Caps (EX-702) generation shift distribution factors

A set of Generalized Generation Distribution Factors (GGDF's) is developed to replace the conventional Generation Shift Distribution Factors (GSDF's). This model relates the line flows with generations for a given network configuration. Being in an integral form, new flows on lines can be obtained directly without running load flows when total system generation changes. Conforming load change is also demonstrated. These new factors are especially suitable for constraint formulation in mathematical programning, such as optimal generation dispatch with security contingencies considered

Power System Security

What is power system security?
Power system security may be looked upon as the probability of the system's operating point remaining within acceptable ranges, given the probabilities of changes in the system (contingencies) and its environment

The Adaptive Reliability Control System

Dy Liacco rst pointed out in 1967 that a power system may be identied to be operating in a number of states. Preventive state Emergency state Restorative state

Preventive state
The preventive state is actually the normal state. The term `preventive' was used to stress the `Security' aspect of the normal operation. Normal operating condition usually means that all the

apparatus are running within their prescribed limits, and all the system variables are within acceptable ranges. The system should also continue to operate `normally' even in the case of credible contingencies. The operator should`foresee' such contingencies (disturbances) and take preventive control actions (as economically as possible) such that the system integrity and quality of power supply is maintained.

Emergency state
The power system enters an emergency state when some of the components operating limits are violated; some of the states wander outside the acceptable ranges, or when the system frequency starts to decrease. The control objective in the emergency state is to relieve system stress by appropriate actions. Economic considerations become secondary at this stage.

Restorative state
Restorative state is the condition when some parts (or whole) of the system has lost power. The control objective in this state is to steer the system to a normal state again by taking appropriate actions.

Major components of security assessment

System monitoring Contingency analysis Preventive and corrective actions

System monitoring
The prerequisite for security assessment of a power system is the knowledge of the system states. Monitoring the system is therefore the rst step. Measurement devices dispersed throughout the system help in getting a picture of the current operating state. The measurements can be in the form of power injections, power flows, voltage, current, status of circuit breakers, switches, transformer taps, generator output etc., which are telemetered to the control centre. Usually a state estimator is used in the control centre to process these telemetered data and compute the best estimates of the system states. Remote control of the circuit breakers, disconnector switches, transformer taps etc. is generally possible. The entire measurement and control system is commonly known as supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system

Contingency analysis
Once the current operating state is known, the next task is the contingency analysis. Results of contingency analysis allow the system to be operated defensively. Major components of contingency analysis are: Contingency denition Contingency selection Contingency evaluation

Contingency denition
. Contingency denition involves preparing a list of probable contingencies. Contingency selection process consists of selecting the set of most probable contingencies in preferred; they need to be evaluated in terms of potential risk to the system. Usually, fast power flow solution techniques such as DC power flow are used to quickly evaluate the risks associated with each contingency.

Finally, the selected contingencies are ranked in order of their security, till no violation of operating limits is observed.

Preventive and corrective actions

Preventive and corrective actions are needed to maintain a secure operation of a system or to bring it to a secure operating state. Corrective actions such as switching of VAR compensating devices, changing transformer taps and phase shifters etc. are mainly automatic in nature, and involve short duration. Preventive actions such as generation rescheduling involve longer time scales. Security-constrained optimal power flow is an example of rescheduling the generations in the system in order to ensure a secure operation.

On-line security assessment

In earlier days, security assessment in a power system was mainly onine in nature. Predened set of rules or nomographs were used to assist the operators in the decision-making process. However, due to the highly interconnected nature of modern power systems, and deregulated energy market scenarios, operating conditions and even the topology of a power system changes frequently. On-line techniques for security assessment are therefore no- longer reliable in modern power systems. On-line security assessment techniques use near-real-time measurements from different locations in a power system, and continuously update the security assessment of the system

Linear sensitivity factors

Analyzing in details a large number of contingencies is a diffcult task. An easy (approximate) way to quickly compute any possible violation of operating limits is the one of linear sensitivity factors.

Two such sensitivity factors for checking line flow violations are generation shift factors and line outage distribution factors.

Generation shift factors

They calculate the efect of change in generation on the line flows, as shown below:

aij =

Fi/Pi

where aij is the linearized generation shift factor for the ith line for a change in output of i th generator; Fi is the MW change in power flow in the ith line; Pi is the change in generation at the ith bus It is assumed here that the change in generation at the ith bus is picked up by the reference bus. Once the new values of flows are computed for all the lines, they are compared with corresponding line flow limits. Operators are `alarmed' in case of any limit violations. In a practical power system, due to governor actions, the loss of generation at the bus i may be compensated by their generators throughout the system. A frequently used method is to assume that the loss of generation is distributed among participating generators in proportion to their maximum MW rating

Transfer Distribution Factors

Transfer Distribution Factors (TDFs) represent the impact of an Interchange Transaction on a given flowgate. TDF is the measure of responsiveness or change in electrical loading on system facilities due to a change in electric power transfer from one area to another expressed in per cent (up to 100%) of the change in power transfer.

TDFs address the question, What portion of a power transfer shows up on flowgate X?

Load Shift Factors

Load Shift Factors (LSF) describe how changes in system loading impacts a flowgate.

Generation-to-Load Distribution Factors Generation-to-Load Distribution Factors (GLDF) describe a generators impact on a flowgate while serving load in that generators Balancing Authority Area

A GLDF is the difference between GSF and an LSF and determines the total impact of a generator serving its native Balancing Authority load on an identified transmission facility or monitored flowgate.

Line Outage Distribution Factor (LODF)

Line Outage Distribution Factor (LODF) represents the percentage of flow on a contingent facility that will flow on the monitored elements, if the contingent facility is outaged Contingency Analysis Post-Contingency Flow on Monitored Element = PreContingency Flow on Monitored Element + (PreContingency Flow on Contingent Element)*LODF LODFs are not used in IDC TLR calculations they are only used in assisting the RCs in filling the TLR NERC Report

Interactions between Generation and Transmission for System Security

The role of generation/transmission interactions in determining a secure operating point is not always recognized in traditional operating environments. In particular, there is

some substitutability between transmission and generation. For example, the system can at times make up for the outage of a generator by using another generator in the same control area, but at other times, by using a generator or generators elsewhere in the system if sufficient transmission capacity is available. The outage of any generator is initially felt everywhere in the system as a twofold impact. First, a downward frequency drift begins everywhere, and, second, the control area that contained the failed generator will start to see a large ACE. Frequency drift is stabilized initially because all generators and many loads are sensitive to frequency changes. The export (or import) from (into) a control area is by definition a regulated quantity. However, as a result of the loss of a generation and the fact that all generators participate in maintaining frequency, the immediate net effect on the area that lost the generator will be a reduction in its exports. Only after the area with the lost generator can readjust its remaining generators output to accommodate for these reduced exports is the power that supplied was by the lost unit replaced with additional local generation (local reserves). Conversely, the loss of a transmission line will generally cause a redistribution of flows in the system. If the newly redistributed flows lead to overloads or other transmission system problems, a different generation pattern that is appropriate to the newly limited transmission conditions must be established. Reliance on demand options during traditional system operations has generally been limited to certain interruptible load programs that meet reserve requirements when conditions are tight. Although in recent years there has been an increase in the use and creativity of voluntary customer load response programs, there remains much unexploited potential for using demand response to help manage system security. Some new trends in this area include the disclosure of real-time prices to loads, the more aggressive use of interruptible load programs in several regions, and the design of entire new ways of compensating customers for the willingness to be interrupted or curtailed. The emergence of alternatives to all-or-nothing power service is another possibility, e.g., allowing customers to sign up for guaranteed levels of service with anything beyond those levels subject to curtailment. Improvements in metering and metering technology will permit the system to take full advantage of voluntary load response. However, local

regulatory barriers and some consumer groups opposition to the notion that electricity should be treated as a commodity have resulted in some parts of the country being either forbidden or reluctant to adopt these demand response solutions.

System Losses
System losses must be taken into account in system operations. Most system losses are associated with series losses in the conductors; because conductors have resistance, every line, transformer, and generator loses some power as it delivers or transmits energy through them. There are also shunt losses in some cable systems and in overhead line arrangements, but these losses are generally far less important than series losses. Consideration of system losses during operations is quite important for system efficiency. Average losses can account for two to five percent of total system energy, and, on the margin, losses can be considerably greater. Incremental losses in the six percent range are quite common, with incremental losses that exceed 10 and even 15 percent possible when there is significant reactive power flow. Ignoring losses or simplifying the accounting of them can lead to substantial economic inefficiencies as a result of some generators being chosen as most economical when in reality, as a result of their marginal losses at the time, they are far from economical. Likewise, desirable generators that do not increase (and in fact may reduce) losses may not be chosen because their marginal cost or bid may be slightly above some other less desirable generator. Thus, in almost all traditional system operations environments, some mechanism is used to account for losses. Because losses vary significantly over the range of system operating capabilities, only correctly computed marginal losses should be used. A marginal loss refers to the change in losses due to the change in an injection of power at a given location. Marginal losses do not increase linearly with system demand, as some would like to assume. The best method for computing marginal losses during operations is based on the use of a transposed Jacobian matrix of the system evaluated at the current operating point

(Alvarado 1979). All that is required for this method is a good model of the system and a knowledge of the systems state. An accurate way to incorporate marginal losses (used in many systems) is the use of carefully computed penalty factors. These factors are multipliers that are applied to the marginal cost (or bid) of every generator (and in principle also to every demand) to correct for the losses attributable to the power injection or the demand. A penalty factor of 1.1 applied to a generator at one location versus a penalty factor of 1 applied to another generator means that, under the postulated system conditions, 10 percent of the power injected by the first generator will be dissipated as losses and none of the power from the second generator will be lost. A penalty factor of 0.95 would indicate that for every MW injected at a location, a reduction of 0.05 MW in losses occurs, making this location desirable. In an efficient environment, credit is due to injections with penalty factors less than 1 although credit for loss reductions is not always given in traditional system operations.

VAR compensation
VAR compensation is defined as the management of reactive power to improve the performance of ac power systems. The concept of VAR compensation embraces a wide and diverse field of both system and customer problems, especially related with power quality issues, since most of power quality problems can be attenuated or solved with an adequate control of reactive power . In general, the problem of reactive power compensation is viewed from two aspects: load compensation and voltage support. In load compensation the objectives are to increase the value of the system power factor, to balance the real power drawn from the ac supply, compensate voltage regulation and to eliminate current harmonic components produced by large and fluctuating nonlinear industrial loads . Voltage support is generally required to reduce voltage fluctuation at a given terminal of a transmission line. Reactive power compensation in transmission systems also improves the stability of the ac system by increasing the maximum active power that can be transmitted. It also helps to maintain a substantially

flat voltage profile at all levels of power transmission, it improves HVDC (High Voltage Direct Current) conversion terminal performance, increases transmission. efficiency, controls steady-state and temporary overvoltages , and can avoid disastrous blackouts. Series and shunt VAR compensation are used to modify the natural electrical characteristics of ac power systems. Series compensation modifies the transmission or distribution system parameters, while shunt compensation changes the equivalent impedance of the load .In both cases, the reactive power that flows through the system can be effectively controlled improving the performance of the overall ac power system. Traditionally, rotating synchronous condensers and fixed or mechanically switched capacitors or inductors have been used for reactive power compensation. However, in recent years, static VAR compensators employing thyristor switched capacitors and thyristor controlled reactors to provide or absorb the required reactive power have been developed . Also, the use of self-commutated PWM converters with an appropriate control scheme permits the implementation of static compensators capable of generating or absorbing reactive current components with a time response faster than the fundamental power network cycle .

Shunt Compensation
the principles and theoretical effects of shunt reactive power compensation in a basic ac system, which comprises a source V1, a power line and a typical inductive load. Figure 1a) shows the system without compensation, and its associated phasor diagram. In the phasor diagram, the phase angle of the current has been related to the load side, which means that the active current IP is in phase with the load voltage V2. Since the load is assumed inductive, it requires reactive power for proper operation and hence, the source must supply it, increasing the current from the generator and through power lines. If reactive power is supplied near the load, the line current can be reduced or minimized, reducing power losses and improving voltage regulation at the load terminals. This can be done in three ways: a) with a capacitor, b) with a voltage source, or c) with a current

source. In Fig. 1-b), a current source device is being used to compensate the reactive component of the load current (IQ). As a result, the system voltage regulation is improved and the reactive current component from the source is reduced or almost eliminated. If the load needs leading compensation, then an inductor would be required. Also a current source or a voltage source can be used for inductive shunt compensation. The main advantages of using voltage or current source VAR generators (instead of inductors or capacitors) is that the reactive power generated is independent of the voltage at the point of connection.

Series Compensation
VAR compensation can also be of the series type. Typical series compensation systems use capacitors to decrease the equivalent reactance of a power line at rated frequency. The connection of a series capacitor generates reactive power that, in a self-regulated manner, balances a fraction of the line's transfer reactance. The result is improved functionality of the power transmission system through: i) increased angular stability of the power corridor, ii) improved voltage stability of the corridor, iii) optimized power sharing between parallel circuits Like shunt compensation, series compensation may also be implemented with current or voltage source devices, as shown in Fig. 2. Figure 2-a) shows the same power system of figure 1-a), also with the reference angle in V2, and Fig. 2-b) the results obtained with the series compensation through a voltage source, which has been adjusted again to have unity power factor operation at V2. However, the compensation strategy is different when compared with shunt compensation. In this case, voltage VCOMP has been added between the line and the load to change the angle of V2, which is now the voltage at the load side. With the appropriate magnitude adjustment of VCOMP, unity power factor can again be reached at V2. As can be seen from the phasor diagram of Fig. 2-b), VCOMP

generates a voltage with opposite direction to the voltage drop in the line inductance because it lags the current IP

As was already mentioned, series compensation with capacitors is the most common strategy. Series Capacitor are installed in series with a transmission line as shown in Fig.3, which means that all the equipment must be installed on a platform that is fully insulated for the system voltage (both the terminals are at the line voltage). On this platform, the main capacitor is located together with overvoltage protection circuits. The overvoltage protection is a key design factor as the capacitor bank has to withstand the throughput fault current, even at a severe nearby fault. The primary overvoltage protection typically involves non-linear metal-oxide varistors, a spark gap and a fast bypass switch. Secondary protection is achieved with ground mounted electronics acting on signals from optical current transducers in the high voltage circuit. Independent of the source type or system configuration, different requirements have to be taken into consideration for a successful operation of VAR generators. Some of these requirements are simplicity, controllability, dynamics, cost, reliability and harmonic distortion. The following sections describe different solutions used for VAR generation with their associated principles of operation and compensation characteristics.

Analysis of Voltage Instability and Collapse

Midterm stability programs that can simulate the system up to a few minutes can be utilized for this purpose provided that they can model the load characteristics accurately and also include the dynamics of OLTC and over excitation limiters.

 The representation of OLTCs can significantly increase the simulation time frame as they have an intrinsic time delay of the order of 30 s and an additional 1-5 s is taken for each subsequent tap movement. It is also necessary to model correctly step size, initial tap position and tap range. Load representation should include not only static loads which are voltage dependent but also dynamic loads such as induction motors and thermostatic loads. All the reactive compensation devices : switched shunt reactors, capacitors, SVC (with limiting action) need to be represented adequately. In addition, special protection schemes such as under voltage load shedding, OLTC blocking, reactor tripping and generator runback should be modeled Small Signal (linear) Analysis Two approaches - static analysis (considering only algebraic equations) and dynamic analysis (considering system dynamics). By defining voltage collapse proximity indicators (VCPI) it is possible to implement security assessment. The system equations are = f (x, y) 0 = g (x, y) Linearizing the above equations, we get = [JSYS] x [JSYS] is termed as the system Jacobian matrix and is distinct from the load flow Jacobian matrix [JFL]. All the eigenvalues of the system Jacobian matrix should lie in the LHP (Re (i) <0) for the equilibrium (operating) point to be stable. The system Jacobian matrix can have either A real eigenvalue which is zero or

 A complex pair on imaginary axis10/17/2010 10:31 AM 6 In the first case, instability is due to the crossing of a real eigenvalue into the RHP and the bifurcation is said to be of saddle-node type. In the second type, the instability is due to the crossing of a complex pair into the RHP and it is termed as Hopf bifurcation. Control of Voltage Instability System must be operated with adequate margin for voltage stability. In the event of voltage instability due to unforeseen contingencies, the system control must prevent widespread voltage collapse and restore the loads as quickly as possible. The incidence of voltage instability increases as the system is operated close to its maximum loadability limit. Present trend is to operate the existing transmission facilities optimally to utilize the inherent margins available. The concept of FACTS is an important step in this direction. The availability of FACTS controllers such as SVC , Controlled Series Compensation (CSC), Static Condenser (STATCON) permit operation close to the thermal limit of the lines without jeopardizing security. The reactive power compensation close to the load centers as well as at the critical buses in the network is essential for overcoming voltage instability. The location, size and speed of control have to be selected properly to have maximum benefits. The design of suitable protective measures in the instability is also necessary. event of voltage

The application of under-voltage load shedding, controlled system separation and adaptive or intelligent control are steps in this direction. Voltage Stability Analysis The analysis of voltage stability for a given system state involves the examination of two aspects : (a) Proximity to voltage instability: How close is the system to voltage instability? Distance to instability may be measured in terms of physical quantities, such as load level, active power flow through a critical interface, and reactive power reserve. (b) Mechanism of voltage instability: How and why does instability occur? What are the key factors contributing to instability? What are the voltageweak areas? What measures are most effective in improving voltage stability? System dynamics influencing voltage stability are usually slow. Many aspects of the problem can be effectively analyzed by using static methods, which examine the viability of the equilibrium point represented by a specified operating condition of the power system. The static analysis techniques can provide much insight into the nature of the problem and identify the key contributing factors. Modelling Requirements Power system elements that have a significant impact on voltage stability :

 Loads: load characteristics could be critical in voltage stability analysis. Expanded sub-transmission system representation in a voltage-weak area may be necessary. This should include transformer ULTC action, reactive power compensation, and voltage regulators in the sub-transmission system. It is important to account for voltage and frequency dependence of loads. It may also be necessary to model induction motors specifically. Generators and their excitation controls. For voltage stability analysis, it may be necessary to account for the droop characteristic of the AVR rather than to assume zero droop. If load (line drop) compensation is provided, its effect should be represented. Field current and armature current limits should be represented specifically rather than as a fixed value of the maximum reactive power limit. Static var system (SVSs ) When an SVS is operating within the normal voltage control range, it maintains bus voltage with a slight droop characteristic. When operating at the reactive power limits, the SVS becomes a simple capacitor or reactor. These characteristics of SVS should be represented appropriately in voltage stability studies. Automatic generation control (AGC). These functions have to be represented appropriately.

Static Analysis The static approach captures snapshots of system conditions at various time frames along time-domain trajectory. Stability is determined by computing the V-P and Q-V curves at selected load buses. Such curves are generated by executing a large number of power flows using conventional models. Such procedures do not readily provide information useful in gaining insight into causes of stability problems. These procedures focus on individual buses . This may unrealistically distort the stability condition of the system. Also, the buses selected for Q-V and V-P analysis must be chosen carefully, and a large number of such curves may be required to obtain complete information. Prevention of Voltage Collapse System Design Measures (a) Application of reactive power-compensating devices Adequate stability margins should be ensured by proper selection of compensation schemes. The selection of the sizes, ratings, and locations of the compensation devices should be based on a detailed study covering the most onerous system conditions for which the system is required to operate satisfactorily. (b) Control of network voltage and generator reactive output Load (or line drop) compensation of a generator AVR regulates voltage on the high tension side of, or partway through, the step-up transformer.

 In many situations this has a beneficial effect on voltage stability by moving the point of constant voltage electrically closer to the loads. (c) Coordination of protections/controls One of the causes of voltage collapse is the lack of coordination between equipment protection/controls and power system requirements. Adequate coordination should be ensured based on dynamic simulation studies. (d) Control of transformer tap changers Where tap changing is detrimental, a simple method is to block tap changing when the source side voltage sags, and unblock when the voltage recovers. There is potential for application of improved ULTC control strategies. The best strategy depends on the characteristics of the specific system. (e) Under voltage load shedding To cater to unplanned or extreme situations, it may be necessary to use under voltage load-shedding schemes. Load shedding provides a low-cost means of preventing widespread system collapse. The characteristics and locations of the loads to be shed are more important for voltage problems . Loadshedding schemes should be designed so as to distinguish between faults, transient voltage dips, and low voltage conditions leading to voltage collapse.

System-Operating Measures (a) Stability Margin The system should be operated with an adequate voltage stability margin by the appropriate scheduling of reactive power resources and voltage profile. There are at present no widely accepted guidelines for selection of the degree of margin and the system parameters to be used as indices. If the required margin cannot be met by using available reactive power resources and voltage control facilities, it may be necessary to limit power transfers and start up additional generating units to provide voltage support at critical areas. (b) Spinning Reserve Adequate spinning reactive-power reserve must be ensured. Required reserve must be identified and maintained within each voltage control area. Operators Action Operators must be able to recognize voltage stability-related symptoms and take appropriate remedial actions such as voltage and power transfer control and, possibly as a last resort, load curtailment. Operating strategies that prevent voltage collapse need to established.