790
2, MAY 2012
Distribution Power Flow Management Utilizing
an Online Optimal Power Flow Technique
Michael J. Dolan, Member, IEEE, Euan M. Davidson, Member, IEEE, Ivana Kockar, Member, IEEE,
Graham W. Ault, Member, IEEE, and Stephen D. J. McArthur, Senior Member, IEEE
Abstract—This paper describes the current connection regime
for distributed generation (DG) in the U.K. and presents a novel ap-
plication of the optimal power flow (OPF) technique for automatic
power flow management (PFM) to manage thermal constraints in
distribution networks. OPF formulations have been used, in an of-
fline mode, as a power system planning tool for several years. The
novel implementation of OPF for “corrective” PFM in an online
operational mode, for MV distribution networks, is presented and
tested in this paper. The authors demonstrate, through simulations
conducted on a commercially available substation computer, that
such an application of OPF can represent first on, last off gener-
ator connection agreements that reflect the current principles of
access in the U.K. Two case study networks, a 33 kV and an 11 kV,
provide the basis for assessment of the OPF-based PFM algorithm
in terms of computation time to arrive at a solution in the event of
a network thermal excursion and the level of DG curtailment nec-
essary to meet network thermal limits. Assessments are made and
fully discussed of the suitability for an OPF-based approach for
distribution network management within an online network con-
trol scheme including discussion of the important consideration of
control robustness.
Index Terms—Active network management, distributed control,
distributed generation, optimal power flow.
I. INTRODUCTION
I N the U.K., increasing numbers of distributed generation
(DG) connections are being made in the distribution net-
works at all voltage levels due to the proximity of new and re-
newable energy resources to distribution circuits. Presently, the
U.K. distribution network operators (DNOs) are obliged to offer
a connection to renewable generators based on the available net-
work capacity and any associated network reinforcement costs.
This cost burden is incurred by the prospective DG developer
and recovered by the DG operator/owner. The generation con-
nections may or may not be economically feasible due to these
reinforcement costs and there is a resulting need to explore more
economic methods of generation connection.
The stochastic nature of the power output of most forms of
renewable energy sources brings operational uncertainty to the
Manuscript received February 17, 2011; revised June 18, 2011 and October
04, 2011; accepted November 16, 2011. Date of publication January 16, 2012;
date of current version April 18, 2012. This work was supported in part by the
UK’s Engineering and Physical Science Research Council (EPSRC), SP Energy
Networks, EDF Energy, and ABB. Paper no. TPWRS-00139-2011.
The authors are with the Institute for Energy and Environment, University of
Strathclyde, Glasgow G1 1XW, U.K. (e-mail: michael.dolan@eee.strath.ac.uk;
edavidson@eee.strath.ac.uk; ivana.kockar@eee.strath.ac.uk; g.ault@eee.
strath.ac.uk; s.mcarthur@eee.strath.ac.uk).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRS.2011.2177673
0885-8950/$26.00 © 2012 IEEE
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 27, NO.
DNOs in terms of power flow directions and magnitudes. This
uncertainty is currently addressed by relatively conservative
planning rules that mitigate these risks and ensure security of
supply. DNOs are looking towards active network manage-
ment (ANM) schemes [1] based on monitoring and control of
the distribution network and connected users to increase DG
connection while minimizing, deferring, or even avoiding any
capacity upgrades associated with DG connection. ANM can
thus support renewable generation connections and, therefore,
help to meet renewable targets through incentives such as the
renewable obligation certificate (ROC) scheme in the U.K. [2].
A prominent approach to delivering ANM schemes is the de-
velopmental Autonomous Regional Active Network Manage-
ment System (AuRA-NMS) developed in a major research, de-
velopment, and demonstration industry oriented activity. The
core functionality of AuRA-NMS, categorized by industry re-
quirements, is to perform automatic restoration, voltage con-
trol and power flow management (PFM). This differs from ex-
isting ANM solutions due to the package of functionalities of-
fered. Thus, AuRA-NMS is a move away from bespoke ANM
solutions to a generic one with multiple functions being hosted
on an open, flexible, extensible platform [3], [4]. Flexibility is
required to allow for deployment on topologically diverse net-
works and by being easily re-configurable within any network
on which it is deployed (e.g., topology or plant rating changes,
addition or removal of DG, installation or removal of monitoring
equipment or changes to the existing control strategy). The ex-
tensible, i.e., modular, characteristic allows for new or updated
versions of the functionality to be integrated within the archi-
tecture or for redundant functionality to be removed without
having to re-write existing software. In addition to the above re-
quirements, the scheme must also operate in a robust, safe and
secure way and should therefore exhibit graceful degradation
under communication failures and erroneous data inputs. The
development stage of AuRA-NMS brought about the investiga-
tion of three approaches to the PFM problem: current tracing,
constraint programming, and optimal power flow.
The work reported here is an extension of the work carried
out under the AuRA-NMS project [5]–[7]. The focus and con-
tent of this paper is on the novel application and real-time testing
of the OPF technique to the distribution PFM problem with em-
phasis on deploying PFM software with a commercially avail-
able OPF engine in a real-time control application. The paper
demonstrates the ability of such an approach to conform to the
current DG connection philosophy in the U.K. and other ter-
ritories: “last-in, first-off” (LIFO). Applying a “pseudo” style
generator cost approach to define the preferential curtailment of
DOLAN et al.: DISTRIBUTION POWER FLOW MANAGEMENT UTILIZING AN ONLINE OPTIMAL POWER FLOW TECHNIQUE
different generating technologies has been previously reported
and applied in [8] and [9].
In this paper, the impact of DG on distribution network power
flows as well as a suitable OPF formulation to address DG ac-
cess rights is discussed initially. Then, the practical applica-
bility and the ability of the OPF to operate within a real-time
and closed loop control environment to deliver PFM is demon-
strated. As discussed in the following sections, this practical im-
plementation was carried out by connecting outputs of the Pow-
erWorld tool with a dedicated PC acting as the real-time sim-
ulator and ABB’s COM6xx series substation automation com-
puting hardware. The results of tests on two different networks
are presented and conclusions on the applicability of OPF in this
application are drawn.
II. IMPACT OF DG ON DISTRIBUTION NETWORK POWER
FLOWS AND THE REQUIREMENT FOR ANM SYSTEMS
A. Constraint and Power Flow Management of DG
Connections
Network power flows are influenced by the characteristics
of power injection and consumption, as well as the impedance
of the connecting circuits. By introducing DG units into dis-
tribution networks, there is a move away from the traditional
unidirectional power flow that distribution networks were origi-
nally designed for. The resultant bidirectional power flows bring
added uncertainty to the direction and magnitude of flows in a
distribution network and may pose significant risk to network
security.
Traditionally network connections for DG have been assessed
against the available network thermal capacity as well as voltage
and fault current constraints. For example, an interconnected
network that has the capability to export excess DG may have
connection agreements that are approved as either “firm” or
“non-firm”. These DG units with “firm” and “non-firm” rights
can deliver power to load and export power to the adjacent net-
works uninhibited under normal network conditions. A “firm”
connection would be calculated on the n-1 maximum export ca-
pacity (for the highest rated interconnecting line being out of
service) plus the network minimum demand. This generation
can therefore remain connected during an n-1 event and at any
load demand level hence the “firm” connection designation.
“Non-firm” connections are calculated using the maximum
export capability (the sum of all interconnecting circuits) plus
minimum load minus the connected “firm” generation. In the
event that one of the interconnecting lines is out of service
(during fault or maintenance), the “non-firm” generation would
need to be removed from the network, via a signal sent by the
DNO. The use of minimum load ensures that connections are
based upon a worst case scenario [10].
The above discussion indicates that there is a need to develop
new ANM schemes to enable enhanced DG network access in an
economically attractive manner. The assessment of one ANM
scheme [11] shows that the lost revenue from carefully con-
trolled curtailment is less costly than the expense of network re-
inforcement. The extent of this benefit depends on the network
characteristics and the level of DG connection being considered.
791
The AuRA-NMS solution addresses the complexity issues
of constraint management schemes by hosting generic and dis-
tributed functionality that is capable of offering responsive mod-
ular control actions for any thermal violation, voltage excursion
and post-fault restoration. Taking an active approach to man-
aging power flows ensures that the thermal limitations placed
upon the network are met while maximizing DG access under
all operating conditions.
B. DG Connection Principles
The connection principle, for “non-firm” generation, prac-
ticed in the U.K. today is a last-in, first-off (LIFO) disconnec-
tion order. This requires the most recent connected DG unit to
reduce its output first during a network constraint situation to re-
solve the constraint and return the network to a normal operating
state. Where this action is not sufficient to resolve the problem
the next most recent connected DG units would be called upon
to resolve the constraint, in succession, until the disconnection
list is exhausted. Conventional system planning rules would en-
sure that, with no DG operational, the network limits would not
be violated under normal operating conditions.
With an increase in the number and capacity of connected
DG units, the LIFO access approach may hinder some invest-
ments in DG as newly connected DG units may face poor access
through more frequent disconnections. It is important to note
that LIFO arrangements had an important and positive role in
the initial stage of DG investments (clarity over network access
rights and protection of prior network connection contracts) but
with a growing need to increase the proportion of electricity gen-
erated by renewable low carbon technologies, in order to fulfil
obligations from the EU 20-20-20 target [12], the authors ac-
knowledge that DG connection principles must evolve. Other
connection principles are being investigated and showing im-
proved network access and subsequent energy yields [13].
The objective of this paper is to explore the role that an OPF
solution can play in active management of DG within the cur-
rent commercial framework. The purpose of this is to better
utilize network assets and increase renewable DG output while
recognizing the future potential and extensibility of an OPF so-
lution to deliver alternative principles of network access (e.g.,
minimize DG set point change or delivering DG access bidding
or sharing). This exploration of the potential of OPF to deliver
ANM is in line with the European Smart Grid Technology Plat-
form’s [14] interest in building up a “toolbox of proven tech-
niques that can be quickly and economically deployed”.
The analysis presented here is based on an OPF formulation
in which the cost of each DG unit reflects its connection order
with the highest cost of generation associated to the last DG
unit connected. Hence, similarly to the LIFO arrangement, this
OPF-LIFO approach will first seek to constrain the last con-
nected DG units. In the case where a network is heavily con-
gested this OPF based method will have sufficient flexibility
to change the order of disconnection and, regardless of their
LIFO order, leave online the DG units whose contribution to
the congestion is very weak and thus the curtailment of their
outputs will not help in relieving congestion. The formulation
of this described OPF-LIFO approach is derived by modifying
cost curves in the traditional OPF problem, as outlined in the
next section.
792
III. APPLICATION OF OPTIMAL POWER FLOW
FOR POWER FLOW MANAGEMENT
A. Standard OPF Formulation
Optimal power flow [15]–[17] is a well established technique
used for power system operation and planning problems that
can be formulated as an optimization problem. Typically, the
goal is to minimize system operation costs or maximize social
welfare, subject to system operating constraints such as power
balance, generation loading limits and network capacity con-
straints. There are, however, various modifications of the ob-
jective function formulation such as minimization of original
control schedule deviation or bilateral contact curtailments [18].
In addition, OPF has been investigated for evaluating the max-
imum connection capacity of renewable DG units [19] and as
a real-time strategy for minimizing load curtailment to remove
thermal congestion [20]. However, those previous applications
of OPF do not consider its use in a real-time generator con-
trol situation, as is the focus of the application described in this
paper.
Typically, the OPF problem seeks to minimize system oper-
ation costs. In vertically integrated system operation, costs re-
flect true costs of operating a unit, while in systems where elec-
tricity markets are introduced, minimization is based on gener-
ating unit offers submitted to a centralized market.
The OPF formulation used within this paper is as follows:
(1)
subject to
• Power balance equations
(2)
(3)
• Generation limits
(4)
(5)
• Thermal limits
(6)
In the objective function (1), is the cost or offer
function of a generator at bus , and are active and re-
active generation outputs while and are active and re-
active demand at bus , , , and are the
upper and lower active and reactive generating unit limits.
and are the active and reactive power flows in the line be-
tween and and is the apparent power thermal limit for
the circuit (including transformers) between buses and . Note
that the power flow limitations (6) are verified for both the re-
ceiving and the sending end of lines. Traditionally the upper
and lower voltage magnitude limits at node can be included
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 27, NO. 2, MAY 2012
within the OPF formulation however, due to the distributed con-
trol architecture of this ANM scheme voltages would be man-
aged by separate voltage control functions and coordinated ap-
propriately within the control architecture.
B. OPF-LIFO Formulation for Power Flow Management of
Distribution Networks
The OPF formulation defined by (1)–(6) is typically used for
operation of high voltage transmission systems with larger gen-
erating units. This is a complex problem with a large number of
decision variables. The system operator has a set of well estab-
lished rules and ancillary service arrangements to help maintain
secure system operation. These rules are reflected in the above
OPF formulation.
As discussed in Section II, power flows at distribution levels
are evolving from being one-directional to bi-directional. Since
the distribution networks were not designed for such an opera-
tion, this can lead towards a more uncertain and congested sit-
uation than previously. This, therefore, requires novel network
management solutions to facilitate increased DG connection. As
such, DG developments at distribution levels are relatively re-
cent and thus the role of the DG in distribution network opera-
tions is less defined than it is for the generating units in the trans-
mission system. As a result, effect of DGs on network calls for
operation techniques that will better reflect these uncertainties
and bi-directional flows.
The aim of the OPF-LIFO approach proposed in this paper
is to offer a solution that will support better operation of such
distribution networks. Since LIFO arrangements are currently
applied by the U.K. DNO operators, the proposed method seeks
to closely follow this LIFO access principle for the majority of
operating conditions. However, it will deviate from LIFO only
to avoid disconnecting or curtailing an unnecessary level of gen-
erator output. In that way application of OPF-LIFO will allow
for better utilization of DG resources and network infrastruc-
ture.
The proposed OPF-LIFO method is based on the above OPF
formulation (1)–(6), with the only change being in the defini-
tion and formulation of the individual generation cost terms,
, in the objective function (1). While in the general
OPF formulation these terms reflect either true costs associated
with the electricity production, or the offer curves that genera-
tors submit when selling energy on the market, in the OPF-LIFO
formulation terms reflect the order of the generators’
connections. Thus, each generator is assigned a constant cost
function defined as
(7)
where is a constant allocated to each generating unit to re-
flect its connection order. This means that in order to priori-
tize the utilization of generators that were connected first, they
will be assigned the lower value of , while those connected
last will be assigned the highest values. Note that the constant
in (7) does not reflect actual generation costs (or offers),
but, as mentioned above, is rather used to indicate a connection
order which would be considered for resolving any network con-
straint.
DOLAN et al.: DISTRIBUTION POWER FLOW MANAGEMENT UTILIZING AN ONLINE OPTIMAL POWER FLOW TECHNIQUE
Such modification of generation costs means that the solu-
tion of the above defined OPF will seek to maintain LIFO ar-
rangements as long as such an approach is curtailing generators
that can relieve the congestion. However, if the curtailment of
the particular generator does not address line overloads, the pro-
posed OPF LIFO will leave the output of this generator unmodi-
fied. Thus, by curtailing outputs of only generators that actually
affect the congestion, the OPF LIFO approach can help in in-
creasing the level of renewable generation outputs while seeking
to maintain LIFO rights.
In the case when deviation from the LIFO rule gives a solu-
tion that enforces less overall DG curtailment, the OPF-LIFO
formulation will automatically yield the improved generation
dispatch. This means that the developed OPF-LIFO formula-
tion may help DNOs automatically decide in which situations it
would be beneficial for the overall system performance to for-
feit LIFO arrangements.
Furthermore, as in the case of other ANM schemes, in the
proposed mechanism a specific area of the distribution system
is controlled with one or more interface points to the rest of the
network. This means that when the generation output from all
of the DGs is greater than the demand in the given area, the sur-
plus power is exported into the rest of the network through the
interfacing nodes. Similarly, if the DG output does not suffice
to supply the area demand, power balance will be maintained
by importing necessary power through the interfacing nodes. In
order to account for both cases, any such nodes are modelled as a
generator bus that can have both a positive and negative genera-
tion output. Furthermore, each of these outputs will have its sep-
arate values of parameter , however the value assigned to the
latter would be lower in order to maximize DG outputs and en-
courage export into the other part of the network. This cost allo-
cation is representative of the negative generation bus being the
first historically connected generator and maintains the LIFO
regime of the connected DG units. In fact, one of the aims of the
DG installation is to reduce energy input from the grid, and here
proposed OPF-LIFO is seeking to minimize this import or max-
imize the export. This is in the interest of all of the DG units in
that area, but financial gains could allocate to cover the possible
losses of some generators. These additional financial arrange-
ments, however, are not the subject of this paper because they
will not affect the results of this real-time application of OPF.
The formulation of the OPF-LIFO presented in this section is
general. However, due to the modular nature of the AuRA-NMS
that, as discussed above, was influenced by the practical aspects
of the DNOs’ operation strategies, OPF-LIFO application was
intended only for relieving congestion due to thermal line limits.
Therefore, the formulation omits voltage constraints as they will
be managed through another module specifically designed for
the voltage control [21], [22]. This enables the application of
the commercially available PowerWorld tool which is included
into the real-time test platform, as discussed in the subsequent
sections.
IV. PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTING
OPF AS AN ACTIVE PFM SCHEME
Traditionally, OPF has been used for generation dispatch
where a calculated operating point can be allocated and
793
Fig. 1. Computation and issue of control signal.
achieved by conventional, larger scale generators. The inter-
mittent nature of renewable DG units introduces problems in
defining and allocating power output set-points. In a congested
network it is straightforward to calculate a curtailment level for
a generating unit assuming that generator output measurements
would be available.
Under congested operation the proposed constraint de-
tection algorithm identifies any congested circuits violating
the condition . The generator cost models
are then sent to the OPF engine which returns generator
outputs based upon the solved OPF.
together with the actual generator real power
output are passed to the algorithm to calculate the gener-
ator control signals . These curtailment factors are sent
to the corresponding generator units, pictured in Fig. 1, as a
proportion of its actual output:
(8)
Restoring the permissible generation output defined by the
current network limits and after the curtailment signal has been
sent is, however, more problematic. This is due to the fact that
potential unconstrained outputs, defined by availability of the
primary renewable resources (e.g., the wind), is unlikely to be
known by the control scheme. The difficulty is in how to rec-
ognize when a constraint has passed and the curtailment of the
DG unit can be relaxed. This is because it cannot be known what
level of output the DG unit will achieve once curtailment is re-
leased. If the primary renewable resource is not known then DG
units can only output what is available and not what the OPF
solution requests or permits.
To overcome this issue the authors formulated a condition
that identified whether an output curtailment could be relaxed
or removed from the constrained generators. Without knowing
the potential output of the renewable DG units the value of
the curtailed generator’s maximum rated output must
be used to obtain the level of relaxation with the variation in
network loading. An updated control signal can be sent
to the corresponding generators as defined in (8). In reality, this
level of output may not be attainable by a renewable DG unit
since the achievable output might be less than ,
as discussed above. However, in order to maintain the system
within thermal limits the generator output cannot exceed
, i.e., generation output is capped. In the case
794 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 27, NO. 2, MAY 2012

where , the control signal (equal to 1)

informs the DG unit that it can run unconstrained at whatever
level of generation resources permit as defined by (8).

V. TEST ENVIRONMENT
A closed loop test environment was established to evaluate
the performance of incorporating OPF into an online PFM al-
gorithm and comprises the following elements: Substation com-
puter, real-time simulator (dedicated PC), PFM and OPF soft-
ware and the case study network models. Each element of the
test environment is introduced in the following sections.
Fig. 2. 11-kV radial system.
A. Hardware Test Platform
The substation computing hardware used for the development
and testing was ABB’s COM6xx series substation automation
product. The COM6xx is a Windows XP Embedded industrial
computer that offers a powerful substation computing platform
onto which ANM and other control functionality can be de-
ployed.
The COM6xx acts as a gateway for mapping, monitoring,
control and protection signals from remote devices (generators,
transformers, protection relays) into the substation as long as the
protocol is supported by the COM6xx. A full description of the
ABB COM6xx series hardware can be found at [23].

B. Real-Time Simulator
A means of emulating the data transfer from network intelli-
gent electronic devices (IEDs) to the PFM algorithms was de-
veloped. The real-time simulator software runs on a dedicated
PC and calls upon data files that hold load and generation pro-
files. These profiles are used to represent the system conditions
over time. The network model embedded within the COM6xx
is set to update once each second.
Within the real-time simulator are embedded controller
functions that simulate network control responses and include:
tap-changers; circuit breakers; real power set-point control
responses; and power factor set-point control responses. For
the purpose of this investigation only real power set-point
control (that includes DG unit power output ramp rates) for DG
trim/trip controls were utilized.
C. PFM and OPF Software
To achieve network management with the OPF-LIFO
approach, a new algorithm was developed. The algorithm iden-
tifies thermal constraint violations, updates DG cost models and
calls upon the OPF engine to solve the congestion constraint
while following connection and operating constraints. The
outputs of running the OPF-LIFO algorithm are control signals
to the corresponding generating units with updated set points.
The PowerWorld power systems analysis software package
provided the functionality to solve the OPF problem defined
above. Additional developed software provides the algorithms
for congestion detection, cost models representing LIFO and
the control signal processing.
Fig. 3. 33-kV interconnected system.
D. Case Study Network models
Network case studies were used to represent two different real
distribution systems in the U.K. The first case study network is a
section of 11-kV radial distribution network with two DG units
(Fig. 2). Common planning practice for 11-kV networks entails
tapered capacity feeders that meet the feeder loading, voltage
drop and post-fault reconfiguration requirements with strategi-
cally placed open points to achieve necessary levels of network
security. This tapering limits the prospective DG connection ca-
pacity on the 11-kV circuits.
The second case study network is the 33-kV interconnected
network depicted in Fig. 3. This network is supplied via two
132-kV circuits from “Sub X”. These terminate into two
132/33-kV transformers at “Sub A” and “Sub B”. These two
substations operate as an interconnected group at 33 kV via
three circuits. A further two 33-kV circuits radiate to supply
loads and generation and these circuits have normally open
points midway along their lengths at “Sub E” and “Sub G”.
Combining the COM6xx platform with the real-time sim-
ulator, the OPF-LIFO software and the case study network
models enabled the authors to perform a number of studies
DOLAN et al.: DISTRIBUTION POWER FLOW MANAGEMENT UTILIZING AN ONLINE OPTIMAL POWER FLOW TECHNIQUE
Fig. 4. Hardware and software interface and function interactions.
to assess the “closed-loop” performance of the OPF-LIFO
approach on the two different test distribution networks.
Fig. 4 shows the hardware connection interface and the soft-
ware interactions of the real-time simulation environment and
the substation computer. A dedicated PC emulated the data re-
trieval from the power system’s IEDs in the field by passing the
data to the substation computer via OPC. This data is then mon-
itored by the thermal detection algorithm and used within the
OPF solver when a thermal excursion is identified.
E. Case Study Profiles
Analysis of the two case studies was carried out for selected
load and generation profiles utilizing the hardware and soft-
ware functions described above. The load and generation pro-
files were selected to ensure that one or more circuits was sub-
jected to a thermal constraint violation.
1) Case Study 1: 11-kV Radial Network: For the purpose of
this test generating unit DG A (Fig. 2) was assumed to have a
constant output value of 1.6 MW with generating unit DG B
varying its output to represent a small wind farm. The combina-
tion of varying DG B together with the varying load at “Bus 5”
changed circuit flows and caused congestion in either “Line 1”
or “Line 2”.
2) Case Study 2: 33-kV Interconnected Network: In the
second case study (Fig. 3), the profiles developed for the inter-
connected system held all generation at a constant level equal
to the maximum rated DG outputs, , with the exception of
generating unit DG 5. An increase of load at “Sub A” and the
varying output of DG 5 contributed to overloads on “Line 1”.
In order to reflect the LIFO connection agreements within the
case study simulations the costs are applied to DG units as per
the example in Table I.
VI. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Note that for the purpose of this lab-based closed-loop
demonstration it is assumed that all input measurement data
795
TABLE I
EXAMPLE OF BREAKPOINT AND COSTS FOR CONNECTED DG
UNITS. DG A IS DEEMED TO BE THE FIRST CONNECTED UNIT
Fig. 5. 11-kV network with DG B last on.
is correct. The real-time simulator was interfaced with the
substation computer using OPC. This enables the data “value”,
“quality of value”, and “timestamp” to be evaluated. In the
event of “bad” data it would be envisaged that such a scheme’s
functionality would be postponed until all data is deemed to be
“good”. The means of data acquisition and management with
the evolution of smart meters and distribution state estimation
brings about uncertainty in ascertaining the quality of “future”
data. An extension of this research is aimed at evaluating these
issues and the performance of ANM functions under these
circumstances. Therefore, the assessment criteria of interest
are the levels of curtailment of DG and the time to compute
a solution rather than robustness against data or model error.
Control signals and computation times are the focus of this
assessment. In the practical implementation described, the load
and generation profiles are updated at each simulation “time
step” and monitored, for thermal excursions, at every third
“time step”.
A. Case Study 1: 11-kV Radial Network
The LIFO connection principle can be represented by ap-
plying a higher cost in the OPF formulation to the last histor-
ically connected DG unit, in (8), and a lower value to the first
historically connected unit. The primary vertical axis in Fig. 5
displays the generating unit control signal value in per unit of
generating unit capacity while the secondary vertical axis shows
the MW line loading with and without curtailment of DG with
line limits shown for reference.
In Fig. 5 it can be observed that DG B was curtailed to alle-
viate the thermal constraint that occurred on “Line 1” as per the
cost models assignment (i.e., DG B was the most recent to con-
nect so had the lower cost of curtailment). Initially, the detected
796 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 27, NO. 2, MAY 2012

TABLE II
GENERATOR CONNECTION PRIORITY

Fig. 6. 11-kV network with DG A last on.

Fig. 8. Case A—Interconnected network—DG 5 last on.

Fig. 7. 11-kV “Line 2” thermal constraint.

constraint conditions require a deeper curtailment, which corre-

spond to the dip at approximately time step 41 in Fig. 5. How-
ever, as network conditions change a further calculation offers
the DG greater access. As Fig. 5 indicates, even a small change
in loading, which occurred only 3 time steps after the initial cur-
tailment signal, results in the reduction of the thermal overload.
This then allows for the partial relaxation of the control signal.
The computation time for each of the seven generator unit set
point control signals under this system event range from 38 to
65 ms. Fig. 5 illustrates that the seventh signal, calculated at step
125, allows DG B to run unconstrained, i.e., control signal equal Fig. 9. Case B—Interconnected network—DG 3 last on.
to 1.
In a second case the DG cost models are reversed and DG A
is deemed to have been the last connected generator and there- cases (unchanged at 1.0 per unit output). Under this congestion
fore called upon first to resolve the thermal constraint on “Line situation and regardless of the connection priority, DG B is the
1” (Fig. 6). The MW line loading with and without DG cur- only DG unit that feeds into the congested line and can therefore
tailment is depicted on Fig. 6. During this scenario there are a be the only unit that can technically resolve the congestion. The
total of four control signals sent with the last signal allowing discrepancy between the two DG B control signals, in Fig. 7, is
DG A to output unconstrained. The computation time, for OPF due to the precise time of thermal overload detection (the algo-
solutions, ranges from 31 to 58 ms until the DG is returned to rithm cycles in a 3 “time step” loop) and illustrates the impact of
unconstrained operation. measurement and scan time on generation control in a dynamic
In order to illustrate the result that the OPF-LIFO approach environment.
has on generating units that do not have any direct effect on the
congested line, the thermal rating of “Line 2” (Fig. 2) is reduced. B. Case Study 2: 33-kV Interconnected Network
Fig. 7 illustrates the control actions for this case. For the second case study network (Fig. 3), increased load at
The dashed trace in Fig. 7 shows the set point control signal “Sub A” ensured a thermal constraint on “Line 1”. In Table II the
sent to DG B when its cost model is set to make it the last con- generating unit identification numbers are listed along with their
nected generating unit. The solid trace shows the DG B set point connection priorities. This situation produces the results illus-
control signal when DG A is set as the last connected generator. trated in Fig. 8, 9, and 11. Three different cases are explored (A,
The constant trace is the DG A set point control signal for both B, and C) with the purpose demonstrating the varying levels of
DOLAN et al.: DISTRIBUTION POWER FLOW MANAGEMENT UTILIZING AN ONLINE OPTIMAL POWER FLOW TECHNIQUE
Fig. 10. Case A and B—interconnected network—line loading.
Fig. 11. Case C—interconnected network (increased constraint).
curtailment under the same thermal constraint location for dif-
fering DG connection orders and severity of thermal constraint.
In Fig. 8, DG 5 had the largest costs in its OPF cost model
to represent being the last connected generating unit, and hence
was the first unit curtailed when “Line 1” experiences a thermal
constraint. The primary vertical axis in Fig. 8 shows the MW
level of curtailed and potential generation, while the secondary
vertical axis depicts the set point control signal sent to the DG
unit. The horizontal axis shows the simulation time steps.
It can be observed that the set point control signal commu-
nicates four changes in output for DG 5, each taking between
48 and 83 ms to compute the solution. The initial control signal
(at time-step 36) requires DG 5 to ramp down to approximately
90% of its output. When allowing generator unit DG 5 to ramp
up towards its potential output, as the thermal constraint reduces
through load decrease, three further control signals are sent to
the DG unit until it operates unconstrained. It is worth noting
that at time-step 73 the generating unit DG 5 would be allowed
to operate at rated power, however, as the primary wind resource
is not present (i.e., insufficient wind speed) the actual generating
unit output level is lower to reflect the unavailability of the wind.
In order to test the effect that the order of priority has on cur-
tailment results the connection order of unit DG 3 was changed.
This is shown in column 2 of Table II where the cost for DG 3
was changed to set it as the last connected DG unit. In Fig. 9,
the axes display the same information as that of Fig. 8 previ-
ously. In Case B there are a number of signals sent to curtail unit
DG 3—noticeable from the number of control signals logged
797
Fig. 12. Interconnected network case C— “line 1” switched out.
on Fig. 9. This occurs as a result of the rise in load which in-
creases the thermal constraint on “Line 1”. A number of revised
initial set point control signals are calculated to compensate for
this increasing congestion (between time-step 37 and 42). As
the thermal constraint is alleviated (from time step 65 onwards),
new set point control signals are calculated, with computation
times ranging from 60 to 97 ms, and sent to the DG unit until it
can run unconstrained at full rated output.
The line loading for the scenarios run in Figs. 8 and 9 is shown
as the solid trace on Fig. 10. The other two traces show the
resultant line loading levels when DG 5 and DG 3 are curtailed.
With the same connection priority maintained, as in Case B
above, the load at “Sub A” is doubled to increase the magni-
tude of the thermal constraint. The DG units’ connection order
list now has to be used more extensively by the OPF-LIFO al-
gorithm to manage the congestion (Fig. 11). DG units 3, 4, and
5, prioritized as 10th, 9th, and 8th, respectively, are curtailed in
the appropriate order to keep the network within thermal limits.
As system loading changes, these generating units are brought
back on in the reverse order. With DG 3 offline and DG unit 5
operating at maximum rated output the DG unit 4 control signals
fluctuates against the network conditions to ensure that thermal
limits are adhered to. In this case loading is such that DG unit 3
must remain offline.
In a further test case the original “case study 2” load profiles
were used while maintaining the connection priority set in Case
C. Fig. 12 illustrates the calculated DG unit set point control
signals when “Line 1” is switched out. The result of this line
outage is a step change in network states which creates over-
loads on “Line 2” and “Line 3” (Fig. 3). Under this system event
the order of curtailment is DG units DG 4, DG 3, DG 5, and
Hydro B. These units are prioritized as 9th, 10th, 8th, and 2nd,
respectively. This breaks the cost modelled LIFO connection
order due to the severity of the situation however the result is
less curtailment than enforcing LIFO under this event. Fig. 12
shows the DG unit control signals. At time-step 14, “Line 1” is
switched out and at time-step 41 the line is returned into service.
Hydro B station is the first to be allowed back on, followed by
units 4 and 5, simultaneously, and then as load levels drop DG 3
is signalled to run unconstrained. This relaxation of DG curtail-
ment follows the LIFO connection agreement, i.e., generators
with the lowest priority are brought back online first.
798
VII. CONCLUSION
The closed loop simulation results presented above demon-
strates that the novel application of OPF combined with pro-
totype PFM algorithms, running on a commercially available
substation computer platform, has the potential to operate in
an online and real-time environment. OPF-LIFO solution com-
putation time is in the tens of milliseconds range for moder-
ately sized distribution network areas. Continuous monitoring
and control leads to progressive DG set point control signals
allowing for the LIFO representation to be maintained and for
good resolution DG set points to be calculated in contrast to
the DG unit capacity blocks proposed in other PFM scheme de-
signs. Under network outage conditions and other more onerous
operation conditions a solution to the circuit congestion is found
through DG unit constraint control but the LIFO connection
agreements are not honoured. The outcome in this case allows
greater energy yields across the DG units than that of conven-
tional methods, i.e., inter-tripping of all “non-firm” DG units.
This non-conformity of the LIFO principle of access demon-
strates the potential for OPF to be used under different connec-
tion principles such as DG bids for access to distribution net-
work capacity or some form of access sharing to enhance DG
access. In summary, the novel OPF-LIFO approach has been
found, through implementation and testing, to be viable in terms
of robustness (find a practical solution under all test cases),
speed of computation and the ability to represent existing (i.e.,
LIFO) and alternative principles of access to distribution net-
work capacity. Future work would be required to address impor-
tant practical issues ahead of field test of the OPF based PFM
method but the results presented in this paper show the potential
of the approach.
VIII. FUTURE WORK
The analysis in this paper indicates that the performance,
based upon reliable data, is robust since no non-convergence
situations arose. However, performance testing would require
modelling and simulating erroneous data from sensors and lack
of measurements as these would have a direct implication on the
network model. Misrepresentation of the actual system states
would lead to erroneous control signals being sent to genera-
tors and increase the probability of load flow divergence. Re-
cently, these issues have been discussed [24] in the context of
voltage control and an approach to dealing with the loss of com-
munications to controllable devices presented. It is envisaged,
for this paper’s approach, that under these severe cases (e.g.,
loss of or uncertain measurements or loss of controllable de-
vices attained via error checks or the communications standard)
that the DNO would have to revert to traditional approaches,
either trip all DG units or wait for protection systems to op-
erate. This is undesirable but on the basis that active power flow
management approaches yield higher levels of DG penetration
[11], [13], [25] than conventional inter-tripping schemes then
this approach may be deemed suitable for extreme cases of error.
In addition, further investigation of the capability of the OPF
technique to represent alternative principles of DG access than
LIFO is required to determine the technique’s feasibility and
flexibility for future connection arrangements. OPF also has the
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 27, NO. 2, MAY 2012
capability to calculate voltage settings and other network con-
trols to meet DNO objectives. The coordination of different ob-
jectives within an OPF formulation of ANM requires further
thought.
REFERENCES
[1] D. Roberts, Network Management Systems for Active Distribution
Networks—A Feasibility Study, DTI Distributed Generation Pro-
gramme (Contractor: SP PowerSystems LTD) Contract Number:
K/EL/00310/00/00, URN Number: 04/1361, 2004.
[2] Department of Trade and Industry, in Energy White Paper: Our Energy
Future—Creating a Low Carbon Economy, 2003 & Meeting the Energy
Challenge, 2007.
[3] E. M. Davidson, S. D. J. McArthur, J. R. McDonald, and P. C. Taylor,
“An architecture for flexible and autonomous network management
systems,” in Proc. CIRED 2009, Jun. 2009.
[4] E. M. Davidson, S. D. J. McArthur, C. Yuen, and M. Larsson,
“AuRA-NMS: Towards the delivery of smarter distribution networks
through the application of multi-agent systems technology,” in Proc.
IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting—Conversion and
Delivery of Electrical Energy the 21st Century, 2008, Jul. 20–24, 2008.
[5] E. M. Davidson, S. D. J. McArthur, M. J. Dolan, and J. R. McDonald,
“Exploiting intelligent systems techniques with an autonomous re-
gional active network management system,” in Proc. IEEE Power and
Energy Society General Meeting 2009.
[6] M. J. Dolan, E. M. Davidson, G. W. Ault, and J. R. McDonald, “Tech-
niques for managing power flows active distribution networks with
thermal constraints,” in Proc. CIRED 2009, Jun. 2009.
[7] E. M. Davidson, M. J. Dolan, S. D. J. McArthur, and G. W. Ault,
“The use of constraint programming for the autonomous management
of power flows,” in Proc. 15th Int. Conf. Intelligent Systems Applica-
tions to Power Systems, Nov. 2009.
[8] M. J. Dolan, E. M. Davidson, G. W. Ault, J. R. McDonald, F. Coffele,
and I. Kockar, “Using optimal power flow for management of power
flows active distribution networks with thermal constraints,” in Proc.
44th Int. Universities’ Power Engineering Conf., Glasgow, U.K., 2009.
[9] T. Boehme, G. P. Harrison, and A. R. Wallace, “Assessment of distribu-
tion network limits for non-firm connection of renewable generation,”
IET Renew. Power Gen., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 64–74, 2010.
[10] A. Collinson, F. Dai, A. Beddoes, and J. Crabtree, Solutions for
the Connection and Operation of Distributed Generation, DTI
Distributed Generation Programme (Contractor: EA Technology)
K/EL/00303/00/01/REP, 2003.
[11] R. A. F. Currie, G. W. Ault, C. E. T. Foote, and J. R. McDonald, “Active
power-flow management utilising operating margins for the increased
connection of distributed generation,” IET Gen., Transm., Distrib., vol.
1, no. 1, pp. 197–202, Jan. 2007.
[12] European Commission, Combating Climate Change: The EU Leads
the Way. [Online]. Available: http://ec.europa.eu/publications/book-
lets/move/70/index_en.htm.
[13] S. C. E. Jupe and P. C. Taylor, “Strategies for the control of multiple
distributed generation schemes,” in Proc. CIRED 2009, Prague, Czech
Republic, Jun. 2009.
[14] European Commission, European SmartGrids Technology Plat-
form—Vision and Strategy for Europe’s Electricity Networks of the
Future, 2006.
[15] J. Carpentier, “Optimal power flow,” Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst.,
vol. 1, pp. 3–15, 1979.
[16] J. Carpentier, “Contribution a l’etude du dispatching economique,”
Bull. Soc. Franc. Elect., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 431–447, 1962.
[17] H. Dommel and W. F. Tinney, “Optimal power flow solutions,” IEEE
Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-87, pp. 1866–1876, 1968.
[18] I. Kockar and F. D. Galiana, “Combined pool/bilateral dispatch—Part
2: Curtailment of firm and non-firm contracts,” IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 1184–1190, Nov. 2002.
[19] L. F. Ochoa, C. J. Dent, and G. P. Harrison, “Distribution network
capacity assessment: Variable DG and active networks,” IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 87–95, Feb. 2010.
[20] F. Capitanescu and L. Wehenkel, “Optimal power flow computations
with a limited number of controls allowed to move,” IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 586–587, Feb. 2010.
[21] P. C. Taylor, T. Xu, S. McArthur, G. Ault, E. Davidson, M. Dolan, C.
Yuen, M. Larsson, D. Botting, D. Roberts, and P. Lang, “Integrating
voltage control and power flow management AuRA-NMS,” in Proc.
CIRED Smart Grids 2008.
DOLAN et al.: DISTRIBUTION POWER FLOW MANAGEMENT UTILIZING AN ONLINE OPTIMAL POWER FLOW TECHNIQUE
[22] P. C. Taylor, T. Xu, N. S. Wade, M. Prodanovic, R. Silversides, T.
Green, E. M. Davidson, and S. D. J. McArthur, “Distributed voltage
control AuRA-NMS,” in Proc. IEEE Power Engineering Society Gen-
eral Meeting, Jul. 2010, pp. 1–7.
[23] ABB. [Online]. Available: http://www.abb.com/Product/
seitp328/3cc7d0b2a99f2f40c1257188002facd2.aspx?product-
Language=us&country=00.
[24] M. Glavic, M. Hajian, W. Rosehart, and T. Van Cutsem, “Re-
ceding-horizon multi-step optimization to correct nonviable or
unstable transmission voltages,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 26, no.
3, pp. 1641–1650, Aug. 2011.
[25] G. W. Ault, R. A. F. Currie, and J. R. McDonald, “Active power flow
management solutions for maximising DG connection capacity,” in
Proc. IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, Jul. 2006,
pp. 1–5.
Michael J. Dolan (M’09) received the B.Eng (Hons)
degree in electronic and electrical engineering from
the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, U.K., in
2006.
He is currently a Research Fellow at the Institute
for Energy and Environment at the University of
Strathclyde. His research interests include: active
network management and sustainable energy sys-
tems for developing countries. His recent work has
focused on techniques and tools for real-time control
and operation of future energy networks.
Euan M. Davidson (M’06) received the M.Eng.
degree from the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow,
U.K., in 2000.
He is a Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for
Energy and Environment at the University of Strath-
clyde. His research interests include: multi-agent
systems; model-based reasoning; and the application
of intelligent system techniques to diagnostic, power
system control, operation, and management prob-
lems. His recent work has focused on active network
management and tools, techniques, and architectures
for intelligent or smart networks
799
Ivana Kockar (S’99–M’04) received the Dipl.Ing.
(M.Sc.) degree from the University of Belgrade, Bel-
grade, Yugoslavia, and the M.Eng. and Ph.D. in 2004
from McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
She is a Lecturer within the Institute for Energy
and Environment at the University of Strathclyde,
Glasgow, U.K. Her research interests include power
system operation planning and economics of energy
systems.
Dr. Kockar chairs the IEEE PES Computing and
Analytical Methods Subcommittee (CAMS) and
co-chairs the IEEE PES Task Force on Agent-Based Modeling of Smart Grid
Market Operation.
Graham W. Ault (M’98) received the B.Eng. degree
in electrical and mechanical engineering and the
Ph.D. degree in electrical power systems from the
University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, U.K., in 1993
and 2000, respectively.
Since 1996, has been researching power system
planning and operations issues relating to distributed
energy resources in distribution systems. He is cur-
rently a Professor in the Institute for Energy and En-
vironment at the University of Strathclyde.
Stephen D. J. McArthur (M’93–SM’07) received
the B.Eng. (Hons.) and Ph.D. degrees from the Uni-
versity of Strathclyde, Glasgow, U.K., in 1992 and
1996, respectively.
He is Director of the Institute for Energy and Envi-
ronment and Director of the British Energy Advanced
Diagnostics Centre at the University of Strathclyde.