Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control

DRAFT and INCOMPLETE
Table of Contents
from
A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos
Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control

Chapter 11 ____________________________________________________________ 2
Power System Security Assessment and Control ______________________________ 2
11.1 Introduction___________________________________________________________ 2
11.2 The Effects of an Outage _________________________________________________ 5
11.3 The Operating States/Operating Philosophies _______________________________ 8
11.4 Security Assessment ____________________________________________________ 12
11.5 Contingency Ranking/Selection __________________________________________ 12
11.6 Postcontingency Power Flow Analysis _____________________________________ 23
11.7 Compensation Methods _________________________________________________ 26
11.7.1 Application of Compensation Method to DC Power Flow___________________________ 29
11.7.2 Application of Compensation method to the Fast Decoupled Power Flow ______________ 33
11.7.3 Discussion on Compensation Methods__________________________________________ 39
11.10 Emergency and Restorative Controls_____________________________________ 39

11.9 Corrective Control Computations - DC Network Model ______________________ 41
11.10 Security Constraint Dispatch ___________________________________________ 52
11.11 Corrective Control Computations - AC Network Model _____________________ 57
11.11.3 Discussion_______________________________________________________________ 65
11.12 Interchange Control___________________________________________________ 65

11.12.1 Interchange Control among Control Areas ______________________________________ 66
11.12.2 Power Transfer Control by an ISO ____________________________________________ 69
11.12.2 Available Transfer Capability________________________________________________ 71
11.13 Voltage Control ______________________________________________________ 72

11.13.1 The VAR Dispatch Problem _________________________________________________ 73
11.13.2 Voltage Instability_________________________________________________________ 75
11.14 Effects of Power Transactions on Security ________________________________ 75

11.15 Summary and Discussion ______________________________________________ 75
11.16 Problems ____________________________________________________________ 77
Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos
Chapter 11
Power System Security Assessment and
Control
11.1 Introduction
The concept of power system security is defined as the ability of the system to withstand
major disturbances. Historically, major power system security breaches in the form of
blackouts triggered intense developmental efforts towards the modern energy
management system. Specifically, system security received attention with the highly
publicized 1965 blackout of New York and other blackouts which occurred after that. It
became evident that the security of the system is of paramount importance with social
and economic impact. Much research has been performed to integrate all supervisory
control and data acquisition systems into a central location for the purpose of monitoring
the security of the system. This integration gave birth to the modern energy management
system with the expectation of improved system security. Today, system security remains
one of the major concerns in the control and operation of power systems.
To place power system security in the proper perspective, one must consider the major
objectives in the operation of a power system. These are:
1. minimize operating cost
2. maintain balance between generated power and load including interchange
transactions
3. maintain nominal frequency
4. maintain absolute correct time
5. maintain operating conditions within equipment rating
6. maintain voltage within permissible limits
7. maintain power reserves in order to minimize the risk of loss of load in the event of
random generator outages
8. meet pollution constraints
It is important to note that the recent trends in the electric power industry and the move
towards an Independent System Operator (ISO) or Regional Transmission Organizations
(RTO) do not change these fundamental objectives. For example the operating cost
consists of different component in the new environment but still the objective remains to
minimize this cost. The remaining objectives remain the same, except that in the new
Page 2
Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006
operating environment they may be provided by a number of different entities

(independent power producers) under the name of ancillary services.
We have seen in Chapter 10 that the automatic generation control function keeps a power
system operating near nominal frequency, and near optimal economic conditions
(economic dispatch), and with the generation always balancing exactly the system load
including scheduled power transactions (contracts). The automatic generation control
also regulates the integral of frequency, i.e. the absolute time of the system. Usual
variations of system load are rather smooth. In this case, the operation of the system is
characterized as a slowly drifting steady state condition (quiescent operation). Thus,
objectives 1 through 4 are met (most of the time) with the action of the automatic
generation control loop. Pollution control can be and has been integrated within the
automatic generating control. The ability of automatic generation control loop to satisfy
objectives 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8, has been satisfactory with few exceptions. Such exceptions
are instances of severe generation deficiency (emergency conditions) and electric loads
with heavy industrial intermittent load.
Objectives 3, 5, 6 and 7 are related to system security. Of these, objective 7 relates to the
broader reliability issue. We will not address this objective in this book. We will focus on
objectives 3, 5 and 6. The design of control loops to meet these objectives is very
complex. The problem is further complicated by the fact that system security and
economic operation are competing factors. But what exactly is system security? The
subsequent discussion will try to quantify system security. We start with the definition of
normal operating state
Normal Operating State of a power system is defined as one which meets the following
conditions:
(1) All the load demands (including interchange transactions)
(mathematically we say that the Power Flow Equations are satisfied).
(2) The frequency, f, is constant (60 Hz in USA).
(3) The bus voltage magnitudes are within prescribed limits.
(4) No components are overloaded.
are
met
Conditions (2), (3), and (4) shall be referred to as operating constraints (O) while
condition (1) shall be referred to as demand constraints (D).
A normal operating state is desirable for pure technical and economic reasons. The
electric load demand must be met since this is the reason of existence of the power
system. Frequency constancy is required for a number of reasons; electric clocks must be
accurate, steam turbines should not be subjected to blade resonance, etc. However, the
most important reason for keeping the frequency constant is that its constancy indicates
that total system power balance (generation-load) is maintained. Voltage constancy is
required because all electric appliances from light bulbs to giant motors are voltage rated.
Component overload must be avoided because it causes overheating and risk for damage.
Page 3
For these reasons, it is necessary to ensure that at any instant of time the system operating
state is normal as defined above.
Most of the time the system operates in a normal operating state. However, there are
instances of unexpected (random) component failures which cause abrupt changes in the
operating condition of the system and which may cause violations of load and/or
operating constraints. In this case, it is important that the system operator be alerted
immediately and corrects the situation as soon as possible. For this purpose, the system
must be continuously monitored. In the event of an emergency, automatic control or
operator initiated controls or both should be applied to remedy the situation. We shall
refer to these controls collectively as security controls. It is also desirable to equip the
operator with the ability to predict what equipment failures will cause an emergency
condition. This is accomplished with a set of software called security assessment. Thus,
system security incorporates the following general functions.
1. System Monitoring
2. Security Assessment
3. Security Controls
System monitoring is achieved with the SCADA system and associated software, i.e.
network configurator, on-line power flow or state estimation. Detailed examination of
this task is given in Chapter 7. The objective of this chapter is to examine the tasks of
security assessment and controls as applied in a real time environment for the purpose of
enhancing system security. The following definitions apply:
System security is defined as the ability of the system to withstand random and planned
disturbances without service interruption.
Security assessment is defined as the real time analysis procedures by which the security
of the system is measured (assessed). Security assessment procedures are classified into
steady state or dynamic depending on whether the transients following the disturbance
are neglected or not.
Security Controls comprise the integration of a number of automatic and manual control
functions for the purpose of maintaining normal operating conditions. Such functions
are:
- Electric load transfer
- Bus voltage control
- Generation rescheduling
- Fast start-up Generation
- Electric load control
- Interchange control
- Load shedding
- Other
Page 4
It is important to note that each of the above controls has, in general, unfavorable impact
on system economics. It is therefore important to use these controls sparingly or to
minimize their unfavorable economic effects. This is achieved with a careful integration
of security controls in operation of the power system via a hierarchical control scheme.
This scheme results from careful evaluation of system objectives and operating
philosophies. The underlying theory of the scheme is developed in the next sections.
11.2 The Effects of an Outage

Many times, the normal operation of a power system is disturbed with random events,
such as circuit tripping (transmission line or transformer), generating unit tripping, or any
combination of the two. Depending on the operating state of the system and the nature of
the outage, the effects on the power system may be mild or severe. Figure 11.1 illustrates
in a conceptual way the possible effects of an outage. The figure illustrates that certain
events may lead to a situation characterized as insufficient generation. In this case, the
frequency of the system declines. The remaining units of the system will gradually
increase their output to cover the deficiency. If the amount of generation deficiency is
small, the system will return to a generation-load balanced condition within a short time.
If, however, the deficiency is large, the remaining generators may not be able to make up
the difference due to response rate limitations. In this case, the frequency will decline
fast and the tie lines will be overloaded. Emergency controls are required to remedy this
situation. The most effective emergency control in this case is load shedding. These
controls stabilize the system until the system operating state adjusts to the disturbance.
Lack of emergency controls may increase the vulnerability of the system and the
possibility of system collapse (blackout).
Unit
Failure
Loss of
Generation
Generating
Bus Isolated
Loss of
Tie Line
System
Partitioned
(Islanding)
Insufficient
Generation
Frequency
Decline
Loss of
Load
Cascading
Failures
Load
Bus Isolated
Line
Failure
Line Overload
or Abnormal
Voltage
System
Collapse
Figure 11.1 Possible Effects of an Outage on System Operation

The most usual effects of an outage are equipment overloads and/or abnormal voltages.
It is expedient to examine the limitations imposed by these effects. Power equipment
Page 5
(transformers, lines, cables, etc.) exhibit thermal as well as voltage limitations. Figure
11.2 illustrates the loading capability of certain equipment (i.e. transformer, transmission
line, etc.) vs. time. Note that equipment may withstand some overloads for short periods
of time. The reason is that equipment is thermally limited. For example, the operation of
a liquid filled transformer is limited by the hot spot temperature, i.e. the temperature
anywhere inside the transformer should not exceed a maximum permissible temperature.
This temperature limit is typically smaller than the temperature that will cause insulation
failure by an amount equal to a desire safety margin. Because any piece of equipment has
a certain thermal time constant, the temperature rises slowly as the loading of the
equipment increases. This means that for a short period of time, any piece of equipment
can be overloaded as long as the permissible operating temperatures are not exceeded.
The protection of equipment should act prior to reaching this limit. This is illustrated in
Figure 11.2. Note the time-dependent operating limits and the protection curve.
Similarly, the permissible voltage magnitude may include gray regions as it is
illustrated in Figure 11.3. In cases of overloads or abnormal voltages some corrective
action must be taken to remedy the abnormal operation. Such actions may include
transformer tap adjustments, capacitor bank switching, load transfer, line switching,
generation rescheduling, etc. In some severe cases, load shedding may be necessary.
Protection Curve
30
Dynamic Loading Curve
Red Alarm
Yellow Alarm Region
15
Safe Region
Time (minutes)
45
Loading
Figure 11.2 Loading capability vs. Time and the Relationship to Protective
Device Response
Page 6
Red
Alert
Yellow
Alert
Normal
Yellow
Alert
Red
Alert
Voltage (pu)
Undervoltage
Relay Setting
1.0
Overvoltage
Relay Setting
Figure 11.3 Conceptual Description of Voltage Allowable Levels

Other events may lead to system separation into islands or cascaded failures of
equipment. These may be the worst type of effects, because they are associated with a
high probability of system collapse.
It is, of course, desirable that the effects of an outage be minimized. To achieve this
objective, it should be recognized that a disturbance is always followed by transients
which are determined by system parameters. Human operators cannot control these
transients. Following the transients, some automatic control action may occur, such as
load transfer, line switching, etc. Later human operators may take actions to achieve
specific objectives. Figure 11.4 illustrates in a conceptual way the aftermath of a system
disturbance. The figure illustrates that immediately after a disturbance, the system may
experience network and intermachine oscillations since it is a dynamic system. Following
these dynamics, the governor action will respond to balance the generation and the load
of the system. In case of voltage abnormalities, capacitors or reactors may automatically
switch in or off the system. In case of deviations from scheduled power transactions, the
secondary automatic generation control loop will respond to control the power
transactions. Finally, the economic control loops will be invoked to bring the system
back to normal economic operation. If after all of these automatic controls, problems still
persists, human intervention and operator initiated remedial controls may be utilized.
This type of overall system/operator respond is illustrated in Figure 11.4.
Page 7
Automatic Response
and Control
Operator Initiated
Control
Remedial Action
Economic Dispatch
and Security Dispatch
Area Control Error Adjustments
Automatic Capacitor / Reactor Switching and Load Transfer
Governor Action
Network and Intermachine Transients
10 sec
1 min
10 min
1 hr
Time After Disturbance
Figure 11.4 The Aftermath of a System Disturbance
11.3 The Operating States/Operating Philosophies

As it has been discussed, the operation of an electric power system should satisfy the
following two types of constraints: (1) demand constraints (D) and (2) operating
constraints (O). Mathematically, the load constraints are expressed in the form of the
power flow equations. The operating constraints are expressed in the form of
inequalities, such as system frequency margins, equipment loading, bus voltage
magnitude, generator real and reactive power output, etc. Mathematically, the operating
state of a system can be classified in terms of the status of the demand and operating
constraints. Here we redefine the normal and secure operating states in terms of demand
and operating constraints:
Normal Operating State is characterized by the fact that all operating and demand
constraints are satisfied.
Emergency Operating State is characterized by the fact that one or more operating
constraints are violated. All demand constraints are satisfied.
Page 8
Restorative State is characterized by the fact that one or more demand constraints are
violated (load has been disconnected). All operating constraints are satisfied.
Extreme State is characterized by the fact that one or more demand and one or more
operating constraints are violated.
Earlier, system security was defined in loose terms as the ability of the system to
withstand disturbances. A disturbance typically involves an abrupt change in system
topology or generation (contingency). The number of disturbances that can occur to a
power system is relatively large. For a quantitative definition of system security, the
disturbances must be defined. To avoid ambiguity, consider a set of possible
disturbances which lead to an equal number of contingencies. We shall refer to this set as
the set of postulated contingencies. This set will be further discussed later. In terms of the
postulated contingencies, a normal system state can be further characterized as follows:
Secure Operating State is defined as an operating condition for which all operating and
demand constraints are satisfied for the present operating conditions and all
contingencies in the set of postulated contingencies.
Vulnerable Operating State is defined as an operating condition for which all operating
and demand constraints are satisfied for the present operating conditions, but one or more
operating constraints are violated for one or more contingencies in the set of postulated
contingencies.
During the operation of the system, the operating state may drift to an operating state
other than the normal system state. In this case, action must be taken by the operator or
automatically to bring the system back to a normal state. Collectively we shall call these
controls security controls. Security controls may be (a) corrective, (b) emergency, (c)
restorative or (d) preventive.
Corrective controls are those controls that will move the system from an emergency
state to a normal state.
Emergency controls are those controls that will move the system from an emergency
state to a restorative state.
Restorative controls are those controls that will move the system from a restorative state
to a normal state.
Preventive controls are those controls that will move the system from a normal
vulnerable state to a normal secure state.
Figure 11.5 shows the operating state transition diagram (which was originally
introduced by DyLiacco and subsequently modified by L. Fink) and provides a
conceptual picture of the overall control requirements of a power system. Note that the
demand constraints are denoted with D and the operating constraints are denoted with O.
Page 9
A bar over these symbols denotes that one or more of these constraints are violated. The
figure also characterizes the various control actions as preventive, corrective, emergency
and restorative based on their intended function. In the figure we also denote the
overriding concern in each of the operating states. For example, when the system
operates in a secure state, the overriding concern is economics. Similarly, when the
system has drifted into an emergency state, the overriding concern is system security. It
should be noted that when the system operates in a normal but vulnerable state, the
overriding concern may be both system economics as well as security.
NORMAL and SECURE
System Optimization
D,O
Preventive
Controls
Restorative
Controls
RESTORATIVE
System Security
D,O
Emergency
Controls
EXTREMIS
System Security
Restorative
Controls
NORMAL but
VULNERABLE/INSECURE
Optimization/Security
D,O
Emergency
Controls
Corrective
Controls
EMERGENCY
System Security
D,O
D,O
Transition Due to Disturbances
Transition Due to Control Action
Figure 11.5 Power System Operating States (After DyLiacco and Fink)
The operating objective of any power system is to meet all electric demand, satisfy
operating constraints and withstand disturbances without affecting electric load, i.e. to
operate always in the normal and secure state. However, because the system is subject to
changing conditions, both scheduled and unscheduled (random), it may drift to other
Page 10
undesirable states. Part of the operations scheduling procedure is to predict such changes
and have the system prepared (with the use of security controls) to withstand such
changes. There are many ways by which this action can be implemented. In general, two
philosophies can be identified: (a). Reactive, or (b). Preventative. A concise description
of the two philosophies is described next:
Reactive: For a given system and electric load, the operating conditions (dispatch, tap
settings etc.) are determined by operating system economics subject to operating
constraints, i.e. the system operates in a normal state (secure or vulnerable). System
security may be assessed but as long as the system operating state is normal, no controls
are exercised which may improve system security. In other words, relative to Figure 11.5
no preventive controls are exercised. Security controls are initiated only when the system
drifts into the emergency, extremis or restorative operating states.
Preventative: For a given system and electric load, and a set of postulated
contingencies, the units are dispatched in such a way that the system operates in a secure
state. It is possible that a secure operating state is not realizable. In this case, the system
is controlled to operate at a point as close as possible to a secure state. It should be
pointed out that since a secure operating state is not always realizable, determination of
preventative actions is not always possible. On the other hand, while the preventative
operating philosophy is desirable for a number of technical reasons, many times it
involves deviation from the economic operation of the system.
In summary, the operating state of a power system has been classified into (a) normal and
secure, (b) normal but vulnerable, (c) emergency, (d) extremis, and (e) restorative. One
of the major objectives of an energy management system is to steer the system in such a
way as to operate in a normal state at every instant of time. For this purpose, modern
energy management systems are equipped with a number of applications software to
monitor the operating state of the system and to exercise security controls when
necessary. A classification of these tools according to the function they perform is:
(1) System Monitoring
. SCADA System
. On-Line Power Flow
. State Estimation
(2) Security Assessment
. Contingency Selection
. Contingency Analysis
(3) Regulation / Economy Controls
. Optimal Power Flow

. VAR Control
. Security Constraint Dispatch
(4) Security Controls
.
.
.
.
Preventive Controls
Corrective Controls
Emergency Controls
Restorative Controls
Page 11
Security assessment and security controls are discussed next in more detail.
11.4 Security Assessment

Security assessment is defined as the real time analysis procedures by which the security
of the system is measured (assessed). Security assessment procedures are classified into
steady state or dynamic depending on whether the transients following the disturbance
are neglected or not. Most of transmission line and transformer outages cause a rather
fast rerouting of power flow in such a way that the transients following the disturbance
are not of consequence. The same is true for generating unit outages when the unit is
small compared to the system or operating at low power points prior to the event. These
cases represent the majority of outage events. Cases of major generation unit outages or
major tie lines may cause transients with major effects on security. In this case, the
transients must be studied and their effect on security must be assessed. This process is
called dynamic security assessment. In this chapter, we study steady state security
assessment methods. The techniques for dynamic security assessment are beyond the
scope of this book.
Steady state security assessment, i.e. assessment of the effects of equipment outages on
system security, requires the analysis of the postcontingency steady state conditions. In
other words, steady state security assessment involves the analysis of the steady state
postcontingency conditions for any foreseeable and probable outage. Since the number of
such contingencies may be extremely large for practical systems, the basic problems in
security assessment are: (a) identification of contingencies which may cause system
problems or adversely affect security (contingency selection) and (b) techniques for
contingency simulation to assess the effects of the contingency. These problems are
discussed next.
11.5 Contingency Ranking/Selection

Contingency analysis is necessary to determine the level of security of a given system
following a disturbance (contingency). Because of the large number of possible
contingencies, this analysis can be extremely costly from the computational point of
view. Yet, it must be performed in real time to assess system security. Fortunately, for
practical electric power systems, only a small number of contingencies are potentially
critical to system security. If these contingencies can be identified, then only these
contingencies should be analyzed to determine their effects on security. The problem of
identifying the critical contingencies is known as contingency ranking. That is,
contingencies are ranked in terms of their severity. This section examines techniques for
contingency ranking.
Page 12
Contingency ranking can be facilitated with the use of security indices which provide a
measure of system "normality". Useful performance indices are:
J 1, S
T
= w k k
k
Tk
2n
I
, J 1,C = w k k
k
Ik
2n
Q j Q j ,av
J3 = wj
Q
j
j ,s
Vi Vi ,av
J 2 = wi
i
Vi , s
2n
(11.1)
(11.2)
2n
(11.3)
where:
Tk
is the apparent power flow on circuit k
Tk
is the rating of circuit k
Ik
is the current magnitude in circuit k
Ik
Is the current rating of circuit k
Vi
is the voltage magnitude of bus i
1
(Vi ,max + Vi ,min )
2
1
Vi , s = (Vi ,max Vi ,min )
2
Vi , max , Vi , min are maximum and minimum allowable voltage magnitudes for bus
Vi ,av =
Qj
i
is the reactive power generated by generating unit j
1
(Q j , max + Q j , min )
2
1
Q j , s = (Q j ,max Q j , min )
2
Q j ,max , Q j , min are maximum and minimum reactive power limits of generating
Q j ,av =
w k , wi , w j
unit j
are appropriate weight constants.
Note that the quantities inside the parenthesis express normalized circuit flow
(normalized current flow), voltage magnitude and generator reactive power, respectively.
The normalization is with respect to equipment capability or allowable limits. Thus,
values of the quantities in the parenthesis in the range (-1.0 to 1.0) indicate normal
operation while values outside this range indicate abnormal operation. When these
quantities are raised to the 2n power, they will produce a large number for abnormal
Page 13
conditions and a very small number for normal conditions. Specifically, large values of
the performance index J1,S (or performance index J1,C) indicate that one or more circuits
are overloaded. Similarly, large values of the performance index J2 indicate that one or
more voltage magnitudes are outside the permissible range for voltage magnitude. Large
values of the performance index J3 indicate that one or more generating unit produces
reactive power outside its limits. A contingency will cause a change in system operating
conditions which will be accompanied by a change in the performance indices J1 , J2, or
J3 .
The security indices provide a quantitative way to assess the security of the system.
Contingencies that may impact system security can be recognized by the change of the
performance indices. Thus in order to rank contingencies on the basis of their impact on
security, we can use the changes in the performance indices due to the contingency. In
general, the exact change of the performance indices J1,S (J1,C), J2, or J3 due to a
contingency can be computed by first obtaining the system postcontigency solution
(power flow solution) and then computing the performance index by direct substitution.
This procedure is computationally demanding and negates the objectives of a
contingency ranking algorithm. Specifically, the objective of contingency ranking is to
compute the approximate change of the security indices due to a set of postulated
contingencies with a highly efficient computational method. Such methods were
introduced in the late 70s. The basis of these methods is presented next.
Consider the outage of a circuit. The outage will cause a change in the parameters of this
circuit. Mathematically one can view this change as increasing the impedance of the
circuit to infinity or decreasing the admittance of the circuit to zero. To formalize this
change we introduce the contingency control variable uc as it is illustrated in Figure
11.6 for circuit km. Note that the contingency control variable uc has the following
property:
1.0, if the component is in operation
uc =
0.0, if the component is outaged
(g + jb )u
km
jb u
skm
km
jb u
smk
Figure 11.6 Definition of the Contingency Control Variable uc. The Circuit is
Represented with Its -Equivalent Admittance Parameters.
Page 14
The variable uc enables a rigorous representation of a contingency. For example consider

the outage of circuit km. The power flow through this circuit is expressed in terms of the
contingency control variable, uc:
Pkm = {g kmVk2 VkVm [ g km cos( k m ) + bkm sin( k m )]}uc

Q km = { (bkm + bskm )Vk2 + VkVm [bkm cos( k m ) g km sin( k m )]}u c
Pmk = {g kmVm2 VkVm [ g km cos( m k ) + bkm sin( m k )]}uc

Q mk = { (bkm + bsmk )Vm2 + VkVm [bkm cos( m k ) g km sin( m k )]}u c
Above equations apply to transmission lines, transformers and tapped transformers. A
similar expression applies to phase shifters.
Similarly, consider the outage of a generating unit. Following the outage, the system will
experience a generation deficiency which will result in frequency decrease. The outage
will be also followed with transients. At the same time, the output of other generators
will increase according to their inertia initially. The net interchange (power
import/export) will also change. In the postcontingency steady state the output of the
remaining units will be increased by the action of the AGC and the net interchange will
return to its scheduled value. The change of the remaining generating unit outputs at the
steady state is determined by economic factors (action of AGC). In other words, the lost
generation will be made up by increasing the output of the remaining generators
according to their economic participation factors. This is shown in Figure 11.7.
Specifically, considering the outage of unit i, we introduce again a contingency control
variable uc which is defined as follows:
Pgi = u c Pgi0
where Pgi0 is the precontingency output for generating unit i, and
Pgi is the generating unit i output.
Page 15
Pog2+s2Pgio(1-uc)
Pog1+s1Pgio(1-uc)
Pog3+s3Pgio(1-uc)
o
Pgiuc
Pog4+s4Pgio(1-uc)
o
o +s5Pgi
Pg5
(1-uc)
....
.
Pogk+skPgio(1-uc)
Power System
Figure 11.7 Illustration of a Unit Outage Model with the Contingency

Control Variable uc.
Note again that when uc=1, the generating unit i is on-line generating Pgi0 . When uc=0 the
generating unit i is on outage. The generation deficiency Pgi0 caused by the outage of this
unit is absorbed from the other units. Consider generating unit j. The output of this unit
will be controlled by the automatic generation control loop to the value:
Pgj = Pgj0 + (1 u c ) j Pgi0

where j is the unit j economic participation factor defined in Chapter 9. Note again that
the generating unit outputs are expressed as a function of the contingency control
variable.
In summary, any circuit or generating unit outage can be modeled with a control variable,
the contingency control variable. Using these control variables, the power flow equations
can be written as a function of the control variables. Specifically, the power flow
equations are written in the usual compact form:
g ( x , u ) = 0.0
(11.4)
where u is a vector of all contingency control variables. The contingency control

variable, uc, completely defines a contingency. For example, uc=1 defines the
precontigency system and uc=0 defines the postcontigency system. The security indices
are in general complex functions of the contingency control variables. Let J be anyone of
the three performance indices (security) discussed earlier. Linearization of the
performance index around the precontigency condition (uc=1) yields:
Page 16
J (u c ) J (u c = 1) +
dJ
(u c 1.0)
dt
The first order change of the security index J due to a contingency is given by
J = J (u c = 0) J (u c = 1) =
dJ
du u
Above equation provides the basis of contingency ranking algorithms: The first order
approximation of the effect of a contingency on security indices is determined by the
derivative of the security index with respect to the contingency control variable.
Thus, the central computational problem in contingency ranking is the computation of the
sensitivities dJ/duc. For this purpose, observe that, in general, the performance index is a
function of the system state, x, and the contingency control variables uc. For simplicity
we will drop the subscript c.
J = f ( x, u )
(11.4)
On the other hand, the state of the system must obey the power flow equations:
g ( x, u ) = 0
(11.5)
The sensitivity of the performance index is given with
dJ f ( x, u ) f ( x, u ) dx
=
+
u
du
x du
(11.6)
Upon linearization of the power flow Equation (11.6) around the operating state:
g ( x, u ) g ( x, u ) dx
+
=0
u
x du
Solution of above equation for
(11.7)
dx
yields:
du
dx
g ( x, u )
=
du
x
g ( x, u )
u
(11.10)
Upon substitution in equation (11.6)
Page 17
dJ f ( x, u ) f ( x, u ) g ( x, u )
=
du
u
x x
g ( x, u )
u
(11.9)
Computationally, above expression is amenable to computing the sensitivities of the

performance index very fast. Observe that the quantity
f ( x, u ) g ( x, u )
x x
is a vector independent of the contingency under consideration. Thus it can be computed

once and for all contingencies to be ranked. Denote this vector with x :
f ( x, u ) g ( x, u )
x =
x x
(11.10)
Upon substitution:
dJ f ( x, u )
g ( x, u )
=
x T
du
u
u
For simplicity define
Ju =
g ( x, u )
f ( x, u )
and g u =
u
u
Then in terms of the vectors x T , Ju and gu above equations become:
dJ
= J u x T g u
du
(11.11)
The vectors Ju and gu must be computed for each contingency separately and substituted
in equation (11.11). The computation of the vectors Ju and gu is straightforward and
represents a relatively insignificant computational effort.
The contingency ranking algorithm is illustrated with an example.
Example E11.1: Consider the electric power system of Figure E11.1. All circuits are
rated 110 MVA (1.1 pu) except circuit 1-4 which is rated 250 MW (2.5 pu). Rank all
single circuit and generator outages. Use the performance index defined in Equation
(11.1) with n = 1.0, wk = 1.0, for all k. For simplicity, use the DC network model.
Page 18
Pg2 = 0.8
-j10
-j8
-j9
-j12.5
3
-j12.0
Sd4 = 2.8+j0.5 pu
Figure E11.1 An Example Four Bus System, Simplified Positive

Sequence Network
Solution: First we introduce contingency control variables for each contingency to be
considered. This process results in the system of Figure E11.1a. Note that we have
introduced six contingency control variables. Next we write the performance index and
the power flow equations in terms of the contingency control variables.
The performance index J is:

2
10 2 u c12
8 u
12.5 4 u c14
9( 2 3 )u c 23
12( 3 4 )u c 34
J = f ( x, u ) =
+ 3 c13 +
+
+
2 .5
1 .1
1.1
1 .1
1 .1
where
uc12, uc13, etc. are the contingency control variables for circuit 1-2, 1-3, etc.
Upon simplification of above expression:
J = 82.645 22uc212 + 52.892 32uc213 + 25.00 42uc214 + 66.942 ( 2 3 ) uc223 + 119.008( 3 4 ) uc234
2
Page 19
Pg2= 0.8ucg2
-j10uc12
-j8uc13
-j9uc23
-j12.5uc14
3
-j12.0uc34
Sd4 = 2.8+j0.5 pu
Figure E11.1a Example Four Bus System with Contingency Control
Variables
The power flow equations (DC network model) in terms of the contingency control
variables are:
10u c12 + 9u c 23
9u
c 23
8u c13
0
9u c 23
2 0.8u cg 2 0
0 = 0
+ 9u c 23 + 12u c 34
12u c 34

3
12.5u c14 + 12u c 34 4 2.8 0
12u c 34
The precontingency power flow solution is obtained by first setting all contingency
control variables equal to 1.0 and solving the resulting equations. The solution is: 1=0.0,
2=0.01718, 3=-0.05262, 4=-0.14006.
The Jacobian matrix
Page 20
g ( x, u )
computed at the present system state is
x
0
19 9
g ( x, u )
= 9 29 12
x
0 12 24.5
The vector
f ( x, u )
computed at the operating point) is:
x
f ( x, u ) f ( x, u ) f ( x, u ) f ( x, u )
=
x
3
4
2
Note that by direct partial differentiation of the performance index:

f ( x, u )
= 165.290 2 u c212 + 133.884( 2 3 )u c223
2
f ( x, u )
= 105.784 3 u c213 133.884( 2 3 )u c223 + 238.016( 3 4 )u c234
3
f ( x, u )
= 50.00 4 u c214 238.016( 3 4 )u c234
4
Upon evaluation of above expression at the present operating point (present power flow
solution and all contingency control variables equal to 1.0):
f ( x, u )
= 12.1848
2
f ( x, u )
= 5.9007
3
f ( x, u )
= 27.8150
4
Thus:
f(x, u)
= [12.1848 5.9007 27.815]
x
Upon substitution into equation (11.10), the costate vector is:
x T = [0.5923 0.1034 1.1859]

The sensitivity of the performance index with respect to the circuit 1-2 is computed by
direct substitution equation (11.11). Specifically:
Page 21
f ( x, u )
= 165.290 22 u c12 = 0.04879
u c12
10 2 0.1718
g ( x, u )
= 0 = 0
u c12
0 0
Upon substitution into equation (11.11):
dJ
= 0.04879 0.10176 = 0.05297
du c12
Similarly, the other sensitivities are computed
dJ
du c13
dJ
du c14
dJ
du c 23
dJ
du c 34
dJ
du cg 2
= 0.24937
= 1.09537
= 0.21523
= 0.6839
= 0.47384
The changes in the performance index due to the various contingencies are:
Contingency
Performance
Index
Gradient
Parameter
Change (u)
Performance Index
Change (PI)
Circuit 1- 2
Circuit 1- 3
Circuit 1-4
Circuit 2-3
Circuit 3-4
Unit G2
-0.05297
0.24937
-1.09537
0.21523
0.6839
0.47384
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
0.05297
-0.24937
1.09537
-0.21523
-0.6839
-0.47384
Above results indicate that the worst outage is the outage of circuit 1-4. The ranking of
the circuit outages is: (1-4, 1-2). The outage of circuits 1-3, 2-3, 3-4, and generator G2
will improve the performance index.
Page 22
Example E11.2: Consider the electric power system of example E11.1. Perform
contingency ranking for all circuits and generators using the AC network model.
Solution:
(To be added)
In summary, security assessment requires a substantial computational effort because the

number of possible contingencies is very large. For this reason, it is important to identify
the contingencies which may cause system problems (critical contingencies) and limit the
analysis only to the small number of critical contingencies. Contingency ranking
algorithms provide a method for identifying the critical contingencies. Specifically, they
provide an indication of the severity of various possible contingencies and provide the
mechanism to limit the number of contingency analyses for security assessment. The
concepts utilized in contingency ranking algorithms have been described. Additional
reading material is provided in References [???], [???], and [???].
Add Discussion: Misrankings, Hybrid method. Other
11.6 Postcontingency Power Flow Analysis

Conceptually, postcontingency power flow analysis involves a power flow solution of the
postcontingency system. Practically, however, it differs from the usual power flow in two
respects: (a) the precontingency information is judiciously utilized to obtain the
postcontingency solution with minimal computations and (b) the response of the system
to the contingency must be simulated, for example the way any generation/load
imbalance will be distributed among the units. The postcontingency power flow analysis
methods will be examined in this section.
Assume that the precontingency power flow equations are written in a form that separates
the variables into state variables, x, and control variables, u (see Dommel, Tinney and
Hart [5], [6]). In our case, the control variables will be the set of contingency control
variables, uc, introduced in the previous section. The introduction of the variable uc
enables the rigorous definition of a contingency in terms of one variable only, i.e. the
contingency control variable uc. In terms of these variables, the power flow equations as
well as the power injections will be functions of the control variables, yielding:
g(x,u) b(u) = 0
(11.12)
where
x is the state of the system prior to the outage
b is the vector of real/reactive power injections prior to the outage
u is the vector of control variables.
Now the contingency will result in a change of the control variables u (i.e. uc from 1.0 to
0.0). We shall express this change as u. This change will cause a change in the state of
Page 23
the system x which in turn will cause a change in system load/generation because loads
are, in general, voltage dependent, losses are system state dependent, generation adjust
itself to maintain balance between load and generation, etc. In general, these changes are
small. It is reasonable and customary to assume that the electric load remains unchanged
and the generating unit outputs remain constant except the slack bus generation which
will adjust itself to compensate for any changes in system losses. This assumption results
to the following postcontingency power flow equations:
g(x + x, u + u) - b (u)= 0
(11.13)
Similarly, consider the outage of a unit. The changes of generating unit outputs are
illustrated in Figure 11.7 as functions of the contingency control variable uc. As in the
case of a circuit outage, it is assumed that the electric load remains unchanged. Thus the
postcontigency steady state is characterized with the following power flow equations
g(x + x, u + u) - b(u + u) = 0
where u is the vector of contingency control variables for generating unit outages.
In summary, postcontingency power flow analysis requires the solution of the following
power flow problems:
a) Circuit outages
b) Unit outages
g(x + x, u + u) - b(u) = 0
g(x + x, u) - b(u + u) = 0
The definition of the postcontingency power flow problem is illustrated with an example.
Example E11.3: Consider the electric power system of Figure E11.1a. Generation exists
at buses 1 and 2 which controls the voltage to 1.0 pu. Bus 1 will be considered as the
slack bus.
a) Write the power flow equations for the system as is. Use both AC and DC network
model.
b) Write the postcontingency power flow equations for the system and for the outage of
circuit 3-4.
c) Write the post-contingency power flow equations for the system and for the outage of
generator G2. Assume power is equally distributed among remaining generators.
Solution: Observe that Figure E11.1 represents the positive sequence network of the
system. All values are admittance in per unit. Since we are considering the outages of
unit G2 and the circuit 3-4, we shall retain the contingency control variables for these
outages, i.e. variables ucg2 and uc34. All other contingency control variables will be set to
1.0.
a) The power flow equations are written by observing that bus 1 is slack bus, bus 2 is a
PV bus, and buses 3 and 4 are PQ buses. In addition the power flow equations are written
in terms of the contingency control variables.
Page 24
The power flow equations using the AC Network Model are:
10.0 sin 2 + 9.0V3 sin( 2 3 ) 0.8u cg 2 = 0
8.0V3 sin 3 + 9.0V3 sin( 3 2 ) + 12.0V3V4 sin( 3 4 )u c 34 = 0

12.5V4 sin 4 + 12.0V3V4 sin( 4 3 )u c 34 + 2.8 = 0
17.0V32 + 12.0V32 u c 34 8V3 cos 3 9V3 cos( 3 2 ) 12.0V3V4 cos( 3 4 )u c 34 = 0
12.5V42 + 12.0V42 u c 34 12.5V4 cos 4 12.0V3V4 cos( 4 3 )u c 34 + 0.5 = 0
The power flow equations using the DC Network Model are:
19.0 2 9.0 3 0.8u cg 2 = 0
9.0 2 + (17.0 + 12.0u c 34 ) 3 12.0 4 u c 34 = 0

12.0 3 u c 34 + (12.5 + 12.0u c 34 ) 4 + 2.8 = 0
b) When the circuit 3-4 is forced out, uc34 assumes the value zero.
=0.0 yields:
Substitution of uc34
AC Network Model:
10.0 sin 2 + 9.0V3 sin( 2 3 ) 0.8u cg 2 = 0
8.0V3 sin 3 + 9.0V3 sin( 3 2 ) = 0

12.5V 4 sin 4 + 2.8 = 0
17.0V32 8V3 cos 3 9V3 cos( 3 2 ) = 0
12.5V42 12.5V4 cos 4 + 0.5 = 0
DC Network Model:
19.0 2 9.0 3 0.8u cg 2 = 0
9.0 2 + 17.0 3 = 0
12 .5 4 + 2.8 = 0
c) The outage of generator G2 will cause ucg2 to assume the value of zero. In addition, it
will leave bus 2 without voltage control. In term of the power flow, bus 2 will become a
PQ bus. Thus, the power flow equations are:
AC Network Model:
10.0V2 sin 2 + 9.0V2V3 sin( 2 3 ) = 0

8.0V3 sin 3 + 9.0V2V3 sin( 3 2 ) + 12.0V3V4 sin( 3 4 )u c 34 = 0
Page 25
12.5V4 sin 4 + 12.0V3V4 sin( 4 3 )u c 34 + 2.8 = 0

19.0V22 10.0V2 cos 2 9V2V3 cos( 2 3 ) = 0
17.0V32 + 12.0V32 u c 34 8V3 cos 3 9V3 cos( 3 2 ) 12.0V3V4 cos( 3 4 )u c 34 = 0
12.5V42 + 12.0V42 u c 34 12.5V4 cos 4 12.0V3V4 cos( 4 3 )u c 34 + 0.5 = 0
DC Network Model:
19.0 2 9.0 3 = 0
9.0 2 + (17.0 + 12.0u c 34 ) 3 12.0 4 u c 34 = 0
12.0 3 u c 34 + (12.5 + 12.0u c 34 ) 4 + 2.8 = 0
The number of contingencies in a practical system is very large. Thus contingency
analysis requires the solution of a large number of power flows. To avoid excessive
computational burden, techniques for the solution of contingent power flows must be
very efficient. In general, these methodologies take advantage of the fact that the
precontingency solution is known. Many methods have been developed along these lines.
Some methods provide the exact solution of the postcontingency power flow and some
methods introduce approximations for increased efficiency. A tabulation of the most
popular methods is given in Table 11.1. The methods have been classified into exact
(those providing the exact solution to the power flow problem), semi-exact methods
(those that provide the solution within a user selected precision) and approximate
methods. Key references are provided for each one of these methods. From the
computational point of view, circuit outages or unit outages that cause bus PV/PQ
switching are the most demanding. The computational methods for these outages, are
based on a well known result in matrix algebra, the Sherman Morrison formula [???] or
otherwise known as the matrix inversion lemma. The methods developed along these
lines are known as compensation methods and they are very useful for contingency
analysis. The next section presents the compensation method with applications to the DC
or AC power flow analysis.
Table 11.1 Power Flow Method for Postcontingency Analysis
Exact Methods
Semi-Exact Methods
Approximate Methods
Fast Decoupled Power Flow [??? ]
Zero Mismatch Approach
DC Power Flow [??? ]
Newton-Raphson Power Flow [??? ]
[??? ]
Distribution Factors [??? ]
Subnetwork Solutions [ ???]
Linearized AC Power Flow [??? ]
11.7 Compensation Methods

The basic idea of the compensation method is to minimize the computational effort
(number of multiply, divide, add operations) in the process of obtaining the solution.
Page 26
Consider for example the power flow problem. At each iteration, the major
computational task is the solution of the linearized power flow equations. These
equations can be expressed in the following general form:
Ax = b
The matrix A may be the Jacobian in the Newton/Raphson power flow, the matrices B or
B of the Fast Decoupled Power Flow, or the DC power flow matrix. Recall that in the
Fast Decoupled Power Flow or the DC power flow, the matrices are constant while in the
Newton/Raphson method the jacobian matrix varies from iteration to iteration. Consider
that the precontingency power flow has been solved. In this case, the matrix A has been
computed and above equation has been solved. Assuming that triangular factorization has
been used for the solution (see Appendix A), this means that the matrices L and U has
been computed, where
A = LU
This information will be used to minimize the computational effort for the
postcontingency solution. Consider now what happens to the postcontingency power
flow equations. For generator outages (which do not cause lost voltage control at a bus)
the basic power flow matrices will remain the same. Only the power injection vector b
will change. Since the power flow matrix has been factorized into the product of a lower
and an upper triangular matrix, then a forward and back substitution will provide the
solution. For circuit outages or generator outages which cause lost voltage control at a
bus, the computations are more complex because the system matrices will change. Table
11.2 summarizes the form of the postcontingency power flow equations for various
contingencies. The change A of matrix A depends on the particular model used (i.e. AC
network model with Newtons method, Fast Decoupled Power Flow, DC Power flow,
etc). Consider for example the outage of a circuit terminated at buses k and m. For
simplicity consider the DC Network model. The matrix change A of the DC power
flow is:
T
A = a km e km e km
where ekm is a vector with all entries equal to zero except the entries corresponding to
buses k and m: the entry corresponding to bus k equals 1.0 and the entry corresponding to
bus m equals -1.0. For the DC network model, the change of the matrix A can be
expressed with the following general form:
A ' = A + acd T
(11.14)
where:
A
A'
a
is the old matrix

is the new matrix
is a scalar
Page 27
c,d
are vectors of appropriate dimensions.
Table 11.2 General Form of Precontingency and Postcontingency

Power Flow Equations.
Power Flow Equation
Basic Computational Entity in an

Iteration
Precontingency
g(x, u) - b (u)= 0
Ax - b = 0
Circuit Outage
g(x+x, u+u) - b(u) = 0
(A+ A)x - b = 0
Unit Outage
g(x+x, u) - b(u+u) = 0
Without Bus Status Change

Ax - (b+ b) = 0
With Bus Status Change
(A+ A)x - (b+ b) = 0
The postcontingency analysis requires the solution of the equation:
( A + acd T ) x ' b = 0
(11.15)
where:
x' is the solution vector for the given contingency
b is a computable vector
Recall that, since the base case power flow has been solved, the triangular factors of the
matrix A are also known. This information can be appropriately utilized to obtain the
solution x' with minimum computations. For this purpose, consider the well known
matrix inversion lemma or as otherwise known the Sherman-Morisson correction formula
[???]:
(A + CD )
T 1
= A1 A1C I m + D T A1C
D T A 1
(11.16)
Where
A: is a n x n general matrix
C: is a n x m general matrix
D: is a n x m general matrix
Im: is the m x m identity matrix
Application of this formula to the matrix A', with C = c, DT = adT, yields:
A' 1 = A1
a
A1cd T A1
T 1
1 + ad A c
The solution x' of equation (11.15) is:
Page 28
ad T A1b
A 1c
x' = A' b = A b
T 1
1 + ad A c
1
Note that the expressions A-1b and A-1c represent vectors. Denote these vectors with x
and , respectively:
x = A-1b
= A-1c
(11.17)
(11.18)
Since the triangular factors of the matrix A are known, the vectors x and can be
computed with appropriate forward and back substitutions on vectors b and c (see
Appendix A). Now the solution x' of the disturbed system is given with:
x' = x
ad T x
1 + ad T
(11.19)
Above expression provides the solution for the disturbed system as the sum of the
solution for the undisturbed system, x and a correction, x, defined with
x =
ad T x
1 + ad T
(11.20)
x represents a "compensation" term for the change in the matrix, thus the name
compensation method. In summary, computation of the solution x' requires the following
steps:
Step 1: Compute the solution x = A-1b
Step 2: Compute the vector = A-1c
Step 3: Substitute x and in equation (11.19) to compute x'.
To evaluate the computational effort of the compensation method, recall that the matrix
A is already factorized. Thus, Steps 1 and 2 require one forward and back substitution
each (Appendix A). Step 3 is much faster than a forward and back substitution. Thus, the
compensation method requires a computational effort which is approximately twice as
much as a forward and back substitution. This should be compared to the alternative of
factoring the matrix A' and performing one forward and back substitution on b to obtain
the solution x'. For a large scale system, this execution time is typically five to seven
times longer. The compensation method is most efficient for the Fast Decoupled Power
Flow or the DC power flow because the matrices are constant.
11.7.1 Application of Compensation Method to DC Power Flow

Application of the compensation method to a DC power flow yields the following results:
Page 29
A = P
A ' ' = P
' = +
where:
=
T
akm ekm
=
T
1 + akm ekm
= A 1 P is the solution of the undisturbed system
= A 1 ekm
The method will be illustrated with an example
Example E11.4: Consider the power system of Figure E11.1. Solve the DC power flow
for the outage of the regulating transformer. The DC power flow solution for the base
case is known: T = [0.0 0.01718 0.05262 0.14006] . The base case power flow
solution is illustrated in Figure E11.2a. The power flow equations (DC network model)
are:
A = P
where
0
19 9
A = - 9 29 12 ,
0 12 24.5
2
= 3 ,

4
0.8
P = 0.0
2.8
Since the base case power flow has been solved, this means that the matrix A has been
triangulated, i.e.
0
0
0 1 0.4737
19
0
1
0.4851
A = LU = 9 24.7367
0
12
0
1
18.6788 0
0
Page 30
0.8
0.1718
2
0.6282
0.4210
1.7508
1.0492
4
2.8
(a)
0.5622
-0.2388
2
0.2380
2.8
4
2.8
(b)
Figure E11.2 Power Flow Solution of a Simplified Four Bus System
(a) Base Case
(b) Outage of Circuit 3-4
Solution: The postcontingency power flow equations (Transformer 3-4 out) are:
A ' ' = P
where:
0.8
P= 0
- 2.8
19 9 0
'
0
A = - 9 17
0 12.5
0
2'
' = 3'
4'
Note that
Page 31
T
A' = A + (12.0)e34 e34
where:
0
e34 = 1

- 1
and A is the precontingency DC power flow matrix. Application of the results in the
previous section yields:
' =
where
= A 1 b
= A 1 e34
T
( 12.0)e 34
=
T
1 + ( 12.0)e34
The computational steps are as follow:

Step 1. The vector , is = A 1 b =[0.01718 -0.05262 -0.14006]T. Note in this case this
vector solution is known from the precontingency solution.
Step 2. Computation of = A-1 e34. A forward and back substitution on vector e34 yields:
0.01282
= 0.02706
0.02756
Step 3. Computation of '
( 12.0)( 0.05262 + 0.14006)

= 3.0453
1 + ( 12.0)(0.02706 + 0.02756)
0.01282 0.03904
= ( 3.0453) 0.02706 = 0.08241
0.02756 0.08393
2' 0.05622
'
3 = 0.02979
4' 0.22399

Page 32
The postcontingency circuit flows are illustrated in Figure E11.2b.
11.7.2 Application of Compensation method to the Fast

Decoupled Power Flow
The basic computational entity in the fast decoupled load flow is the solution of the
equations:
P
B ' =
V
Q
B " V =
V
Assume that the base case power flow solution is known. Thus, matrices B' and B" have
been formed and the triangular factors have been computed i.e. B'= L1U1 and B" = L2U2.
Now, assume that the effects of an outage are to be analyzed. There are two cases: (1)
outage of a unit (without PV/PQ conversion), loss of load, etc., and (2) outage of a circuit
or outage of a unit with PV/PQ conversion. As it has been discussed already, case 1
outage can be handled without difficulty since they will not affect the matrices B' and B".
Case 2 outages, however, may modify the matrix B' and B". Specifically [???],
considering a circuit outage, the matrices are modified as follows:
Bn' = B0' + bij eij' eij'
(11.21)
T
Bn" = B0" + bij eij" eij" + 2bsij ei" ei" + 2bsji e "j e "j
(11.22)
where
B'o, B"o
B'n, B"n
bij, bsij, bsji
e'ij
e''ij
e''i
are the precontingency matrices B' and B"

are the postcontingency matrices B' and B" as modified with the outage
are the parameters of the ousted circuit (pi-equivalent circuit)
is a (n - 1) x 1 vector defined as follows: all entries are zero except entry
i - 1 which is 1.0, and entry j - 1 which is -1.0.
is a vector of dimension equal to the number of PQ buses in the system.
All entries are zero except the entry corresponding to bus i which is 1.0
if bus i is a PQ bus, and the entry corresponding to bus j which is -1.0 if
bus j is a PQ bus. If one or both buses i,j are not PQ buses, the
corresponding entries are zero.
is a vector of dimension equal to the number of PQ buses in the system.
All entries are zero except the entry corresponding to bus i which is 1.0
if bus i is a PQ bus. Otherwise, the vector e''i is identically zero.
Page 33
From the definitions above, it is obvious that if the outage involves a circuit between two
PV buses, the matrix B" will remain unchanged.
The equations that must be solved in the postcontingency power flow are:
P
B n' =
V
Q
Bn'' V =
V
(11.23)
(11.24)
P
Q
are computed by taking into consideration the
where the vectors and
V
V
outage. Application of the matrix inversion lemma to the first equation yields:
=
bij ( a i a j )
1 + bij eijT
(11.25)
where
1
= B0'
V
1
= B0' eij'
Similarly, the matrix inversion lemma can be applied to the second equation. It is
expedient in this case to write equation (11.22) in the following compact form:
B =B + e
"
n
"
0
"
i
ei" T
e [b] " T
e j
"
j
(11.26)
where:
bij + 2bsij
b=
bij
bij
bij + 2bsij
Application of the matrix inversion lemma, with the following matrices:
e "j b
e "j
C = ei"
D = ei"
yields:
Page 34
V = [ 1
2 ][b](I 2 + D T [ 1 2 ][b]) D T
1
(11.27)
where:
1
= B0"
V
1
1 = B0" ei"
1
2 = B0" e "j
The procedure is illustrated with an example.
Example E11.5: Consider the electric power system of Figure E11.3 which shows the
positive sequence network of the system. The base case load flow is:
2 0.0828
= 3 = 0.0248

4 0.1010
V 0.9678
V = 3 =
V 4 0.9858
The precontingency matrices B' and B" and their triangular factors are
0 19
0
0 1 0.4737
0
19 9
B = 9 21 12 = 9 17.8616
0
0
1
0.7348
0
1
0 12 24.5 0 13.125 15.981 0

'
o
0 1 0.54054
22.2 12.0 22.2
B"o =
=
1
12.0 23.24 12.0 19.5534 0
Page 35
Pg2 = 1.8 pu
-j10.0
Slack Bus
V2 = 1.02 pu
V1 = 1.0 pu
j0.2
-j12.5
-j9.0
-j13.125
4
j0.63
3
-j0.6
Figure E11.3 A Four Bus System

Indicated Parameters are Admittance in p.u.
It is desired to determine the impact of the outage of the off nominal tap transformer
which is the circuit between nodes 3 and 4. Perform one iteration of the fast decoupled
load flow for the system without the off nominal tap transformer using the triangular
factors of the matrices B' and B" and the matrix inversion lemma.
Solution: The outage of the off nominal tap transformer will generate the following real
power mismatch:
1.8 /(1.02) (10) sin 2 (9)(0.9678) sin( 2 3 ) 0.0

P
= 0.9858
(9)(1.02) sin( 3 2 )
V =

2.2 / 0.9858 (12.5) sin 4
0.9858
The P- equations read:

P
B n' =
V
where
'
'T
Bn' = B0' + b34 e34
e34
, b34 = 13.125
0
e = 1

1
'
34
The solution is:
Page 36
e' T34 b34
=
1 + b34 e' T34
P
= (B0' )
V
1
'
= (B0' ) e 34
1
Using forward and back substitution:
0.02045
= 0.04317
0.01636
0.02074
= 0.04379
0.01659
Upon substitution:
0.09853
= + 3.765 = 0.20805
0.07882
and
0.18133
= 0.18325
0.17982
For the Q - V iteration, the reactive power mismatch must be computed. This is
Q (8.98) /(.9678) + (9)(1.02) cos( 3 2 ) 0.48914
V = 0.5 / 0.9858 (12.45)( 0.9858) + (12.5) cos = 0.48196
The Q - V equations are:

Q
Bn" V =
V
where
Page 37
B =B + e
"
n
"
0
ei" T
e [b] " T
e j
"
i
"
j
1
e 3" =
0
0
e 4" =
1
14.4375 13.125
b=
11.875
13.125
The solution is:
2 ][b] I 2 + [e 3"
V = [ 1
e 4"
] [
T
) [e
2 ][b]
"
3
e 4"
T
where
1
0.01402
= B0" =
V 0.01227
0.061344
0.033170
1 = B0" e' ' 3 =
0.03317
0.05912
2 = B0" e' ' 4 =

Upon substitution
x1 = I 2 + e 3"
e 4"
] [
T
0.58286 0.41125
0.29710 0.73330
2 ][b] =
2.40250 1.34735
x11 =
0.97337 1.90958
y = x11 e 3"
0.050214
T
e 4" =
0.037077
0.41714 0.41125
A = [ 1 2 ][b] =
0.2667
0.2971
Page 38
0.03619
Ay =
0.02481
0.0502
V =
0.0371
1.0180
V =
0.9487
It is important to note that the benefits of the compensation method are not apparent for
small systems.
11.7.3 Discussion on Compensation Methods

This section presented procedures for fast contingency analysis. Compensation methods
provide the basis for efficient contingency analysis based on precontingency information
of the power flow problem. The matrix inversion lemma or the Sherman-Morisson
formula is the basis of the compensation methods.
Compensation methods and appropriate contingency ranking methods form the basis of
security assessment. Note that the purpose of contingency analysis is to assess the
security of the system. Because of the large number of possible contingencies, it is
impractical to analyze all possible contingencies. For this reason, it is important to
identify the contingencies which may cause system problems (critical contingencies).
Contingency ranking algorithms provide an indication of the severity of the various
possible contingencies and limit the number of contingency analyses for security
assessment. Contingency ranking algorithms have been presented in earlier sections. The
ranked contingencies are analyzed with efficient analysis algorithms to provide an
assessment of the security status of the system.
11.10 Emergency and Restorative Controls

Despite the high level of readiness of power systems, large, abrupt changes do occur
which may drift the system into an emergency condition. An electric power system could
drift into an emergency state in a variety of ways. Depending on the nature of the cause,
they can be classified as smooth or abrupt transitions. Depending on the location of the
cause, they can be classified into local (own system) or external. Table 11.3 lists possible
events which may take a system to an emergency condition.
When a system drifts to an emergency condition, quick action should be taken to bring
the system back to normal operating conditions. An emergency condition can be
corrected in a number of ways. The control actions for alleviating an emergency
Page 39
condition can be automatic or operator initiated. Automatic emergency controls include

(a) automatic load transfer, (b) automatic capacitor/reactor switching, and/or (c) load
shedding. Automatic emergency controls are activated with local control loops. These
control loops are built into the system in the design process.
Table 11.3 Classification of Possible Causes Leading to Emergency
Conditions
Smooth Transitions
Local
External
Abrupt Transitions
Drifting to an Emergency
Condition Due to Load
Changes
Generator Tripping
Tie Line Tripping
Circuit Tripping
Gradual Change in net

Interchange (Tie Line
'Leaning')
Generator Tripping
Tie Line Tripping
Circuit Tripping
Following the automatic controls, the system may be still in an emergency state (although
milder) or it may be moved to the extreme state (see Figure 11.5). In both cases, operator
action may be necessary to restore the system to normal operating conditions. In cases of
severe emergency conditions, the operator may have to violate temporarily some load
constraints. That is he may have to curtail interruptible load or shed load or open tie
lines, thus changing the level of exported/import power. This type of action is classified
as emergency control. Later, when the system recovers, the disconnected load could be
reconnected, the opened tie lines could be closed, etc. This type of action is classified as
restorative control. A summary of emergency controls (automatic or operator initiated) is
given in Table 11.4.
Table 11.4 List of Possible Emergency Controls
Controls which do
not affect electric
loads
Load Controls
Automatic
Capacitor/Reactor
Switching
Electric Load Transfer
Circuit Switching
Operator Initiated
Capacitor/Reactor Switching
Electric Load Transfer
Tie Line Switching
Qick Start-up of Gas-Turbine Units
Electric Load Shedding
Quick Start-up of hydro Units

Interruptible Load Shedding
In cases of mild emergencies, it is possible to exercise a number of system controls such

as changes in generator real power output, changes of transformer tap settings, etc.,
which can bring the system back to a normal operating condition. This type of action is
Page 40
classified as corrective controls. In general, corrective controls do not affect the electric
load of a system. A summary of corrective controls is provided in Table 11.5.
Table 11.5 List of Possible Corrective Controls
1. Changes in Generator Real Power Output.

2. Changes in Generator Reactive Power Output.
3. Changes in Devices Generating Reactive Power
- Switching of Capacitor Banks
- Switching of Reactors.
4a. Changes in Regulating Transformer Tap Settings
4b. Changes in transformer phase shift
5. Circuit Switching.
6. Electric Load Transfer.
In cases of severe emergencies, the fastest and most effective emergency control is load
shedding. Operating experience with power systems dictates that load shedding in an
emergency may avert potential blackouts. In subsequent sections, load shedding schemes
and corrective controls will be examined.
All of the above controls are collectively termed security controls. The practice of
computing and applying security controls varies widely. There is no uniformity among
power system practitioners in modeling, computing and applying security controls.
However, in all applications there is some commonality in approaches and models. In
subsequent paragraphs some of the most common approaches, models and solution
methods to the problem of security controls will be presented. It should be understood
that over the years, the methods have evolved, the models have become more
sophisticated and more powerful computers have allowed more complex approaches. We
will start from simple models based on DC Network formulation and we will proceed to
more sophisticated models leading to the most general approach exemplified with the
security constraint optimal power flow.
11.9 Corrective Control Computations - DC Network

Model
In many emergency conditions, the routing of real power through the circuits of a system
is of interest. This is the case in systems with well distributed VAR sources or whenever
an approximate but quick solution is required. In these cases, it is assumed that circuit
loading can be approximately predicted with the DC power flow model. For system
security, none of the circuits must be loaded above rating. If one or more are loaded
above rating, corrective action should be taken. Corrective action in the form of phase
Page 41
shifter adjustment, if available, generation rescheduling and interchange rescheduling can

rectify the situation.
Mathematically, the problem of corrective control computations can be formulated as an
optimization problem. The DC power flow provides a linear model which relates the
circuit flow to the generating unit outputs, net interchange and phase shifter settings. To
this model, an objective must be postulated yielding an optimization problem. One
should observe that prior to the system drifting into the emergency condition, the system
operation is most likely optimized in some sense, for example the operating conditions
may have been defined by the economic dispatch. In this case, it would make sense to
seek a control action that will solve the problem with minimum deviation from the
present operating conditions, i.e. we postulate an objective function that minimizes the
control action. This approach has two advantages. First, minimum control action
translates into minimal deviation from economic conditions. Second, minimum control
action means minimal wear on the equipment.
The formulation of the corrective control computation problem using a DC network
model will be developed with reference to Figure 11.8. Assume that the generation
dispatch results in an operating condition which violates one or more operating
constraints (circuit overloads). It is desired to adjust some control variables in order to
return to a normal operating condition. It is assumed that the operator can select from the
following controls:
-
phase shift of regulating transformers

real power output of one or more units
electric load transfer
circuit switching
The formulation of the problem proceeds as follows. Let be the vector of phase shifter
settings and Pg be the vector of real power output of the generating units.
Then, the DC power flow yields:
A b( , Pg ) = 0
The solution of this equation is:
= A 1 b( , Pg )
The operating constraints are:
Pij Pij ,
Page 42
for every circuit i,j
ij
iS ,
jS
= Pnet , net system interchange constraint
Pij is the actual real flow on circuit ij

Pij is the maximum allowable real power flow on circuit ij.
where
S is the set of buses in the system of interest.

Pnet is the specified net interchange for the system of interest.
SYSTEM N2
M
M
M
SYSTEM N1
SYSTEM OF INTEREST
Figure 11.8 An Interconnected Power System
Now assume that one or more operating constraints are violated. In this case, it is
necessary to take corrective action to bring the system to a normal operating condition.
For this purpose the following optimization problem is formulated
Min
Pgi + w j j + wk Pk
Subject to:
Pij Pij
iS ,
jS
ij
= Pnet
Page 43
where
: vector of changes in phase shift of regulating transformers, and

Pg : vector of changes in real power output of the generating units.
Pk : load transfer variables

Note that consistent with the previous discussion, above formulation tries to minimize the
total generation shift (and therefore minimize deviation from economic conditions) as
well as to minimize phase shift excursions. For a circuit that has a series phase shifting
device, the power flow (DC Network model) is:
Pij = a ij ( i j ij ) = a ij eijT A 1 b( , Pg ) a ij ij
where ij is the phase shift in circuit ij, zero if circuit ij is not a phase shifter.
As it should be expected, the real power flow Pij is a function of and Pg. Linearization
of the circuit flow Pij with respect to the variables and Pg, around the operating point,
0 , Pg0 , yields:
Pij ( o + , Pgo + Pg ) = Pij ( o , Pgo ) + s cij ,l l + s cij , gk Pgk
l
where
s cij , gk =
s cij ,l =
dPij
dPgk
dPij
d
= a ij eijT A 1
= a ij eijT A 1
db( , Pg )
dPgk
db( , Pg )
d l
a ij
d ij
d l
The above derivatives can be computed with the techniques outlined in Appendix C.
Substitution into the constraint ( *) yields:
Pij ( 0 , Pg0 ) + s cij ,l l + s cij , gk Pgk Pij
l
Each operating constraint yields one inequality as above. The problem then becomes to
find a solution for and Pg which will satisfy all constraints. In general, three
possibilities exist.
Page 44
A solution does not exist. This means that the operating constraints cannot be
satisfied by merely adjusting the phase shift of regulating transformers or
rescheduling the generation. Load shedding or interchange control may be

necessary.
A solution exists and it is unique. This case is very improbable.
A solution exists and it is not unique. This is the usual case. As a matter of fact,
an infinite number of solutions exist in this case.
In practical situations, it is important to determine whether the problem has a solution.

Methodologies to answer this question will be presented later. Assuming there is a
solution, the important question to be answered is which solution should be selected.
Usually, economics dictate the selection of the solution. For example, the solution
should have minimum deviation from economic operation. The deviation of the solution
from economic operation can be expressed as follows:
J = k Pgk
k
The above objective together with the constraints define an optimization problem as
follows:
J = k Pgk
Min
Subject to:
Pij ( 0 , Pg0 ) + s cij ,l l + s cij , gk Pgk Pij , for all circuits ij

l
l l l
for all phase shifters
Pgk Pgk Pgk
for all units k
This problem can be simplified and eventually converted into what is known as a linear
program in standard form. A concise description of these transformations follows. First, it
can be assumed that the corrective controls , Pg will not change the direction of
power in a circuit. This means that the quantity inside the absolute value in the first
constraint will not change sign. Thus if Pijo > 0, then the absolute value can be removed.
If Pijo < 0, the absolute value can be removed and the resulting expression must be
o
should be subtracted from the last
multiplied by -1.0. Finally the quantities ol and Pgk
two inequalities respectively, forming the variables l = l lo and Pgk = Pgk Pgko
respectively.
These transformations result in the following optimization problem:
Min
J = k Pgk
k
Subject to:
u ij s cij ,l l + s cij , gk Pgk Pij Pij ( 0 , Pg0 )u ij , for all circuits ij

k
l
Page 45
l,min l l,max for all phase shifter, l = 1, 2,... .

k ,min Pgk k ,max for all generating units, k = 1, 2,.... .
1.0 if Pijo > 0
u ij =
o
1.0 if Pij < 0
where
l, max = l l0
l, min = l lo
k , max = Pgk Pgko
k , min = Pgk Pgko
The formulated problem can be transformed into a linear program in standard form. For
this purpose, observe that:
can be positive, negative, or zero (free variable)
Pgk can be positive, negative, or zero (free variable).

Substitution of the free variables with nonnegative variables yields:
l = y l+ y l ,
y l+ , y l 0
Pgk = x k+ x k ,
x k+ , x k 0
Upon substitution, the problem becomes

Min
J = k x k+ x k
k
Subject to:
u ij s cij ,l ( y l+ y l ) + s cij , gk ( x k+ x k ) Pij Pij ( 0 , Pg0 )u ij , for all circuits ij

k
l
l, min y l y l l, max
for all phase shifter, l = 1, 2,... .
k , min x k+ x k k , max
for all generating units, k = 1, 2,.... .
From linear programming theory, above problem is converted to the folowoing linear
program in standard form (for details of this transformation, see Appendix B):
Min
J = k ( x k+ + x k )
k
Subject to:
Page 46
u ij s cij ,l ( y l+ y l ) + s cij , gk ( x k+ x k ) + s ij = Pij Pij ( 0 , Pg0 )u ij , for all circuits ij

k
l
+
y l l, max
y l l, min
x k+ k , max
x k k , min
x k+ , x k 0 ,
s ij 0 ,
y l+ , y l 0 ,
The above problem is an optimization problem of the linear programming variety in

standard form (see Appendix B). It can be solved with standard LP techniques. The
solution provides optimal adjustments which will bring the operation of the system to
normal conditions. The procedure will be demonstrated with two examples.
Example E11.6: Consider the two interconnected power systems of Figure E11.6. The
system of interest is the three bus system (buses 1, 2 and 3) with the two tie lines to
another system that has only one bus (bus 4). The present operating condition is
characterized with
1 = 0.0, 2 = 0.05, 3 = 0.1, 4 = 0.25

G1 0.6 p.u.
1
G2
P = 3.1pu
g2
-j8
G3
-j4
-j10
-j10
-j5
3
M
P =1.75pu
Figure E 11.6 An Example Two Area Power System
All circuits are rated 1.4 pu. The rating of the generating units is:
Unit
Capacity (MW)
G1
70
G2
335
G3
245
Page 47
(a) Formulate a linear program whose solution will determine the generation
rescheduling which will bring all circuit loading within limits and the net interchange
equal to 1.9 pu. Convert this problem into a linear program in standard form.
(b) Solve the problem defined in (a).
Solution: The control variables are Pg1 and Pg2. The DC power flow yields the
following line flows:
P12 = 0.4
P13 = 1.0
P23 = 1.5
P24 = 1.2
P34 = 0.75
The unit outputs are:
Pg1 = P12 + P13 = 0.6 pu

Pg 2 = P21 + P23 + P24 = 3.1 pu
There is one overloaded circuit, 2-3, which is loaded 1.5 pu while the permissible loading
is 1.4 pu. The net interchange of the system is 1.95 (the sum of the flows in circuits 2-4
and 3-4) while the scheduled interchange is 1.9. Thus we need to consider the following
constraints:
P23 1.4
P24 + P34 = 1.9
Linearization of above constraints yields:
1.5 + s c 23, g1 Pg1 + s c 23, g 2 Pg 2 1.4
1.95 + ( s c 24, g1 + s c 34, g1 )Pg1 + ( s c 24, g 2 + s c 34, g 2 )Pg 2 = 1.9

Computation of the sensitivities yields (bus 4 is assumed to be the slack bus)
22.0 - 10.0 - 4.0
A = - 10.0 25.0 - 5.0

- 4.0 - 5.0 9.0
Page 48
0.07407 0.04074 0.05555
A = 0.04074 0.06741 0.05555

0.05555 0.05555 0.16666
s c 23, g1 = 0.0
s c 23, g1 = 0.3333
s c 24, g1 = 0.4444
s c 24, g 2 = 0.5185
s c 34, g1 = 0.5555
s c 34, g 2 = 0.4815
The linearized problem becomes
Min
J = Pg1 + Pg 2
Subject to:
1.5 + 0Pg1 + 0.3333Pg 2 1.4
1.95 + Pg1 + Pg 2 = 1.9

0.6 Pg1 0.1
3.1 Pg 2 0.25
Upon substitution of the non-negative variables:
Pg1 = x1 - x2
Pg2 = x3 - x4
and converting the resulting problem into a linear program in standard form:
Min J = x1 + x 2 + x 3 + x 4
Subject to:
0.3333x 3 0.3333x 4 + s 23 = 0.1
x1 x 2 + x 3 x 4 = 0.05
x1 0.1
x 2 0.6
x 3 0.25
x 4 3.1
x1 , x 2 , x 3 , x 4 , s 23 0.0
An attempt to solve the above LP problem (see Appendix B) reveals that this problem
does not have a solution. In this case, we need to decide to relax some constraints and/or
Page 49
change the objective of the solution. For example, we may argue that small overloads on
the lines may be tolerated and therefore seek a solution which tries to match the net
interchange while slightly violating circuit loading constraints. Or, if net interchange is
based on economy, it will be expedient to sacrifice the export constraints for observing
circuit loading constraints. Both of these cases will be discussed next.
Minimization of Overload: We seek a solution that tolerates small overloads. We
formulate the problem with the objective of minimizing the overloads. For this purpose,
we introduce new variables that express the amount of overload. In our case, there is
only one overload and therefore we introduce only one variable, x6, which expresses the
circuit 2-3 overload. Now the optimization problem is stated as follows:
Min J = x6
Subject to:
x6 = P23 1.4
P24 + P34 = 1.9
0.6 Pg1 0.1
3.1 Pg 2 0.25
Upon linearization and transforming the problem into a linear program I standard form:
Min J = x6
Subject to:
0.3333x3 0.3333x4 x6 = 0.1
x1 x 2 + x 3 x 4 = 0.05
x1 0.1
x 2 0.6
x 3 0.25
x 4 3.1
x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 , x6 0.0
Upon solution of this problem
x1 = 0.1
x 2 = 0.0
x 3 = 0.0
x 4 = 0.15
x 6 = 0.05
Thus:
Page 50
Pg1 = 0.10
Pg 2 = 0.15
The new solution is

1 = 0.0,
2 = 0.04167,
3 = -0.10222,
4 = -0.25
And the line flows are:
P12 = 0.3333
P13 = 1.0333
P23 = 1.45
P24 = 1.1666
P34 = 0.7333
Note that the new operating condition satisfies the net interchange constraint (P24 + P34 =
1.90 pu) and at the same time the overload has been reduced from 0.10 pu to 0.05 pu.
Minimization of Net Interchange Deviation: We seek a solution that tolerates small
deviations of net interchange (this will be the case if the contractual agreements permit
deviations). We formulate the problem with the objective of minimizing the deviation of
net interchange. For this purpose, we introduce a new variable, x7, that express the net
interchange deviation. Now the optimization problem is stated as follows:
Min
J = x7
Subject to:
P23 1.4
x 7 = P24 + P34 1.9

0.6 Pg1 0.1
3.1 Pg 2 0.25
Upon linearization, introduction of slack variables, and casting the problem into a linear
program in standard form:
Min J = x 7
Subject to:
0.3333x 3 0.3333x 4 + s 23 = 0.1
x1 x 2 + x 3 x 4 x 7 = 0.05
x1 0.1
x 2 0.6
x 3 0.25
x 4 3.1
Page 51
x1 , x 2 , x 3 , x 4 , s 23 , x 7 0.0
Upon solution of above problem:
x1 = 0.1
x 2 = 0.0
x 3 = 0.0
x 4 = 0.3
s 23 = 0.0
x 7 = 0.15
Thus:
Pg1 = 0.10
Pg 2 = 0.3
The new solution is:

1 = 0.2333,
2 = 0.2722,
3 = 0.1322,
4 = 0.0
And the line flows are:
P12 = 0.311
P13 = 1.011
P23 = 1.40
P24 = 1.089
P34 = 0.661
Note that the loading constraints of the circuits are satisfied while the net interchange has
deviated from the scheduled by 0.15 (1.75 versus 1.90).
11.10 Security Constraint Dispatch

Many times it is expedient to dispatch the units in such a way that the system will be
normal and secure under a set of specified contingencies. In this case the problem is
reformulated to include these additional constraints. In general we can consider the
following problems: (a) economic dispatch without network constraints, (b) economic
dispatch with network constraints and (c) economic dispatch with contingency
constraints. The problem in (b) is referred to as the economic dispatch problem with N-0
constraints. The terminology N-0 refers to the network constraints for the present
operating condition. The terminology N-1 refers to the network constraints for the
Page 52
present operating condition and a set of postulated single contingencies (or N-1
contingencies). It should be expected that when additional constraints are imposed to the
economic dispatch problem, the operating cost of the system will increase. The procedure
will be illustrated with an example. In this example we will consider the three economic
dispatch problems above and we will compute the economic impact of the additional
constraints.
Example E11.7: Consider the electric power system of Figure E11.7.
generating units have the following cost functions:
f 1 ( Pg1 ) = 5.0 + 14.0 Pg1 + 0.4 Pg21
0 Pg1 3.7
f 2 ( Pg 2 ) = 3.5 + 25.0Pg 2 + 0.4075Pg22
0 Pg 2 1.8
The two
The rating of all circuits is 1.25 pu for normal operation and 1.90 pu for short term
emergency loading.
G1
G2
2
j0.0625
j.2
j.1
j.1
j.2
3
4.48pu
Figure E11.7 An Example Three Bus Power System
(a) Compute the economic set points of the units and the total operating cost.
(b) Compute the security constraint economic dispatch considering present operating
conditions only. Compute the cost deviation.
(c) Compute the security constraint economic dispatch considering the postulated outage
of one of the lines 2-3. Compute the cost deviation.
For simplicity use the DC network model formulation and neglect losses.
Solution: (a)
conditions:
The economic set points are computed from the economic dispatch
= 14 + 0.8Pg1
= 15 + 0.815Pg 2
Pg1 + Pg 2 = 4.48
Page 53
Upon solution:
Pgb1 = 2.88
Pgb2 = 1.60
= 16.304
The operating cost is
F = f 1 ( Pgb1 ) + f 2 ( Pgb2 ) = 48.63776 + 28.54320 = 77.18096

(b) The present operating condition is:
A = P
where:
36
A =
- 20
- 20
30
0.0441
A 1 =
0.0294
0.0294
0.0529
1.6
b =
- 4.48
Upon solution of the power flow equations:
1 = 0.0 , 2 = -0.061176 , 3 = -0.190118
P12 = 0.9788
P23 = 2.5788
P13 = 1.9011
By inspection, there is one active constraint, i.e. the flow P23 exceeds the rating.
Therefore we formulate the problem of N-0 security constraints dispatch as follows:
Min
J = Pg1 + Pg 2
Subject to:
P23 2.5
2.88 Pg1 0.82

1.6 Pg 2 0.2
Page 54
Upon linearization of the operating constraint, the optimization problem becomes:
Min
J = Pg1 + Pg 2
Subject to:
0.294Pg 2 0.0788
2.88 Pg1 0.82

1.6 Pg 2 0.2
This problem is a linear problem. The solution is given below.
Pg1 = 0.26803
Pg 2 = 0.26803
Thus
Pg1 = 3.14803
Pg 2 = 1.33197
The new operating cost is
F = f 1 ( Pgb1 ) + f 2 ( Pgb2 ) = 53.036457 + 24.2025 = 77.23897

The operating cost has increased 0.058 or 0.075%.
(c) We consider the problem defined in part (b) and we append constraints that may be
generated whenever one of the circuits between buses 2 and 3 is outaged. Specifically,
consider the outage of one of the circuits 2-3. The DC power flow for this case yields:
A1 ' = P
Where:
26
A1 =
- 10
- 10
20
and
0.0476
A11 =
0.0238
0.0238
0.0619
1' = 0, 2' = -0.030476, 3' = -0.239238

The flow in the circuits during this contingency will be:
Page 55
P12 = 0.4876
P13 = 2.3924
P23 = 2.0876
By inspection, there is one violated constraint, i.e. the power flow P23 is above the short
term emergency rating of 1.9. Thus the following constraint must be added to the
problem.
P23 1.9
Note that linearization of the flow P23, under the contingency, yields
P23 = 2.0879 + s c 23, g 2 Pg 2

where:
T
sc 23, g 2 = a 23e23
A1
b
= 0.238
Pg 2
(computed under contingency conditions)
The overall problem is now formulated as follows:
Min
J = Pg1 + Pg 2
Subject to:
2.5788 + 0.294Pg 2 2.5
2.88 Pg1 0.82

1.6 Pg 2 0.2
2.0879 + 0.238Pg 2 1.9
This problem is a linear problem. The solution is given below.

Pg1 = 0.7882
Pg 2 = 0.7882
Thus
Pg1 = 3.6682
Pg 2 = 0.8118
The new operating cost is
Page 56
F = f 1 ( Pgb1 ) + f 2 ( Pgb2 ) = 61.7371 + 15.94555 = 77.68265

The operating cost has increased 0.50169 or 0.65%.
The impact of various operating policies on the operating cost is summarized below:
Case
Without Security Constraints
With N-0 Security Constraints
With N-1 Security Constraints
Operating Cost
77.18096
77.23897
77.68265
Increase(Decrease)
0.075%
0.65%
It is important to note that security constraints affect the economics of the system. The
exact economic impact is system dependent. In the example above, we have observed
that the economic impact of the N-1 security constraints (and with the simplified model)
was an increase of the operating cost by 0.65%.
11.11 Corrective Control Computations - AC Network

Model
Many times an electric power system will drift into an emergency condition, i.e. an
operating state in which one or more operating constraints are violated. In this case it is
expedient to exercise available controls in the system to alleviate the operating constraint
violations. These controls are typically called remedial controls or remedial actions. The
types of controls that can be exercised are:
Adjustments of real or reactive power output Pgi, Qgi of a generating unit

Tap selection of a regulating transformer
Phase shift of a phase-shifting transformer
Switching of a capacitor bank
Switching of a reactor
Control of a breaker (close or open)
Control of net export real power flow
The criteria for the selection of corrective controls may differ based upon the particular
application and operating philosophy of the specific system. In general, it can be one or a
combination of the following: (a) minimum deviation from economic operation; (b)
minimum number of units rescheduled; (c) minimum number of controls exercised (for
example, minimum number of line switching); or (d) minimum time to control action,
etc.
The general problem of corrective controls can be stated as follows: Assume that in the
present operating condition, one or more operating constraints are violated. These may
be a circuit overload or a bus voltage abnormality (low or high). One or more control
actions can be exercised to bring the system in a normal operating condition. Assume that
Page 57
the objective of the remedial actions has been selected and can be expressed as a function
of the control actions. Then the problem is formulated as a nonlinear optimization
problem:
Min
J = f ( Pg , Q g , t , , bC , bI , Pe )
g ( x, Pg , Q g , t , , bC , bI , Pe ) = 0
Subject to:
S km S km ,
all circuits km
V i Vi Vi
all buses i
In above formulation the following are applied:
Pg
is a vector of generating unit real power output adjustments
Q g
is a vector of generating unit reactive power output adjustments
bC
is a vector of transformer tap changes

is the vector of phase shift adjustments (phase shift transformers)
is a vector of capacitive reactance switched
is a vector of inductive reactance switched
is a vector of net export real power changes.
b I
Pe
The selection of above adjustments is limited by equipment rating. Specifically,

adjustments of the real and reactive power output of generating units are limited by:
P g Pg Pg
Q g Q g Q g
Changes of transformer taps and phase shifts are limited with:
t t t

Capacitor and reactor switching are limited with:
0 bC bC ,max
0 bI bI ,max
The objective function, as well as the constraints, are linearized with respect to the
control variables. This procedure yields the following problem:
Min
J =
j
Page 58
df
u j
du j
Subject to:
o
S km
+
j
dS km
u j S km
du j
Vi , min Vi o +
j
dVi
u j Vi ,max
du j
u j. min u j u j ,max
In above equations, u are the controls representing Pg, Qg, t, etc., and
dS km
dVi
,
,
du j
du j
etc., are the sensitivities of S km , Vi , etc., with respect to the control variables.
The stated problem is a large scale problem. Many solution techniques have been
proposed for this problem. One of the most successful and practical is the one based on
successive linear programming solutions. The procedure is illustrated in Figure 11.8.
Conceptually, the technique is based on linearization of the objective function and
constraints. The procedure results in a linear program which can be solved with standard
methods such as the simplex method (see Appendix B). This conceptually simple
approach has encountered many practical difficulties which result from the nonlinearity
of the problem. We will present the method using an example system and then we will
discuss several practical problems.
Page 59
A s s u m e C o n tro l
V a ria b le s u
C o m p u te S y s te m
S ta te x
A re O p e ra tin g
C o n stra in ts
S a tis fie d ?
Yes
E X IT
No
F o rm u la te O p tim iz a tio n
P ro b le m
L in e a riz e O p tim iz a tio n

P ro b le m
S o lv e L in e a r P ro g ra m
U p d a te C o n tro l V a ria b le s
Figure 11.8 The Successive Linear Programming Procedure

Example E11.8: Consider the electric power system of Figure E11.8. System data and
control variable selection are given in Table E11.8. The power flow problem for this
system has been solved and it is defined with:
o
o
o
~
~
~
~
V1 = 1.0, V2 = 1.02e j 4.9 , V3 = 0.97e j1.0 , V4 = 0.95e j 6.1
(a)
(b)
Compute the violated operating constraints

Formulate the corrective control problem using as objective function minimum
deviation from present economic dispatch and control variables as follows:
t
transformer tap adjustment
Qg2 generator G2 reactive power adjustment
Pg2 generator G2 real power adjustment.
(c)
Page 60
Linearize the formulated problem in (b).
(d)
(e)
Solve the linear problem resulting from (c).

Verify solution.
Solution: (a) To active constraints will be all the violated constraints. By using the given
solution, the following are computed.
Circuit flows in p.u.

S12 = -0.87 - j0.192
S24 = 1.27 + j62.2
S21 = 0.87 + j0.21
S23 = 0.93 + j0.408
S32 = -0.93 - j0.336
S34 = 0.93 + j0.336
S41 = -1.27 - j0.552
S43 = -0.93 - j0.247,
Unit outputs in p.u.
Pg1 = 0.40,
Qg1 = 0.43,
Pg2 = 1.8, and
Qg2 = 0.61
Page 61
G1
G2
Pg2=1.8 p.u.
L1
V2=1.02
-j10
-j9
L2
-j12.5
3
L3
S = 90 MVA
x=j0.08
t=1.00
T1
S D4
(a)
(A) System Parameters
(1)
Circuit
L1
L2
L3
(2)
Rating
100 MVA
90 MVA
150 MVA
Term. Modes
10-20
20-30
10-40
glm
0
0
0
blm
-10
-9
-12.5
gslm
0
0
0
bslm
.03
.02
.05
Transformer T1
Rating: 90 MVA
Reactance 0.08pu on transformer rating (90 MVA)
(B) Demand Variables:
SD40 = 2.2 + j0.8 pu
(C) Slack Bus Voltage:
% = 1.0 ej0
V
10
(D) Present Selection of Control Variables

Transformer Tap Setting: 1.00pu
Real Power Generated at Bus 2: 1.8pu
Voltage at Bus 20: V20 = 1.02pu
(E) Voltage Specifications
0.96 Vi 1.05 for all buses
(F) Generating Unit Limits
Unit
G1
G2
Pmin
30 MW
40 MW
Pmax
150 MW
190 MW
Qmin
-20 MVAR
-25 MVAR
Qmax
45 MVAR
55 MVAR
(b)
Figure E11.8 Four Bus Example System
(a) System Topology
(b) System Parameters
By inspection of above results, the violated operating constraints are:
Page 62
Voltage Constraints:
Bus 4 Voltage
:
Circuit Loading Constraints:
Transmission Line 2-3
Transformer 3-4
Generating Unit Constraints:
Generator G2 Reactive
Power Output
:
V4 = .952 pu
:
:
T2-3 = .9294 + j.4082 pu

T3-4 = .9294 + j.3363 pu
Qg2 = .618 pu
In summary, the operating constraints which have been violated are:

V4 0.96 pu
|T2-3| 0.90 pu
|T3-4| 0.90 pu
Qg2 0.55 pu
(b) Since the objective is to minimize deviation from present economic conditions, the
objective can be expressed as
Minimize
|Pg2|
Now select as control variables the following

t, Pg2, and V2
The constraints have been identified in part (a). Thus, the problem is stated as follows:
Minimize
Subject to
|Pg2|
V4(t, Pg2, V2) > 0.96 pu
_ 0.90 pu
|T2-3(t, Pg2, V2)| <
<
|T3-4(t, Pg2, V2)| _ 0.90 pu
_ 0.55 pu
Qg2(t, Pg2, V2) <
(c) In this step, the problem defined in (b) will be linearized. This can be efficiently
achieved with the methods presented in Appendix C using the co-state method. The
details of these computations have been omitted here. The result of the linearization
procedure is given below:
V4 = 0.952 - 0.26 t + 0 Pg2 + 0.35 V2
|T2-3| = 1.015 - 1.32 t + 0.25 Pg2 + 1.7 V2
Qg2 = 0.618 - 3.62 t + 0.11 Pg2 + 13.75 V2
Now, the problem is stated as follows:
Page 63
Minimize
Subject to
|Pg2|
-0.26 t + 0.35 V2 > 0.008
-1.32 t + 0.25 Pg2 + 1.7 V2 < -0.115
3.62 t + 0.11 Pg2 + 13.75 V2 < -0.068
and constraints on the control variables

-0.05 < t < 0.05
-1.4 < Pg2 < 0.10
(d) To solve the problem defined in (c), the problem will be first converted into the
standard form of LP by introducing the following transformations:
t = x1 - x2
Pg2 = x3 - x4
V2 = x5 -x6
Then the problem is converted into a linear program in standard form.
Minimize
Subject to
x3 + x4
-0.26x1 + 0.26x2 + 0.35x5 - 0.35x6 - x7 = 0.008
-1.32x1 + 1.32x2 + 0.25x3 - 0.25x4 + 1.7x5 - 1.7x6 + x8 = -0.115
-3.62x1 + 3.62x2 + 0.11x3 - 0.11x4 + 13.75x5
-13.75x6 + x9 = -0.068
x1 < 0.05
x2 < 0.05
x3 < 0.10
x4 < 1.4
x5, x6, x7, x8, x9 unbounded
Solution of above problem yields:

x2 = 0.0475
x1 = 0.0
x3 = 0.0
x4 = 0.626
x5 = 0.0
x6 = 0.012
x7 = x8 = x9 = 0.0
t = -0.0475
Pg2 = -0.626
V2 = -0.012
(e) Validation can be achieved by adjusting the control variables as suggested by the
solution of the linear program and solution of the load flow problem. Specifically, the
new selection of the control variables is:
t = to + t = 0.9525 pu
Pg2 = Pog2 + Pg2 =1.174 pu
V2 = Vo2 + V2 = 1.008 pu
Page 64
The new solution of the load flow problem is computed and given below:
~
V1 = 1.0
o
~
V2 = 1.0e j 2.4
o
~
V3 = 0.95e j 2.5
o
~
V4 = 0.961e j 6.9
T23 = 0.749 + j0.498
T34 = 0.749 + j0.446
Qg2 = 0.558
Note that the solution is very close to satisfying all operating constraints. Specifically,
the effective constraints are:
V4 = 0.961
T2-3 = 0.9006
T3-4 = 0.8726
Qg2 = 0.558
(> 0.96 pu)

(< 0.90 pu)
(< 0.90 pu)
(< 0.55 pu)
The small deviations are due to the fact that the linearized model is an approximation of
the actual system model. Since the solution above has been computed with the actual
nonlinear model of the system, a small difference will exist. If greater precision is
needed, the procedure can be repeated from the present solution. This means that the
problem must be formulated again, the linearized optimization problem must be
computed and solved and the new operating conditions must be computed. (Successive
linear programming approach). For this problem, we assume that the present solution is
acceptable as is and therefore no additional iterations are needed.
11.11.3 Discussion
The problem of corrective control computations is a complex large-scale optimization
problem. It can be viewed as a variation of the optimal power flow problem that was
introduced earlier. The literature is rich in methods that have the objective of providing
robust and efficient solution algorithms for this problem. Many variations of sparcity
coded linear programming algorithms have been utilized as well as variations of the socall interior point method. The reader is referred to Appendix B of this book for the
basics of the optimization algorithms and in the bibliography of this book for the various
applications.
11.12 Interchange Control

Modern power systems are interconnected to share their resources and assist in
emergencies. The beneficial economic effects of interconnections as well as their
Page 65
favorable impact on system security have been long recognized. Recent trends such as
competition and transmission access result in increased power transfers among utilities.
This trend improves certain operational and planning problems. For example
interconnections are useful in emergencies whereby the external systems provide
assistance through the tie lines. Under normal operating conditions, external systems
may be the source of less expensive power or may be the marketplace for excess
generation, etc. From the operational point of view, it is important to control the
operation of the system in such a way that interchange agreements are met while at the
same time, system economics are optimized. From the planning point of view it is
important to recognize that as interchanges increase, interconnections may be used at
their capacity or certain operational constraints may limit power transfers. This reality
has brought into focus the practical limitations of interconnections and the associated
problem of transfer capability [9]. Transfer capability refers to the ability of a
transmission network to allow for the reliable movement of electric power from the areas
of supply to the areas of need. Of course transfer capability is an issue of concern to both
system planners as well as system operators.
11.12.1 Interchange Control among Control Areas

In this section we shall address the problem of interchange control among utilities or
control areas. Later we will discuss other forms of power transfers. The problem of
interchange control among control areas is explained with the aid of Figure 11.9 which
illustrates an interconnected power system consisting of several control areas or power
companies. The figure illustrates tie lines interconnecting the various control areas. The
ownership of the tie line determines the location of the power meter on the line. The
figure illustrates the location of the power meter for all tie lines connected to the system
of interest. The net interchange for an area of interest is expressed with:
Pnet , I =
where:
Page 66
Pkm
k
m
Pnet,I
k I , m I
km
is the real power flow on the tie line km (at the meter location)
is a bus in the area of interest (I)
is a bus outside the area of interest (I)
is the total net interchange for area I
Other
Interconnections
M
M
M
M
System of Interest I
Figure 11.9 Illustration of an Interconnected System
Based on interchange agreements, each area is obligated to control its own net
interchange to the scheduled value, i.e.:
Pnet , I = PnetSched
,I
for all areas I
On the other hand, each system is trying to optimize its operation by dispatching the units
in the most economical way subject to the interchange constraints and other operating
constraints of the system. This means that the problem of interchange control should be
formulated in such a way that both of above requirements are met. This is accomplished
by defining an optimization problem which minimizes the total operating cost for all
systems in the study, subject to interchange and other constraints.
Minimize
J =
I S
subject to:
f (P
j G ( I )
,I
gj
for all I S
Other operating constraints.

where:
Pgj
is the output of unit j
Page 67
fj(*) is the operating cost of unit j

G(I) is the set of generating units in system I
S
is the set of areas in the study
The other operating constraints are the usual power flow equations, unit real and reactive
power constraints, transmission circuit loading constraints, and bus voltage constraints.
If a solution exist to above problem, then the solution will satisfy the interchange
constraints and the operating cost for each system will be minimized. The defined
optimization problem can be simplified by introducing control variables which represent
the total generation of a system, i.e.
Let ugi be the total generation of system i. Now the problem becomes:
Minimize
J =
f (P
I S
subject to:
j G ( I )
gj
,I
IS
= u gi
gj
jG ( I )
IS
g ( x, Pg ) = 0
Linearization of all constraints and elimination of the state variables x yields:
Minimize
J =
f (P
I S
jG ( I )
subject to:
I S jG ( I )
P
j
gj
IS
Pgj Pnet , I = 0
IS
u gi = 0
gj
jG ( I )
ij
gj
=0
By introducing Lagrange multipliers, the above problem is transformed to an

unconstrained problem.
Minimize
J =
(a
I S jG ( I )
+ b j Pgjo + c j ( Pgjo ) 2 + (b j + 2c j Pgjo )Pgj + c j Pgj2
T ij Pgj Pnet , I
I S jG ( I )
T Pgj u gi
jG ( I )
Page 68
j Pgj
j
The necessary conditions for this problem are:
(b j + 2c j Pgjo ) + 2c j Pgj i ij i j = 0 ,
i = 0 ,
iS

I S jG ( I )
P
j
ij
Pgj Pnet , I = 0
iS
iS
u gj = 0
gj
jG ( I )
j G(I), I S
gj
=0
Above is a set of linear equations in an equal number of unknowns. Solution of above

equations yields the values of
Pgj
i, ugi
I
j G(I), I S
IS
IS
Since the original problem is nonlinear, the above procedure must be repeated until
convergence. An example with illustrate the concepts as follows:
Example E 11.9: (to be added)
11.12.2 Power Transfer Control by an ISO

In this section we shall address the problem of power transfers in an interconnected
system operated by an ISO. In this environment there may be many power supply players
competing in an open market. The types of power transfers may be of several varieties. A
list is given below.
Unilateral Power Transfer: This involves cases of unilateral agreements, i.e. an
independent producer connected at bus I contracts with a customer connected at bus j to
sell x amount of power for a number of y hours. We will refer to this type of transaction
as bus-to-bus power transfer.
Bus-to-Area Transfer: This involves cases of a single independent producer supplying
load in an area, i.e. an independent producer connected at bus i contracts with an entity
Page 69
(i.e. utility) to supply the electric load of an area for a number of y hours. We will refer to
this type of transaction as bus-to-area power transfer.
Area-to-Area Transfer: This involves cases of agreements between an entity that owns
multiple generating units and an entity that has customers in an area, i.e. an entity with
multiple generating units in an area contracts with an entity that has customers located in
another area to sell x amount of power for a number of y hours. We will refer to this type
of transaction as area-to-area power transfer.
Bus-to-System Transfer: This involves cases of a single independent producer
supplying electric power to the entire system, i.e. an independent producer connected at
bus i contracts with an independent system operator to sell x amount of power for a
number of y hours. We will refer to this type of transaction as bus-to-system power
transfer.
Area-to-System Transfer: This involves cases of agreements between an entity that
owns multiple generating units in an area and an independent system operator, i.e. an
entity with multiple generating units in an area contracts with an independent system
operator to sell x amount of power for a number of y hours. We will refer to this type of
transaction as area-to-system power transfer.
Page 70
Area 1
Area 3
Pgi3 + i3w3
Pgk3 + k3w3
G
Pgj3 + j3w3
Area 2
G
G
i4+i4mdm
m
G
G
Area 4
k4+k4mdm
m
j4+j4mdm
m
Figure X. Illustration of a Multi-Area System Operated by an ISO
11.12.2 Available Transfer Capability

Any power transfer may be limited by operational constraints. As an example consider a
five area system. Consider power transfer from area 1 to area 5. As the amount of power
transfer changes, the MVAR requirements on each system to maintain this transfer are
given in Table X. Note that area 3 reactive power requirements are quite high and at
some point the reactive power capability of this area will be reached.
The phenomena affecting limitations on transfer capability will be illustrated with an
example. Consider a five area system illustrated in Figure Y. For simplicity each area is
represented with an equivalent bus. Assume that the system operates with no power
transfer among the areas, i.e. the area generation serves the area load and the power flows
in the tie lines are zero and the voltage at the equivalent busses is maintained equal to 1.0
pu. Now assume that a power transfer occurs from area 1 to area 5. Areas 2, 3 and 4 do
not participate in the power transfer. However, as the power transfer from area 1 to area 5
increases, areas 2, 3 and 4 must increase their reactive power output to maintain the
Page 71
voltage at 1.0. Table X illustrates the needed reactive power for each area. Note that
when the power transfer equals 381 MW the reactive power requirement of area 3 is 342
MVARs. At this point we have reached the maximum transfer capability of the system.
Area 2
Area 4
Area 3
Area 1
Area 5
Table X. Reactive Power Requirements of Each Area of the System in

Figure X to Support the Power Transfer from Area 1 to Area 5.
Power Transfer
15
100
200
300
350
381
Area 2
MVAr
4
18
45
71
110
Area 3
MVAr
15
62
154
234
342
Area 4
MVAr
5
21
50
70
86
11.13 Voltage Control

A major concern in system operation is voltage normality and voltage stability. Voltage
normality, i.e. voltage magnitude being within prespecified margins, is necessary for the
normal operation of electric apparatus both customer and utility owned. Specifically all
electric apparatus are voltage rated and operate properly only if voltage is maintained
within specific margins. Voltage stability refers to the ability of the system voltage to
remain within the permissible range as electric load changes or disturbances occur in the
system. Voltage instability is exactly the opposite. Recently, there were instances of
voltage instability leading to blackouts, i.e. France, Japan, Sweden, etc. These events
brought the problem of voltage instability into focus.
Operationally, there are two problems to be addressed: a) The voltage magnitude should
be regulated such as to be maintained within the permissible range. This problem is
Page 72
otherwise known as VAR dispatch, whereby the VAR sources in the system are
dispatched in a manner as to maintain the voltage within the permissible range. b) The
operating condition of the system must be monitored to determine whether the system is
vulnerable to voltage instability. Several methods have been proposed to quantify
vulnerability to voltage instability, most of them are based on proximity indices to
voltage instability.
In subsequent paragraphs, a concise treatment of the two problems will be given.
11.13.1 The VAR Dispatch Problem

The normal system operation is greatly dependent upon the ability of a system to
maintain a reasonable voltage profile by appropriate utilization of the reactive power
sources. Energy management systems provide the hardware and software for continuous
monitoring of the system voltage profile. In addition, they provide the capability for
selecting and dispatching reactive power sources to regulate the voltage profile. Such a
function is called VAR dispatch. VAR dispatch has been implemented in several modern
energy management systems. In these implementations, the VAR dispatcher is not a
closed-loop function. It is simply an application program which may be called by the
operator. It utilizes the present network model, the external system equivalent, the
system state, and the available VAR sources and parameters to compute
. Recommended settings of
- Transformer Taps
- Unit Voltage
- Capacitor Banks, etc.
. Estimated Savings, and
. Sensitivity of Losses.
The information may be used to dictate operator action. A block diagram of a VAR
dispatch algorithm is illustrated in Figure 11.11.
Page 73
NETWORK
MODEL
EXTERNAL
SYSTEM
MODEL
VAR
DISPATCHER
SYSTEM
STATE
VAR
SOURCES
AND
PARAMETERS
PRESENT SETTINGS
RECOMMENDED SETTINGS
ESTIMATED SAVINGS
SENSITIVITY OF LOSSES
Figure 11.10 Block Diagram of a VAR Dispatch Algorithm
Page 74
The VAR dispatch problem is normally formulated in the same way as the corrective
control problem. Control variables are restricted only to those affecting the voltage
levels of the system. Specifically, control variables are:
. Switchable Capacitor/Reactor Status
. Transformer Taps
. Generating Unit Reactive Power Output
To avoid duplication of formalisms, the VAR dispatch algorithm will be illustrated with
an example.
Example E11.10: Consider the electric power system of Example E11.7.
a.
b.
Compute a VAR dispatch schedule which will bring the bus 40 voltage as close
as possible to 1.0.
Compute the sensitivity of losses to the transformer tap setting.
Solution:
To be added later.
11.13.2 Voltage Instability

(to be added)
11.14 Effects of Power Transactions on Security

Recent trends in the electric power industry such as deregulation and open access are
certain to impose new challenges to the operation of the system. One such challenge is
the effect open access will have on system security. The problem is very complex and at
the present time uncertain since there is uncertainty as to how open access will be
implemented. However, the basic models discussed in this chapter will be applicable for
assessing the effect of open access on security. Here we focus on power wheeling and
present basic models for assessing the effect of power wheeling on security. Recall that
security can be measured in terms of security indices.
11.15 Summary and Discussion

This chapter presented the problem of security assessment and control. The problem of
static security assessment has been studied in detail and methods for contingency ranking
and contingency simulation have been presented. Emphasis is placed on large scale
systems. Critical contingencies must be controlled to minimize the harmful effects of
emergencies. Computational methods have been discussed for finding system wide
Page 75
controls for emergency mitigation. Other types of controls have been also discussed such
as interchange control and reactive power control. The optimal power flow problem has
been studied as the tool by which any type of control problem can be solved in a
comprehensive manner while optimizing system operation.
Page 76
11.16 Problems
Problem P11.1: Consider a five bus electric power system. Assuming bus 1 to be the
slack bus, the DC power flow equation reads:
A = P
where: = [ 2
T
3 4 5 ]T and P = [1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0] .
The DC power flow matrix A has been factorized into the product L U where:
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
10.0 25.0
0.0
0.0
,
L=
0.0
20.0 0.0
0.0
10.0 10.0 11.0

0.0
1.0 0.5
0.0 1.0
U =
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.4
1.0 0.5
0.0 1.0
Assume a transmission line is added between nodes 2 and 5 of admittance -j10. Compute
the DC power flow solution for this system.
Solution: Bus 1 is the slake bus.
A old = L U
e 2 = [1 0 0 1]
A new = A old + 11 e 2 e T2
1
old = A old
P . Forward and back substitutions, yield:
old
2

T
= 3 = [0.0182 0.0636 0.1545 0.2091]
4

5
1
= A old
e 2 = [0.0455 0.0091 0.0364 0.0727]
new = old
2 0.0312
0.0538
11e old
3 =
T
4 0.1150
1 + 11e 2

5 0.1300
T
2
Page 77
Problem P11.2: Consider the two-circuit, two bus simplified power system of Figure
P11.2. The electric load is S d 2 = 3.0 + j1.5 pu . The generator is assumed to be of infinite
capacity. It controls the voltage at bus 1 to 1.0 pu.
2 - j10
S12,1
(2 - j8) u c
2
S12,2
j0.1uc
j0.1uc
Sd2
Figure P11.2
a)
b)
~
Compute the power flow solution V2 for the specified conditions, and u c = 1.0 .
Consider following performance index
J = S12,1
+ S12, 2
where S12,1 indicates the MVA (in pu) flow in circuit 1 between buses 1 and 2, etc.
as it is illustrated in the figure.
dJ
Compute the derivative:
duc
c)
Compute and plot the performance index J versus uc in the range
u c = [0.0 , 1.0]
Plot on the same coordinate system the line
dJ
(u c 1.0)
J = J o +
du c
What are your observations?
d)
Page 78
Assume that S d 2 = 6.0 + j3.0 pu . Repeat parts (a), (b) and (c).
P11.2. The electric load is S d 2 = 3.0 + j1.5 pu . The generator is assumed to be of infinite
a)
b)
~
Compute the power flow solution V2 for the specified conditions, and u c = 1.0 .
Consider the following performance index:
4
V 2 1 .0
J =
0.05
dJ
Compute the derivative:
duc
c)
Compute and plot the performance index J versus uc in the range

u c = [0.0 , 1.0]
dJ
(u c 1.0)
J = J o +
du
c
d)
Assume that S d 2 = 6.0 + j3.0 pu . Repeat parts (a), (b) and (c).
Solution:
(a) u c = 1.0
x = [ 2 V2 ]
The power flow equations are:
(2 + 2u c )V22 (2 + 2u c )V2 cos( 2 ) + (10 + 8u c )V2 sin( 2 ) + 3.0 = 0.0
T
(10 + 7.9u c )V22 (2 + 2u c )V2 sin( 2 ) (10 + 8u c )V2 cos( 2 ) + 1.5 = 0.0
Solution of the power flow equations yield:
T
x = [ 0.1665 0.8568]
(b) The performance index is:
2
v 1 .0
J= 2
0.05
J ( x, u c ) ^ T g ( x, u c )
dJ
X
=
du c
u c
u c
where
^ T
X =
J ( x , u c ) g ( x , u c )
x
x
= [- 0.1713 - 0.4224 ]
Page 79
0.0685 0.0004
X = [0 114.54]
= [- 3.4258 - 8.4489]
0.0299 0.0738
g( x, u c ) - 1.3580
=
u c
- 0.6759
1.3580
dJ
= 0 [ 3.4258 8.4489]
= 10.3626
du c
0.6759
^ T
(c) The performance index J versus u c in the range [0.0, 1.0]:
uc
0.1000
0.2000
0.3000
0.4000
0.5000
0.6000
0.7000
0.8000
0.9000
1.0000
V2
Performance Index J
0.6205
0.6976
0.7387
0.7678
0.7902
0.8083
0.8234
0.8361
0.8472
0.8568
57.5993
36.5745
27.3033
21.5676
17.6061
14.6999
12.4819
10.7401
09.3418
08.1994
Linearized J
17.5257
16.4895
15.4532
14.4170
13.3807
12.3444
11.3082
10.2719
9.2357
8.1994
P erform anc e Index (J) vs Control V ariable (Uc )

60
P erform ance Index , J
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.1
Page 80
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Control V ariable, Uc
0.8
0.9
Figure 1. Performance index (J) and Linearized Performance Index vs Control

variable u c
At u c = 1.0 , the performance index J and the linearized performance index utilizing the
dJ
sensitivity of the performance index (
) have the same value (see the plot and the last
du c
row in the table). The linearized performance index is tangential to the performance
index J at that point.
Problem P11.4: Consider the simplified three bus electric power system of Figure
P11.4. All transmission circuits have a rating of 1.0 pu. The two generators have the
following quadratic cost functions:
G2
G1
P
g1
1
P
g2
j0.2
j0.125
j0.1
3
P =1.58
d3
Figure P.11.4
Generator G1:
Generator G2:
11 Pg1 + 2.1739 P2g1

10 Pg2 + 0.7407 P2g1
($/hr, Pg1 in pu)

($/hr, Pg2 in pu)
a) Compute the economic set point for the two generators. Note that the transmission
network is lossless.
b) Solve the DC load flow problem. Determine the overloaded circuits.
c) In case there are overloads in b, formulate a linear program in standard form
whose solution will determine the required generation rescheduling (expressed
with Pg2) and/or load shedding (expressed with Pd3) which will alleviate the
overloads. Let the objective of this linear program be the sum Pg2 + Pd3.
d) Solve the linear program from part (c).
Problem 11.5: Consider the single area electric power system of Figure P11.5. All
transmission lines have a series reactance of 0.1 pu and capacity 1.65 pu. At a certain
Page 81
point in time, the load is as indicated in Figure P11.4. The generating units G1, G2, and
G3 have the following economic characteristics:
300 + 12 Pg1 + 0.5 P2g1
100 + 14 Pg2 + 0.75 P2g2
190 + 13.16 Pg3 + 0.6 P2g3
G1:
G2:
G3:
Compute the security constraint economic dispatch for above system. Use DC network
model.
PG1
G3
G2
4
2
2.1 pu
3.6 pu
Figure P11.5
Problem P11.6: Consider the four bus system of Figure E11.9. System data are given in
Table E11.3. The transformer is an off-nominal tap transformer and it is presently set to
1.00 pu. The present operating condition (named base case) is illustrated in table E11.4. It
is observed that the voltage at bus 40 is below acceptable level (minimum acceptable
level at bus 40 = 0.97 pu). It is desired to compute the controls which will alleviate the
undervoltage condition at bus 40. The operator can vary the following controls:
Transformer T1 tap setting:
0.90 t 1.05
Reactive power output of generator at bus 20:
-0.25 Qg2 0.55 pu
Formulate a linear program whose solution will determine the optimal operator control.
Linearization of the equations can be achieved with the information in example E11.5.
Then compute the controls.
Problem P11.7: Consider the system of Figure P11.5. Assume that the operating state of
the system is the one defined in the problem 11.5. The possible contingencies of the
system are all single circuit outage and all single generator unit outages. Rank the
contingencies according to their sensitivities. Assume a performance index equal to the
sum of the normalized circuit flows squared. Use the DC network model.
Page 82
Problem P11.8: Consider the four bus system illustrated in Figure P11.8. The per unit
value of the admittance of each circuit is -j10.0. The DC power flow matrix A, its inverse
A-1, and the solution of the DC power flow are given below:
PG1
PG2
2
200MW
4
400MW
150MW
Figure P11.8
40 10 10
A = 10 30 10 ,
10 10 30
A 1
0.03333 0.01666 0.01666

= 0.01666 0.04583 0.02083
0.01666 0.02083 0.04583
1 = 0.0, 2 = 0.1, 3 = 0.1, and 4 = 0.2 radians

Consider the following contingencies:
Contingency 1: Outage of circuit 1-3.
Contingency 2: Outage of one of the circuits 1-2.
Rank the above contingencies with respect to the following performance criterion:
PI = 100( 2 4 ) + 25 42
2
Problem P11.9: Consider the four bus system illustrated in Figure P11.8. The per unit
value of the admittance of each circuit is -j10.0. The DC load flow matrix A, its inverse
A-1, and the solution of the DC load flow are given:
Page 83
40 10 10
A = 10 30 10 ,
10 10 30
1 = 0.0
2 = -0.1,
0.03333 0.01666 0.01666

A = 0.01666 0.04583 0.02083
0.01666 0.02083 0.04583
-1
3 = -0.1,
and 4 = -0.2
(radians)
The power ratings of the three generating units are 600, 250, and 300 MW for units G1,
G2, and G3, respectively. The power rating of all circuits is 175 MW.
a)
b)
c)
Determine all the overloads of the system.

Formulate an optimization problem whose solution will alleviate all overloads
while the deviation from the present operating condition is minimized. Control
variables are Pg2 and Pg3.
Cast the optimization problem in b in the following form:
Minimize
Subject to
d)
cTx
Ax = b
xh
x0
(Give the numerical values of matrix A and vectors c, b, and h.)

Solve the LP defined in (c) and compute the new operating point.
Solution: (a) The line flows are:
P12,1 = 10(1 2 ) = 1.0 (p.u.)

P12, 2 = 1.0 (p.u.)
P13 = 1.0 (p.u.)

P14 = 2.0 ( p.u.) , overload
P23 = 0.0 (p.u.)

P24 = 1.0 ( p.u.)
P34 = 1.0 (p.u.)

Generating units outputs are:
Pg 2 = 1.0 1.0 + 1.0 + 2.0 = 1.0 (p.u.)
Pg3 = 1.0 + 1.0 + 1.5 = 1.5 (p.u.)
Pg1 = 5.0 (p.u.)
One overload circuit, 1-4, yielding the following operating constraint:
2 + s c14,g 2 Pg 2 + s c14,g 3 Pg 3 1.75
(b) The optimization problem:
Page 84
Minimize Pg 2 + Pg 3
Subject to 2 + s c14, g 2 Pg 2 + s c14, g 3 Pg 3 1.75
1.0 Pg 2 2.5 1.0

1.5 Pg 3 3.0 1.5
Pgi 0, (i = 2,3)
(c)
s c14,g 2 = 10[0 0 1][A ] [1 0 0] = 0.1666

1
s c14,g 3 = 10[0 0 1][A] [0 1 0] = 0.2083

1
let
Pg 2 = x1 x 2
Pg 3 = x3 x 4
e1 = slack variable
Then, the optimization problem becomes:
Minimize z = x1 + x 2 + x 3 + x 4 + 0e1
Subject to 0.1666 x1 0.1666 x 2 + 0.2083 x 3 0.2083 x 4 e1 = 0.25
x1
1 .5
x2
1 .0
x3
1 .5
x4
1.5
x1, x 2, x 3, x 4, e1 0
C T = [1 1 1 1 0]
0.1666 0.1666 0.2083 0.2083 1
0
0
0
0
0
B= 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
T
b = [0.25 0 0 0 0]
h = [1.5 1 1.5 1.5]
(d) Solution of the LP in (c) yield:

x1 = 0.0
x 2 = 0 .0
x 3 = 1.200192
x 4 = 0 .0
e 1 = 0 .0
Page 85
Therefore Pg 3 = 1.2
1.0 2.0
A = 2.7 1.5
0.0 4.0
new = [0.0 0.08 0.045 0.175]

Verify new power flows:
P12,1 = 10(1 2 ) = 0.8 (p.u.)
P12, 2 = 0.8 (p.u.)
P13 = 0.45 (p.u.)

P14 = 1.75 ( p.u.)
P23 = 0.35 (p.u.)

P24 = 0.95 ( p.u.)
P34 = 1.3 (p.u.)

Generating units outputs are:
Pg 2 = 0.8 0.8 0.35 + 0.95 + 2.0 = 1.0 (p.u.)
Pg3 = 0.45 + 0.35 + 1.3 + 1.5 = 2.7 (p.u.)
Pg1 = 0.8 + 0.8 + 1.75 + 0.45 = 3.8 (p.u.)
Generation and Load:
Pg1 + Pg 2 + Pg 3 Pd 2 Pd3 Pd 4 = 3.8 + 1.0 + 2.7 2.0 1.5 4.0 = 0.0 (p.u.)
Problem P11.10: Consider the three-area, three tie line interconnected power system of
Figure P11.10. The location of the meters on the tie lines indicates the boundaries of the
areas. For example, the tie line 2-3 belongs to area 2 because the meter is located on the
area 1 side of the line. The operating costs of each one of the generating units is as
follows:
Area 1
PG1
Sd1
0.2+j0.2
0.0
M
PG2
0.02+j0.1
PG3
2+
j0.
0
Sd2
Sd3
PG4
0.0
0.1
1+ j
Area2
4
M
Sd4
Area3
Page 86
Figure P11.10 A Three Area Interconnected Power system
Unit
G1
G2
G3
G4
Operating Capacity (in pu)

Min
Max
0.5
0.5
0.8
0.5
3.5
3.5
5.0
2.5
Quadratic Cost Coefficients

a
b
c
10
10
15
12
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
The electric load of the system is as follows:

Sd1 = 1.6
Sd2 = 1.8
Sd3 = 4.6
Sd4 = 1.5
By agreement, the following net interchange must be observed:
Pnet,1 = 1.5 pu
Pnet,2 = -1.5 pu
Pnet,3 = 0.0
a)
b)
c)
Compute the optimal operating point for the entire three area system, i.e. compute
the optimal Pg1, Pg2, Pg3, and Pg4.
What are the transmission system losses for area 3? for area 2? and for system 1?
Assume that an ideal phase shifter is placed in series with circuit 1-4 at the meter
site. The phase shifter is controlled in such a way that the power flow on circuit 1-4
is zero. Compute the optimal operating point for the entire system under these
conditions. What are the transmission losses for system 3? for system 2? and for
system 1? What are your observations?
Hint: The power flow through a circuit ij (with a phase shifter) is
Pij = aij ( i j ij )
Problem P11.11: Consider the simplified electric power system of Figure P11.11. All
indicated circuit parameters are admittances in per unit. The rating of all circuits is 1.5
pu.
Page 87
G1
G2
~
V1
~
V2
-j10
-j6
Pg2 = 1.717
-j8
-j6
~
V3
3.03
Figure P11.11
a) Write the power flow (DC network model) for the system. Solve the power flow
equations.
4
P
b) Define a security index J 1 = k
k Pk
where: Pk is the power flow through circuit k
Pk is the rating of the circuit

In addition define the contingency control variables u c12 , u c13 , u c 23 , u cg1 , and u cg 2 for the
outage of circuits 1-2, 1-3 (one circuit only), 2-3, unit G1, and unit G2 respectively.
Then compute the derivatives of J1 with respect to each one of the contingency control
variables. On the basis of the results, rank the outages in terms of their severity on circuit
loading.
Problem P11.12: Consider the electric power system of Figure P11.12. The power flow
problem for this system has been solved and the results are listed below.
0
~
V1 = 1.02e j0
0
~
V2 = 1.00e j2
0
~
V3 = 0.98e j8
It is known that the generators G1 and G2 control the magnitude of the voltages at buses
1 and 2 respectively (at V1=1.02 and V2=1.0 pu respectively).
a) Determine the number of state variables for this system.
b) Write the power flow equations for the system.
c) Compute the jacobian matrix at the present conditions.
Page 88
d) Define a security index J 2 = ((Vi 1.0) / 0.05) 2 where Vi is the voltage magnitude
i
at bus i. Also define the contingency control variables uc12, uc13, uc23, ucg1 and ug2 for the
outage of circuits 1-2, 1-3, 2-3, unit G1 and unit G2 respectively. Then compute the
derivatives of J2 with respect to each one of the contingency control variables. On the
basis of the results, rank the outages in terms of their severity on voltage.
G1
G2
~
V1
~
V2
-j1 0
-j1 2
P g 2 = 1 .7 1 7
-j8
~
V3
3 .0 3 + j0 .3 9
Figure P11.12
P11.2. The electric load is Sd2 = 3.0 + j1.5 pu. The generator is assumed to be of infinite
a)
b)
% for the specified conditions, and u =1.0.

Compute the power flow solution V
2
c
Consider the following performance index
J = z12
where:
z1 = z22 , and
V2 1.0
= z2 , or 0 = V22r + V22i (0.05z2 + 1.0) 2
0.05
Compute the derivative,
dJ
, using the quadratized power flow formulation.
duc
c) Compute and plot the performance index J versus uc in the range

uc = [0.0, 1.0]
Page 89
dJ
(uc 1.0)
J = J o +
duc

d) Assume that Sd2 = 6.0 + j3.0 pu. Repeat parts (a), (b) and (c).
Problem P11.14: Consider the simplified power system of Figure P11.14. The
illustrated transformer is a TCUL (Tap Changer Under Load). Specifically, there is a
local control loop which adjusts the transformer tap (within limits) is such a way that the
voltage at bus 4 is maintained near 1.0 pu.
Consider the following: when the transformer control loop is not active (open) the
operating condition of the system is the one illustrated in the Figure. The operator
suspects that is he activates the transformer control loop, the generator G2 may be loaded
beyond its reactive capability which is: 25 MVAr Q g 2 85 MVAr .
Pg2 = 0.8
-j10
-j8
-j9
-j12.5
3
-j12.0
Sd4 = 2.8+j0.5 pu
Figure P11.14
It is necessary then to determine whether it is safe to turn on the transformer control loop.
For this reason:
Page 90
(a) Define a linear program whose solution will provide the answer. Specifically,
formulate a linear program with the following:
Objective: Min Q g 2 Q g0 2 .
Constraints: generator reactive power output:
25 MVAr Q g 2 85 MVAr
and
transformer tap limits: 0.90 t 1.10 .

Additional data are given in Figure.
(b) Solve the problem defined in (a). Can the operator activate the transformer control
withoutr violating operating constraints?
Solution: (a) When the transformer control loop is on, the formulation of the problem is
(in pu):
Min
Q g 2
subject to: V 4 = 1.0

0.25 Q g 2 0.85
0.90 t 1.10
(b) The above problem is linearized to yield:
Min
Q g 2
subject to: 0.02545Q g 2 0.1678t = 0.048
0.868 Q g 2 0.232
0.1 t 0.1
Above problem is transformed into a linear program in standard form:
Min
x1 + x 2
0.02545( x1 x 2 ) 0.1678( x 3 x 4 ) = 0.048

x 1 0.232
x 2 0.868
x 3 0.1
x 4 0 .1
x1 , x 2 , x 3 , x 4 0
A starting solution can be found with the phase I of the simplex method:
Min r
0.02545( x1 x 2 ) 0.1678( x 3 x 4 ) + r = 0.048
x 1 0.232
x 2 0.868
Page 91
x 3 0.1
x 4 0 .1
x1 , x 2 , x 3 , x 4 , r 0
Above problem has the following solution:
x1 = 0.232, x 2 = 0.0, x 3 = 0.0, x 4 = 0.1, r = 0.0253

Since the variable r is at nonzero value, the initial problem does not have a solution. This
means that if the operator will turn on the transformer control loop, the generator will be
forced to operate outside its limits.
Problem P11.15: Consider the two bus system of Figure P11.15. The voltage at bus 1
(slack bus) is maintained at 1.0 pu and 0.0 phase angle. The voltage at bus 2 is 0.8 pu and
phase angle -35 (with respect to the slack bus). The parameters of the circuit are listed in
the Figure. The electric load at bus 2 is a function of the voltage magnitude V 2 at bus 2 as
follows:
S L = a (1 + 0.2V 2 ) + jb(1 + 0.1V 2 )
(a) Compute the constants a and b.

dV2
(b) Compute the sensitivity:
da
dV2
(c) Compute the sensitivity:
db
The power flow equations for this system are:
V22 V2 (cos 2 10 sin 2 ) + a (1 + 0.2V2 ) = 0
9.99V22 V2 (sin 2 + 10 cos 2 ) + b(1 + 0.1V2 ) = 0
Figure P11.15
Solution: (a) The electric load is:
S L = 460 .39 j 29.92
MVA
Equating: S L = a (1 + 0.2V 2 ) + jb(1 + 0.1V 2 ) = 460 .39 j 29.92 , yields:

a = 3.96891, b = 0.2771
(b) to compute the sensitivity use the costate method:
Page 92
Problem P11.16: Consider the three bus system of Figure P11.16. The generators G2
and G3 produce 85 MW and 105 MW respectively. The admittance of each circuit is j10
pu. Consider the following contingencies:
1. Outage of one circuit between buses 1 and 2.

2. Outage of one circuit between buses 1 and 3
3. Outage of the circuit between buses 2 and 3
4. Outage of unit G2
5. Outage of unit G3
Rank the contingencies. Use as performance index the following function:
PI = T122 + T132 + T232

where PI = T122 + T132 + T232 is the power flow on circuit between buses i and j.
Figure P11.16
Use DC Network model.
Page 93

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

DRAFT and INCOMPLETE

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control

11.10 Emergency and Restorative Controls_____________________________________ 39

11.12 Interchange Control___________________________________________________ 65

11.13 Voltage Control ______________________________________________________ 72

11.14 Effects of Power Transactions on Security ________________________________ 75

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

operating environment they may be provided by a number of different entities

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

11.2 The Effects of an Outage

Figure 11.1 Possible Effects of an Outage on System Operation

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

Yellow Alarm Region

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

Figure 11.3 Conceptual Description of Voltage Allowable Levels

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

Time After Disturbance

Figure 11.4 The Aftermath of a System Disturbance

11.3 The Operating States/Operating Philosophies

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

(2) Security Assessment

(3) Regulation / Economy Controls

. Optimal Power Flow

(4) Security Controls

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

11.4 Security Assessment

11.5 Contingency Ranking/Selection

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

is the apparent power flow on circuit k

is the rating of circuit k

is the current magnitude in circuit k

Is the current rating of circuit k

is the voltage magnitude of bus i

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

The variable uc enables a rigorous representation of a contingency. For example consider

Pkm = {g kmVk2 VkVm [ g km cos( k m ) + bkm sin( k m )]}uc

Pmk = {g kmVm2 VkVm [ g km cos( m k ) + bkm sin( m k )]}uc

Pgi is the generating unit i output.

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

Figure 11.7 Illustration of a Unit Outage Model with the Contingency

Pgj = Pgj0 + (1 u c ) j Pgi0

where u is a vector of all contingency control variables. The contingency control

Copyright A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos 1990-2006

Power System Modeling, Analysis and Control: Chapter 11, Meliopoulos

The sensitivity of the performance index is given with