LOSS MINIMIZATION IN OPTIMAL POWE R FLOW

by
AHIAKWO C.O. and IGWEH C.O.

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering

Rivers State University of Science and Technology
Nkpolu-Oroworukwo, Port Harcourt.
ABSTRACT
Loss minimization in optimal power flow (OPF) is the minimization of the
losses on the line due to current heating. This is done by selecting and
augmenting the already power solution from the cost minimization done before
on the system.
This paper has a set of algorithm for the analysis of congested power
systems, which will provide for the most efficient operational cost with
minimum line losses. The algorithms are simulated in the computer using
MATLAB and convergence is achievable at ranges.
This paper therefore is geared towards developing
algorithms to solve this congestion management problem.

suitable OPF

Keyword:- Optimal Power flow (OPF), control variables, congestion

management, line losses
INTRODUCTION
Optimal Power Flow (OPF) is a generic term that describes a broad class of
problems. It determines optimal control variables and system quantities for efficient
power system planning and operation.[1]
When we talk of power system
optimization, it has to always relate to optimal power flow, which is simply a

mathematical model for the calculation of power flow in a power system,

taking into account the line losses, lagging or leading power factor effect,
regular disturbance due to switching etc.
For over one hundred years, the electric power industry in nearly
every country worldwide operated as a regulated industry. But in our
own country, Nigeria the difference is the case, since the government is
the sole operator of the power system in operation.
Many methods have been used in the computation of the operation
and planning of a power system, some of which are dealt with in this
work. There is a full analysis of a case study using the power loss
minimization equation(2).
The need for a non-stop power supply, made it very necessary to have
a very effective computational method which will allow both the addition
of new loads/ generator input and proper running of any number of substations without exceeding the transmission limits.

3.1

THEORETICAL ANALYSIS
RESEARCH GOAL
1

The need for the control of the ever-growing demand of power

via congestio n management could be analyzed in this work by
formulating the following problems which are the usual control
variables in the following problems which ar e the usual control
variables in loss minimization.
(a) Generator bus voltage magnitudes
(b) Transformer tap ratios
(c) Switch able shunt capacitors and inductors
(d) Phase-s hifter angles
In the formulation of loss minimization, generator voltages
8
and transformer tap ratios are used as control variables.
During the o ptimization, transformer Tap ratios are tr eated as
continuous variable, and are later adjusted to the nearest
physical tap position and reiterated ho lding the taps at the
adjusted values which is justified based on the small stepsize
usually found in transformers (3).
The following assumptions are made in the formulation of
the loss minimizatio n objective.
1.
Loss minimization is done after a cost minimizatio n,
holding the active power generations excluding the slack
bus generation at their optimal values.
2.
Generator bus voltages and transformer tap ratios are used
as control variables, shunt reactances and phase shifter
angels (where available) are held at nominal values.
3.
During the optimization the transformer tap ratios are
treated as continuo us variables, after which they are
adjusted to the nearest physical tap positio n and
reiterated.
4.
R estrictions made on the real and imaginary components
of the complex voltage across the lines control the current
flow approximately.
5.
C onting ency constraints are neglected.
MATHEMATICAL MODEL FO R LOS S MINIMIZ ATION

The objective functio n to be minimized is given by the sum of

all line losses.
Nl

Pl =

ik
K=1individual
P ik, the

(1)
line losses is given in terms of voltages

Where
and phase angles as
P ik =g k (v i 2+vj 2 -2v iv j cos ( i - j )) k=1,.., N l (2.)
Which can be transformed to equivalent rectangular form as
P ik =g k (e i 2+f i 2 +e j 2+f j 2)-2(e i e j +f i fj ))(3.)
K=1,..,N l
Hence, simplified to be,
P ik =g k ((e i -e j ) 2 +(f i -f j )2)
K=1,.N (4)

Therefore the objective function can be written as

N l g k ((e i -e j ) 2 +(f i -f j ) 2),, ..(5)
The equality
Pl = Sconstraints are given by
Pi-Pgi K=1 + Pdi = 0
i = 1,...,Nb
..(6)
i gen
Qi Qgi + Qdi = 0
i = 1,...,Nb
..(7)
i gen-synch
Nb

Nb

Where Pi = S (Gijei Bijfi) + fi S (Gijfj +Bijei)

j =1
j =1
Nb

.(8)

Nb

Qi + Fi S (Gijei Bijej) ei S (Gijfj +Bijei)

j =1
j =1
i = 1,...,Nb ..(9)
kp1

and
kp2 = 0
kp1 = 1,,Npi
kp2 =- 1,.Npi
kp1 = kp2

..(10)

The inequality constraints are

vimin Vi vimax
i = 1,...,Nb
..(11)
Pgimin Pgi Pgimax
i slack bus .(12)
Qgimin Qgi Qgimax i = 1,.,Ngq
..(13)
imin i imax
i =1,,Ni
..(14)
-kei . Iimax ei ej kei . Iimax l = 1,,N1
...-(15)
i,j defined by l
-kfi . Iimax fi fj kfi . Iimax l = 1,,N1
.(16)
i,j defined by 1.
It should be noted that equation (2.24) is not linear in the
rectangular formulation, hence an approximate linear form is
K eimin . Vimax ei keimax Vimax i = 1,,Nb ..(17)
Kfimin . Vimin fi kfimax . Vimax
i = 1,,Nb
(18)
V in exact form given as
Vi2 = ei2 + fi2
i = 1,,Nb
(19)
The transformer tap ratio controls the optimization via the admittance
matrix. The relationship is as follows
Gli = S ( g~Li +
LieN Li

g Li
tm

g Li )

i = 1,,Nb..

(20)

RESULTS
Using data from the Nigeria Power System.
The following results are enclosed:
==========================================================================

System Summary
==========================================================================

Buses
20
Generators
6
Committed Gens 6
Loads
14
Fixed
14
Dispatchable 0
Shunts
1
Branches
22
Transformers
0
Inter-ties
0
Areas
1

P (MW)
Q (MVAr)
----------------------------Total Gen Capacity 335.0
-95.0 to 405.9
On-line Capacity
335.0
-95.0 to 405.9
Generation (actual) 159.7
-850.5
Load
143.3
82.6
Fixed
143.3
82.6
Dispatchable
0.0 of 0.0
0.0
Shunt (inj)
0.0
0.2
Losses (I^2 * Z)
2072.71
-8728.84
Branch Charging (inj) 855.9
Total Inter-tie Flow 0.0
0.0

Minimum
Maximum
------------------------- -------------------------------Voltage Magnitude
0.114 p.u. at bus 15
16.725 p.u. @ bus 17
Voltage Angle
-171.28 deg at bus 13
167.85 deg @ bus 10
P Losses (I^2*R)
19097.22 MW @ line 12-17
Q Losses (I^2*X)
7895.73 MVAr @ line 12-17
==========================================================================
======
| Bus Data
|
==========================================================================
======
Bus Voltage
Generation
Load
# Mag(pu) Ang(deg) P (MW) Q (MVAr) P (MW) Q (MVAr)
----- ------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------1 1.000 0.000 -5.98 -64.10
2 1.000 -34.772 60.97 104.03 21.70 12.70
3 1.000 17.987 21.59 -274.49
2.40 1.20
4 1.000 150.945 26.91 -484.30
7.60 1.60
5 1.000 -146.875 19.20 -64.07
6 1.000 -170.527 37.00 -67.54
7 1.013 -27.107
22.80 10.90
8 2.212 -148.473
30.00 30.00
9 0.627 -33.653
10 0.136 167.850
5.80
2.00
11 0.998 -0.192
12 8.175 119.762
11.20
7.50
13 0.143 -171.276
4

14 0.985 152.678
6.20
1.60
15 0.114 41.845
8.20 2.50
16 8.177 131.637
3.50
1.80
17 16.725 54.964
9.00
5.80
18 0.858 -30.515
3.20 0.90
19 1.447 -67.428
9.50 3.40
20 2.227 -51.645
2.20 0.70
-------- -------- -------- -------Total: 159.69 -850.46 143.30 82.60
==========================================================================
======
| Branch Data
|
==========================================================================
======
Brnch From To From Bus Injection To Bus Injection Loss (I^2 * Z)
# Bus Bus P (MW) Q (MVAr) P (MW) Q (MVAr) P (MW) Q (MVAr)
----- ----- ----- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------1 11 1 0.00 -0.00
0.00 -1.10 0.002 -0.00
2 4 1 -35.61 -52.22 -5.98 -63.00 -41.593 -114.34
3 5 13 8.34 -61.28
2.36 8.03 10.701 -50.19
4 6 13 15.82 -65.53 -2.14
9.27 13.678 -55.40
5 13 10 -0.94 -0.89 1.12
0.39 0.179 -0.41
6 13 18
6.32 -9.23 -5.52 -67.90 0.800 -75.81
7 18 8 -158.57 -239.91 350.84 -660.56 192.274 -887.34
8 5
6 -25.39 -13.42 27.78 -2.01 2.389 -11.13
9 5
9 67.23 18.44 28.04 -34.38 95.271 -14.02
10 9 4 72.99 -89.36 127.36 -133.58 200.350 -219.85
11 4 12 -710.39 -457.78 6900.78 105.70 6190.387 -270.28
12 12 16 3202.46 5718.49 -1946.22 -6368.94 1256.243 -537.45
13 12 17 4959.47 -10063.57 14137.75 17480.74 19097.222 7895.73
14 2 7 23.37
2.19 -22.80 -10.90 0.573 -3.18
15 5
2 -99.79 -7.62 -43.95 89.14 -143.736 82.95
16
4 14
6.34
1.09 -6.20 -1.60 0.136 -0.17
17 4 19 -187.09 156.59 -68.87 342.85 -255.958 508.81
18 9 19 -42.91 -83.84 176.80 31.58 133.891 12.56
19 9 15 268.82 -12.11 -14.28 -46.77 254.541 -58.39
20 15 19
9.29 -33.86 444.94 -32.99 454.231 -64.31
21 19 20 54.70 -168.95 -150.89 219.82 -96.183 57.37
22 17
3 -27114.70 -14710.06 1822.01 -275.69-25292.688 -14923.97
-------- -------Total: 2072.709 -8728.84
>> | System Summary
|
==========================================================================
======
How many?
--------------------Buses
20
Generators
6
Committed Gens
Loads
14
Fixed
14

How much?
P (MW)
Q (MVAr)
------------------- ------------- ----------------Total Gen Capacity 335.0
-95.0 to 405.9
On-line Capacity
335.0
-95.0 to 405.9
6 Generation (actual) 159.7
-850.5
Load
143.3
82.6
Fixed
143.3
82.6
5

Dispatchable 0
Dispatchable
Shunts
1 Shunt (inj)
Branches
22 Losses (I^

0.0

0.0 of 0.0
0.2

0.0

INTERIOR POINT RESULTS

[ e1, e2, e3, e4, e5, e6, e7, e8, e9, e10, e11, e12, e13, e14, e15, e16, e17, e18, e19,
e20]
1.200, 0.9000,0.9000,0.9000,0.9000,0.9000,0.9000,0.9000,0.9000,0.9000,0.9000
0.9000 , 0.9000,0.900, 0.900 , 0.9000, 0.9000, 0.9000, 0.9000, 0.9000
[ f1, f2, f3, f4, f5, f6, f7, f8, f9, f10, f11, f12, f13, f14, f15, f16, f17, f18, f19, f20]
0 , 0.1380, 0.0567,-0.1512,-0.0796,0.2382,-0.2270,-0.0255,0.1682,0.0066,0.0107
0.0876, -0.1800,-0.2157,0.2165,0.1004,0.1621,-0.245, 0.1809,-0.2011
slack variable
-0.000, 4.9349,-0.0000,-0.0000,0.0000, -0.000, 0.0000,0.0000,-0.0000,0.0000,-0.000,
0,0.0000,0.0000,-0.0000,0.0000,0.0000,-0.0000,0.0000,0.0000,-0.0000,-0.0000,0.0000, 0.0000,0,0.0000, 0.0000,-0.0000,-0.0000,-0.0000,-0.0000,0.0000, 0,-0.0000,0.0000,-0.0000,-0.000, 0.0000,0.0000,-0.0000, 0.0000
Total Power loss=
0.7100

CONCLUSION

This paper has identified a class of decompositions and has

selected a super-hybrid that is well suited to problems. The algorithm
have the following attractive features.
(i)
Nonlinear
objective
functions
and
constraints
can
be
accommodation directly, without tricks or intricate manoevres.
(ii) It is convenient to chooses these variables to be the same as the
ones calculated in a load flow program.
(iii) The algorithm will force convergence from profoundly infeasible
starting points.
(iv) The algorithm has been proved to be fast in tests on large
problems.
(v) To calculate the sensitivity of the optimal solution to parameter
variations, the algorithm has all the required information.
REFERENCE
1. Momah. J.A., Guo S. X., Ogbuobiri C.E. and Adapa R. (1993) The
Quadratic Interior point method for solving power system
problems IEEE Trans. On power system, Vol. 9.
2.
British Britannica Encyclopedia (1980)
3.

Burechett R. C., Happ H.H. and Wirgau K.A. (1982) Large Scale
Optimal Power Flow, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and
System, Vol. PAS 101, (No, 10) 3722-3732.

4.

Dommel H.W. and Tinney W.F 91968) Optimal Power Flow

solutions IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems,
Vol. PAS 87, 1866-1876.
5. Momoh J.A. (2001) Electric Power System Applications
Optimization. Marcel Deker Inc. New York 339-399.

of

6. Chukwu, Nwodo, and Ahiakwo (2005) Modelling of Phase Shifting

Transformer for Load Flow Studies. AMSE Journals .
7.

P.E.GILL,w.Murray,M.A

Saunders,andM.H.Wright,

Quadratic

Programmming-Based Methods for Large scale Nonlinearly constrained

Optimization,Technical

Report

SOL

81-1,Systems

Optimization

Laboratory,Stanford University,January 1981.

8.

http://www.pserc.cornell.edu/matpower/matpower.html
7