The Impact of Facts Devices On Generation Reallocation and Load Shedding of A Power

qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty
uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasd
fghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx
cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui
opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg
hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
hjklzxcvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn
mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwert
yuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas
dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklz

THE IMPACT OF FACTS DEVICES ON
GENERATION REALLOCATION AND
LOAD SHEDDING OF A POWER

www.BEProjectReport.com

VISIT US, CHOOSE THE PROJECT YOU LIKE AND
CLICK THE DOWNLOAD BUTTON

THE IMPACT OF FACTS DEVICES ON GENERATION REALLOCATION AND LOAD SHEDDING OF A
POWER

www.BEProjectReport.com Page 2

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

1.1 LOAD FLOW ANALYSIS
The operational feature of a composite power system can be determined by symmetrical steady
state. But three major problems encountered in this mode of operation are listed.
- Load flow problem
- Optimal load flow scheduling problem
- System control problem.

Load flow study is the steady state solution of the power system network. The solutions provides
magnitude & phase angles of load bus voltage, creative power at generating bus real and reactive
power flow on transmission line. It also gives the initial conditions of the system when the transient
behavior of the system is to be studied. The load flow study of a power system is essential to decide
the best operation of existing system and for planning the future expansion of the system.
1.2 DEVELOPMENTS IN LOAD FLOW ANALYSIS
Before the advent of digital computers, AC calculating board was the only means of carrying out
load flow studies. These studies were therefore, tedious and time consuming. With the availability of
fast and large size digital computers, all kinds of power system studies, including load flow, can now
be carried out conveniently. In fact some of advance level sophisticated studies which were almost
impossible to carry out on the AC calculated boards have now become possible by MAT lab
software.
There are different types of iterative algorithm for solving load flow studies in MAT lab
software as follows:
- Gauss method
- Gauss-Seidel method
- Newton-Raphson method
- Decoupled Newton method
- Fast Decoupled load flow
- New Power flow method

Gauss method is a simplest method to calculate load flow analysis. The number of iterations in
this method is more and it is much slower to converge, sometimes fail to do so Gauss Seidel method
is used. In Gauss Seidel method calculations are simple and programming task is lesser and its
memory requirement is less but there are many disadvantages in this method they are:

POWER


- Require large number of iterations to reach convergence
- Not suitable for large systems
- Convergence time increases with size of system

The above problems can be rectified in Newton-Raphson method. It is a powerful flow method of
solving non- linear algebraic equations. It has the following advantages.
- This method is faster, more reliable and the results are accurate
- Require less number of iterations for convergence.
- The number of iterations are independent of the size of the system
- Suitable for large systems

Its only drawback is the large requirement of computer memory. To reduce the memory
requirements decoupled load flow method is used. It is not much of an advantage from the point of
view of speed. Since the time per iteration of the DLF is almost the same as that of NR method and it
always takes more number of iterations to converge because of the approximation. A Fast Decoupled
Load Flow is carried out to achieve some speed advantage without much loss in accuracy of solution
using the DLF model. In above all the methods frequency is not considered but during abnormal
conditions frequency changes occurs so a new method has been developed called New Power Flow
Method. This method has the following advantages:
- Used for the steady state behavior of large complex power systems
- It allows study power flow in normal as well as abnormal conditions.
- Demand supply unbalance is distributed between among all generators
- Get exact and accurate results.

1.3 CONTRIBUTIONS TO PROJECT WORK
- The load flow calculations for 3-bus, 5-bus and 24-bus are performed by using Newton-
Raphson method and new power flow method.
- In order to avoid the over-load on the generators and to reduce the losses generation re
allocation is performed.
- Even after the generation reallocation the load does not met the demand so the load is
curtailed by doing load shedding.
- To increase the voltage profile facts devices are placed like SVC and TCSC for the 3-bus, 5-
bus and 24-bus systems and results are obtained.

1.4 ORGANIZATION OF PROJECT WORK
POWER


- Chapter-2, it deals with the New power flow method mathematical modeling and its basic
equations. Comparisons of Newton-Raphson method and New power flow method for all the
3,5,24 bus systems has been done.
- Chapter-3 deals with generation reallocation mathematical equations and comparison with
Newton-Raphson method for all the 3,5,24 bus systems.
- Chapter-4 includes load shedding problem formulation, its advantages and disadvantages.
Comparison with Newton-Raphson method for all the 3,5,24 bus systems has been done.
- Chapter-5 deals with impact of FACTS devices on power systems and different types of
FACTS devices, their circuit representation & description. This chapter also includes the
effect of facts devices placed in different lines for each bus. The comparison with Newton
method also obtained.
- Chapter-6, it discuss with the overall conclusion of the project work.

POWER


CHAPTER 2
NEW POWER FLOW METHOD

2.1 INTRODUCTION
Power flow calculations for determining the steady state of power systems have
conventionally been solved by assuming that system frequency remains constant, that supply demand
unbalances would be regulated by an ideal generator, called slack bus and by neglecting the voltage
characteristics of loads. Since this method of solution neglects frequency discrepancies and voltage
characteristics, i.e., the control characteristics of various generators and system load characteristics,
it is not suited to analyzing a new steady state following a disturbance, or a major supply outage.
It is necessary, however, from the point of view of the security of increasingly large
and complex power systems, to be able to determine the frequency, voltage, presence or absence of
overload, and local supply bottlenecks following a sudden major supply outage or tripping of tie-line
breakers. Thus the need is clear for a calculation model that takes account of generator control
effects, and the voltage and frequency characteristics of load.
The classical methods of solving Load flows assume that system frequency remains
constant, an ideal generator, called slack bus, would regulate that supply - demand unbalance. The
voltage and frequency characteristics i.e. the control characteristics of various generators and system
load characteristics are not considered in these classical power flow models. The conventional Gauss
Seidel, NR Power Flow Models etc. are not suitable to study the system during dynamic condition
as these models are intended to give solution for a pre-defined static operating point.
2.2 NECESSITY OF NEW POWER FLOW METHOD
A new power flow model is used for the steady state behavior of large complex power systems. It
allows the study of power flow under abnormal conditions as well as normal conditions.
- It is necessary to take account of system frequency deviation
- While system frequency is maintained relatively constant under normal conditions, changes
will occur in the event of supply-demand unbalance resulting from a major supply outage or
tie-line tripping. It is thus necessary to establish new steady state values by checking for the
magnitude of frequency deviation.
- Demand-supply unbalance must be distributed among all generators
- If the whole unbalance is absorbed by a single swing bus, there may be major distortions
in load flow distribution, and the model fails to match reality. Thus it is necessary to develop
a model which distributes and absorbs the unbalance on the basis of the governor
characteristics, load characteristics, of each generator.
- Voltage characteristics of the system cannot be neglected
- Load usually depends on voltage, and system voltages are controlled by generators,
capacitors, reactors, transformers.
POWER


2.2.1 Generator real power output
Generator real power output is adjusted by the static response of the prime mover shown in the fig
2.1 which may be expressed as
f
R
P
P P
R
Gset G
= (2.1)
And
Gmax G Gmin
P P P s s (2.2)
Where
G
P : Real power output of generator

Gset
P : Scheduled real power output of generator
R
P : Rated output of generator
R : Speed regulation in per unit
f A : Change in frequency
max G
P ,
min G
P : Real power limits of generator.

Figure 2.1: Generator Governor Model

POWER


2.2.2 Generator Reactive Power Output and Terminal Voltage
In this new model, different types of generator buses are considered.
Bus type 1:
A generator bus is specified by their
G
P and
G
Q , or operated under constant power factor.
G
Q is
adjusted according to the characteristic as shown in the Fig. 2.2.
2
G Q G Q Gset G
P b P a Q Q + + =
(2.3)
f
R
1
P P
R G
= (2.4)
Where
G
Q : Reactive power output of generator

Gset
Q : Scheduled reactive power output of generator

Q
a ,
Q
b : Coefficients of reactive generation control characteristics

Figure 2.2 Characteristics of Generator Reactive Power.
Bus type 2:
G
P and
G
V are specified, and the bus is operated under constant terminal
voltage. Line drop compensation can be applied to the Automatic Voltage Regulator (AVR), and
exciter capability can be taken in to account.
The model for this bus can be expressed by
I jX V V
LC
Gset
G
+ = (2.5)
I jX V E
f G
+ = (2.6)
max min
E E E s s (2.7)
POWER


Where
G
V : Generator terminal voltage

set G
V : Scheduled voltage
f
X : Direct axis synchronous reactance
E : Voltage proportional to field voltage
min
E ,
max
E : Limits of field voltage
Bus type 3:
Same as Type 1, with the addition of excitation capability
G
Q as in equations (2.3) and (2.4) as in
equations (2.6) and (2.7).

Bus type 4:
Same as Type 2, with the addition of reactive power generation limits.
G
Q is as in equations (2.3) and (2.4), and
Gmax G Gmin
Q Q Q s s (2.8)
Where
min G
Q ,
max G
Q : Reactive power limits of generator
2.3 LOAD MODEL

Load normally depends on voltage and frequency, and study of emergency system control must take
into account of frequency and voltage characteristics of the load.

Loads may be expressed by:
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
+ A + =
2
1
) 1 (
LB
z
N
LB
c p P Lset L
V
V
p
V
V
p p f k P P (2.9)
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
+ A + =
2 2
) 1 (
LB
z
N
LB
c p Q Lset L
V
V
q
V
V
q q f k Q Q (2.10)

POWER


Where
L
P ,
L
Q : Power input of load
set L
P ,
set L
Q : Rated power of load

Z
p ,
Z
q :Portion of total load proportional to constant impedance load
C
p ,
C
q : Portion of total load proportional to N
th
power of voltage
P
p ,
P
q : Portion of total load proportional to constant power load
P
K ,
Q
K : Frequency characteristics of load
B L
V : Normal-operating voltage at load bus
2.4 SOLUTION METHOD
In order to study power flow, taking into account of system frequency deviation, it is
necessary to introduce frequency characteristics into traditional power flow equations. There are
expressed as follows:
The balance of real and reactive power at a node i the following equations one for real power
balance and the other for reactive power balance are shown by equations (2.11) and (2.12.)
0 = + A
Li Gi i pi
P P P f (2.11)
0 = + A
Li Gi i Qi
Q Q Q f (2.12)
Where
pi
f ,
i Q
f : Error of power flowing into node i

=
=
n
j
j ij
i
V Y I
1
(2.13)
= + =
n
j
j ij i
i
i
i i
V Y V Q j P I V
1
* *
*
(2.14)
Where
i
i : current flowing into node i

i
P ,
i
Q : injected power into node i.
In traditional load flow studies, a single node or bus is considered to be a slack bus to make up for
the difference between scheduled load, system loss and generation. In this new model, however,
system frequency changes according to the supply demand difference so that a balance among
load, generation and system loss is obtained automatically, and there is no need for a slack bus. It
is however, necessary to specify the voltage phase angle of one of the buses as reference node in
POWER


order to find the voltage angles of the other nodes. All the generators participate in picking up the
entire load and system losses.
2.4.1 Basic equations
We can represent the bus voltage of node i as,
i
j
e
i
V
i
V = (2.15)
Then Eq. (2.14) becomes
= +
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
n
1 j
j
i
j
e
j
V
i
V
ij
Y
i
jQ
i
P
(2.16)

And Eq. (2.11) and (2.12) can be represented as functions of V
1
, o
1
,V
2
, o
2
,., Vn ,
n
o ,
and Af, where Af is also one of the variables representing change in the system frequency, i.e.,

( ) f V V V f f
n
n
P P
A = , , ,......, , , ,
2
2
1
1 o o o (2.17a)
( ) f V V V f f
n
n
Q Q
A = , , ,......, , , ,
2
2
1
1 o o o (2.17b)
The New power flow problem to be solved is represented as a set of simultaneous non linear
equations as follows:
(a) For nodes for which real and reactive power are specified:
( ) 0 , , ,......, , , ,
2
2
1
1 = Af V V V f
n
n
Pl
o o o (2.18a)
( ) 0 , , ,......, , , ,
2
2
1
1 = Af V V V f
n
n
Ql
o o o (2.18b)
(b) For nodes for which power and voltage magnitude are specified:
10
( ) 0 , , ,......, , , ,
2
2
1
1 = Af V V V f
n
n
Pm
o o o (2.19)
Where n is the number of nodes for which real and reactive powers are specified and m is the
number of nodes for which real and voltage magnitude are specified.
POWER


Given approximate results for the unknown variables
( ) k
V ,
( ) k
o ,
( ) k
f A in equations (2.18) and
(2.19), corrected values V A , o A , ( ) f A A can be obtained from the matrix.
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
A
A
A A
A
A
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
=
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(

ll
l
n
ij i ij
ij i ij
Qll
Ql
Pn
n P
P
V
V
f
L G J
N F H
f
f
f
f
f
.
.
.
) (
.
.
.
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
1
1
1
1
1
o
o
(2.20)
Where
1
l , . . . .
l
l are the number of nodes for which voltage is not specified and
n
o is taken for the
phase reference bus. The total number of variables in equation (2.20) is
(2n-m), where n is the total number of buses and m is the number of P-V buses Values for
P
f ,
Q
f ,
and the Jacobian matrix in equation (2.20) can be obtained by substituting the approximations
( ) k
V ,
( ) k
o ,
( ) k
f A , solutions for which can be obtained by solving a system of linear equations. The new
values for
( ) 1 + k
V ,
( ) 1 + k
o ,
( ) 1 +
A
k
f are calculated from equations (2.21a), (2.21b)
A + =
A + =

+
+
) ( ) ( ) 1 (
) ( ) ( ) 1 (
k k k
k k k
v v V
o o o

(2.21a)
( )
) ( ) ( ) 1 (

k k k
f f f A A + A = A
+
(2.21b)
The elements of equation (2.20) are defined in equation (2.22)
,
j
Pi
ij
f
H
o c
c
=
j
Qi
ij
f
J
o c
c
= ; ,
j
Pi
ij
v
f
N
c
c
=
j
Qi
ij
v
f
L
c
c
=
,
f
f
F
Pi
ij
A c
c
=
f
f
J
Qi
ij
A c
c
= (2.22)
Terms of equations (2.22) are given and the computational procedure is given in the
flow chart shown in Appendix(B). 11

POWER


2.5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Table 2.1 Results for 5-bus system using Newton method
GENERATION LOAD SHUNT
Bus
Name
Type V Delta MW MVAR M
W
MVAR MVAR
1 bus-
1
slack 1.060 0.00 131.1 90.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
2 bus-2 PVbus 1.000 -2.06 20.0 -71.6 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 bus-3 PQbus 0.987 -4.64 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.0
4 bus-4 PQbus 0.984 -4.96 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.0
5 bus-5 PQbus 0.972 -5.76 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.0

Forward Power Flow Power Losses
Name Name MW MVAR MW MVAR

bus-2

bus-1

-86.840

-72.9105

2.4857

1.0864
bus-3 bus-1 -40.271 -17.5109 1.5176 -0.6928
bus-3 bus-2 -24.112 -0.3493 0.3595 -2.8709
bus-4 bus-2 -27.250 -0.8277 0.4608 -2.5547
bus-5 bus-2 -53.439 -4.8241 1.2147 0.7278
bus-4 bus-3 -19.343 -4.6884 0.0401 -1.8230
bus-5 bus-4 -6.553 -5.1703 0.0431 -4.6526

*************** SYSTEM-GRID TOTALS ******************

Total Generation

151.11MW

19.21 MVAR
Shunt(inductive) 0.00 MVAR
POWER


Total P - Q Load 145.00 MW 30.00 MVAR
Total Power Losses 6.12 MW -10.78 MVAR

Fig 2.3: Voltage profile of Newton method for 5-bus system
Table 2.2 Results for 5-bus system using new power flow method
GENERATION LOAD
Bus Name Type V Delta MW MVAR MW MVAR
1
2
3
4
5
Bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
slack
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
1.000
1.000
0.971
0.971
0.967
0.000
-3.394
-5.740
-6.119
-7.058
120.00
20.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-9.80
-1.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
45.00
40.00
60.00
0.00
0.00
15.00
5.00
10.00
Forward Power Flow Reverse Power Flow Power Losses
SB EB MW MVAR MW MVAR MW MVAR
1
1
2
2
2
3
4
2
3
3
4
5
4
5
89.68
40.64
24.82
28.08
55.03
18.73
6.26
-29.97
-1.99
6.22
5.27
9.08
-7.22
-2.81
-87.93
-39.32
-24.41
-27.57
-53.78
-18.69
-6.22
29.23
1.09
-8.87
-7.64
-8.22
5.46
-1.78
1.75
1.32
0.41
0.50
1.26
0.04
0.03
-0.74
-0.89
-2.66
-2.37
0.87
-1.76
-4.60
POWER



Total Generation :
Shunt (inductive) :
Total P - Q Load :
Total Power Losses :

140.0009 MW

145.0254 MW
-5.3123 MW

-11.6066 MVAR
0.00 MVAR
30.0000 MVAR
-12.1529 MVAR

- From the table 2.1 and table 2.2, it is observed that at constant load, there is a decrement in
total power loss of 13.07% in new power flow method when compared with Newton method.
As losses have decreased, the generation decreases from 151.11MW to 140.0009MW.

Fig 2.4: Voltage profile of Newton & New power flow method for 5-bus system
- From fig 2.4, the voltage profile of new power flow method is decreased by 1.6% when
compared with Newton Raphson method .

0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
newton method
new power flow
method
voltage
profile
bus number
POWER


Table 2.3 Results for 24-bus system using Newton method
Bus Name Type V delta MW MVAR MW MVAR MVAR
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
bus-6
bus-7
bus-8
bus-9
bus-10
bus-11
bus-12
bus-13
bus-14
bus-15
bus-16
bus-17
bus-18
bus-19
bus-20
bus-21
bus-22
bus-23
slack
PVbus
PVbus
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
1.060
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.898
0.918
0.886
0.993
0.942
0.938
1.030
1.039
1.000
1.026
1.024
0.968
1.021
0.972
0.966
0.940
0.982
1.003
0.987
0.00
-12.49
-9.29
-21.54
-19.72
-35.34
-34.65
-36.37
-27.50
-37.66
-20.33
-23.70
-37.07
-32.83
-5.76
-14.06
-16.11
-36.15
-31.72
-30.24
-27.52
-34.19
-24.54
1654.1
160.0
350.0
520.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
576.9
-54.7
-0.6
93.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.3
2.8
3.2
1.8
1.2
0.6
0.0
0.0
4.5
0.0
7.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
0.9
1.1
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.8
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-60.7
-48.9
0.0
-47.7
-95.0
-42.5
-47.2
-96.8
-169.1
-120.1
0.0
-103.2
-88.3
POWER


24

bus-24

PQbus

0.999

-13.28

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0 -283.4

Table 2.4 Results for 24-bus system using new power flow method
GENERATION LOAD
Bus Name Type V delta MW MVAR MW MVAR
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
bus-6
bus-7
bus-8
bus-9
bus-10
bus-11
bus-12
bus-13
slack
PVbus
PVbus
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
1
1
1
1
0.844
0.844
0.829
0.825
0.876
0.88
0.968
0.953
0.821
0
-12.621
-10.914
-19.1
-22.155
-33.569
-34.222
-35.256
-27.431
-25.582
-19.76
-22.717
-35.359
1655.87
160
350
520
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
523.53
36.25
197.07
305.51
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
430.01
280.00
320.00
180.00
120.00
60.00
0.00
0.00
450.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
170.00
90.00
110.00
70.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
0.00
180.00

SYSTEM-GRID TOTALS

Total Generation :
Shunt (inductive) :
Total P - Q Load :

2684.06 MW

2620.00 MW
64.06 MW

614.98 MVAR
-1203.00 MVAR
980.00 MVAR
-784.08 MVAR
POWER


14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
bus-14
bus-15
bus-16
bus-17
bus-18
bus-19
bus-20
bus-21
bus-22
bus-23
bus-24

PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
0.877
0.966
0.917
0.984
0.913
0.892
0.884
0.939
0.873
0.921
0.96
-31.455
-6.494
-15.797
-16.269
-23.871
-29.303
-29.216
-25.219
-30.945
-24.022
-14.947
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
780.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
300.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

Total Generation :
Shunt (inductive) :
Total P - Q Load :
2685.8702 MW

2620.0000 MW
65.8720 MW
1062.3602 MVAR
1048.9373 MVAR
980.0000 MVAR
85.5636 MVAR

From the table 2.3 and table 2.4, it is observed that at constant load, there is a decrement in total
power loss of 13.33% in new power flow method when compared with Newton method. As losses
have decreased, the generation decreases from 2684.06MW to 2685.8702MW.

POWER


Fig 2.5: Voltage profile of Newton & New power flow method for 24-bus system

- From the fig2.5 the voltage profile of new power flow method is increased by 7.6% when
compared with Newton Raphson method

Conclusion:
- From above results it is concluded that the power losses of new power flow method is
decreased by 13% when compared with Newton Raphson method.
- The generation of NPF method is decreased when compared with Newton Raphson method.
- As the number of buses increases the voltage profile is increased and the losses are decreased.
Generation= demand + losses

0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
newton method
new power flow
method
bus number
voltage
profile
s
POWER


CHAPTER 3
GENERATION REALLOCATION

3.1 INTRODUCTION

Generation reallocation is also called as optimum power flow. The generation reallocation is a power
flow problem in which certain variables are adjusted to minimize an objective function such as cost
of the active power generation or the losses, while satisfying physical operating limits on various
controls, dependent variables and function of control variables. Because the objective includes
losses, and controls include reactive devices, the problem is characterized by a non-separable
objective function. The characteristic, which sets the classical OPF apart from similar optimization
problems, also makes it more difficult to solve. It was first discussed by Carpentier in 1962 [7] and
took a long time to become a successful algorithm that could be applied for everyday use.
The OPF method is based on load flow solution by the Newtons method [8], a first order gradient
adjustment algorithm for minimizing the objective function and use of penalty functions to account
for inequality constraints on dependent variables. The types of controls that an optimal power flow
must be able to accommodate are active and reactive power injections, generator voltages,
transformer tap ratios and phase-shift angles. In the given OPF study, active power controls, reactive
power controls or a combination of both may be optimized.

Practical solutions for OPF problems with separable objective functions have been obtained with
special linear programming methods, but the classical OPF has defined practical solutions, the
Newton approach is a flexible formulation that can be used to develop different OPF algorithms
suited to the requirements of different applications. In other words, the optimal power problem seeks
to find an optimal profile of active and reactive power generations along with voltage magnitudes in
such a manner as to minimize the total operating costs of a thermal electric power system, while
satisfying network security constraints.

There are many applications of the OPF including
- The calculation of the Optimum generation pattern, as well as control variables, to active the
minimum cost of generation together with meeting transmission system limitations.
- In an emergency, that is when some component of system is overloaded or a bus is
experiencing a voltage violation, the OPF can provide a corrective dispatch, which tells the
operation of system, the adjustments to be made to relieve the overload or voltage violation.
- The OPF can be used periodically to find the optimum setting for generation voltages,
transformer taps and switched capacitors or static VAR compensators.
- The OPF is routinely used in planning studies to determine the maximum stress that a
planned transmission system can withstand. For example, the OPF can calculate the
maximum power that can safely be transferred from one area of network to another.
POWER


3.2 SOLUTION OF THE OPTIMAL POWER FLOW:
The optimal power flow is a very large and difficult mathematical programming problem.
Almost every mathematical programming approach that can be applied to this problem has been
attempted and it has taken developers many decades to develop computer codes that will solve the
OPF reliably.

There are different methods of solving the optimal power flow problem.
- Lambda Iteration Method
- Gradient Method
- Newtons Method
- Linear Programming Method
- Interior Point Method

In the Lambda Iteration method, losses are represented by a [B] matrix, or the penalty factors may be
calculated outside by a power flow. Gradient methods are slow in convergence and are difficult to
solve in the presence of inequality constraints. The Linear Programming method and Interior Point
method easily handle the inequality constraints.
The problems with the Gradient method lie mainly in the fact that the direction of gradient must be
changed quite often and this leads to a very slow convergence. To speed up this convergence,
Newtons method is used. It has got very fast convergence characteristics. Efficient and robust
solutions can be obtained for problems of any practical size or kind. Solution effort is approximately
proportional to network size, and is relatively independent of the number of controls or binding
inequalities. A direct simultaneous solution for all of the unknowns in the Lagrangian function in
each iteration is obtained.

The objective function for minimizing the operating cost is
) (
1
2
1
i g i
NG
i
g i
NG
i
i
c P b P a F F
i i
+ + = =

= =
Rs/hr (3.1)
Subject to
(a) Active power balance in the network
0 ) , ( = +
i i
d g i
P P V P o (i=1,2 n) (3.2)
(b) Reactive power balance in the network
0 ) , ( = +
i i
d g i
Q Q V Q o (i= nv+1,nv+2,., n) (3.3)
(c) Security related constraints called the soft constraints
(i) Limits on real power generations

max min
i i i
g g g
P P P s s (i= 1, 2,., n) (3.4)
(ii) Limits on voltage magnitudes

max min
i i i
V V V s s (i= nv+1,nv+2,., n) (3.5)
(iii) Limits on voltage angles

max min
i i i
o o o s s (i= 1, 2, n) (3.6)
POWER


(d) Functional constraint which is a function of control variables
Limits on Reactive power

max min
i i i
g g g
Q Q Q s s (3.7)
The Real Power Flow equations are

=
+ =
n
j
j i ij j i ij j i i
B G V V V P
1
)) sin( ) cos( ( ) , ( o o o o o (3.8)
The Reactive Power Flow equations

=
=
n
j
j i ij j i ij j i i
B G V V V Q
1
)) cos( ) sin( ( ) , ( o o o o o (3.9)
Where,
n is the number of buses
ng is the number of generator buses
nv is the number of voltage controlled buses

i
P is the active power injection into bus i

i
Q is the reactive power injection into bus i

di
P is the active load on bus i

gi
P is the active generation on bus i

gi
Q is the reactive generation on bus i

i
V is the voltage magnitude at bus i

i
o is the voltage phase angle at bus i

j i j i j i
jB G Y + = (are the elements of admittance matrix)
The initial values of
g
P and are calculated using the formula given in the equation (3.10). In
addition,
pi
is initialized to for all buses and
qi
is initialized to zero for load buses. Voltages for
all the buses are taken as flat voltages and the voltage angles are initialized to zeroes. The
constrained minimization problem can be transferred into an unconstrained one by augmenting the
load flow constraints into the objective function.

The additional variables are known as Lagrangian multiplier functions or incremental cost functions.

|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
=

=
= =
n
i i
n
i
n
i i
i
d
a
a
b
P
i
1
1 1
2
1
2
and
i
i
g
a
b
P
i
2
=

(i=1,2 ng) (3.10)
The Lagrangian function becomes

= = =
+ + + + + + =
n
i
d g i qi
n
i
d g i Pi i g i
ng
i
g i g
i i i i i i
Q Q V Q P P V P c P b P a V P L
1 1 1
2
) ) , ( ( ) ) , ( ( ) ( ) , , ( o o o
(3.11)
The optimization problem is solved, if the following equations of optimality are solved.

POWER


(
(
(
(
(
(
(
V
V
V
V
V
=
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
A
A
A
A
A
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
V V
V V V V
V V V
V V V V
V V
q
p
g
q q
q p
p p g p
q p
p g g g
V
p
q
p
g
V
V VV V V
V p
V
P P P
V
P
o
o
o
o
o o o o o
o
0 0 0
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
(3.12)

To solve the above equation, Jacobian and Hessian matrix elements are to be calculated. Then the
values of
q p g
V P o A A A A A , , ,
,
are calculated by multiplying the Jacobian matrix with the inverse of
Hessian matrix. The convergence is checked using the formula given below, which must be less than
or equal to a pre-specified tolerance value. Otherwise, the values
q p g
V P o , , ,
,

are updated.
e s
(
A + A + A + A + A

+ = + = = = =
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (
ng
nv i
q
n
nv i
i
n
i
p
n
i
i
ng
i
g
i i i
V P o (3.13)

The limits are also checked, if any variable violates the limit, then a penalty function is imposed on
it.

POWER


An OPF program by Newtons approach has been written using MATLAB, and the results for 3-bus
system, 5-bus system and 24-bus system are obtained.

Table3.1: Newtons Method results for 3-Bus System

Bus Name Type V Delta MW MVAR MW MVAR MVAR
1
2
3
bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
slack
PVbus
PQbus
1.0500
1.0100
1.0217
0.0000
0.1520
-2.3762
83.3333
96.6667
0.0000
145.2480
-102.4507
0.0000
0.00
0.00
1.80
0.00
0.00
0.30
0.00
0.00
0.00
bus-2
bus-3
bus-3
bus-1
bus-1
bus-2
5.626
-88.960
-91.040
-80.793
-55.951
25.951
0.000
0.000
-0.000
3.215
5.290
4.292
Total Generation :
Shunt (inductive) :
Total P - Q Load :
180.00 MW

180.00 MW
-0.00 MW
42.80 MVAR
0.00 MVAR
30.00 MVAR
12.80 MVAR
POWER


Table3.2: OPF results for 3-Bus System

Fig 3.1: Voltage profile of Newton and Opf for 3-bus system
- From table 3.1 and 3.2 it is found that the 3-bus system has two PV buses and one PQ bus.
The burden on the slack is reduced by 61MW (42.5%) and it is shared by PV bus.
- Fig 3.1 shows that the voltage profile is improved by 1%
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4
V
o
l
t
a
g
e

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
Bus Number
Newton-Raphson Method
1 bus-1 PQbus 1.022 -2.92 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.3 0.0
2 bus-2 PVbus 1.010 -0.96 35.0 -102.9 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 bus-3 slack 1.050 0.00 145.0 146.6 0.0 0.0 0.0
bus-2 bus-1 70.608 -22.3868 0.0000 2.6893
bus-3 bus-1 109.392 62.2611 0.0000 7.1851
bus-3 bus-2 35.608 84.2989 0.0000 3.7978
Total Generation : 180.00 MW 43.67 MVAR
Shunt (inductive) : 0.00 MVAR
Total P - Q Load : 180.00 MW 30.00 MVAR
Total Power Losses : 0.00 MW 13.67 MVAR
POWER



1 bus-1 slack 1.060 0.00 131.1 90.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
2 bus-2 PVbus 1.000 -2.06 20.0 -71.6 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 bus-3 PQbus 0.987 -4.64 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.0
4 bus-4 PQbus 0.984 -4.96 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.0
5 bus-5 PQbus 0.972 -5.76 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.0
bus-2 bus-1 -86.840 -72.9105 2.4857 1.0864
bus-3 bus-1 -40.271 -17.5109 1.5176 -0.6928
bus-3 bus-2 -24.112 -0.3493 0.3595 -2.8709
bus-4 bus-2 -27.250 -0.8277 0.4608 -2.5547
bus-5 bus-2 -53.439 -4.8241 1.2147 0.7278
bus-4 bus-3 -19.343 -4.6884 0.0401 -1.8230
bus-5 bus-4 -6.553 -5.1703 0.0431 -4.6526
Total Generation 151.11MW 19.21 MVAR
POWER


1
2
3
4
5
Bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5

slack
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
1.0600
1.0000
0.9875
0.9843
0.9717
0.0000
-0.1127
-3.2069
-3.4231
-3.9535
66.7022
83.6080
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
110.30
-93.52
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.45
0.40
0.60
0.00
0.00
0.15
0.05
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
bus-2
bus-3
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
bus-4
bus-5
bus-1
bus-1
bus-2
bus-2
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
-33.128
-30.705
-28.471
-30.725
-55.153
-14.153
-4.847
-91.954
-21.358
1.471
0.615
-4.165
-6.758
-5.835
1.802
1.067
0.506
0.589
1.292
0.024
0.030
-0.965
-2.045
-2.432
-2.172
0.960
-1.872
-4.692

Total Generation :
Shunt (inductive) :
Total P - Q Load :

150.31 MW

145.00 MW
5.31 MW

16.78 MVAR
0.00 MVAR
30.00 MVAR
-13.22 MVAR

POWER


- The burden on slack bus is decreased by 50% by performing optimal power flow method.
- The real power generation is reduced by 1MW, while reactive power generation is reduced
by 2.5MW.
- Real power losses are decreased by 0.8MW for 5-bus system with two PV buses and one PQ
bus.
- From fig 3.2 it is inferred that voltage profile is improved.

Fig 3.2: Voltage profile of Newton and Opf for 5-bus system

0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
V
o
l
t
a
g
e

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
Bus Number
Newton-Raphson
Optimal Power
POWER


Bus

Name

Type

V

delta

MW

MVAR

MW

MVAR

MVAR

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
bus-6
bus-7
bus-8
bus-9
bus-10
bus-11
bus-12
bus-13
bus-14
bus-15
bus-16
bus-17
bus-18
bus-19
bus-20
bus-21
bus-22
bus-23
slack
PVbus
PVbus
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.844
0.844
0.829
0.825
0.876
0.880
0.968
0.953
0.821
0.877
0.966
0.917
0.984
0.913
0.892
0.884
0.939
0.873
0.921
0.00
-12.62
-10.91
-19.10
-22.16
-33.57
-34.22
-35.26
-27.43
-25.58
-19.76
-22.72
-35.36
-31.45
-6.49
-15.80
-16.27
-23.87
-29.30
-29.22
-25.22
-30.94
-24.02
1655.9
160.0
350.0
520.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
523.5
36.8
198.2
307.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.3
2.8
3.2
1.8
1.2
0.6
0.0
0.0
4.5
0.0
7.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
0.9
1.1
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.8
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-53.5
-41.2
0.0
-34.9
-84.6
-38.1
-43.9
-85.5
-144.5
-106.4
0.0
-78.0
-77.0
POWER


24 bus-24 PQbus 0.960 -14.95 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -261.4

Name

Name

MW

MVAR

MW

MVAR

bus-23
bus-18
bus-12
bus-17
bus-14
bus-24
bus-18
bus-23
bus-20
bus-16
bus-16
bus-24
bus-19
bus-19
bus-20
bus-8
bus-5
bus-6
bus-7
bus-8
bus-9
bus-22
bus-22
bus-11
bus-11
bus-12
bus-17
bus-24
bus-24
bus-23
bus-15
bus-24
bus-15
bus-21
bus-22
bus-21
bus-13
bus-16
bus-19
bus-20
bus-14
bus-23
210.935
169.098
-195.330
197.368
-192.378
38.103
-229.200
-489.071
-156.393
-368.789
-64.182
-484.255
-346.752
65.550
-165.255
11.572
-430.00
-280.00
-320.00
-191.57
-120.00
33.0442
-10.0289
-65.0926
1.0195
-136.2234
-116.3538
-97.4833
-167.4229
-99.3193
-93.6954
-173.9701
-76.0130
-266.9147
8.3169
-150.0760
15.1848
-170.00
-90.00
-110.00
-85.18
-40.00
2.6395
2.2364
0.8599
1.1778
2.9519
0.2018
3.6518
7.7162
1.3291
6.1232
0.7290
6.7514
2.8602
0.2298
1.5220
0.0225
2.97
1.20
1.65
0.81
0.41
-73.2578
-102.3059
-48.8408
-68.7230
-112.3103
-135.1601
-100.7803
-187.1462
-90.1636
-29.5282
-53.9007
-203.3029
-122.2094
-69.1407
-60.1173
-7.0383
59.53
24.10
33.04
16.13
8.27
POWER


bus-10
bus-13
bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-18
bus-22
bus-15
bus-17
bus-24
bus-21
-60.00
-438.45
1655.87
160.00
350.00
520.00
-20.00
-157.78
523.53
36.82
198.20
307.01
0.10
2.03
9.95
0.53
1.60
3.61
2.05
40.23
202.07
10.67
32.10
72.35

Shunt (inductive) : -1048.94 MVAR
Total Power Losses : 65.87 MW -915.54 MVAR

POWER



GENERATION

LOAD

SHUNT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
bus-6
bus-7
bus-8
bus-9
bus-10
bus-11
bus-12
bus-13
bus-14
bus-15
bus-16
bus-17
bus-18
bus-19
bus-20
bus-21
bus-22
bus-23
slack
PVbus
PVbus
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
0.8506
0.8371
0.8269
0.8149
0.8812
0.8848
0.9436
0.9279
0.8150
0.8595
0.9714
0.9232
0.9639
0.9179
0.8858
0.8819
0.9332
0.8702
0.9260
0.0000
23.7387
7.1291
6.8282
-11.8111
-11.2051
-13.2050
-14.2063
-9.6755
-8.3635
5.6828
1.8833
-14.9406
-9.3932
-2.9026
-5.5440
10.1380
-6.6703
-6.8720
-8.1734
-1.6160
-10.9149
-6.3034
754.2801
578.8871
642.2324
708.2775
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
407.5732
130.5805
204.3099
352.4880
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
4.3000
2.8000
3.2000
1.8000
1.2000
0.6000
0.0000
0.0000
4.5000
0.0000
7.8000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
1.7000
0.9000
1.1000
0.7000
0.4000
0.2000
0.0000
0.0000
1.8000
0.0000
3.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
-50.8753
-39.0517
0.0000
-33.5014
-85.5977
-38.6492
-42.1324
-86.3588-
142.3511
-105.8237
0.0000
-77.6053
-77.7780
POWER


24

bus-24

PQbus

0.9613 -0.3660 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

-262.3646

bus-23
bus-18
bus-12
bus-17
bus-14
bus-24
bus-18
bus-23
bus-20
bus-16
bus-16
bus-24
bus-19
bus-19
bus-20
bus-8
bus-5
bus-6
bus-7
bus-8
bus-9
bus-22
bus-22
bus-11
bus-11
bus-12
bus-17
bus-24
bus-24
bus-23
bus-15
bus-24
bus-15
bus-21
bus-22
bus-21
bus-13
bus-16
bus-19
bus-20
bus-14
bus-23
144.906
105.134
-237.356
240.499
-233.185
-325.775
-165.235
-326.899
-61.121
-114.614
-318.312
144.418
-434.588
153.366
-260.537
52.112
-430.000
-280.000
-320.000
-232.112
-120.000
46.228
0.348
-59.660
12.268
-110.838
-11.057
-108.734
-196.443
-125.542
-145.431
-121.845
-182.529
-252.157
-4.684
-123.506
-14.124
-170.000
-90.000
-110.000
-55.876
-40.000
1.563
1.081
1.319
1.825
4.170
5.640
1.962
3.529
0.464
1.011
3.156
0.647
4.078
0.903
2.878
0.134
2.925
1.222
1.658
1.073
0.408
-85.516
-114.428
-40.120
-58.148
-90.229
-74.333
-119.580
-233.243
-101.281
-84.748
-28.782
-270.485
-104.884
-60.011
-42.470
-6.336
58.627
24.490
33.225
21.460
8.177
POWER


- For 24-bus system of constant load there are four PV buses and 20 PQ buses the real power
generated from slack bus is reduced by 55%
- The real power losses are decreased by 3%.
- From the fig 3.3 it is found that the voltage profile is improved by 1.3%.

bus-10
bus-13
bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-18
bus-22
bus-15
bus-17
bus-24
bus-21
-60.000
-398.022
754.280
578.887
642.232
708.277
-20.000
-187.788
407.573
130.580
204.310
352.488

0.101
1.837
2.426
6.973
4.497
6.196
2.027
36.454
49.249
139.456
90.114
124.180
SYSTEM-GRID TOTALS
Total Generation :
Shunt (inductive) :
Total P - Q Load :

2683.68 MW

2620.00 MW
63.68 MW
1094.95 MVAR
-1042.09 MVAR
980.00 MVAR
-1059.96 MVAR
POWER


Fig 3. 3: Voltage profile of Newton and opf for 24-bus system

3.4 CONCLUSION
- As the number of buses increases the burden on the slack bus is decreasing, the real power
losses are found to be decreased.
- The real power losses are reduced by 2%.
- By using optimal power flow method the power generated was shared among all the
generating units optimally.

0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
V
o
l
t
a
g
e

P
r
o
f
i
l
e
Bus Number
Newton-Raphson Method
Optimal Power Flow Method
POWER


CHAPTER 4
GENERATION LOAD IMBALANCES
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Modern electric power systems are highly interconnected and heavily loaded. A severe emergency
state may occur as a result of insufficient generation to meet load demand. Quite simply, if one unit
is lost, spinning reserve prevents an excessive drop in system frequency. Spinning reserve either
represents a percentage of peak demand or is capable of making up the loss of the most heavily
loaded unit at a given period of time. The reserves must be allocated among fast-responding and
slow-responding units to allow the automatic generation control system to restore frequency and
interchange quickly in the event of the outage of generating unit. Load shedding is one of the
remedial actions to prevent area collapse, alleviate line overloads and voltage violations and relieve
system over-frequency or under-frequency. A large number of research papers are available on the
subject of corrective rescheduling of the generated power and load shedding by linear or non-linear
programs. In almost all the methods, the frequency was assumed to be constant.
4.1.2 DEVELOPMENTS IN LOAD SHEDDING TECHNIQUE
A policy of load shedding in power systems has been discussed by Hajdue (1968). Medicheria
(1979, 1981) and Chan (1979) proposed generation rescheduling or reallocation and load shedding to
alleviate line overloads. Application of under-frequency relays for automatic load shedding has been
studied by Lokay. Anoop Nanda has developed an under-voltage load shedding scheme based on
Lyapunovs energy methods where the derived energy function eliminates the need to calculate the
critical equilibrium points. A power flow model, load shedding and solution method including load
and generator characteristic with effects of system control devices have been presented by Okamura
(1975) and Palaniswamy (1985). El-Hawary (1990, 1985) and Venkataramona (1995) have studied
load models and their effects on power system performance. A real-time simulation of the network
components by Rafian (1987) used to provide more accurate results and a realistic operator training
environment. Under-frequency relays may be used to trip loads, in order to restore the balance
between loads and generation, or generation units for unit protection which is studied by Smaha
(1980).
This chapter presents an optimum load shedding algorithm for generation load
imbalances. The voltage and frequency characteristics of the loads are considered in this dynamic
study. The effects of the frequency deviation, as a result of power mismatch between generation and
load on load, and system components are reported. The effects of system average time constant,
speed drop factor, load reduction ratio, system inertia and load shedding on the system frequency are
studied. A simple proposed load distribution factor of load shedding is used during the iterative
process of this algorithm.

POWER


4.2 PROBLEM FORMULATION AND SOLUTION METHODOLOGY
The objective in this problem is to seek a minimum load shedding following the loss of generation in
order to supply the customers with minimum degradation of service for a given generation level. The
performance index or the objective function is
( )
2
*
i li li
C K S S =
i=1,..., NB (4.1)
Where NB is the number of system buses

i
K is the weighting factor depending on the demand priorities at bus i

*
li
S and
li
S are the final and initial apparent power of the load at bus i
This objective function is subjected to the following constraints and proposed conditions:
(1) Active and reactive power flow equations
( ) ( ) ( )
, cos sin
Gi li i i j ij i j ij i j
P P P v V V G B o o o o o
(
= = +

(4.2a)
( ) ( ) ( )
, sin cos
Gi li i i j ij i j ij i j
Q Q Q v V V G B o o o o o
(
= =

(4.2b)

Where
Gi
P ,
Gi
Q is active and reactive generation power.

li
P ,
li
Q are active and reactive load power.

i
P ,
i
Q are net injected active and reactive power at bus i
f is the frequency

i
V and
i
o are bus voltage magnitude and angle of bus i

ij
G and
ij
B are the real and imaginary parts of the bus admittance matrix.
(2) Generation constraints are specified by

min max min max
, ,
Gi Gi Gi Gi Gi Gi
P P P Q Q Q s s s s
i=1, NG (4.3)
where NG is the number of generation buses

min
Gi
P ,
max
Gi
P are the minimum and maximum generation active power limits.

min
Gi
Q ,
max
Gi
Q are the minimum and maximum generation reactive power limits.
(3) Bus voltage and line angle constraints are
POWER


min max
i i i
V V V s s ie NG
max
| |
i j ij
o o o s for all lines (4.4)
Where
max
ij
o is the maximum angle difference of line connected between bus i and bus j

min
i
V is minimum value of the voltage magnitude at load bus.

max
i
V is the maximum value of the voltage magnitude at load bus.
Now, assume a generator is partially or totally outage. The system frequency will vary due to the
imbalance between the system generation and loads.
The frequency variation in turn will change;
(1) The generation at the remaining generators according to their speed regulation constants and
plant reserve and
(2) The loads according to load reduction ratio. The resulting instantaneous operating conditions give
rise to an emergency state. Then, all control and corrective remedial actions are integrated to resume
the normal state of the system and minimize the duration period of this emergency state. Therefore,
the previous problem formulation is adapted to handle voltage and frequency characteristics of the
loads to consider the effect of frequency variation and generator control effects.
4.3 GENERATOR MODEL
The use of digital telemetry is becoming common-place in modern automatic generation control
schemes wherein supervisory control (opening and closing sub-station breakers), telemetry
information (measurements of MW, MVAR, MVA, voltage, etc.) and control information (unit raise
lower) are sent via the same channels. The new desired output MW,
des
Gi
P , during the disturbance for
unit i can be expressed as follows;

( ) ( )
/
des base
Gi Gi i
P t P f t R = A
(4.5)
Where
base
Gi
P is the base point (reference) generation for unit i

i
R is the speed regulation factor for unit i
f (t) is the system frequency deviation at any time t.
4.4 LOAD MODEL
Most mathematical load models (constant power and or constant current and or constant impedance)
now used in power flow, security analysis, system control and transient stability studies do not
represent actual load characteristics because collection of real data is not an easy task. Better
formulations can predict and give power system performance more accurately and bring
improvements in transmission system planning and utilization. The load at any bus is a composite of
POWER


lighting, resistance heating, arc furnaces, dc converters, and motors of various sizes and types. The
load model in this chapter is

2
1
z I p p
li loi p i p i p F Lshedi
P P K V K V K K f P
( (
= + + + A

(4.6a)

2
1
z I p q
li loi q i q i q F Lshedi
Q Q K V K V K K f Q
( (
= + + + A

(4.6b)
Where
loi
P ,
loi
Q are the case active and reactive load power at bus i

Lshedi
P ,
Lshedi
Q are the active and reactive load shedding at bus i
f is the frequency deviation

p
F
K
,
q
F
K
are the active and reactive frequency sensitivity factors,
z
p
K ,
I
p
K
,
p
p
K ,
z
q
K ,
I
q
K ,
p
q
K are the active and reactive voltage sensitivity factors (constant
impedance, constant current and constant power).
4.5 TRANSMISSION LINES AND TRANSFORMER MODEL
Transmission lines are represented using a model where the series impedance of the line connected
between bus i and bus j is
ij ij
r jX + and the shunt admittance at bus i is
pi
Y . At frequency f the line
parameters in p.u. (f = 1 p.u) are
( ) ( )
0 0
1 , 1
ij ij pi pi
X X f Y Y f = +A = +A
(4.7)
For a transformer k connected between bus i and bus j with tap changing turns ratio
k
t , phase shifting
k
u , winding resistance
k
r and winding reactance
k
X , the model is as follows referred to the bus i:
With tap changing only
( )
2
, ,
1/
ii k k jj k ij ji k k
k k k k k
y t y y y y y t y
y G jB r jX
= = = =
= = +
(4.8)
With phase shifter
ii k jj
y y y = =

( )
( )
cos sin cos sin
cos sin cos sin
ij k k k k k k k k
ji k k k k k k k k
y G B j B G
y G B j B G
| | | |
| | | |
= +
= +
(4.9a)
With tap changing and phase shifter
2
, ,
ii k jj k
y t y y y = =
POWER


( )
( )
' '' ' ''
' '' ' ''
' ''
,
,
cos , sin
ij k k k k k k k k
ji k k k k k k k k
k k k k k k
y G t B t j B t G t
y G t B t j B t G t
t t t t | |
= +
= +
= =
(4.9b)
4.6 LOAD SHEDDING DISTRIBUTION
For load shedding ( )
k
D Lshed
P P A of the total demand at iteration k, the load shedding at
35
each bus
k
li
P A is given by

,
k k
li Li D
new k
li li li
P P
P P P
o A = A
= A
i=1,,NB (4.10)
where
Li
o are proposed load distribution factors and defined by
Li
o = /
li li
P P
, i = 1,, NB and
li
o
= 1.
The new value of the load reactive power is given by /
new new
li li li li
Q P Q P = assuming the power factor
is fixed.
4.7ADVANTAGES OF LOAD SHEDDING
Load Shedding is a process of curtailment of load on power system to avoid collapse of the
system. The advantages of load curtailment are:
- Avoids total system collapse.
- The consumers affected by supply outage are minimum.

POWER


4.8 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table4.1 When 3- bus system is overloaded.

1 bus-1 PQbus 0.955 -4.25 0.0 0.0 2.4 2.8 0.0
2 bus-2 PVbus 1.010 -1.53 35.0 33.9 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 bus-3 slack 1.050 0.00 205.0 290.5 0.0 0.0 0.0

bus-2 bus-1 91.522 113.9498 0.0000 10.4700
bus-3 bus-1 148.478 205.7093 0.0000 29.1891
bus-3

bus-2

56.522 84.7533 0.0000

4.7065

POWER


Table4.2: After load shedding at bus-1 by 25 %( 60MW) on 3-bus system

- If a bus system get over loaded the voltage profile violates the limits, so to make the voltage
profile within limits load curtailment is to be performed.
- For 3-bus system the voltage at bus-3 is reduced to 0.95, so as to maintain the voltage profile
60MW of load is to be curtailed at bus-3

1 bus-1 PQbus 1.022 -2.92 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.3 0.0
2 bus-2 PVbus 1.010 -0.96 35.0 -102.9 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 bus-3 slack 1.050 0.00 145.0 146.6 0.0 0.0 0.0
bus-2 bus-1 70.608 -22.3868 0.0000 2.6893
bus-3 bus-1 109.392 62.2611 0.0000 7.1851
bus-3 bus-2 35.608 84.2989 0.0000 3.7978

POWER


Table4.3: When 5- bus system is overloaded.
1
2
3
4
5
Bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
slack
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
1.060
1.000
0.961
0.951
0.879
0.00
-3.81
-7.12
-7.91
-7.84
200.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
84.2
43.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0000
0.0000
0.4500
0.8000
0.8000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1500
0.0500
0.9000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
bus-2
bus-3
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
bus-4
bus-5
bus-1
bus-1
bus-2
bus-2
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
-134.410
-58.293
-33.804
-41.381
-72.444
-46.829
-7.556
-54.2975
-19.3585
-10.6704
-12.6078
-64.1120
-16.0523
-25.8879
4.1395
3.1976
0.7935
1.2137
4.7736
0.2679
0.6541
6.0477
4.4764
-1.4652
-0.1672
11.6629
-1.0233
-2.2278

Total Generation :
Shunt (inductive) :
Total P - Q Load :

220.04 MW

205.00 MW
15.04 MW

127.30 MVAR
0.00 MVAR
110.00 MVAR
17.30 MVAR

POWER


Table 4.4: After load shedding of 40MW at bus-4 and 20MW at bus-5 for 5-bus system.

GENERATION

LOAD

SHUNT
1
2
3
4
5
Bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5

slack
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
1.060
1.000
0.987
0.984
0.972
0.00
-2.06
-4.64
-4.96
-5.76
131.1
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
90.8
-71.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0000
0.0000
0.4500
0.4000
0.6000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1500
0.0500
0.1000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000

bus-2
bus-3
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
bus-4
bus-5
bus-1
bus-1
bus-2
bus-2
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
-86.840
-40.271
-24.112
-27.250
-53.439
-19.343
-6.553
-72.9105
-17.5109
-0.3493
-0.8277
-4.8241
-4.6884
-5.1703
2.4857
1.5176
0.3595
0.4608
1.2147
0.0401
0.0431
1.0864
-0.6928
-2.8709
-2.5547
0.7278
-1.8230
-4.6526

Total Generation :
Shunt (inductive) :
Total P - Q Load :

151.11 MW

145.00 MW
6.12 MW

19.21 MVAR
0.00 MVAR
30.00 MVAR
-10.78 MVAR

POWER


- From table 4.3 it is inferred that the voltage at bus-4 and bus-5 is less than 0.96, so 40MW at
bus-4 and 20MW at bus-5 are curtailed.
- By this load shedding the voltage profile maintained within the limits

POWER


Bus

Name

Type

V

delta

MW

MVAR

MW

MVAR

MVAR

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
bus-6
bus-7
bus-8
bus-9
bus-10
bus-11
bus-12
bus-13
bus-14
bus-15
bus-16
bus-17
bus-18
bus-19
bus-20
bus-21
bus-22
bus-23
bus-24
slack
PVbus
PVbus
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.808
0.795
0.781
0.744
0.816
0.701
0.922
0.896
0.740
0.798
0.951
0.882
0.955
0.787
0.844
0.838
0.909
0.793
0.862
0.921
0.00
-17.83
-15.25
-27.62
-25.98
-43.26
-43.18
-45.48
-34.73
-46.69
-25.60
-29.19
-45.91
-40.39
-7.51
-19.07
-21.50
-35.82
-38.47
-37.57
-33.84
-40.74
-30.82
-19.33
1893.3
160.0
350.0
520.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
755.3
111.3
392.8
458.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.3
2.8
3.2
1.8
1.2
2.6
0.0
0.0
4.5
0.0
7.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
0.9
1.1
0.7
0.4
0.8
0.0
0.0
1.8
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-48.6
-36.4
0.0
-28.9
-82.1
-35.3
-41.3
-63.5
-129.3
-95.4
0.0
-64.5
-67.4
-240.8
POWER


Table4.5 When 24- bus system is overloaded.
Name

Name

MW

MVAR

MW

MVAR

bus-23
bus-18
bus-12
bus-17
bus-14
bus-24
bus-18
bus-23
bus-20
bus-16
bus-16
bus-24
bus-19
bus-19
bus-20
bus-8
bus-5
bus-6
bus-7
bus-8
bus-9
bus-10
bus-13
bus-22
bus-22
bus-11
bus-11
bus-12
bus-17
bus-24
bus-24
bus-23
bus-15
bus-24
bus-15
bus-21
bus-22
bus-21
bus-13
bus-16
bus-19
bus-20
bus-14
bus-23
bus-18
bus-22
257.928
88.140
-215.141
218.118
-210.809
59.308
-351.118
-556.960
-176.810
-434.694
1.449
-642.879
-364.310
82.954
-145.047
29.662
-430.00
-280.00
-320.00
-209.66
-120.00
-260.00
-420.40
74.9175
-61.3606
-97.1439
51.2052
-134.7518
-126.9106
-141.8067
-182.3175
-63.3072
-111.5874
-158.7623
-99.4397
-328.1871
81.7339
-179.3510
12.9175
-170.00
-90.00
-110.00
-82.92
-40.00
-80.00
-161.60
4.7175
0.7544
1.2661
1.7110
4.3324
0.4375
12.1150
11.5405
1.7460
9.2633
0.5445
12.7404
4.0886
0.8123
1.7934
0.0643
3.25
1.36
1.86
1.15
0.48
2.98
2.34
-35.0308
--90.1960
-37.6275
-56.9268
-74.0313
-123.1953
11.3866
-119.6538
-72.7837
8.4212
-51.1314
-124.6345
-93.8333
-51.8849
-50.2689
-5.4865
65.04
27.17
37.23
22.94
9.53
59.69
46.35
POWER


bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-15
bus-17
bus-24
bus-21
1893.29
160.00
350.00
520.00
755.28
111.30
392.84
458.86
13.71
0.75
2.74
4.76
278.38
15.04
54.92
95.42


POWER


Table4.6: After load shedding of 200MW at bus-10 for 24-bus system.
Bus

Name

Type

V

delta

MW

MVAR

MW

MVAR

MVAR

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
bus-6
bus-7
bus-8
bus-9
bus-10
bus-11
bus-12
bus-13
bus-14
bus-15
bus-16
bus-17
bus-18
bus-19
bus-20
bus-21
bus-22
bus-23
slack
PVbus
PVbus
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.844
0.844
0.829
0.825
0.876
0.880
0.968
0.953
0.821
0.877
0.966
0.917
0.984
0.913
0.892
0.884
0.939
0.873
0.921
0.00
-12.62
-10.91
-19.10
-22.16
-33.57
-34.22
-35.26
-27.43
-25.58
-19.76
-22.72
-35.36
-31.45
-6.49
-15.80
-16.27
-23.87
-29.30
-29.22
-25.22
-30.94
-24.02
1655.9
160.0
350.0
520.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
523.5
36.8
198.2
307.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.3
2.8
3.2
1.8
1.2
0.6
0.0
0.0
4.5
0.0
7.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
0.9
1.1
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.8
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-53.5
-41.2
0.0
-34.9
-84.6
-38.1
-43.9
-85.5
-144.5
-106.4
0.0
-78.0
-77.0
POWER


24 bus-24 PQbus 0.960 -14.95 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -261.4

Name

Name

MW

MVAR

MW

MVAR

bus-23
bus-18
bus-12
bus-17
bus-14
bus-24
bus-18
bus-23
bus-20
bus-16
bus-16
bus-24
bus-19
bus-19
bus-20
bus-8
bus-5
bus-6
bus-7
bus-8
bus-22
bus-22
bus-11
bus-11
bus-12
bus-17
bus-24
bus-24
bus-23
bus-15
bus-24
bus-15
bus-21
bus-22
bus-21
bus-13
bus-16
bus-19
bus-20
bus-14
210.935
169.098
-195.330
197.368
-192.378
38.103
-229.200
-489.071
-156.393
-368.789
-64.182
-484.255
-346.752
65.550
-165.255
11.572
-430.00
-280.00
-320.00
-191.57
33.0442
-10.0289
-65.0926
1.0195
-136.2234
-116.3538
-97.4833
-167.4229
-99.3193
-93.6954
-173.9701
-76.0130
-266.9147
8.3169
-150.0760
15.1848
-170.00
-90.00
-110.00
-85.18
2.6395
2.2364
0.8599
1.1778
2.9519
0.2018
3.6518
7.7162
1.3291
6.1232
0.7290
6.7514
2.8602
0.2298
1.5220
0.0225
2.97
1.20
1.65
0.81
-73.2578
-102.3059
-48.8408
-68.7230
-112.3103
-135.1601
-100.7803
-187.1462
-90.1636
-29.5282
-53.9007
-203.3029
-122.2094
-69.1407
-60.1173
-7.0383
59.53
24.10
33.04
16.13
POWER



From table 4.5 it is observed that the voltage at buses 8, 10 and 13 violated the limits. By shedding a
load of 200MW at bus-10, the profile is improved and voltage constraints are satisfied.
4.7 CONCLUSION
- To improve the voltage profile for 3, 5 and 24 bus systems load shedding is performed. The load
curtailed for 3-bus system is 25% of the total load, while for 5-bus it is 29% and for 24-bus
system it is 7%.
- By this method the load has been curtailed to satisfy the voltage constraints. The consumers
affected by supply outage are reduced.

bus-9
bus-10
bus-13
bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-23
bus-18
bus-22
bus-15
bus-17
bus-24
bus-21
-120.00
-60.00
-438.45
1655.87
160.00
350.00
520.00
-40.00
-20.00
-157.78
523.53
36.82
198.20
307.01
0.41
0.10
2.03
9.95
0.53
1.60
3.61
8.27
2.05
40.23
202.07
10.67
32.10
72.35
POWER


CHAPTER 5
IMPACT OF FACTS DEVICES

5.1 INTRODUCTION:
Flexible AC Transmission System (FACTS) is a concept proposed by Hingorani that involves
the application of high power electronic controllers in AC transmission networks which enable fast
and reliable control of power flows and voltages. FACTS do not indicate a particular controller but a
host of controllers which the system planner can choose, based on cost benefit analysis. Flexible AC
Transmission Systems, called FACTS, got in the recent years a well-known term for higher
controllability in power systems by means of power electronic devices. Several FACTS-devices have
been introduced for various applications Worldwide. The usage of lines for active power
transmission should be ideally up to the thermal limits.
Voltage and stability limits shall be shifted with the means of the several different FACTS
devices. It can be seen that with growing line length, the opportunity for FACTS devices gets more
and more important. The influence of FACTS-devices is achieved through switched or controlled
shunt compensation, series compensation or phase shift control. The advent of FACTS devices has
given a system operator additional leverage to control a power system. In this context, analytical
tools to study steady state and transient behavior have to be augmented to incorporate these devices.
This will enable planners to decide the size, location, and nature of FACTS devices, and enable
operators to schedule power flows appropriately. A new formulation for load flow studies is
proposed for series FACTS devices. The formulation uses dual variables and specifications for series
connected devices in much the same way as for a conventional load flow study. The dual state
variables (current magnitude and its angle) and dual control variables (series injected real power and
voltage in quadrature with line current) can be related to device limits and line loading.
FACTS are classified into various types:
1 Static VAR compensator(SVC)
2 Thyristor control series capacitor(TCSC)
3 Thyristor control phase angle regulator(TCPAR)
4 Static condenser(STATCON)
5 Static synchronous series compensator(SSSC)
6 Unified power flow controller(UPFC)

POWER


Table 5.1: Over voltage protection of FACTS devices
Functions FACTS and Other Devices
Voltage Control Power Plants (Exciter Control) Conventional Transformer
Tap Changer Conventional Shunt Capacitor/Reactor
Synchronous Condenser
SVC, STATCON ,UPFC
Power Flow Control

Power Plants (Generation Control)
Conventional Phase Angle Regulator
Conventional Switched Series Capacitors
TCSC, TCPAR,UPFC

Transient Stability

Conventional Series Capacitor
SVC, STATCON, TCSC, TCPAR
UPFC
Conventional controls like -
Braking Resistors, Excitation Enhancement
Generation Tripping, Fast Valving
Line Sectioning
Dynamic Stability

Power System Stabilizer
TCSC, SVC, STATCON, UPFC, TCPAR

POWER


APPLICATIONS OF FACTS DEVICES
1 power flow control,
2 increase of transmission capability,
3 voltage control,
4 reactive power compensation,
5 stability improvement,
6 power quality improvement,
7 power conditioning,
8 flicker mitigation,
9 Interconnection of renewable and distributed generation and storages

ADVANTAGES OF FACTS
1 Avoid cost intensive or landscape requiring extensions of power systems, for instance like
upgrades or additions of substations and power lines.
2 FACTS-devices provide a better adaptation to varying operational conditions and improve
the usage of existing installations.
3 Regulation of power flows in prescribed transmission routes.
4 Secure loading of lines nearer their thermal limits.
5 Prevention of cascading outages by contributing to emergency control.
6 Damping of oscillations, this can threaten security or limit the usable line capacity

5.2 STATIC VAR COMPENSATION:
Among the FACTS devices, the Static VAR compensator is a versatile device that controls the
reactive power injection at a bus using power electronic switching components. The reactive source
is usually a combination of reactors and capacitors.
SVC state variables are combined with the nodal voltage magnitudes and angles of the network in a
single frame of reference for unified, iterative solutions using the Newton-Raphson method.

POWER


5.2.1Circuit representation of SVC
SVC is shunt compensation component when it is installed in the transmission lines, it can be
treated as PV bus with the generation of real power as zero. A capacitance is placed in parallel
between any line and ground. The model is shown between i and j

Fig; 5.1 Model of SVC
5.2.2 Mathematical model of static VAR compensation Model
The SVC is taken to be a continuous, variable Susceptance, which is adjusted in order to achieve a
specified voltage magnitude while satisfying constraint conditions. SVC total susceptance model
shown in Fig.5.1 represents a changing susceptance
s vc
B
represents the fundamental frequency
equivalent susceptance of all shunt modules making up the SVC. This model is an improved version
of SVC models.
5.2.3 Representation of SVC Model
The SVC characteristic is represented by connecting the generator to a dummy bus coupled to the
high voltage node via an inductive reactance whose value on the SVC base, is equal to the per unit
slope [5]. The dummy bus is represented as a PV-type node whereas the high voltage node is
represented as a PQ-type node.
For operation outside limits, the generator representation is no longer valid. In such cases,
CIGRE recommends changing the SVC representation to a fixed reactive susceptance.
The combined model yields a different number of nodes. The generator uses two or three nodes [5]
whereas the fixed susceptance uses only one node. It must be remarked that for operation outside
limits, it is important to model the SVC as a susceptance and not as a generator. Ignoring this point
will lead to inaccurate results. The reason is that the amount of reactive power drawn by the SVC is
given by the product of the fixed susceptance
fixed
B
, and the nodal voltage magnitude.
k
V
. Since
k
V

is a function of network operating conditions, the amount of reactive power drawn by the fixed
susceptance model may differ from the reactive power drawn by the generator model, i.e.
POWER


2
k fixed violated
V B Q =

The SVC model presented above, based on the generator and fixed susceptance representations, and
is better handled as a susceptance model only. It takes the form of
1 Variable susceptance model when the svc is operating with in the limits and
2 Fixed susceptance model when the limits are violated.

5.2.4 Incorporation of SVC Model
The variable susceptance model and its equivalent circuit is shown in Fig 5.2 SVC can be
represented as an adjustable reactance.

Fig 5.2 Representation of Variable shunt Susceptance
In general, the transfer admittance equation for the variable shunt compensator is

k
jBV I =
(5.1)
and the reactive power equation is

B V Q
k k
2
=
(5.2)
The linearized equation of the SVC is given by the following equation where the total susceptance
SVC
B is taken to be the state variable.
i
svc svc
k
i
k
i
k
k
B B
Q Q
P
(
(
A
A
(
=
(
A
A
/
0
0 0
u

(5.3)
at the end of iteration i, the variable shunt susceptance
SVC
B updated according to the equation (2.4)
given below;
POWER


svc
i
i
svc
svc
svc
i
svc
i
B
B
B
B B
|
|
.
|
\
| A
+ =
+1
(5.4)
Based on the equivalent circuit of SVC (susceptance model) in Figure 2.1, the power flow equations
are given below.
The current drawn by the SVC is
k svc svc
V jB I =
(5.5)
Reactive power drawn by the SVC, which is also reactive power injected at bus k, is
SVC k k svc
B V Q Q
2
= =
(5.6)

5.2.5 SVC Jacobian Equations
The SVC linearized power equations are combined with linearized system of equations
corresponding to the rest of the network
| | | | | | X J x F A = ) (
(5.7)
Where,
| | | |
T
m k m k
Q Q P P x F A A A A = ) (
(5.8)
P
k ,
k
Q A
are the power mismatch equations, and superscript T indicates transposition.
[X] is the solution vector
[J] is the Jacobian matrix

For the case when SVC susceptance necessary to maintain the nodal voltage magnitude at the
specified value.
| | | |
T
m k m k
V V X A A A A = A u u
(5.9)
The modified Jacobian matrix is given as
POWER


| |
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
=
m
m
k
m
m
m
k
m
m
k
k
k
m
k
k
k
m
m
k
m
m
m
k
m
m
k
k
k
m
k
k
k
V
Q
V
Q Q Q
V
Q
V
Q Q Q
V
P
V
P P P
V
P
V
P P P
J
u u
u u
u u
u u
(5.10)
In this case,
k
V
is maintained constant at 1 pu. The Jacobian terms in (5.10)
5.2.6 Results of 5-bus system

Fig 5.3: 5-bus system
Table 5.2: Results for 5-bus system with SVC using Newton method
1 bus-1 slack 1.060 0.00 131.1 85.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
2 bus-2 PVbus 1.000 -2.05 20.0 -87.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 bus-3 PQbus 1.000 -4.84 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.0
4 bus-4 PQbus 0.994 -5.11 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.0
5 bus-5 PQbus 0.975 -5.80 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.0

POWER



bus-2

bus-1

-86.629

-72.9892

2.4806

1.0711
bus-3 bus-1 -40.552 -12.4091 1.3941 -1.1266
bus-3 bus-2 -24.094 6.6872 0.3936 -2.8192
bus-4 bus-2 -27.183 4.7681 0.4760 -2.5497
bus-5 bus-2 -53.288 -2.0891 1.1946 0.6572
bus-4 bus-3 -19.592 -13.0204 0.0535 -1.8284
bus-5 bus-4 -6.712 -7.9109 0.0637 -4.6586


Total Generation

151.06 MW

-1.72 MVAR
Total P - Q Load 145.00MW 30.00 MVAR
Total Power Losses 6.06MW -11.25 MVAR

Table5.3: Comparison of Power flow solution with and without SVC in Newton

Total
P gen
(MW)
Total
Q gen
(MVAR)
Total
P loss
(MW)
Without
SVC

151.11

19.21

6.12
With
SVC
151.0 -1.72 6.01
POWER


Fig 5.4: Voltage profile with and without SVC for 5-bus system
- For 5-bus system there are three PQ buses and two PV buses. The voltage increased from
0.958V to 0.987V at bus-3.
- The power losses is decreased from 6.12MW to 6.10MW
- From table 5.3 the total real power generation is reduced from 151.11MW to 151.0MW
because of decrease in total power losses.

0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
without SVC
with SVC
voltage
profile
bus number
POWER


Table5.4: Results for 24-bus system with SVC using Newton method

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
bus-6
bus-7
bus-8
bus-9
bus-10
bus-11
bus-12
bus-13
bus-14
bus-15
bus-16
bus-17
bus-18
bus-19
bus-20
bus-21
bus-22
slack
PVbus
PVbus
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
1.060
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.898
0.918
0.886
0.993
0.942
0.938
1.030
1.039
1.000
1.026
1.024
0.968
1.021
0.972
0.966
0.940
0.982
1.003
0.00
-12.49
-9.29
-21.54
-19.72
-35.34
-34.65
-36.37
-27.50
-37.66
-20.33
-23.70
-37.07
-32.83
-5.76
-14.06
-16.11
-36.15
-31.72
-30.24
-27.52
-34.19
1654.1
160.0
350.0
520.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
576.9
-54.7
-0.6
93.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.3
2.8
3.2
1.8
1.2
0.6
0.0
0.0
4.5
0.0
7.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
0.9
1.1
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.8
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-60.7
-48.9
0.0
-47.7
-95.0
-42.5
-47.2
-96.8
-169.1
-120.1
0.0
-103.2
POWER


23
24

bus-23
bus-24

PQbus
PQbus

0.987
0.999

-24.54
-13.28

0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0
-88.3
-283.4

Table 5.5: Comparison of Power flow solutions with and without SVC in Newton

SYSTEM-GRID TOTALS

Total Generation :
Shunt (inductive) :
Total P - Q Load :

2684.06 MW

2620.00 MW
64.06 MW

614.98 MVAR
-1203.00 MVAR
980.00 MVAR
-784.08 MVAR

Total
P gen
(MW)
Total
Q gen
(MVAR)
Total
P loss
(MW)
Without
SVC

2685.87

1065.56

65.87
With
SVC
2684.06 614.98 64.06
POWER


Fig 5. 5: Voltage profile with and without SVC of Newton Raphson method for 24-bus
- For 24 bus system there are four PV buses and 20 PQ buses. The voltage profile is increased
from 0.844V to 0.898V at bus-5
- The total power loses are reduced from 65.87MW to 64.06MW.
- From the table 5.2 the total power generation is reduced from 2568.7MW to 2685MW.

Table5.6: Results for 5-bus system with SVC using New Power Flow method
GENERATION LOAD
Bus Name Type V Delta MW MVAR MW MVAR
1
2
3
4
5
Bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5

slack
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.994
0.975
0.000
-5.009
-9.963
-9.802
-9.333
108.98
18.16
0.00
0.00
0.00
-9.80
-1.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
45.01
40.01
60.01
0.00
0.00
15.00
5.00
10.00
Forward Power Flow Reverse Power Flow Power Losses
SB EB MW MVAR MW MVAR MW MVAR
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
newton method
SVC
voltage
profile
bus number
POWER


1
2
2
2
3
4
2
3
4
5
4
5
132.88
43.80
43.10
62.16
-2.44
-0.55
-40.93
-14.53
-11.14
1.25
19.59
5.79
-129.06
-42.56
-41.93
-60.61
2.49
0.61
46.38
14.26
10.66
0.47
-21.45
-10.47
3.82
1.25
1.16
1.55
0.04
0.06
5.46
-0.26
-0.48
1.72
-1.86
-4.68

Total Generation :
Shunt (inductive) :
Total P - Q Load :

138.457MW

145.0254 MW
-7.8757 MW

-11.6066 MVAR
0.00 MVAR
30.00 MVAR
-0.1075 MVAR

Table 5.7: Comparison of Power flow solutions with and without SVC in NPF 5-bus

Total
P gen
(MW)
Total
Q gen
(MVAR)
Total
P loss
(MW)
Without
SVC
140.0009 -11.6066 -5.3123
With
SVC
138.457 -11.6066 -7.8757
POWER


Fig 5. 6: Voltage profile with and without SVC for 5-bus system.
- New power flow method with SVC for 5-bus system in NPF method by incorporating SVC
the total real power generation is reduced to 138.457MW
- The reactive power generation remains constant and the total power losses reduced to -
7.857MW.
- The fig 5.6 shows the voltage profile of NPF method for 5-bus system with and without SVC.

0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 1 2 3 4 5
NPF without SVC
NPF with SVC
voltage
profile
bus number
POWER


Table5.8: Results for 24-bus system with SVC using new power flow method
GENERATION LOAD
Bus Name Type V delta MW MVAR MW MVAR
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
bus-6
bus-7
bus-8
bus-9
bus-10
bus-11
bus-12
bus-13
bus-14
bus-15
bus-16
bus-17
bus-18
bus-19
bus-20
bus-21
bus-22
bus-23
slack
PVbus
PVbus
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.870
0.922
0.891
0.995
0.949
0.967
1.036
1.046
1.000
1.032
0.974
0.941
1.022
1.001
0.970
0.945
0.985
1.009
0.993
0.000
-12.276
-10.595
-17.428
-21.410
-30.677
-31.474
-31.654
-25.738
-24.189
-19.212
-21.848
-31.843
-28.900
-6.427
-15.401
-15.896
-22.768
-27.088
-27.119
-23.396
-28.613
-22.818
1644.83
158.93
347.67
526.53
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
513.71
35.20
194.79
302.16
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
430.01
280.00
320.00
180.00
120.00
60.00
0.00
0.00
450.01
0.00
780.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
170.00
90.00
110.00
70.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
0.00
180.00
0.00
300.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
POWER


24 bus-24

PQbus 0.991 -14.590 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Table 5.9: Comparison of Power flow solutions with and without SVC in NPF 24-bus


Total Generation :
Shunt (inductive) :
Total P - Q Load :
2677.9703 MW

2620.0333 MW
57.1593 MW
1045.8640 MVAR
1200.3586 MVAR
980.0000 MVAR
-158.4444 MVAR

Total
P gen
(MW)
Total
Q gen
(MVAR)
Total
P loss
(MW)
Without
SVC
2685.8702 1062.3602 65.8720
With
SVC
2677.9703 1045.8640 57.1593
POWER


Figure 5.7: Comparison of voltage profiles with and without SVC (at 13),
- In NPF method by incorporating SVC the total real power generation is reduced to
2677.97MW
- The reactive power generation decreased to 1045.864MVAR and the total power losses are
reduced to 65.870MW.
- The fig 5.7 shows the voltage profile of NPF method for 5-bus system with and without SVC

Fig 5.8: Voltage profiles for 24- Bus system without SVC

POWER


Fig 5.9: Voltage Profiles of buses 24 Bus System including SVC.
5.2.8 Advantages of SVC
1. It improves the voltage stability in the power system.
2. We can also expand the use of SVC for reduction of load curtailments.
5.3Thyristor control series capacitor:
The primary uses of TCSC are to enhance the power system angle stability and to mitigate
the sub-synchronous resonance by regulating real power and maximizing transient synchronizing
torque between the interconnected power systems. In conventional load curtailment problem, the
objective is to minimize the total amount of load curtailment; the constraints are the system security
constraints. The control variables are the real and reactive power generation of each generation bus,
real and reactive load at each load bus. TCSC is a series compensation component. With the firing
control of the thyristors, it can change its apparent reactance smoothly and rapidly.
5.3.1 The model of TCSC for flow control:

Fig5.7: TCSC model:
POWER


When TCSC is installed in the system, there will be one more control variables to be added in which
is the reactance of TCSC.
Through the control of the reactance of TCSC, the power flow distribution of the system may be
changed. When TCSC is installed in a branch, the power flow of the entire system may be changed
as a result of the apparent impedance change of that transmission line. Accordingly, it can reduce the
amount of load curtailment, which will in turn reduce the cost associated with load curtailment
5.3.2 Mathematical model of TCSC:
Objective:
1
min _
n
i
i
L CUT
=

( ) ( ) ( )
1
| || | cos sin 0
n
gi li i j ij TCSC ij ij TCSC ij
j
P P U U G X B X o o
=
+ =
(5.11)
( ) ( ) ( )
1
| || | sin cos 0
n
gi li i j ij TCSC ij ij TCSC ij
j
Q Q U U G X B X o o
=
=
(5.12)
/ /
li lireq li lireq
P P Q Q = (5.13)
0
li lireq
P P s s (5.14)
0
li lireq
Q Q s s (5.15)
min max
| | | | | |
i i i
U U U s s (5.16)
min max gi gi gi
P P P s s (5.17)
min max gi gi gi
Q Q Q s s (5.18)
min max SVC SVC SVC
Q Q Q s s (5.19)
2 2 2
max ij ij ij
P Q S + s (5.20)
m
0.5 0.5
mn TCSC n
X X X s s (5.21)
0
SVC
P = (5.22)
Where:
_
i
L CUT =
lireq
P -
li
P ;
lireq
P is the real load demand at bus i;
POWER


li
P is the actual real load supply at bus i;
n is bus number of the system;
gi
P is the real power generation at bus i;
gi
Q is the reactive power generation at bus i;
lireq
Q is the reactive load demand at bus i;
li
Q is the actual reactive load supply at bus i;
| |
i
U is the voltage magnitude at bus i;
| |
j
U is the voltage magnitude at bus j;
TCSC
X is the reactance of TCSC;
( )
ij TCSC
G X is the real part of element of the bus admittance matrix, which may function
of the reactance of TCSC
( )
ij TCSC
B X is the real part of element of the bus admittance matrix, which may function
of the reactance of TCSC
ij
o is the angle difference between the voltage at bus i and that at bus j;

min gi
P ,
max gi
P are the minimum/maximum real power generation at generation bus i;
min gi
Q ,
max gi
Q are the minimum/maximum reactive power generation at generation bus i;
min SVC
Q
,
max SVC
Q are the minimum/maximum reactive power generation of SVC;
SVC
P is the real power generation of SVC;
min
| |
i
U ,
max
| |
i
U are the minimum/maximum voltage magnitude at bus i ;

ij
P ,
ij
Q are the real /reactive power flow through transmission line ij;
max ij
S is the maximum apparent power flow allowed in line ij;
mn
X is the reactance of the line where TCSC has been installed,

POWER


The following table shows the results when TCSC is placed at different locations for 3,5 and 24-bus
system
Table 5.6: Results for 3-bus system, Tcsc placed at three locations



OBSERVATIONS FROM THE RESULTS
Line No. 1 2 3
Total P gen(MW) 180.00 180.00 180.00
Total Q gen(MVAR) 42.66 40.71 46.51
Total Q loss(MVAR) 12.67 10.71 16.51
Line No. 1 6 7
Total P gen(MW) 154.04 151.12 151.13
Total Q gen(MVAR) 19.68 19.15 19.15
Total P loss(MW) 9.05 6.13 6.14
Line No. 1 6 13
Total P gen(MW) 2685.52 2684.87 2684.78
Total Q gen(MVAR) 1027.87 1020.58 1022.91
Total P loss(MW) 65.52 64.87 64.78
POWER


- From table 5.6 it is inferred that the real power losses are zero, so considering reactive power
losses these are very less when TCSC is placed in line-2.
- From table 5.7 it is observed that the real power losses are less when TCSC is placed in line-
6.
- From table 5.8 it is observed that the real power losses are less when TCSC is placed in line-
13.

Fig5.8: Voltage profile by incorporating TCSC in 5-bus system

Table5.9: TCSC is incorporated in line 1 for 3-bus system
POWER


1 bus-1 PQbus 1.018 -2.54 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.3 0.0
2 bus-2 PVbus 1.010 -1.36 35.0 -111.4 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 bus-3 slack 1.050 0.00 145.0 154.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

bus-2 bus-1 85.179 -31.1683 0.0000 2.0162
bus-3 bus-1 94.824 69.4443 0.0000 6.2649
bus-3

bus-2

50.177

84.5936 0.0000

4.3872

1 bus-1 PQbus 1.031 -1.73 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.3 0.0
2 bus-2 PVbus 1.010 -0.38 35.0 -123.4 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 bus-3 slack 1.050 0.00 145.0 164.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
POWER


66


bus-2 bus-1 49.105 -42.6609 0.0000 2.0739
bus-3 bus-1 130.895 80.0739 0.0000 5.3391
bus-3

bus-2

14.105

84.0469 0.0000

3.2938

Total Power Losses : 0.00 MW 10.71MVAR
POWER


1 bus-1 PQbus 1.022 -2.73 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.3 0.0
2 bus-2 PVbus 1.010 -0.58 35.0 -183.6 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 bus-3 slack 1.050 0.00 145.0 230.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

bus-2 bus-1 77.678 -22.1801 0.0000 3.1986
bus-3 bus-1 102.322 61.8625 0.0000 6.4838
bus-3

bus-2

42.678

168.2147 0.0000

6.8294

Total Power Losses : 0.00 MW 16.51MVAR
POWER


Table5.12: TCSC incorporated in line 1 for 5-bus system

1

bus-1

slack

1.060

0.00

134.0

159.7

0.0

0.0

0.0
2 bus-2 PVbus 1.000 -0.10 20.0 -140.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 bus-3 PQbus 0.987 -3.20 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.0
4 bus-4 PQbus 0.984 -3.42 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.0
5 bus-5 PQbus 0.972 -3.95 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.0

bus-2 bus-1 -96.771 -138.4799 5.5439 1.9450
bus-3 bus-1 -30.664 -21.3723 1.0655 -2.0502
bus-3 bus-2 -28.488 1.4812 0.5066 -2.4304
bus-4 bus-2 -30.737 0.6234 0.5892 -2.1701
bus-5 bus-2 -55.154 -4.1571 1.2920 0.9597
bus-4 bus-3 -14.129 -6.7662 0.0241 -1.8717
bus-5 bus-4 -4.838 -5.8369 0.0301 -4.6921


Total Generation

154.04MW

19.68 MVAR
POWER



1

bus-1

slack

1 .060

0.00

131.1

90.9

0.0

0.0

0.0
2 bus-2 PVbus 1.000 -2.05 20.0 -71.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 bus-3 PQbus 0.987 -4.70 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.0
4 bus-4 PQbus 0.984 -4.86 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.0
5 bus-5 PQbus 0.972 -5.72 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.0

bus-2 bus-1 -86.402 -73.0740 2.4751 1.0546
bus-3 bus-1 -40.696 -17.4141 1.5442 -0.6120
bus-3 bus-2 -24.798 -0.2050 0.3806 -2.8067
bus-4 bus-2 -26.513 -0.9653 0.4358 -2.6307
bus-5 bus-2 -53.073 -4.8840 1.1981 0.6776
bus-4 bus-3 -20.451 -4.5013 0.0444 -1.8766
bus-5 bus-4 -6.919 -5.1106 0.0470 -4.6429


Total Generation

151.12MW

19.15 MVAR
POWER



1

bus-1

slack

1 .060

0.00

131.1

91.1

0.0

0.0

0.0
2 bus-2 PVbus 1.000 -2.04 20.0 -71.9 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 bus-3 PQbus 0.987 -4.71 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.0
4 bus-4 PQbus 0.983 -5.05 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.0
5 bus-5 PQbus 0.973 -5.57 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.0

bus-2 bus-1 -86.310 -73.1083 2.4729 1.0480
bus-3 bus-1 -40.792 -17.4927 1.5536 -0.5823
bus-3 bus-2 -24.959 -0.3120 0.3855 -2.7906
bus-4 bus-2 -28.318 -0.7625 0.4983 -2.4396
bus-5 bus-2 -51.040 -4.9440 1.1064 0.3998
bus-4 bus-3 -20.706 -4.6141 0.0457 -1.8038
bus-5 bus-4 -8.953 -5.0518 0.0739 -4.6730


Total Generation

151.13 MW

19.15 MVAR

POWER


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
bus-6
bus-7
bus-8
bus-9
bus-10
bus-11
bus-12
bus-13
bus-14
bus-15
bus-16
bus-17
bus-18
bus-19
bus-20
bus-21
bus-22
bus-23
slack
PVbus
PVbus
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.845
0.852
0.831
0.840
0.875
0.890
0.975
0.963
0.836
0.891
0.966
0.918
0.988
0.923
0.900
0.886
0.943
0.887
0.920
0.00
-12.24
-10.90
-18.14
-22.13
-32.16
-33.89
-33.34
-28.05
-24.60
-19.15
-21.89
-33.29
-29.89
-6.49
-15.78
-15.89
-22.92
-27.97
-28.91
-24.25
-28.91
-24.63
1655
160.0
350.0
520.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
518.6
28.1
192.2
289.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.3
2.8
3.2
1.8
1.2
0.6
0.0
0.0
4.5
0.0
7.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
0.9
1.1
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.8
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-54.3
-42.0
0.0
-36.0
-84.6
-38.2
-44.2
-87.3
-147.0
-106.8
0.0
-80.6
-76.8
POWER



GENERATION

LOAD SHUNT

Bus

Name

Type

V

delta

MW

MVAR

MW

MVAR

MVAR
24 bus-24 PQbus 0.961 -14.93 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -262.1


Total Generation :

2685.52 MW

1027.87 MVAR

65.52 MW

-942.02 MVAR

POWER


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

bus-1
bus-2
bus-3
bus-4
bus-5
bus-6
bus-7
bus-8
bus-9
bus-10
bus-11
bus-12
bus-13
bus-14
bus-15
bus-16
bus-17
bus-18
bus-19
bus-20
bus-21
bus-22
bus-23
bus-24

slack
PVbus
PVbus
PVbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus
PQbus

1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.846
0.852
0.836
0.844
0.884
0.889
0.963
0.947
0.837
0.900
0.966
0.919
0.983
0.922
0.900
0.890
0.944
0.885
0.929
0.962

0.00
-13.47
-10.88
-18.28
-22.08
-32.56
-33.40
-33.45
-26.89
-25.04
-21.15
-24.58
-33.87
-29.31
-6.49
-15.76
-17.12
-23.36
-28.37
-28.47
-24.38
-29.87
-23.54
-14.91

1654
160.0
350.0
520.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

511.6
40.7
183.9
284.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.3
2.8
3.2
1.8
1.2
0.6
0.0
0.0
4.5
0.0
7.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
0.9
1.1
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0
1.8
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-53.0
-40.7
0.0
-36.7
-84.7
-38.3
-43.8
-87.2
-147.0
-107.9
0.0
-80.3
-78.2
-263.0

POWER


5.5 CONCLUSION:
- From fig 5.2 and 5.4 there is a 1.3% increase in the voltage profile and 2% decrease in losses.
Both TCSC and SVC reduces the load curtailment of the system.
- From tables 5.3, 5.4, &5.5 it concluded that the optimum location of TCSC is observed.

POWER


CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION

A load flow solution uses both Newton- Raphson method and New Power Flow
method has been carried out in MATLAB software. It has been found that for a 3-bus, 5-bus and 24-
bus systems the losses has decreased for new power flow by 13% when compared with Newton
Raphson method. The New power flow model provided exact and practical solutions for the study of
Power flow under normal conditions and under abnormal or emergency conditions following loss of
generation, load or tie- line support, and the effects of system control devices. It requires less number
of iterations for convergence.

By generation reallocation the heavy burden on the slack bus is reduced. In normal
method whenever there is increase in load the whole burden falls on slack bus. By generation
reallocation the load is shared between all the generators units according to there limits. The OPF
studies has been derived and implemented in MATLAB software. A 5-bus system has been
presented in which the burden on the slack bus reduced to half and total load is equally shared. The
power losses are reduced by 13%. This has been extended to 3-bus &24-bus systems.

When the load on any bus system increases suddenly system collapses. Then the load is
curtailed by load shedding program carried out in MATLAB software. The load is curtailed for 3, 5
and 24 bus systems.

SVC models are presented, that is being incorporated into a Newton-Raphson load flow
algorithm and New power flow method under normal conditions. The Jacobian matrix has been
modified in order to place the SVC parameters at their respective positions in the matrix. The model
has been included in a Newton- Raphson load flow algorithm, which is capable of solving large
power networks reliably. The algorithm retains quadratic convergence. A test system of 3-bus, 5-bus
and 24-bus has been used to explain the performance of the SVC. The solutions were compared with
and without SVC in Newton-Raphson load flow algorithm. It is observed that the voltage profile has
increased by 1.3% and losses are reduced by 1%. In the similar manner SVC is incorporated in new
power flow method for 5-bus and 24-bus. The results are compared with and without SVC of new
power flow algorithm. It was seen that voltage profile has increased by 2.3%, and losses are reduce
by 2%. Finally it is observed that there is good improvement in the overall system performance i.e.,
improvement in voltage profiles, improvement in power flow, and reduction in losses after the
incorporation of SVC.
A 5-bus system has been presented to show actually how the TCSC performs
and to observe the incorporation of Jacobian elements. This method has been extended to 3-bus, 24-
bus practical system. The TCSC is placed in all different locations in the bus system. The best
location is chosen by comparing the real and reactive power generations, losses, voltage magnitudes
and angles. A graph is plotted by comparing the voltage magnitudes as a function of load bus
POWER


number, with and without incorporating the TCSC. From the graph it is observe that real and reactive
powers increased by 2%, voltage profile increased by 1.3% and the losses decreased by 2 % which
improves the system stability.

POWER


BIBLIOGRAPHY

[1] D.P.Kothari, I.J.Nagarath, Modern Power System Analysis , third Edition
(Tata Mc.Graw Hill).
[2] J.Carpentier Optimal Power Flows, Electrical Power and Energy Systems, Vol.1, April
1979, pp 959-972.
[3] D.I.Sun, B.Ashley, B.Brewer, A.Hughes and W.F.Tinney, Optimal Power Flow by Newton
Approach, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and systems, vol.103, No.10, 1984,
pp2864-2880.
[4] Y.O-ura,S.Hauashi,K.Uemura,F.Ishiguro, A New Power Flow Model And Solution Method
Including Load And Generator Characteristics And Effects of System control Devices, IEEE
Trans.on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-94,no,3,May/June 1975.
[5] H.Ambriz-Perez, E.Acha, and C.R. Fuerte-Esquivel, Advanced SVC models for Newton-
Raphson Load Flow and Newton Optimal Power Flow studies, IEEE Trans.on Power
Systems 15(1) 129-136.
[6] G W Stagg and A H El-Abid, Computer Methods in Power System Analysis(Book),
McGraw-Hill Book Co, 1968.
[7] W F Tinney and C E Hart, Power Flow-Solution by Newtons Method, IEEE Transactions
(PAS), vol 86, November 1967, p 1449.
[8] FACTS Modelling and Simulation in Power Networks (Book) by Enrique Acha, Claudio R.
Fuerte-Esquivel, Hugo Ambriz-Perez, Cesar Angeles-Camacho.
[9] N. Hingorani, L. Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS, Concepts and Technology of Flexible AC
Transmission Systems, IEEE Press, New York, 2000.
.[10] Hajdu, L. P., Peschon, J., Tinney, W. F. and Piercy, D. S. (1968). Optimal load shedding
policy for power systems IEEE rans. Power ppar. Systems, PAS-87, 784795.

POWER


APPENDIX - A

Flow Chart for New Power Flow Method

No
Optimal ordering
Of nodes
Form node
admittance
matrix
Set variables for
starting
Preparation for
making Jacobian
matrix
Compute
P
f ,
Q
f
Calculate elements for
Jacobian matrix decompose
the matrix in the multipliers
L.U.
Solve for
corrections
) ( , , f V A A A Ao

Emergency control
CB trip, load and
generation shedding
system splitting
START
STOP
Need power flow
Calculation in
Abnormal
condition?
Less than rough
Tolerance?
Within
Restraints
?
Less than
Expected
tolerance?
Make
adjustments
Using equations
2.21 a & 2.21b
Is power flow
calculation
In normal condition
Read
initial
Condition
s

Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
POWER


APPENDIX - B
3 BUS SYSTEM DATA

Number of Buses : 3
Number of Generators : 2
Number of Lines : 3
Number of Transformers : 0
Number of PV Buses : 0
Number of Fixed Shunts : 0
Slack Bus Number : 1
Convergence Value : 0.0001

Transmission Line Data:
LN : Line Number
SB : Starting Bus
EB : Ending Bus
Z-Series : Line Series Impedance
B/2 : Half Line Charging Admittance

LN SB EB Z-Series B/2
(pu)

R(pu) X(pu)
1 1 2 0.0 0.05 0.00
2 1 3 0.0 0.05 0.00
3 2 3 0.0 0.05 0.00

POWER


Scheduled Generation, Loads and Specified Bus Voltages Data:

Bus Type
3 Slack Bus
1 PV Bus
0 PQ Bus

Bus
No.
Type Generation Powers Load Powers Specified
Voltage(pu)
Pg (MW) Qg (MVAR) Pd (MW) Qd (MVAR)
1 0 0.00 0.00 180.00 30.00 1.00
2 1 35.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.01
3 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.06

5 BUS SYSTEM DATA

Number of Buses : 5
Number of Lines : 7
Number of PV Buses : 0

POWER


LN : Line Number
SB : Starting Bus
EB : Ending Bus
(pu)

R(pu) X(pu)
1 1 2 0.02 0.06 0.030
2 1 3 0.08 0.24 0.025
3 2 4 0.06 0.18 0.020
4 2 4 0.06 0.18 0.020
5 2 5 0.04 0.12 0.015
6 3 4 0.01 0.03 0.010
7 4 5 0.08 0.24 0.020


Bus Type
3 Slack Bus
1 PV Bus
0 PQ Bus

Bus
No.
Type Generation Powers Load Powers Specified
Voltage(pu)
Pg (MW) Qg (MVAR) Pd (MW) Qd (MVAR)
1 3 120.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.06
POWER


2 1 20.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
3 0 0.00 0.00 45.00 15.00 1.00
4 0 0.00 0.00 40.00 5.00 1.00
5 0 0.00 0.00 60.00 10.00 1.00

24 BUS SYSTEM DATA

Number of Buses : 24
Number of Lines : 16

LN : Line Number
SB : Starting Bus
EB : Ending Bus
Tap : Transformer Tap

POWER


(pu) R(pu) X(pu)
1 22 23 0.00430 0.04770 0.63700
2 22 18 0.00589 0.05995 0.78410
3 11 12 0.00198 0.02471 0.32304
4 11 17 0.00280 0.02998 0.42699
5 12 14 0.00546 0.06794 0.88836
6 17 24 0.00477 0.05103 0.72763
7 24 18 0.00569 0.06008 0.79414
8 24 23 0.00272 0.02872 1.51829
9 23 20 0.00388 0.04834 0.65470
10 15 16 0.00372 0.03931 0.53139
11 24 16 0.00245 0.02587 0.34966
12 15 24 0.00261 0.02780 1.48500
13 21 19 0.00145 0.01802 0.93968
14 22 19 0.00289 0.03603 0.46222
15 21 20 0.00297 0.03706 0.47543
16 13 8 0.00315 0.01569 0.05274

POWER


Transformers Data:
SB EB Z-Series Tap
R(pu) X(pu)
16 5 0.00099 0.01984 1.0
19 6 0.00099 0.01984 1.0
20 7 0.00099 0.01984 1.0
14 8 0.00125 0.02500 1.0
23 9 0.00198 0.03968 1.0
18 10 0.00198 0.03968 1.0
22 13 0.00063 0.01250 1.0
15 1 0.00033 0.00670 1.0
17 2 0.00198 0.03960 1.0
24 3 0.00099 0.01984 1.0
21 4 0.00099 0.01984 1.0

POWER


Fixed Shunt Data:
Bus X(pu)
22 2.2050
22 1.7500
11 1.7500
12 2.2050
14 2.2050
17 2.2050
15 1.1025
24 1.1025
24 0.5176
23 1.1025
16 2.2050
18 0.9756
20 1.1025
19 1.1025
19 2.2050
20 2.2050
19 2.2050

POWER


Bus Type
3 Slack Bus
1 PV Bus
0 PQ Bus

Bus No. Type Generation Powers Load Powers Specified
Voltage(pu)
Pg (pu) Qg (pu) Pd (pu) Qd (pu)
1 3 18.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
2 1 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
3 1 3.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
4 1 5.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
5 0 0.00 0.00 4.30 1.70 1.00
6 0 0.00 0.00 2.80 0.90 1.00
7 0 0.00 0.00 3.20 1.10 1.00
8 0 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.70 1.00
9 0 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.40 1.00
10 0 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.20 1.00
11 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
12 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
13 0 0.00 0.00 4.50 1.80 1.00
14 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
15 0 0.00 0.00 7.80 3.00 1.00
16 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
17 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
POWER


18 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
19 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
20 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
21 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
22 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
23 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
24 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00

The Impact of Facts Devices On Generation Reallocation and Load Shedding of A Power

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

The Impact of Facts Devices On Generation Reallocation and Load Shedding of A Power

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi