Chapter 4: Load Flow Studies

Section III: Preparation Of Data For Load Flow

Let real and reactive power generated at bus- i be denoted by PGi and QGi respectively. Also let us denote the (4.8) real and reactive power consumed at the i th th bus by PLi and QLi respectively. Then the net real power injected in bus- i is

(4.9) Let the injected power calculated by the load flow program be Pi, calc . Then the mismatch between the actual injected and calculated values is given by

(4.10) In a similar way the mismatch between the reactive power injected and calculated values is given by

The purpose of the load flow is to minimize the above two mismatches. It is to be noted that (4.6) and (4.7) are used for the calculation of real and reactive power in (4.9) and (4.10). However since the magnitudes of all the voltages and their angles are not known a priori, an iterative procedure must be used to estimate the bus voltages and their angles in order to calculate the mismatches. It is expected that mismatches P reduce with each iteration and the load flow is said to have converged when the mismatches of all the buses become less than a very small number. For the load flow studies we shall consider the system of Fig. 4.1, which has 2 generator and 3 load buses. We define bus-1 as the slack bus while taking bus-5 as the P-V bus. Buses 2, 3 and 4 are P-Q buses. The line impedances and the line charging admittances are given in Table 4.1. Based on this data the Y bus matrix is given in Table 4.2. This matrix is formed using the same procedure as given in Section 3.1.3. It is to be noted here that the sources and their internal impedances are not considered while forming the Ybus matrix for load flow studies which deal only with the bus voltages.

Fig. 4.1 The simple power system used for load flow studies. Table 4.1 Line impedance and line charging data of the system of Fig. 4.1.
Line (bus to bus) Impedanc e Line charging ( Y /2)

1-2 1-5 2-3 2-5 3-4 3-5 4-5

0.02 + j 0.10 0.05 + j 0.25 0.04 + j 0.20 0.05 + j 0.25 0.05 + j 0.25 0.08 + j 0.40 0.10 + j 0.50

j 0.030 j 0.020 j 0.025 j 0.020 j 0.020 j 0.010 j 0.075

Table 4.2 Ybus matrix of the system of Fig. 4.1.

1 1 2.6923 - j 13.4115 - 1.9231

2 - 1.9231 + j 9.615 4 3.6538

3 0

4 0

5 - 0.7692 + j 3.8462

- 0.9615

- 0.7692 + j 3.8462

+ j 9.6154 3 0

- j 18.19 42

+ j 4.8077 - 0.4808 + j 2.4038

- 0.9615 2.2115 + j 4.807 - j 11.0027 0.769 7 2 + j 3. 8462 0 - 0.7692 + j 3.8462 1.153 8 - j 5. 6742 0.384 6 + j 1. 9231

- 0.3846 + j 1.9231

- 0.7692 + j 3.8462

- 0.7692 + j 3.846 2

- 0.4808 + j 2.4038

2.4038 - j 11.8942

The bus voltage magnitudes, their angles, the power generated and consumed at each bus are given in Table 4.3. In this table some of the voltages and their angles are given in boldface letters. This indicates that these are initial data used for starting the load flow program. The power and reactive power generated at the slack bus and the reactive power generated at the P-V bus are unknown. Therefore each of these quantities are indicated by a dash ( - ). Since we do not need these quantities for our load flow calculations, their initial estimates are not required. Also note from Fig. 4.1 that the slack bus does not contain any load while the P-V bus 5 has a local load and this is indicated in the load column.

Table 4.3 Bus voltages, power generated and load - initial data.

Bus no.

Bus voltage
Magnitude (pu) Angle (deg)

Power generated
P (MW) Q P (MVAr (MW) )

Load
P (MVAr)

1 2 3 4 5

1.05 1 1 1 1.02

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 48

0 0 0 -

0 96 35 16 24

0 62 14 8 11

(4.38)

(4.39)

Formation of the Jacobian Matrix

We shall now discuss the formation of the submatrices of the Jacobian matrix. To do that we shall use the real and reactive power equations of (4.6) and (4.7). Let us rewrite them with the help of (4.2) as

(4.40) A. Formation of J11 Let us define J11 as

(4.41) It can be seen from (4.32) that Lik's are the partial derivatives of Pi with respect to k. The derivative Pi (4.38) with respect to k for i k is given by

Similarly the derivative Pi with respect to k for i = k is given by

(4.42)

Comparing the above equation with (4.39) we can write

(4.43)

B. Formation of J21 Let us define J21 as

(4.44) From (4.34) it is evident that the elements of J21 are the partial derivative of Q with respect to . From (4.39) we can write

Similarly for i = k we have

(4.45)

The last equality of (4.45) is evident from (4.38).

(4.46)

..Contd from previous slide...Formation of the Jacobian Matrix

C. Formation of J12 Let us define J12 as

(4.47) As evident from (4.33), the elements of J21 involve the derivatives of real power P with respect to magnitude of bus voltage |V| . For i k , we can write from (4.38)

(4.48)

For i = k we have

(4.49)

Formation of J22 For the formation of J22 let us define

(4.50)

For i k we can write from (4.39)

(4.51)

Finally for i = k we have

We therefore see that once the submatrices J11 and J21 are computed, the formation of the submatrices J12 and J22is fairly straightforward. For large system this will result in considerable saving in the computation time.

Chapter 4: Load Flow Studies

Solution of Newton-Raphson Load Flow

The Newton-Raphson load flow program is tested on the system of Fig. 4.1 with the system data and initial conditions given in Tables 4.1 to 4.3. From (4.41) we can write

Similarly from (4.39) we have

Hence from (4.42) we get

In a similar way the rest of the components of the matrix J11(0) are calculated. This matrix is given by

For forming the off diagonal elements of J21 we note from (4.44) that

Also from (4.38) the real power injected at bus-2 is calculated as

Hence from (4.45) we have

Similarly the rest of the elements of the matrix J21 are calculated. This matrix is then given as

For calculating the off diagonal elements of the matrix J12 we note from (4.47) that they are negative of the off diagonal elements of J21 . However the size of J21 is (3 X 4) while the size of J12 is (4 X 3). Therefore to avoid this discrepancy we first compute a matrix M that is given by

The elements of the above matrix are computed in accordance with (4.44) and (4.45). We can then define

Furthermore the diagonal elements of J12 are overwritten in accordance with (4.48). This matrix is then given by

Finally it can be noticed from (4.50) that J22 = J11 (1:3, 1:3). However the diagonal elements of J22 are then overwritten in accordance with (4.51). This gives the following matrix

From the initial conditions the power and reactive power are computed as

Consequently the mismatches are found to be

Then the updates at the end of the first iteration are given as

The load flow converges in 7 iterations when all the power and reactive power mismatches are below 106 .

Chapter 4: Load Flow Studies

Section VII: Load Flow Results

In this section we shall discuss the results of the load flow. It is to be noted here that both Gauss-Seidel and Newton-Raphson methods yielded the same result. However the NewtonRaphson method converged faster than the Gauss-Seidel method. The bus voltage magnitudes, angles of each bus along with power generated and consumed at each bus are given in Table 4.4. It can be seen from this table that the total power generated is 174.6 MW whereas the total load is 171 MW. This indicates that there is a line loss of about 3.6 MW for all the lines put together. It is to be noted that the real and reactive power of the slack bus and the reactive power of the P-V bus are computed from (4.6) and (4.7) after the convergence of the load flow.

Table 4.4 Bus voltages, power generated and load after load flow convergence.
Bus voltage Bus no. Magnitude (pu) 1.05 0.9826 0.9777 Angle (deg) 0 5.0124 7.1322 Power generated P (MW) 126.60 0 0 Q (MV Ar) 57.11 0 0 P (M W) 0 96 35 Load P (MVAr)

1 2 3

0 62 14

4 5

0.9876 1.02

7.3705 3.2014

0 48

0 15.59

16 24

8 11 (4.52)

The current flowing between the buses i and k can be written as

(4.53) Therefore the complex power leaving bus- i is given by

(4.54) Similarly the complex power entering bus- k is

(4.55) Therefore the I 2 R loss in the line segment i-k is

The real power flow over different lines is listed in Table 4.5. This table also gives the I2 R loss along various segments. It can be seen that all the losses add up to 3.6 MW, which is the net (4.56) difference between power generation and load. Finally we can compute the line I2X drops in a similar fashion. This drop is given by

However we have to consider the effect of line charging separately.

Table 4.5 Real power flow over different lines.

Power dispatched from (bus) 1 amount (MW) 101.0395 Power received in (bu s) 2 amoun t (MW) 98.649 4 2.3901 Line loss (MW)

1 2 3 5 5 5

25.5561 17.6170 0.7976 15.1520 18.6212 15.4566

5 3 4 2 3 4

25.229 7 17.488 2 0.7888 14.967 6 18.309 5 15.211 2

0.3264 0.1288 0.0089 0.1844 0.3117 0.2454 Total = 3.5956

Chapter 4: Load Flow Studies

... Contd from previous slide...Load Flow Results

Consider the line segment 1-2. The voltage of bus-1 is V1 = 1.05 < 0 per unit while that of bus-2 is V2 = 0.9826 < 5.0124 per unit. From (4.52) we then have per unit Therefore the complex power dispatched from bus-1 is

where the negative signal indicates the power is leaving bus-1. The complex power received at bus-2 is MW Therefore out of a total amount of 101.0395 MW of real power is dispatched from bus-1 over the line segment 1-2, 98.6494 MW reaches bus-2. This indicates that the drop in the line segment is 2.3901 MW. Note that

MW

where R12 is resistance of the line segment 1-2. Therefore we can also use this method to calculate the line loss. Now the reactive drop in the line segment 1-2 is

MV Ar We also get this quantity by subtracting the reactive power absorbed by bus-2 from that supplied by bus-1. The above calculation however does not include the line charging. Note that since the line is modeled by an equivalent- p , the voltage across the shunt capacitor is the bus voltage to which the shunt capacitor is connected. Therefore the current I 12 flowing through line segment is not the current leaving bus-1 or entering bus-2 - it is the current flowing in between the two charging capacitors. Since the shunt branches are purely reactive, the real power flow does not get affected by the charging capacitors. Each charging capacitor is assumed to inject a reactive power that is the product of the half line charging admittance and square of the magnitude of the voltage of that at bus. The half line charging admittance of this line is 0.03. Therefore line charging capacitor will inject

MV Ar at bus-1. Similarly the reactive injected at bus-2 will be

MV Ar The power flow through the line segments 1-2 and 1-5 are shown in Fig. 4.2.

(a)

(b)
Fig. 4.2 Real and reactive power flow through (a) line segment 1-2 and (b) line segment 1-5. The thin lines indicate reactive power flow while the thick lines indicate real power flow.

Chapter 4: Load Flow Studies

Newton-Raphson Load Flow

The Newton-Raphson load flow program is stored in the files loadflow_nr.m. The outputs of the program can be checked by typing indx v abs(v) angle(v)/d2r preal preac pwr qwr q pl ql the number of iterations bus voltages in Cartesian form magnitude of bus voltages angle of bus voltage in degree real power in MW reactive power in MVAr power flow in the various line segments reactive power flow in the various line segments reactive power entering or leaving a bus real power losses in various line segments reactive drops in various line segments

It is to be noted that in calculating the power and reactive power the conventions that the power entering a node is positive and leaving it is negative are maintained. The program listing for the Newton-Raphson load flow is given below. % Program loadflow_nr % THIS IS THE NEWTON-RAPHSON POWER FLOW PROGRAM clear all d2r=pi/180;w=100*pi; % The Ybus matrix is [ybus,ych]=ybus; g=real(ybus);b=imag(ybus); % The given parameters and initial conditions are p=[0;-0.96;-0.35;-0.16;0.24]; q=[0;-0.62;-0.14;-0.08;-0.35]; mv=[1.05;1;1;1;1.02]; th=[0;0;0;0;0]; del=1;indx=0; % The Newton-Raphson iterations starts here while del>1e-6 for i=1:5 temp=0; for k=1:5 temp=temp+mv(i)*mv(k)*(g(i,k)-j*b(i,k))*exp(j*(th(i)-th(k))); end pcal(i)=real(temp);qcal(i)=imag(temp); end

% The mismatches delp=p-pcal'; delq=q-qcal'; % The Jacobian matrix for i=1:4 ii=i+1; for k=1:4 kk=k+1; j11(i,k)=mv(ii)*mv(kk)*(g(ii,kk)*sin(th(ii)-th(kk))b(ii,kk)*cos(th(ii)-th(kk))); end j11(i,i)=-qcal(ii)-b(ii,ii)*mv(ii)^2; end for i=1:4 ii=i+1; for k=1:4 kk=k+1; j211(i,k)=-mv(ii)*mv(kk)*(g(ii,kk)*cos(th(ii)-th(kk))b(ii,kk)*sin(th(ii)-th(kk))); end j211(i,i)=pcal(ii)-g(ii,ii)*mv(ii)^2; end j21=j211(1:3,1:4); j12=-j211(1:4,1:3); for i=1:3 j12(i,i)=pcal(i+1)+g(i+1,i+1)*mv(i+1)^2; end j22=j11(1:3,1:3); for i=1:3 j22(i,i)=qcal(i+1)-b(i+1,i+1)*mv(i+1)^2; end jacob=[j11 j12;j21 j22]; delpq=[delp(2:5);delq(2:4)]; corr=inv(jacob)*delpq; th=th+[0;corr(1:4)]; mv=mv+[0;mv(2:4).*corr(5:7);0]; del=max(abs(delpq)); indx=indx+1; end preal=(pcal+[0 0 0 0 0.24])*100; preac=(qcal+[0 0 0 0 0.11])*100; % Power flow calculations for i=1:5 v(i)=mv(i)*exp(j*th(i)); end for i=1:4

end

for k=i+1:5 if (ybus(i,k)==0) s(i,k)=0;s(k,i)=0; c(i,k)=0;c(k,i)=0; q(i,k)=0;q(k,i)=0; cur(i,k)=0;cur(k,i)=0; else cu=-(v(i)-v(k))*ybus(i,k); s(i,k)=-v(i)*cu'*100; s(k,i)=v(k)*cu'*100; c(i,k)=100*abs(ych(i,k))*abs(v(i))^2; c(k,i)=100*abs(ych(k,i))*abs(v(k))^2; cur(i,k)=cu;cur(k,i)=-cur(i,k); end end

pwr=real(s); qwr=imag(s); q=qwr-c; % Power loss ilin=abs(cur); for i=1:4 for k=i+1:5 if (ybus(i,k)==0) pl(i,k)=0;pl(k,i)=0; ql(i,k)=0;ql(k,i)=0; else z=-1/ybus(i,k); r=real(z); x=imag(z); pl(i,k)=100*r*ilin(i,k)^2;pl(k,i)=pl(i,k); k)=100*x*ilin(i,k)^2;ql(k,i)=ql(i,k); end end end

ql(i,