IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 29, NO. 4, JULY 2014
1503
Calculation of Power Transfer Limit Considering ElectroThermal Coupling of Overhead Transmission Line
Xiaoming Dong, Member, IEEE , Chengfu Wang, Jun Liang, Xueshan Han, Feng Zhang, Hua Sun, Mengxia Wang, and Jingguo Ren
Abstract— In this paper, new formulations of the power ﬂ ow and continuation power ﬂ ow that allow for electrothermal coupling in transmission lines have been proposed. The new formulations capture the overhead lines’ electrothermal coupling effects by treating their series resistances as temperature dependent vari ables. They generate results that can differ from the results of conventional formulations markedly, particularly for problems centring on line impedances. T he paper demonstrates this by applying the new formulations to the power transfer limit cal culation. Generally, power transfer limits are deﬁ ned either by encountering a line’s thermal limit or detecting the onset of voltage collapse in the system. Studies based on 2bus and 14bus test systems are used to demonstrate the ef ﬁ cacy of the new formula tions for both situations. For these studies, speci ﬁ c pointtopoint power transfer limits are calculated with and without the lines’ electrothermal coupling effects and the results are compared.
Index Terms— Continuation method, electrothermal coupling, power ﬂ ow, saddlenode bifurcation, thermal limit.
I. I NTRODUCTION
A central problem in electricity markets is establishing the maximum power that can be safely transferred between a
generating plant and a load center, known as the power transfer limit (PTL). In PTL formulation, the PTL is reached when the temperature, or alternatively the current, of a transmission line reaches its allowable level, called thermal limit (TL) [1]–[8]. Al ternatively, with the rampant increase in voltage stability (VS) problems, the PTL could be de ﬁ ned by encountering a system voltage collapse point, also known as the saddlenode bifurca tion (SNB) point [9]–[13]. In either case, values of the PTLs are heavily in ﬂ uenced by the characteristics of the lines forming the power network.
Manuscript received August 12, 2012; re vised December 19, 2012, April 24, 2013, August 18, 2013, and October 08, 2013; accepted December 17, 2013. Date of publication January 10, 2014; date of current version June 16, 2014. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51307101, 51177091, and 51077087), the ScienceTechnology Founda tion for Middleaged and Young Scientist of Shandong Province, China (No. BS2013NJ011). Paper no. TPWRS008332012.
X. Dong and C. Wang are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Ts
inghua University, Beijing 100084, China (email: dong.xiaoming@126.com).
J. Liang, X. Han, F. Zhang, M. Wang, and J. Ren are with the School of
Electrical Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan 250061, China (email:
liangjun@sdu.edu.cn).
H. Sun is with the Department of Electrical Automation, Shandong Labour
Vocational and Technology College, Jinan 250022, China.
Digital Object Identi ﬁ er 10.1109/TPWRS.2013.2296553
An effective method for PTL evaluation is the power ﬂ ow (PF) simulation. It involves gradual increases in power demands at receiving buses, while maintain the power balance by ad justing outputs of sending generators, until a device operating limit is encountered. In some cas es, before encountering an op erating limit, the system state approaches an SNB point, ren dering the PF Jacobian matrix illconditioned and the PF iter ations nonconvergent. An app roach that allows running PFs very close to an SNB point is the continuation power ﬂ ow (CPF) [14]–[19], which is based on the principles of the Continuation Method (CM). In the conventional PF and CPF formulations, line series re sistances are treated as ﬁ xed, ignoring their variations with line currents. This approximation intr oduces an error in the resulting PTLs that, for certain class of power grids, could be signi ﬁ cant. Therefore, an objective of this p aper is to indicate how large such errors can become and which power grids tend to mag nify them. Note that, as the primary focus of this study is on the relationships among line curre nt, temperature, and series re sistance, impacts of atmospheric/meteorological conditions on these quantities are ignored here. The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section II reveals that, even for a primitive power system, line resis tance changes alter the SNB point. In Section III, steadystate electrothermal coupling (ETC ) equations [2]–[8] are derived from dynamic heat balance relations of overhead transmission lines (OTL). Using the analyses of Sections II and III, in Section IV the ETC power ﬂ ow (ETCPF) model is proposed. Then, in Section V ﬂ ow diagrams detailing the steps com prising the ETCPF and ETCCPF procedures are presented. Section VI deploys two case s tudies to show the degree at which PTL values can be in ﬂ uenced by the new formulations. In Section VII, the main results are summarized and key con clusions are recapped.
II. SNB A NALYSIS W ITH C HANGING R ESISTANCE
In Fig. 1,
is the voltage source magnitude;
is the branch series impedance; and
is the load impedance. As shown in (1), the critical value of
the power demand
determined by
, de ﬁ ning the SNB, is solely
(1)
08858950 © 2014 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publi cations/rights/index.ht ml for more information.
1504
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 29, NO. 4, JULY 2014
III. S TEADY S TATE ETC
It is assumed that all overhead conductors (OCs) of a three phase OTL operate nearly under the same atmospheric/mete orological conditions and have the same physical properties, counting the thermal ones. The dynamic heat balance equations for each OC are the same and are expressed as follows:
erence values for resistance, temperature, and temperature co
efﬁ cient, respectively;
resistance, temperature and current, respectively;
is the heat capacity of its material, while
and
is
is its
radiation rate. For systems with slow varying demands, one can assume
. That is, the OTLs heat balance dynamics can be
ignored, as they are generally slow, longterm, processes. That
its absorbed heat rate;
ﬁ cients, respectively. For each per unit length of the OC,
are its convective and radiation heat transfer coef
is its am
are the OC actual series
, and
bient temperature;
is its convective heat rate and
with
(9)
” refers to the
th OTL and
(10)
(11)
(12)
with
(2)
The sensitivity of
is given by
where index “
line’s perunit values for
system base MVA;
are
is the
th
represents
(3)
, and
is the phase base impedance of the
With the assumption that
per unit (p.u.) and
and
OTL;
is the base voltage of the
is shown in
Fig. 2. When the load power factor is ﬁ xed, an increase in
causes
increases
with higher power factors. To reduce power loss and provide voltage support, shunt capacito rs are deployed extensively at buses serving large loads. Hence, load buses are usually oper
to have
ated at high power factors, causing the increases in
higher impacts on
p.u., the relationship between
to decline.
both the line base current and the phase base current of the
OTL under the assumption that the threephase OTL is star con nected. Then, (9) is expressed in its compact form by
th
As shown in Fig. 3, the sensitivity of
(13)
The assumption that all OTL conductors are constructed from the same material implies their thermal characteristics are the
same and a single set of parameters can be used to de ﬁ ne them.
and
DONG et al. : CALCULATION OF POWER TRANSFER LIMIT CONSID ERING ELECTROTHERMAL COUPLING OF OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINE
1505
TABLE I
_{L} INE T HERMAL B EHAVIOR C OEFFICIENT
TABLE II
_{L} INE P ARAMETERS
Fig. 4. Diagram of the relationship among
, and
Table I contains the parameters used in Section VI to analyze case studies. The line parameters are set as shown in Table II.
increase approximately linearly
and
IV. ETC P OWER F LOW
With all of line parameters expressed as perunit values, the conventional PF equations are expressed as
conductance and mutual susceptance, respectively, between bus
. In its compact form, (14) is expressed as follows:
(15)
(16)
(17)

(20) 

where indicates that bus 
and bus 
are the terminal 

buses of the following equations ar e derived from (20): th OTL and is expressed in form of 

. The 


(21) 

Equation (18) is abbreviated as follows: 


(22) 

Equation (23) is derived from (13) and (22): 


(23) 
The equations in (24), which treat OTL series resistances as PF variables, represent the ETCPF model:
(25)
The ETCPF solution vector,
vectors
and
; that is
, is comprised of the unknown
(26)
1506
To solve the nonlinear, algebraic, equations in (24), the iter ative scheme of (27) is deployed:
(28)
where
is a small positive number that is given in advance.
represents the extended Jacobian matrix, which is
In (27),
expressed as follows:
(29)
with
(31)
The elements of the matrix lowing relations:
are given by the fol
(32)
with
(33)
The elements of the matrix relations:
are given by the following
The elements of the matrix relations:
(35)
are given by the following
(36)
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 29, NO. 4, JULY 2014
with
(37)
V. ETCPF AND ETCCPF P ROCEDURES
To avoid illconditioning problems at and near the SNB, the ETCCPF model is derived (see the Appendix). Then, a com puter program consisting of th e ETCPF and ETCCPF models is designed, and its ﬂ ow diagram is given in Fig. 5. At the begin ning of ETCPF, an initial point must be given for the iteration process. Variables representing line series resistances are initial ized to their rated values. Voltage magnitudes and voltage angles are initialized for a “ ﬂ at start”. Through iter ative calculation, the numerical solutions of the ETCPF equations and the base point
of ETCCPF
are obtained. This ba se point is generally
in accordance with typical syst em operating co nditions such as winter peak or summer peak. Once the base point is given, with alternating predictor and corrector steps, the ETCCPF model
traces the solutions of the parametric load ﬂ ow equation as
changes (
electric power demand and gener ation are increased gradually
). It simulates the process where the
until the SNB is reached
VI. C ASE S TUDIES
In this section the new formulations are applied to two case studies to show how ETC can in ﬂ uence power grid’s transfer limits. For each test system a speci ﬁ c pointtopoint power transfer limit is calculated with and without the ETC effect and the results are compared. Case 1 is a simple twobus power system, comprised of a gen erator and a load, connected by an OTL. The simplicity of this case allows one to explore the impacts of various system pa rameters on PTL in the presence of ETC, including load power factor and line length. Case 2 is the IEEE 14bus system, which consists of 5 gener ation buses and 11 load points, interconnected by 17 lines and transformers. In this system, po wer generation and distribution are performed at 34.5 kV, while power transmission is accom plished via 138kV lines. As shown in Fig. 10, here the power transfer limit of interest is pointtopoint, between the generator bus 1 and the load at bus 10. Case 1: Table I speciﬁ es the thermal characteristics of the line in the test system of Fig. 6. The values for other parameters describing the system are provided in Tables III and IV.
at the beginning
are respectively the load’s ac
tive and reactive power components.
of ETCPF simulation;
, which is set to
, denotes the value of
and
DONG et al. : CALCULATION OF POWER TRANSFER LIMIT CONSID ERING ELECTROTHERMAL COUPLING OF OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINE
1507
TABLE III
O VERHEAD T RANSMISSION L INE P ARAMETERS
TABLE IV
_{C}_{P}_{F} _{C} ALCULATING P ARAMETERS
Fig. 7. PV curves and the line resistance curve.
TABLE V
_{R} ESULTS C ALCULATED BY THE T WO M ETHODS
are the result of ignoring the ETC. Some speci ﬁ c data are given in Table V for comparison.
is the critical active power at the SNB
is the critical series resistance at the SNB point;
denotes the solution of the
ETCPF model as well as the base point of ETCCPF. As shown in Table V, when using conventional CPF,
and
when ETC is taken into account, there exists a 6.25% margin
of error between
reaches
In Fig. 7,
the critical powers
are calculated by the con
respectively. At the cri tical point in ETCCPF, 0.1142, with a 24% margin of error compared to
is the initial value; and
are all equal to
and
due to ignore the ETC. However,
, which are 0.0880 and 0.0935,
and
ventional method and the ETCCPF model, respectively. To quantitatively express the er ror between the two methods, the
following parameter is deﬁ ned:
(38)
In Fig. 7,
is approximately 6.9%; however, its value varies
with various trajectories (representing the scaling up of
and
Q). In Fig. 8, the OB trajectory represents the growth path of the load power; point O denotes the base point; point A and point B denote the SNB points obtained by the two methods,
respectively; and point C represents the value of
B, and C are all related to the trajectory OB. As shown in Fig. 8,
Points A,
is larger with greater proportions of active power. Because the line series impedan ce is highly correlated with
In Fig. 7, PV (1) is obtained using the conventional CPF model; PV (2) and the resistance curves are obtained using the 
the line length changes in to different 
, the results of ETCCPF will vary due to , corresponding , introduced . Critical line temperature , can be produced by ETCCPF. 

ETCCPF model. The differences between PV (1) and PV (2) 
as TL, is set to 70 . Then, as shown in Fig. 9, the relationship 
1508
among SNB, TL, and
. When
is revealed by comparing
is longer than 119 km,
is lower than
It implies that the SNB is the major limitation for longdistance power transmission; on the other hand, more attention must be paid to TL for shortdistance power transmission. Case 2: In this case, an IEEE 14bus test system (see Fig. 10) is analyzed using both the conventional method and the new
method. The
is
is set to 100 MW. Some line parameters
are modi ﬁ ed and supplemented as shown in Table VI.
the line charging capacitance. In traditional system studies, line overloads are decided by comparing line currents against their
maximum allowable currents,
, also known ; that is shown
as its TL, is obtained using (9) with in (39) at the bottom of the page.
values given in Table VI are obtained using (39)
with
calculations are those given in Table I. It is assumed that power consumption at bus 10 will be in creased to meet the energy demands of new factories, planned to be constructed in that vicinity. To satisfy the future demands at bus 10, one option is to transfer power from bus 1 to bus 10.
The
. The lines thermal coefﬁ cients used in
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 29, NO. 4, JULY 2014
Fig. 10. IEEE 14bus test system.
TABLE VI
L INE P ARAMETERS OF THE IEEE 14B US T EST S YSTEM
Establishing the feasibility of this option, that is whether bus 1 can in fact supply sufﬁ cient power to bus 10, requires a PTL analysis. This analysis entails increasing the active power at
(39)
DONG et al. : CALCULATION OF POWER TRANSFER LIMIT CONSID ERING ELECTROTHERMAL COUPLING OF OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINE
1509
Fig. 11. Analysis with conventional CPF.
bus 10 in steps and supplying from bus 1 the resulting system power imbalance. Below the results of applying to this problem the conventional CPF, as well as ETCCPF, are discussed. The trend lines in Fig. 11 are o btained using conventional CPF. They show increases in the OTL currents, as the active
power demand at bus 10 is increased. Parameter 

, de ﬁ ned by 

(40) 
has been introduced here to indicate the available loading ca
pacity of each line at each demand level. When for a line
that line is fully loaded and any further increase in the demand at bus 10 leads to its overload. As observed in Fig. 11, using the conventional CPF steps,
the ﬁ rst overcurrent
followed by bus9–bus10, bus7–bus9, bus10–bus11, and bus6–bus13. Therefore, based on CPF analysis, the maximum
active power that can be served at bus 10 (that is,
) is 0.627
p.u., while
obtained by ETCCPF
are shown in Fig. 12. The ﬁ rst overtemperature
OTL is bus6–bus11, followed by bus7–bus9, bus9–bus10 and so
on.
which are signi ﬁ cantly different from the results of the conven tional method. The differences between these values and their CPF counterparts are simply du e to OTL resistances changing with their line temperatures. The results of the ETCCPF are expected to be more accurate b ecause it is based on a more pre cise representation of the OTL operation. The PTL values pro duced by CPF are consistently larger than those generated by ETCCPF. As such, using CPF without a large safety margin could lead to transmission system expansion plans that may fall short of their stipulated power transfer goals. Discussion: The IEEE 14bus system, which is used in con structing Case 2, is a special low voltage network. As shown in
are 0.544 p.u. and 1.506 p.u., respectively,
OTL is bus6–bus11,
is 2.340 p.u
The trends of line temperatures
and
Table VI, the majority of the lines in this system have values that are above 1/4 and a good many of the lines have
values that are approximately 1/2. In this case, the in ﬂ uence of electrothermal coupling is considerable. However,
Fig. 12. Analysis with ETCCPF.
values are typically
much smaller. Therefore, it is r easonable to expect that the in ﬂ u ence of electrothermal coupling on high voltage power grids to be much smaller than those indicated by Case 2. In other words,
, produced by
CPF and ETCCPF, would be markedly smaller.
for high voltage networks, the lines’
and
the differences in the values of
VII. C ONCLUSIONS
Traditional calculation of powe r transfer limits neglects the electrothermal coup ling in overhead transmission lines. This results in overestimating the power transfer limits, the extent of which can be signiﬁ cant for certain systems. In this paper, a new power ﬂ ow formulation that takes into account the electro thermal couplings of overhead transmission lines is introduced. Then, using the Continuation M ethod framework, it has been used to calculate the power transfer limits for two study cases. The results obtained for Cas e 2, which uses the IEEE 14bus test system, indicate 13.45% error in the value of a power transfer limit, when it is calculated using the conventional method and de ﬁ ned by the lines’ thermal limits. This error increases to 34% when the power transfer is limited by the onset of voltage collapse in the power grid. For low voltage networks, the errors in the values of power transfer limits can be substantial. These errors are not typical of high voltage networks, where ratios of line resistances to their reactances are generally very small. Compared with traditional models of transmission lines, the proposed method uses a more detailed representation for the overhead transmission lines. The refore, with accurate model pa rameters, it is capable of consis tently producing more precise, and therefore more reliable, va lues for power transfer limits.
A PPENDIX
ETCCPF M ODEL
The ETCCPF model consists of four parts:
1510
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 29, NO. 4, JULY 2014
is introduced into
the ETCPF equations to represent the power increment, (A1) is derived:
1) Parameterization: When parameter
The following inequality is used to judge the convergence of
(A8):
(A1)
where
(A9)
is a small positive number that is given in advance.
where
denotes the original active power at bus
denotes
portion of incremental power. With (A1), the ETCPF equation becomes a parametric equation, the solutions of which are de
termined by the parameter as follows for brevity:
. The ETCCPF equation is written
(A2)
2) Predictor: The predictor process aims to give an approx imate solution (predicted point) that is the initial value of the corrector iterative processes. The predicted point is computed by (A3) in the predictor process:
(A3)
where
predictorcorrector step, solutions of ETCPF);
is calculated by the corrector of the last step (at the ﬁ rst
is initialized in accordance with the
is the step size controlling coefﬁ cient;
with
(A5)
Equation (A5) represents a set in which the
is 1 and the others are zer o. The local parameter
th component
is calculated
(A6)
3) Corrector: In the corrector process, the predicted point is used as the initial value to solve (A7):
(A7)
To solve (A7), Newton iterative formats are established as shown here:
where
(A8)
4) StepSize Control: In the calculation cases, the coefﬁ cient
in (A3) is set to a constant and is a sufﬁ ciently small value.
_{R} EFERENCES
[1] IEEE Standard 7381993 , IEEE Standard for Calculating the Current Temperature Relationship of Bare Overhead Conductors, 1993.
[2] M. W. Davis, “A new thermal ratin g approach: The r ealtime thermal rating system for strategic overhead conductor transmission lines part I general description and justi ﬁ cation of the real time thermal rating system,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS96, no. 3, pp. 803–809, 1977. [3] M. W. Davis, “A new thermal ratin g approach: The r ealtime thermal rating system for strategic overhead conductor transmission lines part
II steady state thermal rating program,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst. ,
vol. PAS96, no. 3, pp. 810–825, 1977. [4] M. W. Davis, “A new thermal rating approach: The real time thermal rating system for strategic overhead conductor transmission lines part
III steady state thermal rating program continued solar radiation con
siderations,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst. , vol. PAS97, no. 2, pp. 444–455, 1978. [5] M. W. Davis, “A new thermal rating approach: The real time thermal rating system for strategic overhead conductor transmission lines part
IV daily comparisons of realtime and conventional thermal ratings and
establishment of typical annual weather models,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS99, no. 6, pp. 2184–2192, 1980. [6] D. A. Douglass and A. A. Edris, “Realtime monitoring and dynamic thermal rating of power transmission circuits,” IEEE Trans. Power Del. , vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 1407–1417, Jul. 1996. [7] H. Banakar, N. Alguacil, and F. D. Galiana, “Electrothermal coordina tion: Part I theory and implementation scheme,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst. , vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 798–805, May 2005. [8] N. Alguacil, H. Banakar, and F. D. Galiana, “Electrothermal coordina
tion: Part II case studies,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst. , vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 1738–1745, May 2005. [9] I. Dobson and L. Lu, “New methods for computing a closest saddle node bifurcation and worst case load power margin for voltage col lapse,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 905–913, Aug. 1993. [10] J. Lu, C. W. Liu, and J. S. Thorp, “New methods for computing a saddlenode bifurcation point for voltage stability analysis,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst. , vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 978–989, May 1995. [11] K. Chen, A. Hussein, M. E. Bradley, and H. Wan, “A performance index guided continuation method for fast computation of saddlenode bifurcation in power systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst. , vol. 18, no.
2, pp. 753–760, May 2003.
[12] M. Perninge, V. Knazkins, M. Amelin, and L. Soder, “Risk estimation
of critical time voltage instability induced by saddlenode bifurcation,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 1600–1610, Aug. 2010. [13] S. Grijalva, “Individual branch and path necessary conditions for saddlenode bifurcation voltage collapse,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst. , vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 12–19, Feb. 2012.
[14] K. Iba, H. Suzuki, and M. Egawa et al., “Calculation of critical loading condition with nose curve using homotopy continuation method,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst. , vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 584–593, May 1991. [15] V. Ajjarupu and C. Christy, “A tool for steady state voltage stability analysis,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst. , vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 416–423, Feb.
1992.
H. D. Chiang, A. J. Flueck, and K. S. Shah, “A practical tool for tracing power system steadystate stationa ry behavior due to load and genera tion variations,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 623–632, Nov. 1995.
[17] A. J. Flueck and J. R. Dondeti, “A new continuation power ﬂ ow tool
[16]
for investigating the non linear effects of transmission branch parameter
variations,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst. , vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 223–227, Feb.
2000.
DONG et al. : CALCULATION OF POWER TRANSFER LIMIT CONSID ERING ELECTROTHERMAL COUPLING OF OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINE
1511
[18] D. A. Alves, L. C. P. Da Silva, and C. A. Castro et al., “Continuation fast decoupled power ﬂ ow with secant predictor,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst. , vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 1078–1085, Aug. 2003. [19] S. H. Li and H. D. Chiang, “Continuation power ﬂ ow with nonlinear power injection variations,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 1637–1643, Nov. 2008.
Jun Liang received the Ph.D. degree from the School of Electrical Engineering at Shandong University, Jinan, China. He is currently a Professor at Shandong Univer sity. His research interests include power system au tomation, power system operation, and power system control.
Xiaoming Dong (M’10) received the Ph.D. degree from the School of Electrical Engineering at Shan dong University, Jinan, China, in 2013. He is currently a Research Associate at Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. His research interests in clude power system stability, power system control, and power system operation.
Xueshan Han received the Ph.D. degree from the
School of Electrical Engineering and Automation at Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China, in
1994.
He is currently a Professor at Shandong Univer sity, Jinan, China. His research interests include power system generation, power system operation, power system economics and optimization, and electric power economics.
Feng Zhang is a Lecturer at Shandong University, Jinan, China. His major is power system operation.
Hua Sun is a Lecturer at Shandong Labour Vo cational and Technology College. His major is power system operation.
Chengfu Wang received the Ph.D. degre e from the School of Electrical Engineering at S handong Uni versity, Jinan, China, in 2012. He is currently a Res earch Associate a t Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. His rese arch interests in clude and power system operation and renewable op eration and control.
Mengxia Wang is a Lecturer at Shandong University, Jinan, China. His major is electricalthermal coupling approach.
Jingguo Ren is a Doctoral Student at Shandong University, Jinan, China. His research interests include voltage source converter based dc transmission and multiterminal dc transmission.
Molto più che documenti.
Scopri tutto ciò che Scribd ha da offrire, inclusi libri e audiolibri dei maggiori editori.
Annulla in qualsiasi momento.