   Vi Vk (Gik sin ik  Bik cosik )  QGi  QDi
k 1
Bus two power balance equations
V2 V1 (10sin  2 )  2.0  0
V2 V1 ( 10cos  2 )  V2 (10)  1.0  0
2
Two Bus Example, cont’d

P2 (x)  V2 (10sin  2 )  2.0  0
Q2 (x)  V2 (10 cos 2 )  V2 (10)  1.0  0
2
Now calculate the power flow Jacobian

 P2 (x) P2 (x) 
  V 2 
J ( x)   2

 Q 2 (x) Q 2 ( x) 
   V 2 
 2
10 V2 cos 2 10sin  2

 
10 V2 sin  2 10 cos 2  20 V2 
Two Bus Example, First Iteration

0
Set v  0, guess x (0)
 
1 
Calculate
 V2 (10sin  2 )  2.0   2.0 
f(x )  
(0)
  1.0 
 V2 (10cos 2 )  V2 (10)  1.0 
2
 
10 V2 cos 2 10sin  2  10 0 
J (x )  
(0)
   0 10 
10 V2 sin  2 10cos 2  20 V2   
1
0  10 0   2.0  0.2
Solve x (1)
       
1   0 10  1.0   0.9 
Two Bus Example, Next Iterations

 0.9 (10sin(0.2))  2.0  0.212 
f(x )  
(1)
 
 0.9( 10 cos( 0.2))  0.9 2
 10  1.0   0.279 
 8.82 1.986 
J (x )  
(1)

 1.788 8.199 
1
 0.2   8.82 1.986  0.212   0.233
x 
(2)
       
 0.9   1.788 8.199   0.279   0.8586 
 0.0145  0.236 
f(x )  
(2)
 x (3)
  
0.0190   0.8554 
0.0000906 
f(x (3)
)  Done! V2  0.8554  13.52
 0.0001175
Two Bus Solved Values

Once the voltage angle and magnitude at bus 2 are
known, we can calculate all the other system values, such
as the line flows and the generator reactive power output.
200.0 MW -200.0 MW
168.3 MVR Line Z = 0.1j -100.0 MVR
One 1.000 pu Two 0.855 pu -13.522 Deg
200.0 MW 200 MW
168.3 MVR 100 MVR
Two Bus Case Low Voltage Solution

This case actually has two solutions! The second
"low voltage" is found by using a low initial guess.
 0 
Set v  0, guess x (0)
 
 0.25 
Calculate
 V2 (10sin  2 )  2.0   2 
f(x )  
(0)
   0.875
 V2 (10cos 2 )  V2 (10)  1.0 
2
 
10 V2 cos 2 10sin  2   2.5 0 
J (x )  
(0)
   0 5
10 V2 sin  2 10cos 2  20 V2   
Low Voltage Solution, cont'd

1
 0   2.5 0   2   0.8 
Solve x   (1)
       
 0.25   0  5   0.875   0.075 
1.462  (2)  1.42  (3)  0.921
f (x )  
(2)
 x   x  
 0.534   0.2336   0.220 
Low voltage solution
200.0 MW -200.0 MW
831.7 MVR Line Z = 0.1j -100.0 MVR
One 1.000 pu Two 0.261 pu -49.914 Deg
200.0 MW 200 MW
831.7 MVR 100 MVR
Two Bus Region of Convergence

Slide shows the region of convergence for different initial
guesses of bus 2 angle (x-axis) and magnitude (y-axis)
Red region
converges
to the high
voltage
solution,
while the
yellow region
converges
to the low
voltage
solution
Using the Power Flow: Example 1

A
SLA C K3 4 5
MVA
A
MVA
2 1 8 MW
1 .0 2 pu RA Y 3 4 5
sla ck
5 4 M var
A A A
1 .0 2 pu MVA MVA SLA C K1 3 8 MVA

T IM 3 4 5
1 .0 1 pu RA Y 1 3 8
A
A
1 .0 3 pu
Using
A
MVA
T IM 1 3 8
MVA
MVA
1 .0 0 pu 3 3 MW A
1 .0 2 pu
1 3 M var MVA
A
A
1 6 .0 M var 1 8 MW
1 .0 2 pu RA Y 6 9
MVA
MVA 5 M var 3 7 MW
A
1 7 MW A
MVA
1 .0 2 pu
2 3 MW
7 M var
T IM 6 9
MVA
A
1 .0 1 pu
P A I6 9
A
1 .0 1 pu
MVA
GRO SS6 9 A
MVA
3 M var
FERNA 6 9
MVA
1 .0 1 pu
1 3 M var
WO LEN6 9
case
2 1 MW
M O RO 1 3 8
A
from
MVA
MVA
H ISKY 6 9 7 M var
A
A
4 .8 M var
1 2 MW MVA
A MVA
5 M var 2 0 MW 1 .0 0 pu MVA
8 M var A
1 .0 0 pu BO B1 3 8
P ET E6 9 A
DEM A R6 9
Example
MVA
1 .0 0 pu A A
H A NNA H 6 9 5 8 MW
MVA
MVA MVA
5 1 MW 4 0 M var
4 5 MW
1 5 M var A
1 .0 2 pu BO B6 9
1 2 M var
2 9 .0 M var MVA
UIUC 6 9 0 .9 9 pu
1 4 .3 M var
1 .0 0 pu 1 4 0 MW 5 6 MW
MVA
A
MVA
5 8 MW
A
MVA
1 2 .8 M var
A
A
MVA
4 5 M var
0 MW
0 M var
A
1 3 M var
1 4 MW
LY NN1 3 8
6.13
0 .9 9 7 pu BLT 1 3 8
3 6 M var MVA 1 .0 0 pu MVA 4 M var
0 .9 9 pu A M A NDA 6 9 A
A
A
SH IM KO 6 9 1 .0 2 pu
H O M ER6 9 3 3 MW
MVA
MVA
7 .4 M var
A
MVA
1 0 M var 1 .0 1 pu A
BLT 6 9 MVA
A 1 .0 1 pu MVA
1 5 MW A MVA
1 5 MW
3 M var H A LE6 9 A 1 0 6 MW 5 M var
MVA
1 .0 0 pu 8 M var A
MVA
3 6 MW
MVA
A
A A
1 .0 1 pu
6 0 MW MVA 1 0 M var 7 .2 M var MVA
A
A
MVA
1 2 M var
1 .0 0 pu 1 .0 0 pu P A T T EN6 9 MVA
0 .0 M var A
MVA
4 5 MW 1 4 MW RO GER6 9
MVA
1 .0 0 pu WEBER6 9 0 M var
LA UF6 9 2 M var
1 .0 2 pu
2 3 MW
2 2 MW 0 MW
A A
6 M var 1 4 MW A
2 0 MW 1 5 M var 0 M var
MVA MVA 3 M var MVA
3 0 M var
1 .0 2 pu JO 1 3 8 JO 3 4 5
LA UF1 3 8 1 .0 2 pu SA V O Y 6 9 4 2 MW
1 .0 0 pu
2 M var
1 .0 1 pu BUC KY 1 3 8 A
MVA
A A
1 5 0 MW
MVA 1 .0 1 pu SA V O Y 1 3 8 MVA
A A
0 M var
MVA MVA
1 5 0 MW
A
0 M var
MVA
1 .0 3 pu
1 .0 2 pu A
MVA
Three Bus PV Case Example

For this three bus case we have
 2   P2 (x)  PG 2  PD 2 
x   3  f (x)   P3 (x)  PG 3  PD3   0
   
 V2   Q2 (x)  QD 2 
Line Z = 0.1j
0.941 pu
One 1.000 pu Two -7.469 Deg
170.0 MW 200 MW
68.2 MVR 100 MVR
Line Z = 0.1j Line Z = 0.1j
Three 1.000 pu
30 MW
63 MVR
Modeling Voltage Dependent Load

So far we've assumed that the load is independent of
the bus voltage (i.e., constant power). However, the
power flow can be easily extended to include voltage
depedence with both the real and reactive load. This
is done by making PDi and Q Di a function of Vi :
n
 Vi Vk (Gik cosik  Bik sin ik )  PGi  PDi ( Vi )  0
k 1
n
 Vi Vk (Gik sin ik  Bik cosik )  QGi  QDi ( Vi )  0
k 1
Voltage Dependent Load Example

In previous two bus example we assumed the load is
constant impedance, so
P2 (x)  V2 (10sin  2 )  2.0 V2
2
 0
Q2 (x)  V2 (10cos 2 )  V2 (10)  1.0 V2  0
2 2
Now calculate the power flow Jacobian

10 V2 cos 2 10sin  2  4.0 V2 
J ( x)   
 10 V2 sin  2 10cos  2  20 V2  2.0 V2
Voltage Dependent Load, cont'd

0 
Again set v  0, guess x (0)
 
1 
Calculate
 V 2 (10sin  2 )  2.0 V2
2   2.0 
f(x )  
(0)
  
 V2 (10cos 2 )  V2 (10)  1.0 V2 
2 2
1.0 
10 4 
J (x )  
(0)

 0 12 
1
0  10 4   2.0   0.1667 
Solve x (1)
   1.0    
  
1 0 12     0.9167 
Voltage Dependent Load, cont'd

With constant impedance load the MW/Mvar load at bus 2
varies with the square of the bus 2 voltage magnitude. If the
voltage level is less than 1.0, the load is lower than 200/100
MW/Mvar.
160.0 MW -160.0 MW
120.0 MVR Line Z = 0.1j -80.0 MVR
0.894 pu
One 1.000 pu Two -10.304 Deg
160.0 MW 160 MW
120.0 MVR 80 MVR
Solving Large Power Systems

 The most difficult computational task is inverting the
Jacobian matrix
– inverting a full matrix is an order n3 operation,
meaning the amount of computation increases with
the cube of the size
– this amount of computation can be decreased
substantially by recognizing that since the Ybus is a
sparse matrix, the Jacobian is also a sparse matrix
– using sparse matrix methods results in a
computational order of about n1.5
– this is a substantial savings when solving systems
with tens of thousands of buses
Newton-Raphson Power Flow

 Advantages
– fast convergence as long as initial guess is close to
solution
– large region of convergence
 Disadvantages
– each iteration takes much longer than a Gauss-Seidel
iteration
– more complicated to code, particularly when
implementing sparse matrix algorithms
 Newton-Raphson algorithm is very common in power
flow analysis
67
Dishonest Newton-Raphson
 Since most of the time in the Newton-Raphson iteration
is spend calculating the inverse of the Jacobian, one
way to speed up the iterations is to only
calculate/inverse the Jacobian occasionally
– known as the “Dishonest” Newton-Raphson
– an extreme example is to only calculate the Jacobian
for the first iteration
Honest: x(v1)  x( v ) - J (x( v ) )-1 f (x( v ) )
Dishonest: x(v1)  x( v ) - J (x(0) )-1 f (x( v ) )
Both require f (x(v ) )   for a solution
Dishonest Newton-Raphson Example

Use the Dishonest Newton-Raphson to solve
f ( x)  x 2 - 2  0
1
 df ( x )  (0)
x (v )
   f ( x (v)
)
 dx 
x ( v )  1  (v) 2
   (0)  (( x ) - 2)
2x 
(v)  1 
x ( v 1)  x   (0)  (( x ( v ) )2 - 2)
2x 
Dishonest N-R Example, cont’d

x ( v 1)
 x (v)  1  (v) 2
  (0)  (( x ) - 2)
2x 
Guess x (0)  1. Iteratively solving we get
v x ( v ) (honest) x ( v ) (dishonest)
0 1 1 We pay a price
1 1.5 1.5 in increased
iterations, but
2 1.41667 1.375 with decreased
3 1.41422 1.429 computation
per iteration
4 1.41422 1.408
Two Bus Dishonest ROC

Slide shows the region of convergence for different initial
guesses for the 2 bus case using the Dishonest N-R
Red region
converges
to the high
voltage
solution,
while the
yellow region
converges
to the low
voltage
solution
Honest N-R Region of Convergence
Maximum
of 15
iterations
Decoupled Power Flow

 The completely Dishonest Newton-Raphson is not used
for power flow analysis. However, several
approximations of the Jacobian matrix are used.
 One common method is the decoupled power flow. In this
approach, approximations are used to decouple the real
and reactive power equations.
Decoupled Power Flow Formulation

General form of the power flow problem
 P ( v ) P ( v ) 
 
 θ  V  θ( v )   P ( x( v ) ) 
       f ( x (v)
)
 Q ( v ) Q (v)  (v )
  V   Q( x ) 
(v)
 
 θ  V 
where
 P2 ( x( v ) )  PD 2  PG 2 
 
P (x )  
(v )

 P (x(v ) )  P  P 
 n Dn Gn 
Decoupling Approximation
P ( v ) Q ( v )
Usually the off-diagonal matrices, and
V θ
are small. Therefore we approximate them as zero:
 P ( v ) 
 0 
 θ (v ) 
 P (x( v ) ) 
θ
        f ( x (v)
)
 Q    V 
(v ) ( v )
 Q(x ) 
( v )
 0 
  V 
Then the problem can be decoupled
1 1
 P ( v )  (v )  Q (v) 
θ( v )    P ( x (v )
)  V     Q ( x (v )
)
 θ   V 
Off-diagonal Jacobian Terms

Justification for Jacobian approximations:
1. Usually r x, therefore Gij Bij
2. Usually  ij is small so sin  ij  0
Therefore
Pi
 Vi  Gij cos ij  Bij sin  ij   0
 Vj
Qi
  Vi V j  Gij cos ij  Bij sin  ij   0
θ j
Decoupled N-R Region of Convergence
Fast Decoupled Power Flow

 By continuing with our Jacobian approximations we can
actually obtain a reasonable approximation that is
independent of the voltage magnitudes/angles.
 This means the Jacobian need only be built/inverted
once.
 This approach is known as the fast decoupled power flow
(FDPF)
 FDPF uses the same mismatch equations as standard
power flow so it should have same solution
 The FDPF is widely used, particularly when we only
need an approximate solution
FDPF Approximations
The FDPF makes the following approximations:
1. G ij  0
2. Vi  1
3. sin  ij  0 cos  ij  1
Then
1  P ( x (v)
) ( v ) 1 Q ( x (v)
)
θ  B
(v )
(v )
 V B
V V (v )
Where B is just the imaginary part of the Ybus  G  jB,
except the slack bus row/column are omitted
FDPF Three Bus Example

Use the FDPF to solve the following three bus system
Line Z = j0.07
One Two
200 MW
100 MVR
Line Z = j0.05 Line Z = j0.1
Three 1.000 pu
200 MW
 34.3 14.3 20 
100 MVR
Ybus  j  14.3 24.3 10 

 
 20 10 30 
FDPF Three Bus Example, cont’d

 34.3 14.3 20 
   24.3 10 
Ybus  j 14.3 24.3 10  B  
   10 30 
 20 10 30 
 0.0477 0.0159 
B 1   
 0.0159 0.0389 
Iteratively solve, starting with an initial voltage guess
(0)

 2
(0)
0  V 2  1
   0  V   1
 3    3 

 2
(1)
0   0.0477 0.0159   2   0.1272 
   0    0.0159 0.0389   2    0.1091
 3       
FDPF Three Bus Example, cont’d

(1)
V 2  1  0.0477 0.0159  1 0.9364 
V   1   0.0159 0.0389  1   0.9455
 3      
Pi (x ) n P P
  Vk (Gik cos ik  Bik sin  ik )  Di Gi
Vi k 1 Vi

 2
(2)
 0.1272   0.0477 0.0159   0.151  0.1361
    0.1091   0.0159 0.0389  0.107    0.1156 
 3       
(2)
V 2  0.924 
V    
 3 0.936 
 0.1384  0.9224 
Actual solution: θ    V 
 0.1171  0.9338
FDPF Region of Convergence
“DC” Power Flow

 The “DC” power flow makes the most severe
approximations:
– completely ignore reactive power, assume all the
voltages are always 1.0 per unit, ignore line
conductance
 This makes the power flow a linear set of equations,
which can be solved directly
θ  B 1 P
Power System Control

 A major problem with power system operation is the
limited capacity of the transmission system
– lines/transformers have limits (usually thermal)
– no direct way of controlling flow down a
transmission line (e.g., there are no valves to close
to limit flow)
– open transmission system access associated with
industry restructuring is stressing the system in new
ways
 We need to indirectly control transmission line flow by
changing the generator outputs
DC Power Flow Example
DC Power Flow 5 Bus Example

One Five Four Three
A A
360 MW 520 MW
MVA MVA
A
0 Mvar
MVA
slack
0 Mvar
1.000 pu 1.000 pu A A
1.000 pu 80 MW
0.000 Deg -4.125 Deg MVA MVA
-1.997 Deg 0 Mvar
1.000 pu
0.524 Deg
1.000 pu Two
-18.695 Deg
800 MW
0 Mvar
Notice with the dc power flow all of the voltage magnitudes

are 1 per unit.
Indirect Transmission Line Control

What we would like to determine is how a change in
generation at bus k affects the power flow on a line
from bus i to bus j.
The assumption is
that the change
in generation is
absorbed by the
slack bus
Power Flow Simulation - Before

• One way to determine the impact of a generator change is to compare
a before/after power flow.
• For example, below is a three bus case with an overload
131.9 MW
124%
One Two
200.0 MW 200 MW
68.1 MW 68.1 MW
71.0 MVR 100 MVR
Z for all lines = j0.1

Three 1.000 pu
0 MW
64 MVR
Power Flow Simulation - After

Increasing the generation at bus 3 by 95 MW (and hence
decreasing it at bus 1 by a corresponding amount) results
in a 31.3 drop in the MW flow on the line from bus 1 to 2.
101.6 MW
100%
One Two
105.0 MW 200 MW
3.4 MW 98.4 MW
64.3 MVR 100 MVR
92%
Z for all lines = j0.1
Limit for all lines = 150 MVA
1.000 pu
Three
95 MW
64 MVR
Analytic Calculation of Sensitivities

 Calculating control sensitivities by repeat power flow
solutions is tedious and would require many power flow
solutions. An alternative approach is to analytically calculate
these values
The power flow from bus i to bus j is

Vi V j i   j
Pij  sin( i   j ) 
X ij X ij
 i   j  ij
So Pij  We just need to get
X ij PGk
Analytic Sensitivities
From the fast decoupled power flow we know
θ  B 1P (x)
So to get the change in θ due to a change of
generation at bus k, just set P ( x) equal to
all zeros except a minus one at position k.
0
 
 
P   1  Bus k
0
 
 
Three Bus Sensitivity Example

For the previous three bus case with Zline  j 0.1
 20 10 10 
   20 10 
Ybus  j 10 20 10  B   
   10 20 
 10 10 20 
Hence for a change of generation at bus 3
1
  2   20 10   0   0.0333 
     1   0.0667 
 3  10 20     
0.0667  0
Then P3 to 1   0.667 pu
0.1
P3 to 2  0.333 pu P 2 to 1  0.333 pu
The N-R Power Flow: 5-bus Example
T2
800 MVA
1 T1 5 4 345/15 kV 3 520 MVA
Line 3
345 kV
50 mi
400 MVA 800 MVA
15 kV 15 kV
Line 2
Line 1
400 MVA 345 kV 345 kV 40 Mvar 80 MW
15/345 kV 100 mi 200 mi
2
280 Mvar 800 MW
Single-line diagram

V  PG QG PL QL QGmax QGmi
Bus Type per degree per per per per per n
unit s uni uni unit unit unit per
t t unit
Table 1. 1 Swing 1.0 0   0 0  
Bus input 2 Load   0 0 8.0 2.8  
data
3 Constan 1.05  5.2  0.8 0.4 4.0 -2.8
t voltage
4 Load   0 0 0 0  
5 Load   0 0 0 0  
Maximum
R’ X’ G’ B’ MVA
Bus-to- per unit per unit per unit per unit per unit
Table 2. Bus
Line input data 2-4 0.0090 0.100 0 1.72 12.0
2-5 0.0045 0.050 0 0.88 12.0
4-5 0.00225 0.025 0 0.44 12.0

Maximum
R X Gc Bm Maximum TAP
per per per per MVA Setting
Table 3. Bus-to- Unit unit unit unit per unit per unit
Transformer Bus
input data 1-5 0.00150 0.02 0 0 6.0 —
3-4 0.00075 0.01 0 0 10.0 —
Bus Input Data Unknowns

1 V1 = 1.0, 1 = 0 P1, Q1
2 P2 = PG2-PL2 = -8 V2, 2
Q2 = QG2-QL2 = -2.8
Table 4. Input data
and unknowns 3 V3 = 1.05 Q3, 3
P3 = PG3-PL3 = 4.4
4 P4 = 0, Q4 = 0 V4, 4
5 P5 = 0, Q5 = 0 V5, 5
Time to Close the Hood: Let the Computer Do

the Math! (Y bus Shown)
Ybus Details
Elements of Ybus connected to bus 2
Y21  Y23  0
1 1
Y24    0.89276  j 9.91964 per unit
R24  jX 24 0.009  j 0.1
' '
1 1
Y25  '   1.78552  j19.83932 per unit
R25  jX 25 0.0045  j 0.05
'
' '
1 1 B24 B25
Y22  '  ' j j
R24  jX 24 R25  jX 25
' '
2 2
1.72 0.88
 (0.89276  j 9.91964)  (1.78552  j19.83932)  j j
2 2
 2.67828  j 28.4590  28.5847  84.624 per unit
Here Are the Initial Bus Mismatches
And the Initial Power Flow Jacobian
And the Hand Calculation Details!
P2 (0)  P2  P2 ( x)  P2  V2 (0){Y21V1 cos[ 2 (0)  1 (0)  21]

 Y22V2 cos[ 22 ]  Y23V3 cos[ 2 (0)   3 (0)   23 ]
 Y24V4 cos[ 2 (0)   4 (0)  24 ]
 Y25V5 cos[ 2 (0)   5 (0)   25 ]}
 8.0  1.0{28.5847(1.0) cos(84.624)
 9.95972(1.0) cos( 95.143)
 19.9159(1.0) cos( 95.143)}
 8.0  (2.89 104 )  7.99972 per unit
J124 (0)  V2 (0)Y24V4 (0) sin[  2 (0)   4 (0)  24 ]
 (1.0)(9.95972)(1.0) sin[ 95.143]
 9.91964 per unit
Five Bus Power System Solved

One Five Four Three
A A
MVA MVA
395 MW A
520 MW
MVA
114 Mvar slack

337 Mvar
1.000 pu 0.974 pu A A
1.019 pu 80 MW
0.000 Deg -4.548 Deg MVA MVA
-2.834 Deg 40 Mvar
1.050 pu
-0.597 Deg
0.834 pu Two
-22.406 Deg
800 MW
280 Mvar
37 Bus Example Design Case

Metropolis Light and Power Electric Design Case 2
A
SLA C K3 4 5
MVA
A
MVA
2 2 0 MW
1 .0 3 pu RA Y 3 4 5
sla ck
5 2 M var
System Losses: 10.70 MW A A A
1 .0 2 pu SLA C K1 3 8
T IM 3 4 5
MVA MVA MVA
1 .0 2 pu RA Y 1 3 8
A A
A
1 .0 3 pu
MVA MVA
T IM 1 3 8 3 3 MW A MVA
1 .0 0 pu 1 .0 3 pu
1 3 M var MVA
1 5 .9 M var 1 8 MW
A 1 .0 2 pu RA Y 6 9
A 5 M var 3 7 MW
MVA A
1 7 MW A
MVA
P A I6 9 1 3 M var
1 .0 1 pu MVA 3 M var MVA
1 .0 2 pu T IM 6 9
A 1 .0 1 pu GRO SS6 9 A
2 3 MW
MVA
MVA
FERNA 6 9
7 M var A
1 .0 1 pu WO LEN6 9
A A
1 2 MW
H ISKY 6 9
MVA
3 M var
MVA MVA P ET E6 9 A
A
A
4 .9 M var
M O RO 1 3 8 MVA
5 8 MW A MVA
3 9 MW MVA
4 0 M var 1 .0 1 pu MVA
1 3 M var 1 .0 0 pu BO B1 3 8
1 2 MW
A
H A NNA H 6 9 2 8 .9 M var DEM A R6 9

5 M var
A A
6 0 MW
MVA
1 9 M var
MVA MVA
1 .0 0 pu 2 0 MW
1 .0 0 pu
A
1 .0 2 pu BO B6 9
1 2 M var
0 .9 9 pu 1 4 .2 M var UIUC 6 9 MVA
1 .0 0 pu
1 2 .8 M var 1 2 4 MW 5 6 MW
KYLE69 A A
4 5 M var
A
MVA MVA 1 3 M var LY NN1 3 8
1 6 MW
MVA
A -1 4 M var
2 5 MW A A
MVA 1 4 MW
3 6 M var BLT 1 3 8
A M A NDA 6 9
MVA
1 .0 0 pu MVA 4 M var
A 0 .9 9 pu A A
MVA 2 5 MW MVA MVA SH IM KO 6 9 1 .0 2 pu

H O M ER6 9 1 0 M var 1 .0 1 pu 7 .4 M var
A
A
BLT 6 9 MVA
A
1 .0 1 pu MVA
A
1 5 MW
2 0 MW
MVA
H A LE6 9 5 5 MW 5 M var
3 M var MVA A
2 5 M var A
1 .0 0 pu MVA
3 6 MW
MVA
A
A A
1 .0 1 pu
A
A
MVA
1 2 M var
1 .0 0 pu 1 .0 0 pu P A T T EN6 9 MVA
0 .0 M var A
MVA
4 5 MW 1 4 MW RO GER6 9
MVA
LA UF6 9 2 M var
1 .0 2 pu
2 3 MW
2 2 MW 1 0 MW
A A
6 M var 1 4 MW A
3 M var
2 8 M var
MVA MVA MVA
1 .0 2 pu JO 1 3 8 JO 3 4 5
LA UF1 3 8 1 .0 2 pu SA V O Y 6 9 3 8 MW
1 .0 0 pu
3 M var
1 .0 1 pu BUC KY 1 3 8 A
A MVA A
1 5 0 MW
A A
0 M var
MVA MVA
1 5 0 MW
A
0 M var
MVA
1 .0 3 pu
1 .0 2 pu A
MVA
Good Power System Operation

 Good power system operation requires that there be no
reliability violations for either the current condition or in
the event of statistically likely contingencies
• Reliability requires as a minimum that there be no
transmission line/transformer limit violations and that
bus voltages be within acceptable limits (perhaps 0.95
to 1.08)
• Example contingencies are the loss of any single
device. This is known as n-1 reliability.
 North American Electric Reliability Corporation now has
legal authority to enforce reliability standards (and there
are now lots of them). See http://www.nerc.com for
details (click on Standards)
Looking at the Impact of Line Outages

A
SL A C K3 4 5
MVA
A
MVA
2 2 7 MW
1 .0 3 pu RA Y 3 4 5
sla ck
4 3 M var
1 .0 2 pu SL A C K1 3 8
T IM 3 4 5
MVA MVA MVA
1 .0 2 pu RA Y 1 3 8
A A
A
1 .0 3 pu
MVA MVA
T IM 1 3 8 3 3 MW A MVA
1 .0 1 pu 1 .0 3 pu
1 3 M var MVA
1 6 .0 M var 1 8 MW
A 1 .0 2 pu RA Y 6 9
A 5 M var 3 7 MW
MVA A
1 7 MW A
MVA
P A I6 9 1 3 M var
1 .0 2 pu T IM 6 9
A 1 .0 1 pu GRO SS6 9 A
2 3 MW
MVA
MVA
FERNA 6 9
7 M var A
1 .0 1 pu WO L EN6 9
A A
1 2 MW
H ISKY 6 9
MVA
3 M var
MVA MVA P ET E6 9 A
A
4 .9 M var
M O RO 1 3 8 5 8 MW A MVA
3 9 MW MVA
4 0 M var 1 .0 1 pu MVA
1 3 M var 1 .0 0 pu BOB1 3 8
1 2 MW
A

5 M var
A A
6 0 MW
MVA
1 9 M var
MVA MVA
1 .0 0 pu 2 0 MW
1 .0 0 pu
A
1 .0 2 pu BOB6 9
1 2 M var
0 .9 0 pu 1 1 .6 M var UIUC 6 9 MVA
1 .0 0 pu
1 2 .8 M var 1 2 4 MW 5 6 MW
KYLE69 A A
4 5 M var
A
MVA MVA 1 3 M var L Y NN1 3 8
1 6 MW
MVA
A -1 4 M var
2 5 MW A A
MVA 1 4 MW
3 6 M var BLT 1 3 8
A M A NDA 6 9
MVA
A 0 .9 0 pu A A
110% 2 5 MW MVA MVA SH IM KO 6 9 1 .0 2 pu

MVA
A
A
BLT 6 9 MVA
A
1 .0 1 pu MVA
A
1 5 MW
2 0 MW 135%
MVA
H A L E6 9 5 5 MW 5 M var
3 M var MVA
A
3 2 M var A
0 .9 4 pu MVA
3 6 MW
MVA
A
A A
1 .0 1 pu
A
A
MVA
1 2 M var
1 .0 0 pu 1 .0 0 pu P A T T EN6 9 MVA
0 .0 M var A
MVA
4 5 MW 1 4 MW RO GER6 9
MVA
1 .0 0 pu WEB ER6 9 0 M var
L A UF6 9 2 M var
1 .0 1 pu
2 3 MW
A 2 2 MW 1 0 MW
A
6 M var 1 4 MW A
2 0 MW 80% 1 5 M var 5 M var

3 M var
4 0 M var
MVA MVA
MVA
1 .0 2 pu JO 1 3 8 JO 3 4 5
L A UF1 3 8 1 .0 1 pu SA V O Y 6 9 3 8 MW
0 .9 9 pu
9 M var
1 .0 0 pu B UC KY 1 3 8 A
A MVA A
1 5 0 MW
A A
4 M var
MVA MVA
1 5 0 MW
A
4 M var
MVA
1 .0 3 pu
1 .0 2 pu A
MVA
Opening one line (Tim69-Hannah69) causes an overload.

This would not be allowed
Contingency Analysis
Contingency
analysis provides
an automatic
way of looking
at all the
statistically
likely
contingencies. In
this example, the
contingency set
is all the single
line/transformer
outages.
Power Flow And Design

 One common usage of the power flow is to determine
how the system should be modified to remove
contingency problems or serve new load
• In an operational context, this requires working with
the existing electric grid
• In a planning context, additions to the grid can be
considered
 In the next example, we look at how to remove the
existing contingency violations while serving new load.
An Unreliable Solution
A
SLA C K3 4 5
MVA
A
MVA
2 6 9 MW
1 .0 2 pu RA Y 3 4 5
sla ck
6 7 M var
1 .0 2 pu SLA C K1 3 8
T IM 3 4 5
MVA MVA MVA
1 .0 1 pu RA Y 1 3 8
A A
A
1 .0 3 pu
MVA MVA
T IM 1 3 8 3 3 MW A MVA
0 .9 9 pu 1 .0 2 pu
1 3 M var MVA
1 5 .9 M var 1 8 MW
A 1 .0 2 pu RA Y 6 9
A 5 M var 3 7 MW
MVA A
1 7 MW A
MVA
P A I6 9 1 3 M var
1 .0 2 pu T IM 6 9
A 1 .0 1 pu GRO SS6 9 A
2 3 MW
MVA
MVA
FERNA 6 9
7 M var A
1 .0 1 pu WO LEN6 9
A A
1 2 MW
H ISKY 6 9
MVA
3 M var
MVA A MVA P ET E6 9 A
A
4 .9 M var
M O RO 1 3 8 96% 5 8 MW A MVA
MVA
3 9 MW MVA
4 0 M var 1 .0 1 pu MVA
1 3 M var 1 .0 0 pu BO B1 3 8
1 2 MW
A

5 M var
A A
6 0 MW
MVA
1 9 M var
MVA MVA
1 .0 0 pu 2 0 MW
1 .0 0 pu
A
1 .0 2 pu BO B6 9
1 2 M var
0 .9 7 pu 1 3 .6 M var UIUC 6 9 MVA
1 .0 0 pu
1 2 .8 M var 1 2 4 MW 5 6 MW
KYLE69 A A
4 5 M var
A
1 6 MW
MVA
A -1 4 M var
2 5 MW A A
MVA 1 4 MW
3 6 M var BLT 1 3 8
MVA
A 0 .9 7 pu A A

A
A
A M A NDA 6 9 BLT 6 9 MVA

A
1 .0 1 pu MVA
A
1 5 MW
2 0 MW
MVA
3 M var MVA A
2 8 M var A
0 .9 9 pu MVA
3 6 MW
MVA
A
A A
1 .0 1 pu
A
A
MVA
1 2 M var
1 .0 0 pu 1 .0 0 pu P A T T EN6 9 MVA
0 .0 M var A
MVA
4 5 MW 1 4 MW RO GER6 9
MVA
LA UF6 9 2 M var
1 .0 2 pu
2 3 MW
2 2 MW 1 0 MW
A A
6 M var 1 4 MW A
3 M var
4 0 M var
MVA MVA MVA
1 .0 2 pu JO 1 3 8 JO 3 4 5
LA UF1 3 8 1 .0 2 pu SA V O Y 6 9 3 8 MW
1 .0 0 pu
4 M var
1 .0 1 pu BUC KY 1 3 8 A
A MVA A
1 5 0 MW
A A
1 M var
MVA MVA
1 5 0 MW
A
1 M var
MVA
1 .0 3 pu
1 .0 2 pu A
MVA
Case now has nine separate contingencies with reliability

violations
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in 108
whole or in part.
A Reliable Solution
A
SLA C K3 4 5
MVA
A
MVA
2 6 6 MW
1 .0 2 pu RA Y 3 4 5
sla ck
5 9 M var
1 .0 2 pu SLA C K1 3 8
T IM 3 4 5
MVA MVA MVA
1 .0 1 pu RA Y 1 3 8
A A
A
1 .0 3 pu
MVA MVA
T IM 1 3 8 3 3 MW A MVA
1 .0 0 pu 1 .0 3 pu
1 3 M var MVA
1 5 .8 M var 1 8 MW
A 1 .0 2 pu RA Y 6 9
A 5 M var 3 7 MW
MVA A
1 7 MW A
MVA
P A I6 9 1 3 M var
1 .0 2 pu T IM 6 9
A 1 .0 1 pu GRO SS6 9 A
2 3 MW
MVA
MVA
FERNA 6 9
7 M var A
1 .0 1 pu WO LEN6 9
A A
1 2 MW
H ISKY 6 9
MVA
3 M var
MVA MVA P ET E6 9 A
A
A
4 .9 M var
M O RO 1 3 8 MVA
5 8 MW A MVA
3 9 MW MVA
4 0 M var 1 .0 1 pu MVA
1 3 M var 1 .0 0 pu BO B1 3 8
1 2 MW
A

5 M var
A A
6 0 MW
MVA
MVA MVA
1 9 M var
Kyle138 2 0 MW
0 .9 9 pu
A
1 .0 2 pu BO B6 9
1 2 M var
0 .9 9 pu 1 4 .1 M var UIUC 6 9 MVA
A
1 .0 0 pu
1 2 .8 M var 1 2 4 MW 5 6 MW
M VA
KYLE69 A A
4 5 M var
A
1 6 MW
MVA
A -1 4 M var
2 5 MW A A
MVA 1 4 MW
3 6 M var BLT 1 3 8
MVA
A 0 .9 9 pu A A

A
A
A M A NDA 6 9 BLT 6 9 MVA

A
1 .0 1 pu MVA
A
1 5 MW
2 0 MW
MVA
3 M var MVA A
2 9 M var A
1 .0 0 pu MVA
MVA
A
A
3 6 MW A
1 .0 1 pu
A
A
MVA
1 2 M var
1 .0 0 pu 1 .0 0 pu P A T T EN6 9 MVA
0 .0 M var A
MVA
4 5 MW 1 4 MW RO GER6 9
MVA
LA UF6 9 2 M var
1 .0 2 pu
2 3 MW
2 2 MW 1 0 MW
A A
6 M var 1 4 MW A
3 M var
3 8 M var
MVA MVA MVA
1 .0 2 pu JO 1 3 8 JO 3 4 5
LA UF1 3 8 1 .0 2 pu SA V O Y 6 9 3 8 MW
1 .0 0 pu
4 M var
1 .0 1 pu BUC KY 1 3 8 A
A MVA A
1 5 0 MW
A A
1 M var
MVA MVA
1 5 0 MW
A
1 M var
MVA
1 .0 3 pu
1 .0 2 pu A
MVA
Previous case was augmented with the addition of a 138 kV

Transmission Line
Generation Changes and The Slack Bus

 The power flow is a steady-state analysis tool, so the
assumption total load plus losses is always equal to total
generation
• Generation mismatch is made up at the slack bus
 When doing generation change power flow studies one
always needs to be cognizant of where the generation is
being made up
• Common options include system slack, distributed
across multiple generators by participation factors or by
economics
Generation Change Example 1

A
SL A C K3 4 5
MVA
A
MVA
1 6 2 MW
0 .0 0 pu RA Y 3 4 5
sla ck
3 5 M var
A A A
0 .0 0 pu SL A C K1 3 8
T IM 3 4 5
MVA MVA MVA
-0 .0 1 pu RA Y 1 3 8
A A
A
0 .0 0 pu
MVA
T IM 1 3 8
MVA
0 .0 0 pu 0 MW
A MVA
0 .0 0 pu
0 M var
-0 .1 M var 0 MW
A MVA
A
-0 .0 1 pu RA Y 6 9
MVA
MVA 0 M var 0 MW
A
0 MW A
0 .0 0 pu T IM 6 9 P A I6 9 0 M var
A
0 MW 0 .0 0 pu GRO SS6 9 A
A
0 M var
MVA
A
MVA
FERNA 6 9
MVA 0 .0 0 pu WO L EN6 9
A 0 MW
M O RO 1 3 8
H ISKY 6 9
MVA
0 M var
MVA A
A
-0 .1 M var
0 MW MVA
A MVA
0 M var 0 MW -0 .0 1 pu
MVA
0 M var A
-0 .0 3 pu BOB1 3 8
P ET E6 9 A
DEM A R6 9
0 .0 0 pu
MVA A A
H A NNA H 6 9 0 MW
MVA
0 MW 0 M var
MVA MVA
0 MW
0 M var
A
0 .0 0 pu BOB6 9
0 M var
-0 .2 M var
UIUC 6 9 0 .0 0 pu
MVA
-0 .1 M var
0 .0 0 pu -1 5 7 M W 0 MW
-0 .1 M var
A
-4 5 M var
A
MVA 0 M var L Y NN1 3 8
A
0 MW
MVA
A 0 M var
MVA
A
0 MW A
0 MW
-0 .0 0 2 pu
MVA
BLT 1 3 8
0 M var MVA -0 .0 3 pu MVA 0 M var
0 .0 0 pu A M A NDA 6 9 A
A
A
SH IM KO 6 9 0 .0 0 pu
H O M ER6 9 0 MW
MVA
0 .0 M var
MVA A
MVA
0 M var 0 .0 0 pu A
BLT 6 9 MVA
A -0 .0 1 pu MVA
0 MW A MVA
0 MW
0 M var H A L E6 9 A 0 MW 0 M var
0 .0 0 pu
MVA
5 1 M var
A
MVA
MVA
A
A
0 MW A
0 .0 0 pu
0 MW MVA 0 M var 0 .0 M var MVA A
A
MVA
0 M var
0 .0 0 pu 0 .0 0 pu P A T T EN6 9 MVA
0 .0 M var A
MVA
0 MW 0 MW RO GER6 9
MVA
0 .0 0 pu WEB ER6 9 0 M var
L A UF6 9 0 M var
0 .0 0 pu
0 MW
0 MW 0 MW
A A
0 M var 0 MW A
0 MW 0 M var 0 M var
0 M var
4 M var MVA MVA MVA
0 .0 0 pu JO 1 3 8 JO 3 4 5
L A UF1 3 8 0 .0 0 pu SA V O Y 6 9 0 MW
0 .0 0 pu
3 M var
0 .0 0 pu B UC KY 1 3 8 A
A MVA A
0 MW
A A
2 M var
MVA MVA
0 MW
A
2 M var
MVA
0 .0 0 pu
0 .0 0 pu A
MVA
Display shows “Difference Flows” between original 37 bus case,

and case with a BLT138 generation outage; note all the power change is
picked up at the slack
Generation Change Example 2 A

SLA C K3 4 5
MVA
A
MVA
0 MW
0 .0 0 pu RA Y 3 4 5
sla ck
3 7 M var
A A A
0 .0 0 pu SLA C K1 3 8
T IM 3 4 5
MVA MVA MVA
-0 .0 1 pu RA Y 1 3 8
A A
A
0 .0 0 pu
MVA
T IM 1 3 8
MVA
0 .0 0 pu 0 MW
A MVA
0 .0 0 pu
0 M var
-0 .1 M var 0 MW
A MVA
A
0 .0 0 pu RA Y 6 9
MVA
MVA 0 M var 0 MW
A
0 MW A
0 .0 0 pu T IM 6 9 P A I6 9 0 M var
A
0 MW 0 .0 0 pu GRO SS6 9 A
A
0 M var
MVA
A
MVA
FERNA 6 9
MVA 0 .0 0 pu WO LEN6 9
A 0 MW
M O RO 1 3 8
H ISKY 6 9
MVA
0 M var
MVA A
A
0 .0 M var
0 MW MVA
A MVA
0 M var 0 MW 0 .0 0 pu
MVA
0 M var A
-0 .0 3 pu BO B1 3 8
P ET E6 9 A
DEM A R6 9
0 .0 0 pu
MVA A A
H A NNA H 6 9 0 MW
MVA
0 MW 0 M var
MVA MVA
0 MW
0 M var
A
0 .0 0 pu BO B6 9
0 M var
-0 .2 M var
UIUC 6 9 0 .0 0 pu
MVA
-0 .1 M var
0 .0 0 pu -1 5 7 M W 0 MW
-0 .1 M var
A
-4 5 M var
A
MVA 0 M var LY NN1 3 8
A
0 MW
MVA
A 0 M var
MVA
A
0 MW A
0 MW
-0 .0 0 3 pu
MVA
BLT 1 3 8
0 M var MVA -0 .0 3 pu MVA 0 M var
0 .0 0 pu A M A NDA 6 9 A
A
A
SH IM KO 6 9 0 .0 0 pu
H O M ER6 9 0 MW
MVA
-0 .1 M var
MVA A
MVA
0 M var -0 .0 1 pu A
BLT 6 9 MVA
A -0 .0 1 pu MVA
0 MW A MVA
0 MW
0 M var H A LE6 9 A 1 9 MW 0 M var
0 .0 0 pu
MVA
5 1 M var
A
MVA
MVA
A
A
0 MW A
0 .0 0 pu
0 MW MVA 0 M var 0 .0 M var MVA A
A
MVA
0 M var
0 .0 0 pu 0 .0 0 pu P A T T EN6 9 MVA
0 .0 M var A
MVA
0 MW 0 MW RO GER6 9
MVA
LA UF6 9 0 M var
0 .0 0 pu
0 MW
0 MW 0 MW
A A
0 M var 0 MW A
9 9 MW 0 M var 0 M var
0 M var
-2 0 M var MVA MVA MVA
0 .0 0 pu JO 1 3 8 JO 3 4 5
LA UF1 3 8 0 .0 0 pu SA V O Y 6 9 4 2 MW
0 .0 0 pu
-1 4 M var
0 .0 0 pu BUC KY 1 3 8 A
A MVA A
0 MW
A A
0 M var
MVA MVA
0 MW
A
0 M var
MVA
0 .0 0 pu
0 .0 0 pu A
MVA
Display repeats previous case except now the change in

generation is picked up by other generators using a participation factor
approach
Voltage Regulation Example: 37 Buses

A
SL A C K3 4 5
MVA
A
MVA
2 1 9 MW
1 .0 2 pu RA Y 3 4 5
5 2 M var
sla ck
1 .0 2 pu SL A C K1 3 8
T IM 3 4 5
MVA MVA MVA
1 .0 1 pu RA Y 1 3 8
A
A
MVA
A
1 .0 3 pu
T IM 1 3 8
MVA
MVA
1 .0 0 pu 3 3 MW A
1 .0 3 pu
1 3 M var
1 5 .9 M var 1 8 MW
A MVA
A
1 .0 2 pu RA Y 6 9
MVA
MVA 5 M var 3 7 MW
A
1 7 MW A
1 .0 2 pu T IM 6 9 P A I6 9 1 3 M var
A
2 3 MW 1 .0 1 pu GRO SS6 9 A
A
7 M var
MVA
MVA
FERNA 6 9
MVA A
1 .0 1 pu WO L EN6 9
2 1 MW
M O RO 1 3 8
A
MVA
MVA
H ISKY 6 9 7 M var
A
A
4 .8 M var
1 2 MW MVA
A MVA
5 M var 2 0 MW 1 .0 0 pu MVA
8 M var A
1 .0 0 pu BO B1 3 8
P ET E6 9 A
MVA DEM A R6 9
1 .0 0 pu A A
MVA
H A NNA H 6 9 5 8 MW
MVA MVA
5 1 MW 4 0 M var
4 5 MW
1 5 M var A
1 .0 2 pu BO B6 9
1 2 M var
2 9 .0 M var
UIUC 6 9 0 .9 9 pu
MVA
1 4 .3 M var
1 .0 0 pu 1 5 7 MW 5 6 MW
1 2 .8 M var A
4 5 M var
A
MVA 1 3 M var L Y NN1 3 8
A
0 MW
MVA
0 M var
A
A
MVA A
MVA
MVA 5 8 MW A
1 4 MW
0 .9 9 7 pu BL T 1 3 8 MVA
3 6 M var MVA 1 .0 0 pu 4 M var
0 .9 9 pu A M A NDA 6 9 A
A
A
3 3 MW SH IM KO 6 9 1 .0 2 pu
H O M ER6 9
MVA
MVA A
MVA
1 0 M var 0.0 Mvar 1 .0 1 pu
BL T 6 9
7 .4 M var
MVA
A 1 .0 1 pu
1 5 MW
3 M var
A
MVA
H A L E6 9
MVA
A 9 2 MW 1.010 pu 1 5 MW
5 M var
1 .0 0 pu 1 0 M var
MVA
A
A
A
3 6 MW A
1 .0 1 pu
MVA
A
A
MVA
1 2 M var
1 .0 0 pu 1 .0 0 pu P A T T EN6 9 MVA
2 0 .8 M var A
MVA
4 5 MW 1 4 MW RO GER6 9
MVA
L A UF6 9 2 M var
1 .0 2 pu
2 3 MW
2 2 MW 0 MW
A A
6 M var 1 4 MW A
MVA MVA 3 M var MVA
9 M var
1 .0 2 pu JO 1 3 8 JO 3 4 5
L A UF1 3 8 1 .0 2 pu SA V O Y 6 9 3 8 MW
1 .0 0 pu
3 M var
1 .0 1 pu BUC KY 1 3 8 A
A MVA A
1 5 0 MW
A A
0 M var
MVA MVA
1 5 0 MW
A
0 M var
MVA
1 .0 3 pu
1 .0 2 pu A
MVA
Display shows voltage contour of the power system, demo

will show the impact of generator voltage set point,
reactive power limits, and switched capacitors
Real-sized Power Flow Cases

 Real power flow studies are usually done with cases
with many thousands of buses
• Buses are usually grouped into various balancing
authority areas, with each area doing its own
interchange control
 Cases also model a variety of different automatic
control devices, such as generator reactive power
limits, load tap changing transformers, phase
shifting transformers, switched capacitors, HVDC
transmission lines, and (potentially) FACTS devices
Sparse Matrices and Large Systems

 Since for realistic power systems the model sizes are
quite large, this means the Ybus and Jacobian matrices
are also large
 However, most elements in these matrices are zero,
therefore special techniques, known as sparse
matrix/vector methods, can be used to store the values
and solve the power flow
 Without these techniques, large systems would be
essentially unsolvable
Eastern Interconnect Example VIK 138

BIG BEN D
WH TWTR3
EEN 138 ST RITA
WH TWTR4 M UKWO N GO
SUN 138
TRIPP
WH TWTR5
UN IVRSTY
Raci ne
JAN 138
SGR CK4
LBT 138 UN IV N EU
SGR CK5
LAN 138 BRLGTN 2 SO M ERS

ALB 138
RO R 138
N LK GV T
BRLGTN 1
ALBERS-2
Paddock
PO T 138 N O M 138 M RE 138 PARIS WE BAIN 4
TICH IGN
H LM 138
D AR 138 WIB 138
N LG 138
N ED 138
N WT 138 Pl easant Prai ri e

N ED 161 Kenosha
LIBERTY5
TRK RIV5 BCH 138 WBT 138
ELK 138
CASVILL5 BLK 138 LAKEVIEW
CO R 138 D IK 138
LEN A ; B LEN A ; R
8TH ST. 5 Zi on
Ant i och Zi on (138 kV)
Rockford
LO RE 5
ELERO ; BT ELERO ; RT
ASBURY 5 Wempl eton M cHenr y
SO . GVW. 5 PECAT; B G ur nee
Round Lake
CN TRGRV5 Waukegan
LAN CA; R
JULIAN 5 SALEM N 5
H arl em Bel vi dere M arengo Woodstock Wi l son

Sal em FREEP; Roscoe
P Val Lakehur st
GALEN A 5 Cr yst al Lake
Sand Park
Pi erpont
Li ber t yvi l l e Li ber t yvi l l e
Si l ver Lake 345 kV 138 kV Nor t h Chi cago
B465 Hunt l ey
FO RD A; R
Al gonqui n
S PEC; R E. Rockf ord
U. S. N Tr ai ni ng
Al pi ne Abbot t Labs Par k
Lest hon
Charl es
B427 ; 1T
Sabrooke
Apt aki si c
Cherry Val l ey
O l d El m
Lake Zur i ch
Buf f al o G r oove
Bar r i ngt on
Bl aw khaw k Wheel i ng
Deer f i el d
Pal at i ne
SAVAN N A5 D undee Pr ospect Hei ght s
Ar l i ngt on Pr ospect Nor t hbr ook
M Q O KETA5 STILL; RT Hof f m an Est at es Hei ght s

WYO M IN G5
C434
M ount Pr ospect
Tol l w ay
M T VERN 5 Schaum ber g El m w ood
PCI 5
Byron
Hanover S. Schaum ber g G ol f M i l l
Busse
Landm
BERTRAM 5
Spaul di ng Skoki e
Bar t l et t
El gi n Des Pl ai nes Evanst on
Tonne
YO RK 5 Ni l es
M ARYL; B How ar d Devon

Sout h El gi n Wayne Des Pl ai nes Hi ggi ns
I t asca
Al t G E Rose Hi l l
Nor di
G l endal e Nor t hr i dge M i chi gan Ci ty
West Chi cago
W407 ( Fer m i ) Addi son Nat om a Nor t hw est
-0. 40 deg
LEECO ; BP H 445 ; 3B W. De Kal b G l i dden Chur ch -13. 4 deg
Fr ankl i n Par k -13. 3 deg
H 440 ; R
Aur or a El m hur st 2. 35 deg Dr i ver
Lom bar d Rockw el l
GR M N D 5 G al ew ood Cl ybour n
O ak Par k
Rock Crk. ALBAN Y 6
E CALM S5 Sugar Grove G l en El l yn Ber kel ey
M EN D O ; T O akbr ook Congr ess Cr osby
GARD E; D IXO N ; BT Wat er m an N Aurora
BVR CH 65 BVR CH 5 O hi o Ki ngsbur y
D EWITT 5 ALBAN Y 5 But t e
H 71 ; BT Bel l w ood Cl i nt
H 440 ; RT STEWA; B El ect r i c Junct i on Yor k Cent er
H 71 ; B Y450 Jef f erson
D ekov Tayl or
La G r ange
H 71 ; R STERL; B Ri dgel and Uni versi ty
Li sl e D unacr
H -471 (N W Steel ) M cCook Lasal l e
Fi sk
D799 Washi ngton Park
Craw f ord -1. 1 deg
War r envi l l e D775 State Garf i el d H arbor
D ow ners Groove
Frontenac
Woodri dge Saw yer Q uarry
Wol f Creek Ford Ci ty 0. 6 deg
Q uad Ci ti es Cl earni ng
W600 ( Naper vi l l e)
N el son Wi l l ow Cal umet Chi ave
M ECCO RD 3 W604 H ayf ord 1. 9 deg Babcock
O sw ego Bedf ord Park D amen
Sandw i ch Bur r Ri dge State Li ne
Sayre Wal l ace
Sub 91 W601 W603 Ri ver Shef i el d
Pl ano J307 Evergreen
CO RD O ; N ELSO ; R Bri dgevi ew
M ontgomery Bol i ngbrook Al si p
Z-494
W602
Wi l l Co. Roberts Beverl y
R FAL; B R FAL; R Z-715 Lake George
N ELSO ; RT W507 Romeo G394 G3851 Z-100 Tow er Rd
SB 79 5 Pal os O rl an
SB 49 5 H egew i sch M unster
SBH YC5 G3852
Archer Crestw ood Wi l dw ood Z-524
SB UIC 5 M endota Pl ai nf i el d Burnham
SB 74 5
D avenport SB 90 5 SB 17 5 Lockport
J-332 Bl ue Isl and
Wal cott SUB 77 5 Bel l Road Goodi ngs Grove
Sub 92 SB 71 5
D AVN PRT5 Green Lake
N O RM A; R N O RM A; B
SB 78 5 Kenda Green Acres
H i l l crest Rockdal e J322 Ti nl ey Park
SB 76 5 South H ol l and Sand Ri dge
SB 89 5
SB 88 5 Jo456 H arvey
J323
Shore Jol i et Lansi ng
IPSCO 3 SB 58 5 J370
SB JIC 5 SB 70 5 Gl enw ood
IPSCO 5 F-503 Chi cago H ei ghts
Bri gg
SB A 5 J-371 M oken
J-326 F-575
East Frankf ort
J-390 Frankf ort Country Cl ub H i l l s
SB 52 5 SB 28 5 J-375 El w ood
N Len M atteson Park Forest
PRIN C TP J-339 Bl oom
SB 48 5 SB 47 5 SB 31T 5 U. Park Woodhi l l
J-305 St. John
SB 53 5 PRIN CTN Upnor

SB 85 5 LTV STL Goose Lake
E M O LIN E KEWAN IP
Col l i ns
LTV TP E Wi l ton Center Crete
LTV TP N D resden
East M ol i ne M ason
KEWAN ; ESK TAP Schahf er
SB 18 5
SB 43 5
S ST TAP
B B
105%
93%
H EN N E; T
H EN N EPIN
SB 112 5 Kendra
1556A TP
O TTAWA T
MVA MVA N LASAL
O GLES; T O GLESBY La Sal l e

Lasal l e M arsei l l es
O GLSBY M Wi l mi ngton
K-319 # 1
Loui sa
D avi s Creek K-319 # 2
KPECKTP5
WEST 5 Bradl ey
SO . SUB 5 Streator
Br ai dw ood
9 SUB 5
H WY61 5
M IN O N K T
GALESBR5
Kankakee
GALESBRG
RICH LAN D
N EWPO RT5
M O N M O UTH
SPN G BAY
Ponti ac M i dpoi nt
D equi ne
M PWSPLIT
H ALLO CK
ELPASO T
Peoria
WATSEKA 17GO D LN D
GILM AN
FARGO
CAT M O SS
RSW EAST
RAD N O R
CAT SUB1
PIO N EERC E PEO RIA

CAT TAP
Example, which models the Eastern Interconnect contains about 43,000 buses.
Solution Log for 1200 MW Gen Outage

In this example, we
simulated the loss
of a 1200 MW
generator in Northern
Illinois. This caused
a generation imbalance
in the associated
balancing authority
area, which was
corrected by a
redispatch of local
generation.
Balancing Authority Areas

 A balancing authority area (use to be called operating areas)
has traditionally represented the portion of the
interconnected electric grid operated by a single utility
 Transmission lines that join two areas are known as tie-
lines.
 The net power out of an area is the sum of the flow on its
tie-lines.
 The flow out of an area is equal to
total gen – total load – total losses = tie-flow
Area Control Error (ACE)

 The area control error (ACE) is the difference between the
actual flow out of an area and the scheduled flow, plus a
frequency component
ace  Pint  Psched  10 f
 Ideally, the ACE should always be zero
 Because the load is constantly changing, each utility must
constantly change its generation to “chase” the ACE.
Automatic Generation Control

 Most utilities use automatic generation control (AGC) to
automatically change their generation to keep their ACE
close to zero.
 Usually the utility control center calculates ACE based
upon tie-line flows; then the AGC module sends control
signals out to the generators every couple of seconds.
Power Transactions
 Power transactions are contracts between generators and
loads to do power transactions.
 Contracts can be for any amount of time at any price for
any amount of power.
 Scheduled power transactions are implemented by
modifying the value of Psched used in the ACE calculation
PTDFs
 Power transfer distribution factors (PTDFs) show the linear
impact of a transfer of power.
 PTDFs calculated using the fast decoupled power flow B
matrix
θ  B 1P (x)
Once we know θ we can derive the change in
the transmission line flows
Except now we modify several elements in P( x),
in portion to how the specified generators would
participate in the power transfer
Nine Bus PTDF Example

Figure shows initial flows for a nine bus power system
300.0 MW
400.0 MW 300.0 MW
A B 250.0 MW D
10% 71%
71.1 MW C
60% 57%
92% 0.00 deg 64%
55%
11%
G F E
150.0 MW
74% 250.0 MW 250.0 MW 44% 32%
24%
H I
200.0 MW
150.0 MW
Nine Bus PTDF Example, cont'd

Figure now shows percentage PTDF flows from A to I
300.0 MW
400.0 MW 300.0 MW
A B 250.0 MW D
43% 30%
71.1 MW C
57% 10%
13% 0.00 deg 20%
35%
2%
G F E
150.0 MW
34% 250.0 MW 250.0 MW 34% 32%
34%
H I
200.0 MW
150.0 MW
Nine Bus PTDF Example, cont'd

Figure now shows percentage PTDF flows from G to F
300.0 MW
400.0 MW 300.0 MW
A B 250.0 MW D
6% 18%
71.1 MW C
6% 6%
12% 0.00 deg 12%
61%
19%
G F E
150.0 MW
21% 250.0 MW 250.0 MW 20%
21%
H I
200.0 MW
150.0 MW
WE to TVA PTDFs
Line Outage Distribution Factors

(LODFs)
 LODFs are used to approximate the change in the flow on
one line caused by the outage of a second line
– typically they are only used to determine the change in
the MW flow
– LODFs are used extensively in real-time operations
– LODFs are state-independent but do depend on the
assumed network topology
Pl  LODFl ,k Pk
Flowgates
 The real-time loading of the power grid is accessed via
“flowgates”
 A flowgate “flow” is the real power flow on one or
more transmission elements for either base case
conditions or a single contingency
– contingent flows are determined using LODFs
 Flowgates are used as proxies for other types of limits,
such as voltage or stability limits
 Flowgates are calculated using a spreadsheet
NERC Regional Reliability Councils
NERC
is the
North
American
Electric
Reliability
Council
NERC Reliability Coordinators

539782

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

539782

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Power System Analysis and Design, 6e Glover, Overbye, Sarma

Power Flow Analysis

Power Balance Equations

The network power injection is then Si  Vi I i*

Power Balance Equations, cont’d

Real Power Balance Equations

Power Flow Requires Iterative Solution

With the Gauss method we need to rewrite our

To iterate we first make an initial guess of x, x (0) ,

Gauss Iteration Example

Gauss Power Flow

Gauss Two Bus Power Flow Example

SLoad = 1.0 + j0.5 p.u.

Gauss Two Bus Example, cont’d

Gauss Two Bus Example, cont’d

Gauss Two Bus Example, cont’d

Gauss with Many Bus Systems

Three Types of Power Flow Buses

Inclusion of PV Buses in G-S

Inclusion of PV Buses, cont'd

Two Bus PV Example

Two Bus PV Example, cont'd

Generator Reactive Power Limits

Generator Reactive Limits, cont'd

Accelerated G-S Convergence

Accelerated Convergence, cont’d

General form of problem: Find an x such that

Newton-Raphson Method (Scalar)

Newton-Raphson Method, cont’d

Newton-Raphson Example, cont’d

Sequential Linear Approximations

Multivariable Case, cont’d

Multivariable Case, cont’d

Multivariable N-R Procedure

Multivariable Example, cont’d

Multivariable Example, cont’d

NR Application to Power Flow

Real Power Balance Equations

Newton-Raphson Power Flow

Power Flow Variables

N-R Power Flow Solution

Power Flow Jacobian Matrix

Power Flow Jacobian Matrix, cont’d

Two Bus Newton-Raphson Example

One 1.000 pu Two 1.000 pu

2    j10 j10 

Two Bus Example, cont’d

Two Bus Example, cont’d

Now calculate the power flow Jacobian

10 V2 cos 2 10sin  2

Two Bus Example, First Iteration

Two Bus Example, Next Iterations

Two Bus Solved Values

One 1.000 pu Two 0.855 pu -13.522 Deg

Two Bus Case Low Voltage Solution

Low Voltage Solution, cont'd

One 1.000 pu Two 0.261 pu -49.914 Deg

Two Bus Region of Convergence

Using the Power Flow: Example 1

1 .0 2 pu MVA MVA SLA C K1 3 8 MVA

Three Bus PV Case Example

Modeling Voltage Dependent Load

Voltage Dependent Load Example