IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 29, NO.

4, JULY 2014 1503

Calculation of Power Transfer Limit Considering
Electro-Thermal Coupling of Overhead
Transmission Line
Xiaoming Dong, Member, IEEE, Chengfu Wang, Jun Liang, Xueshan Han, Feng Zhang, Hua Sun,
Mengxia Wang, and Jingguo Ren
AbstractIn this paper, new formulations of the power ow and
continuation power ow that allow for electro-thermal coupling
in transmission lines have been proposed. The new formulations
capture the overhead lines electro-thermal 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. The paper demonstrates this by
applying the new formulations to the power transfer limit cal-
culation. Generally, power transfer limits are dened either by
encountering a lines thermal limit or detecting the onset of voltage
collapse in the system. Studies based on 2-bus and 14-bus test
systems are used to demonstrate the efcacy of the new formula-
tions for both situations. For these studies, specic point-to-point
power transfer limits are calculated with and without the lines
electro-thermal coupling effects and the results are compared.
Index TermsContinuation method, electro-thermal coupling,
power ow, saddle-node bifurcation, thermal limit.
I. INTRODUCTION
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 dened by encountering a system
voltage collapse point, also known as the saddle-node bifurca-
tion (SNB) point [9][13]. In either case, values of the PTLs are
heavily inuenced by the characteristics of the lines forming the
power network.
Manuscript received August 12, 2012; revised 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 Science-Technology Founda-
tion for Middle-aged and Young Scientist of Shandong Province, China (No.
BS2013NJ011). Paper no. TPWRS-00833-2012.
X. Dong and C. Wang are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Ts-
inghua University, Beijing 100084, China (e-mail: 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 (e-mail:
liangjun@sdu.edu.cn).
H. Sun is with the Department of Electrical Automation, Shandong Labour
Vocational and Technology College, Jinan 250022, China.
Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TPWRS.2013.2296553
An effective method for PTL evaluation is the power 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 cases, before encountering an op-
erating limit, the system state approaches an SNB point, ren-
dering the PF Jacobian matrix ill-conditioned and the PF iter-
ations non-convergent. An approach that allows running PFs
very close to an SNBpoint is the continuation power 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 xed, ignoring their variations with line
currents. This approximation introduces an error in the resulting
PTLs that, for certain class of power grids, could be signicant.
Therefore, an objective of this paper 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 current, 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, steady-state
electro-thermal 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 ow (ETC-PF) model is proposed.
Then, in Section V ow diagrams detailing the steps com-
prising the ETC-PF and ETC-CPF procedures are presented.
Section VI deploys two case studies to show the degree at
which PTL values can be inuenced by the new formulations.
In Section VII, the main results are summarized and key con-
clusions are recapped.
II. SNB ANALYSIS WITH CHANGING RESISTANCE
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 , dening the SNB, is solely
determined by , and .
(1)
0885-8950 2014 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
1504 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 29, NO. 4, JULY 2014
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of a simple radial power system.
Fig. 2. Relationship between and .
Fig. 3. Relationship between and .
with
(2)
The sensitivity of to changes in is given by
(3)
With the assumption that per unit (p.u.) and
p.u., the relationship between and is shown in
Fig. 2. When the load power factor is xed, an increase in
causes to decline.
As shown in Fig. 3, the sensitivity of to increases
with higher power factors. To reduce power loss and provide
voltage support, shunt capacitors are deployed extensively at
buses serving large loads. Hence, load buses are usually oper-
ated at high power factors, causing the increases in to have
higher impacts on and .
III. STEADY-STATE 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:
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
In the above relations, is the length of the OC; is its unit
weight; , and represent the manufacturer-supplied ref-
erence values for resistance, temperature, and temperature co-
efcient, respectively; , , and are the OC actual series
resistance, temperature and current, respectively; is its am-
bient temperature; is the heat capacity of its material, while
and are its convective and radiation heat transfer coef-
cients, respectively. For each per unit length of the OC, is
its absorbed heat rate; is its convective heat rate and 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, long-term, processes. That
removes time, , from the equations, allowing (4) to be restated
as
(8)
Since and of the th OTL are per-unit quantities, it fol-
lows that
(9)
with
(10)
(11)
(12)
where index refers to the th OTL and , , and are
lines per-unit values for , , and , respectively; is the
system base MVA; is the phase base impedance of the th
OTL; is the base voltage of the th OTL; and represents
both the line base current and the phase base current of the th
OTL under the assumption that the three-phase OTL is star con-
nected. Then, (9) is expressed in its compact form by
(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 dene them.
DONG et al.: CALCULATION OF POWER TRANSFER LIMIT CONSIDERING ELECTRO-THERMAL COUPLING OF OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINE 1505
TABLE I
LINE THERMAL BEHAVIOR COEFFICIENT
TABLE II
LINE PARAMETERS
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.
As shown in Fig. 4, and increase approximately linearly
with increases in .
IV. ETC POWER FLOW
With all of line parameters expressed as per-unit values, the
conventional PF equations are expressed as
(14)
where is the total number of network buses; and are the
active power and reactive power injected into network at bus ,
respectively; is the voltage magnitude at bus ;
is the phase angle between complex bus voltages and
; and are the self-conductance and self-suscep-
tance at bus , respectively; and and are the mutual
conductance and mutual susceptance, respectively, between bus
and . In its compact form, (14) is expressed as follows:
(15)
where
(16)
(17)
When conductance and susceptance are expressed in terms of
resistance and reactance
(18)
(19)
where and are the resistance and reactance, respec-
tively, between bus and bus . Under the assumption that the
th OTL is star connected, the phase current is equal to the line
current and is expressed as follows:
(20)
where indicates that bus and bus are the terminal
buses of the th OTL and is expressed in form of . The
following equations are derived from (20):
(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 ETC-PF model:
.
.
.
.
.
.
(24)
where is the number of OTLs. Vector represents the series
resistances:
(25)
The ETC-PF solution vector, , is comprised of the unknown
vectors , and ; that is
(26)
1506 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 29, NO. 4, JULY 2014
To solve the nonlinear, algebraic, equations in (24), the iter-
ative scheme of (27) is deployed:
(27)
where and represent the steps of the iterations.
The following inequality is used as the convergence standard
of the Newton iteration process:
(28)
where is a small positive number that is given in advance.
In (27), represents the extended Jacobian matrix, which is
expressed as follows:
(29)
where is the conventional Jacobian matrix. The elements of
the matrix are given by the following relations:
(30)
with
(31)
The elements of the matrix are given by the fol-
lowing relations:
(32)
with
(33)
The elements of the matrix are given by the following
relations:
(34)
with
(35)
The elements of the matrix are given by the following
relations:
(36)
with
(37)
V. ETC-PF AND ETC-CPF PROCEDURES
To avoid ill-conditioning problems at and near the SNB, the
ETC-CPF model is derived (see the Appendix). Then, a com-
puter program consisting of the ETC-PF and ETC-CPF models
is designed, and its ow diagram is given in Fig. 5. At the begin-
ning of ETC-PF, 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 at start. Through iterative calculation, the
numerical solutions of the ETC-PF equations and the base point
of ETC-CPF are obtained. This base point is generally
in accordance with typical system operating conditions such as
winter peak or summer peak. Once the base point is given, with
alternating predictor and corrector steps, the ETC-CPF model
traces the solutions of the parametric load ow equation as
changes ( , ). It simulates the process where the
electric power demand and generation are increased gradually
until the SNB is reached .
VI. CASE STUDIES
In this section the new formulations are applied to two case
studies to show how ETC can inuence power grids transfer
limits. For each test system a specic point-to-point power
transfer limit is calculated with and without the ETC effect and
the results are compared.
Case 1 is a simple two-bus 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 14-bus system, which consists of 5 gener-
ation buses and 11 load points, interconnected by 17 lines and
transformers. In this system, power generation and distribution
are performed at 34.5 kV, while power transmission is accom-
plished via 138-kV lines. As shown in Fig. 10, here the power
transfer limit of interest is point-to-point, between the generator
bus 1 and the load at bus 10.
Case 1: Table I species 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.
, which is set to , denotes the value of at the beginning
of ETC-PF simulation; and are respectively the loads ac-
tive and reactive power components.
DONG et al.: CALCULATION OF POWER TRANSFER LIMIT CONSIDERING ELECTRO-THERMAL COUPLING OF OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINE 1507
Fig. 5. Flow diagram of ETC-CPF.
Fig. 6. Simple test power system.
TABLE III
OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINE PARAMETERS
TABLE IV
CPF CALCULATING PARAMETERS
In Fig. 7, PV (1) is obtained using the conventional CPF
model; PV (2) and the resistance curves are obtained using the
ETC-CPF model. The differences between PV (1) and PV (2)
Fig. 7. PV curves and the line resistance curve.
TABLE V
RESULTS CALCULATED BY THE TWO METHODS
are the result of ignoring the ETC. Some specic data are given
in Table V for comparison.
In Table V, is the critical active power at the SNB
point; is the critical series resistance at the SNB point;
is the initial value; and denotes the solution of the
ETC-PF model as well as the base point of ETC-CPF. As
shown in Table V, when using conventional CPF, ,
and are all equal to due to ignore the ETC. However,
when ETC is taken into account, there exists a 6.25% margin
of error between and , which are 0.0880 and 0.0935,
respectively. At the critical point in ETC-CPF, reaches
0.1142, with a 24% margin of error compared to . In Fig. 7,
the critical powers and are calculated by the con-
ventional method and the ETC-CPF model, respectively. To
quantitatively express the error between the two methods, the
following parameter is dened:
(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 . Points A,
B, and C are all related to the trajectory OB. As shown in Fig. 8,
is larger with greater proportions of active power.
Because the line series impedance is highly correlated with
the line length , the results of ETC-CPF will vary due to
changes in . Critical line temperature , corresponding
to different , can be produced by ETC-CPF. , introduced
as TL, is set to 70 . Then, as shown in Fig. 9, the relationship
1508 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 29, NO. 4, JULY 2014
Fig. 8. SNB boundary comparison and error analysis.
Fig. 9. Relationship among , SNB, and TL.
among SNB, TL, and is revealed by comparing and
. When is longer than 119 km, is lower than .
It implies that the SNB is the major limitation for long-distance
power transmission; on the other hand, more attention must be
paid to TL for short-distance power transmission.
Case 2: In this case, an IEEE 14-bus test system (see Fig. 10)
is analyzed using both the conventional method and the new
method. The is set to 100 MW. Some line parameters
are modied and supplemented as shown in Table VI. is
the line charging capacitance. In traditional system studies, line
overloads are decided by comparing line currents against their
maximum allowable currents, . A lines , also known
as its TL, is obtained using (9) with ; that is shown
in (39) at the bottom of the page.
The values given in Table VI are obtained using (39)
with . The lines thermal coefcients used in
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.
Fig. 10. IEEE 14-bus test system.
TABLE VI
LINE PARAMETERS OF THE IEEE 14-BUS TEST SYSTEM
Establishing the feasibility of this option, that is whether bus 1
can in fact supply sufcient 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 CONSIDERING ELECTRO-THERMAL 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 ETC-CPF, are discussed.
The trend lines in Fig. 11 are obtained using conventional
CPF. They show increases in the OTL currents, as the active
power demand at bus 10 is increased. Parameter , dened 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 rst over-current OTL is bus6bus11,
followed by bus9bus10, bus7bus9, bus10bus11, and
bus6bus13. Therefore, based on CPF analysis, the maximum
active power that can be served at bus 10 (that is, ) is 0.627
p.u., while is 2.340 p.u..
The trends of line temperatures obtained by ETC-CPF
are shown in Fig. 12. The rst over-temperature
OTL is bus6bus11, followed by bus7bus9, bus9bus10 and so
on. and are 0.544 p.u. and 1.506 p.u., respectively,
which are signicantly different from the results of the conven-
tional method. The differences between these values and their
CPF counterparts are simply due to OTL resistances changing
with their line temperatures. The results of the ETC-CPF are
expected to be more accurate because 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
ETC-CPF. 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 14-bus system, which is used in con-
structing Case 2, is a special low voltage network. As shown in
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-
uence of electro-thermal coupling is considerable. However,
Fig. 12. Analysis with ETC-CPF.
for high voltage networks, the lines values are typically
much smaller. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that the inu-
ence of electro-thermal coupling on high voltage power grids to
be much smaller than those indicated by Case 2. In other words,
the differences in the values of and , produced by
CPF and ETC-CPF, would be markedly smaller.
VII. CONCLUSIONS
Traditional calculation of power transfer limits neglects the
electro-thermal coupling in overhead transmission lines. This
results in overestimating the power transfer limits, the extent
of which can be signicant for certain systems. In this paper, a
new power ow formulation that takes into account the electro-
thermal couplings of overhead transmission lines is introduced.
Then, using the Continuation Method framework, it has been
used to calculate the power transfer limits for two study cases.
The results obtained for Case 2, which uses the IEEE 14-bus
test system, indicate 13.45% error in the value of a power
transfer limit, when it is calculated using the conventional
method and dened 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. Therefore, with accurate model pa-
rameters, it is capable of consistently producing more precise,
and therefore more reliable, values for power transfer limits.
APPENDIX
ETC-CPF MODEL
The ETC-CPF model consists of four parts:
1510 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 29, NO. 4, JULY 2014
1) Parameterization: When parameter is introduced into
the ETC-PF equations to represent the power increment, (A1)
is derived:
(A1)
where denotes the original active power at bus ; denotes
the original reactive power at bus ; denotes the rate of ac-
tive power change at bus as changes; and denotes the
rate of reactive power change at bus as changes. Specically,
and should be given in advance to determine the pro-
portion of incremental power. With (A1), the ETC-PF equation
becomes a parametric equation, the solutions of which are de-
termined by the parameter . The ETC-CPF equation is written
as follows for brevity:
(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 is calculated by the corrector of the last step (at the rst
predictor-corrector step, is initialized in accordance with the
solutions of ETC-PF); is the step size controlling coefcient;
and is the tangent vector, which can be calculated according
to (A4). (the last element of vector ) denotes the SNB:
(A4)
with
(A5)
Equation (A5) represents a set in which the th component
is 1 and the others are zero. The local parameter is calculated
according to (A6). For the rst predictor-corrector step, is
initialized to to provide an initial direction:
(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:
(A8)
where and represent the step of the iterations.
The following inequality is used to judge the convergence of
(A8):
(A9)
where is a small positive number that is given in advance.
4) Step-Size Control: In the calculation cases, the coefcient
in (A3) is set to a constant and is a sufciently small value.
REFERENCES
[1] IEEE Standard 738-1993 , IEEE Standard for Calculating the Current-
Temperature Relationship of Bare Overhead Conductors, 1993.
[2] M. W. Davis, A new thermal rating approach: The real-time thermal
rating system for strategic overhead conductor transmission lines
part I general description and justication of the real time thermal
rating system, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-96, no. 3, pp.
803809, 1977.
[3] M. W. Davis, A new thermal rating approach: The real-time thermal
rating system for strategic overhead conductor transmission lines part
II steady state thermal rating program, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst.,
vol. PAS-96, no. 3, pp. 810825, 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. PAS-97, no. 2, pp.
444455, 1978.
[5] M. W. Davis, A new thermal rating approach: The real time thermal
rating system for strategic overhead conductor transmission lines part
IVdaily comparisons of real-time and conventional thermal ratings and
establishment of typical annual weather models, IEEE Trans. Power
App. Syst., vol. PAS-99, no. 6, pp. 21842192, 1980.
[6] D. A. Douglass and A. A. Edris, Real-time monitoring and dynamic
thermal rating of power transmission circuits, IEEE Trans. Power
Del., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 14071417, 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. 798805, 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.
17381745, 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. 905913, Aug. 1993.
[10] J. Lu, C. W. Liu, and J. S. Thorp, New methods for computing a
saddle-node bifurcation point for voltage stability analysis, IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 978989, May 1995.
[11] K. Chen, A. Hussein, M. E. Bradley, and H. Wan, A performance-
index guided continuation method for fast computation of saddle-node
bifurcation in power systems, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 18, no.
2, pp. 753760, May 2003.
[12] M. Perninge, V. Knazkins, M. Amelin, and L. Soder, Risk estimation
of critical time voltage instability induced by saddle-node bifurcation,
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 16001610, Aug. 2010.
[13] S. Grijalva, Individual branch and path necessary conditions for
saddle-node bifurcation voltage collapse, IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 1219, 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. 584593, 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. 416423, Feb.
1992.
[16] H. D. Chiang, A. J. Flueck, and K. S. Shah, A practical tool for tracing
power system steady-state stationary behavior due to load and genera-
tion variations, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 623632,
Nov. 1995.
[17] A. J. Flueck and J. R. Dondeti, A new continuation power ow tool
for investigating the nonlinear effects of transmission branch parameter
variations, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 223227, Feb.
2000.
DONG et al.: CALCULATION OF POWER TRANSFER LIMIT CONSIDERING ELECTRO-THERMAL 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 ow with secant predictor, IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 10781085, Aug. 2003.
[19] S. H. Li and H. D. Chiang, Continuation power ow with nonlinear
power injection variations, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 23, no. 4,
pp. 16371643, Nov. 2008.
Xiaoming Dong (M10) 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.
Chengfu Wang received the Ph.D. degree from the
School of Electrical Engineering at Shandong Uni-
versity, Jinan, China, in 2012.
He is currently a Research Associate at Tsinghua
University, Beijing, China. His research interests in-
clude and power system operation and renewable op-
eration and control.
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.
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 Vocational and Technology College.
His major is power system operation.
Mengxia Wang is a Lecturer at Shandong University, Jinan, China. His major
is electrical-thermal coupling approach.
Jingguo Ren is a Doctoral Student at Shandong University, Jinan, China. His
research interests include voltage source converter based dc transmission and
multi-terminal dc transmission.