PV PQ bus switching

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

33 Aufrufe

PV PQ bus switching

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

- Design and Optimization of Multipass Heat Ex Changers
- Transient Stability Analysis Using MiPower
- Load Flow Analysis of 37-Bus System
- Optimal Reactive Power Planning Based on Improved Tabu Search Algorithm
- Australian Reduced Model 14 Generator System PSSE Study Report
- Comparison of Power Flow Algorithms for Inclusion in on-Line Powe
- ERACS Power Network Model
- Path-Based Distribution Network Modeling Application to Re Configuration for Loss Reduction
- AAA1
- TET 4115_2015 Assignment 7
- contingency analysis
- genetic alogorithm
- CTPS LESSON 1.docx
- V3I8IJERTV3IS080738
- Load Flow GS
- Lecture 11
- 12Vol5No4
- TET 4115_2015 Solution to Assignment 8
- TET 4115_2015 Assignment 8
- 1702.08372

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 7

COMPUTATION

Jinquan Zhao,

Hohai University

Nanjing, P.R. China

jqzhao2@tom.com

Cornell University

Ithaca, NY, U.S.A

type switching logic in power flow computation considering generator reactive power limits is presented in this

paper. Beside the numerical blow-up divergence, another

kind of divergence called bus type identification divergence can be met in the power flow computation. The bus

type identification divergence denotes a phenomenon of

voltage instability, which is corresponding to the limit

induced bifurcation voltage collapse. Using several supplementary logics, even though they are seemingly reasonable, will result in finding an unstable solution. The numerical results of a practical system and IEEE 118 bus test

system are shown to describe this phenomenon. Then a

theoretical analysis is given and the Stability Constraints

of a load flow solution are proposed for the first time. At

last, the numerical results are shown that the wrong results could be obtained by using unreasonable supplementary PV-PQ switching logics in continuation power flow

computation for voltage stability assessment.

switching, Switching Logic, Voltage Stability, Unstable

Solution

1 INTRODUCTION

Power flow computation is an elementary task in

power system analysis. Many static or dynamic advanced applications such as transient stability analysis,

voltage stability analysis, optimal power flow and contingency security analysis are based on a basic power

flow solution. The accuracy and rapidity of power flow

computation used to be considered as an important issue

for the past forty years [1-8]. Another important issue

about power flow computation, handling of generator

reactive power limits, is paid much less attention for a

long term.

In static analysis of power system the reactive power

outputs of generators and switchable shunts are modeled to vary instantaneously within their physical limits

to maintain some buses voltage magnitudes. Those

buses called voltage regulated buses. In power flow

computation, if the voltage magnitude of a bus can be

regulated by the automatic voltage regulator of generator or the continuously-switchable shunt, its type may

be switched between PV and PQ. Generally speaking,

the type of a bus is PV, which means the real power

injection and voltage magnitude of a bus are fixed while

its reactive power injection and voltage phase angle are

free. When its reactive power injection reached its upper or lower limit, the type of this bus becomes PQ,

Ping Ju

Hohai University

Nanjing, P. R.China

are fixed while the voltage phase angle and magnitude

are free.

Most of the voltage regulated buses are local control

buses since the corresponding reactive power injection

equipments located at them. Only less of them are remote control buses since the corresponding reactive

power support equipments located at the neighboring

buses instead of themselves. For some special cases,

one bus may belong to both of them. That is to say, its

responsible reactive power support equipments are

located at both themselves and some neighboring buses.

The process of power flow computation is mathematically an iterative solution process of a set of linear

algebraic equations. The type identification of voltage

regulated bus is done between two iterations. If some

buses types are switched, then the dimension of the

Jacobian matrix is changed. Without loss of generality,

in this paper we use the Newton-Raphson method and

suppose that all voltage regulated buses are the local

control buses.

In this paper we are going to show that beside the

numerical blow-up divergence there is another kind of

divergence in power flow computation, in which the

power mismatches maintain around a small specific

value but the bus type of the voltage regulated buses

keep switching. This kind of divergence phenomena are

ignored usually. Are they ture unsolvable cases or an

unreasonable bus-type switching logic is used? Can the

switching logic be modified to solve these divergence

problems? What relationship between this kind of divergence and the Limit Induced bifurcation in voltage

stability assessment? Are there any mathematical ways

to handle the inequality constraints in power flow computation instead of the heuristic type-switching logic?

We try to answer these questions in this paper.

An investigation about the impacts of the bus type

switching logic on power flow solution was presented

in this paper. The paper is organized as follows: In

Section II, the bus PV-PQ type switching logic in load

flow computation is given in detail. In section III three

supplementary logics used usually for handling the type

identification difficulties are given. The numerical test

results of a practical system and IEEE 118 bus system

are shown that a voltage unstable solution could be

obtained by using the supplementary logics in Section

IV. A theoretical analysis is presented in Section V. In

Section VI, the impacts of unreasonable switching lo-

Page 1

described.

2

LOGIC

Mathematically two tasks need to be done in power

flow computation. One is to decrease the mismatches to

a very small value through an iterative process. Another

is the type identification of the voltage regulated buses.

After k th power flow iteration, for a voltage regulated bus i , the computed value of its reactive power

injection can be solved as:

(1)

Q i = f Q (V k , k )

i

k

There are three possibilities for each voltage regulated bus:

1. Bus i is a PQ bus in the previous iteration and its

reactive power was fixed at its lower limit:

If its voltage magnitude V i V i , s e t , then it is still a

PQ bus at current iteration and set Qi = Qi min . If

V i < V i , set , then to compare Qi with the upper and

set Qi = Qi max . If Q i Q i m in , then it is still a PQ bus

and set Qi = Qi min . If Qi min < Qi < Qi max , then it is

switched to PV bus, set V i , n e w = V i , s e t .

2.

its reactive power was fixed at its upper limit:

If its voltage magnitude V i V i , s e t , then bus i still

comparison between Q i and its upper/lower limits

need to be done. If Qi Qi max , then it is still a PQ bus

and set Qi = Qi max . If Q i Q i m in , then it is still a PQ

bus but let Qi = Qi min in current iteration. If

Vi ,new = Vi , set .

3.

Compare Qi with its upper and lower limits. If

Qi = Qi max . If Q i Q i m in , then it is switched to PQ

and set Qi = Qi min . If Qi min < Qi < Qi max , then it is still a

PV bus.

Note: When a voltage regulated bus is switched to

PV from PQ, there is a mismatch with its voltage magnitude V = Vi , set Vi ,old . If it is too big, the numerical

oscillation would happen, which produce the frequent

oscillation of bus type and slow convergence. There-

fore, an acceleration factor ( 0 < 1) could be introduced to damp the numerical oscillation.

Vi ,new = Vi ,old + (Vi , set Vi ,old )

(2)

3 SUPPLEMENTARY SWITCHING LOGICS

There are two kinds of divergences with power flow

computation. One is the numerical divergence, in

which the power mismatches increase rapidly with

iterations. Another is the identification divergence, in

which the power mismatches maintain around a specific

value but the bus type identification of the voltage regulated buses meet difficulty. The former usually has less

iteration times than the latter one.

Those buses, which types are switched frequently in

the computation process, are called the hard identification buses in this paper. To handle this identification

difficulty, one seemingly reasonable idea is to stop the

oscillation. The following supplementary logic is usually used.

Supplementary logic 1: If the number of type

switching from PV to PQ for some buses is bigger than

N (say N = 3 ) in the solution process, then these

buses are fixed at PQ type in latter iterative computation

and the switching criterion above is never checked

again.

Generally, one solution can be obtained by using the

above supplementary logic. Furthermore, we hope that

the number of those buses, which are handled by this

supplementary logic, is as small as possible. Therefore,

the following supplementary logic could be an improved one:

Supplementary logic 2: When the supplementary

logic 1 is used, only one of the hard identification buses

is fixed in each iteration while let the others alone. In

general the most limit violated bus is selected to be

fixed.

Another advantage of the supplementary logic 2 is

that the numerical zigzag phenomena in the power flow

computation can be avoided. Its disadvantage is that the

total iteration times would increase.

Since both the bus type identification and the numerical solution are executed alternately in the power

flow computation, it is hard to know if the numerical

convergence process has a bad impact on the correct

identification of bus type. The following supplementary

logic is used based on this idea in which these two tasks

are separated.

Supplementary logic 3: First keep the type of all

voltage regulated buses, run purely numerical iteration

until a converged solution is got, then check if the type

of some buses need to be switched. If there are this kind

of buses, then switch them according to the original

logic described in section II and continue the numerical

solution process. If there is no such kind of bus, then

stop the computation.

Page 2

Switching Logics.

there is no an equilibrium point of post-contingency

system. The nose point is a Limit Induced Bifurcation

Point (LIBP) [10]. The key reactive power limit which

results in the immediate instability is the one corresponding to generator bus 111. Bus 111 is coincidently

the only bus fixed as PQ bus by using supplementary

logic 2.

Nose curvebus190

Voltagep.u.

4 NUMERICAL RESULTS

4.1 A practical power system

The numerical tests on power flow convergence of a

practical 640 bus power system are shown here. Using

the original bus type switching logic (OL) and the supplementary logics (SL) above we run the power flow

computation for base case, the case of 500KV tie line

#5031 outage and the case of #5001 outage respectively. The numerical results with respect to convergence are shown in table 1.

Logic

Base case

5001 outage 5031 outage

OL Convergence Divergence Convergence

SL1 Convergence Convergence Convergence

SL2 Convergence Convergence Convergence

SL3 Convergence Divergence Convergence

0.97

0.96

0.95

0.94

0.93

0.92

0.91

0.9

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

branch parameter

For base case system and the case of tie line 5031

outage, the converged solutions were obtained by using

the original logic and three supplementary logics. Actually the hard identification buses didnt arise in the

solution process. For the case of tie line 5001 outage,

the power flow diverges by using the original logic,

which is a type identification divergence. One convergent solution was obtained by using supplementary

logic 1, but this solution is an abnormal solution, since

five of all voltage regulated buses are fixed as PQ type

while their reactive powers are fixed at their upper limits but their voltage magnitudes are higher than their set

point values. One abnormal solution was also obtained

by using the supplementary logic 2, since the voltage

regulated bus 111 is fixed as PQ type while its reactive

power is fixed at its upper limit but its voltage magnitude is higher than its set point. By using supplementary

logic 3, the power flow computation is still diverged.

Tie line

5001 outage

SL1

SL2

Bus ID(fixed at PQ

by SL1 or SL2)

Abnormal bus

27, 43, 91, 93, 111 27, 43, 91, 93, 111

111

111

One question is whether there is a steady stable solution with the case of tie line 5001 outage. In other

words, whether this post contingency load flow is solvable or not? The reference [9] presented a branch parameterized continuation power flow tool to investigate

the nonlinear effect of branch outages. It is used to

verify the above analysis and the nose curve obtained is

shown in Fig. 1.

The branch parameter value max corresponding

to the nose point of the V Curve is smaller than 1

( max 0.921) as shown in Fig. 1, which indicates that

Logic

OL

SL1

SL2

SL3

Base case

Convergence

Convergence

Convergence

Convergence

Case 1

Divergence

Divergence

Convergence

Divergence

Case 2

Divergence

Convergence

Convergence

Divergence

Switching Logics.

The following numerical tests on IEEE118 bus system were done. In base case, the load at bus 59 is

277MW/113MVar. We define Case 1 as increasing the

load in bus 59 to 1055.66MW/502.33MVar. We define

Case 2 as increasing the load in bus 59 to

990.66MW/470.33MVar and line 59-60 outage. The

slack bus 69 takes the real power differences induced by

load increases for both cases. Using the original logic

and three supplementary logics, the power flow to base

case, case 1 and case 2 are solved respectively. The

convergences are shown in table 3.

For base case, the solutions obtained by using the

original logic and three supplementary logics. In addition, since the hard-identification buses are not found in

the solution process, the solutions are same. For Case 1,

when the original logic is used, power flow is diverged

and it is an identification divergence. When the SL1 or

SL3 are used, solution is still diverged. When the SL2 is

used, power flow is converged. For Case 2, the solution

is diverged by using the original logic, which is a numerical divergence but there are about 30 bus type

switching iterations before the numerical blowup. When

we used SL1 and SL2, we got power flow solutions.

Page 3

When we used SL3, the power flow is still diverged. In

table 4 we give the comparison of three infeasible solutions in table 3. According to table 4, not all the buses

fixed at PQ by supplementary logic are abnormal buses.

Bus ID(fixed at PQ by Abnormal bus

SL1 or SL2)

34, 36, 46, 54, 66

34, 46

SL2 case 1

34, 66

66

SL1 case 2

66

66

SL2 case 2

Table 4: Comparison of Three Infeasible Solutions.

whether there is a power flow solution corresponding to

Case 1. The maximal transfer power from the slack bus

69 to bus 59 is computed. The load at bus 59 is increased at a proportion 2 to 1 of real power w.r.t. reactive power. The maximal load at bus 59 obtained is

1051.66MW/500.33Mvar (smaller than Case 1). The

corresponding nose point is a LIBP and the key limit is

the generator reactive power limit at bus 66. In table 4,

bus 66 is right one of the buses which are fixed at PQ

type by SL2. The PV curve obtained by using

CPFLOW [11] is given in Fig. 2, which is shown that

there is no a feasible power flow solution for Case 1.

PV Curve(bus 59)

5 THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

First of all, we give the mathematical expression

which is equivalent with the heuristic PV-PQ switching

logic in power flow computation. They are a set of

complementarity constraints between the terminal voltage magnitude and the reactive power of each generator.

(Qi Qi min )(Vi Vi,set )(Qi max Qi ) = 0 (i = 1,2,", ng ) (3)

where ng is the number of generator buses. There are

two variables at each bus in load flow problem. They

are bus voltage magnitude and angle. If the reactive

powers of all generators are considered as variables

either, then there are totally 2n + ng variables. Therefore

equations for all buses ( n is the number of buses),

totally 2n + ng equations. They can be written in vector

1.2

Voltagep.t.

solutions can be obtained by using SL1 or SL2 while no

solution can be got by using the original logic. The

reason is that these supplementary logics are unreasonable. The original logic excludes automatically the possibility of infeasible solutions. The SL3 has no help for

identification of bus type of voltage regulated buses.

Actually its resulting numerical zigzagging is very severe. The bus type identification divergence in power

flow solution generally corresponds to the LIBP phenomena.

form as:

0.8

f ( , V , Qg ) = 0

0.6

(4)

0.4

0.2

are:

0

0

200

400

600

800

LoadMW

power flow solution corresponding to Case 2 is done as

follows. The line 59-60 is cut off first, then the maximal

load point of bus 59 is computed. The results show that

the maximal load at bus 59 is 985.51MW and

467.25MVar which is smaller than the one in Case 2.

The obtained maximal load point is a saddle-node bifurcation point. This result shows that there is no a power

flow solution with Case 2.

4.3 Analysis and Conclusions

The following conclusions can be made according

to the numerical results of the above practical system

and IEEE 118 bus system. For base case or light load

cases of power system, good solutions can be obtained

by using original logic and three supplementary logics.

Qi min Qi Qi max

(i = 1, 2,", ng )

(5)

constraints (5) are not enough for obtaining a feasible

load flow solution. Some important constraints were

missing here which can guarantee that the power flow

solution is a stable solution.

Q

Qmax

Stable

branch

Unstable

branch

Vset

Qmin

Unstable

branch

Stable branch

Page 4

at a given operating condition for every bus in the system, the bus voltage magnitude increase as the reactive

power injection at the same bus is increased. A system

is voltage unstable if, for at least one bus in the system,

the bus voltage magnitude decreases as the reactive

power injection at the same bus is increased. In other

words, a system is voltage stable if V Q sensitivity is

positive for all buses while it is voltage unstable if

V Q sensitivity is negative for at least one bus (see the

reference [12]).

The QV modeling curve of generator is shown in

Fig. 3. The arrowhead denotes the load increase direction. It is undifferentiable at the turning points where

the Newton method does not work. Therefore the heuristic PV-PQ bus type switching logic has to be used

there for keeping the efficiency of Newton method. The

real lines denote the stable branches while the broken

lines denote the unstable cases in fig. 3. If the supplementary logics are used in load flow solution, then the

solution points of some generators may be located on

either the unstable branches or the stable branches. If

the original PV-PQ switching logic is used only, then

the solution points of all generators can be located on

the stable branches only. A hyperbolic or sigmoid function is proposed to smooth the QV curve of generator

by Kataoka in [13]. However, it is unsuitable in many

applications such as voltage stability assessment since it

masks the true face of this physical problem.

The stability constraints, which a stable power

flow solution has to subject to, can be written as:

(Vi Vi , set )(Qi max Qi ) 0

(6)

(7)

of a bus is smaller than its setting point, the corresponding reactive power must be fixed at is upper limit. Constraints (7) denote if the voltage magnitude of a bus is

higher than its setting point, the corresponding reactive

power must be fixed at its lower limit. When a bus is

switched to PQ type from PV type, there is a small

perturbation Q with its reactive power injection. If a

positive perturbation produces a positive response of its

voltage magnitude or a negative perturbation produces a

negative response, then it will satisfy with the original

switching logic and the counter-switching does not

happen. Or else the inequality constraints (6), (7) are

not satisfied, it needs to be switched from PQ to PV.

Therefore according to the classical criterion for static

voltage stability, the original bus type switching logic

without any supplements is an only reasonable logic. It

is equivalent to the voltage stability constraints (6) and

(7). It avoids the possibility that the power flow computation is converged to a voltage unstable solution.

The power flow problem with generator reactive

power limits could be considered as a special optimal

power flow problem. However, the way of control in

this problem is a decentralized local control instead of

decentralized and independent objectives which are to

minimize the adjustments of voltage magnitudes of all

generators as the following formula:

1

(8)

M in

(V i V i , set ) 2 i = 1, 2, ..., n g

2

where V i is the generator terminal voltage. Therefore,

the complete problem formulation is composed of the

objective function (8), power flow equation, and the

inequality constraints (5), (6) and (7) together. It is

necessary to note that the complementary conditions (3)

are not required any more. This problem seemingly can

be solved by using a multiple objective nonlinear programming tool without help of the heuristic logics.

However, the inequality constraints (6) and (7) are not

easy to be handled. This formulation is not appropriate

for a direct application of optimization methods. Whenever Qi is at a limit and Vi = Vi , set for a bus, the

Hessian matrix will become singular. A set of complementarity constraints on generator excitation limits,

which are equivalent to stability constraints (6) and (7),

are given by Vournas in loadability limit problem formulation [14]. The decentralized objective functions (8)

are replaced by a scalar objective function. However,

the generator underexcitation limits are not considered

in [14]. A penalty function based approach is used to

solve this optimization problem and to overcome the

complementarity constraints induced solution difficulty.

A more complete formulation of OPF with the complementarity constraints is given by Rosehart in [15,16].

The nonlinear interior point is used to solve the OPF

and a criterion is given for eliminating the singularity of

Hessian matrix or the ill-conditioning of reduced Hessian matrix.

In this paper we focused on the load flow problem instead of general OPF problem. A better way of solving

this special OPF problem is that to solve the basic load

flow equations iteratively while the constraint checking

and equations switching are executed by using a heuristic logic between two iterations. Therefore the sparsity

characteristics are used well to decrease the computational demands. The only requirement is that the switching logic is reasonable and correct, especially for constraints (6) and (7).

According to the sensitivity theory of voltage stability, the bus with key reactive power constraint, which

results in a limit induced bifurcation, is the most sensitive controllable bus for preventing voltage collapse and

increasing the load margins. The area where this bus

located is the most sensitive area. Therefore, if we can

locate quickly the hard identification voltage regulated

buses while the bus type identification divergence happens in load flow solution process, it would give the

valuable information for control.

Page 5

CONTINUATION POWER FLOW

The Continuation Power Flow has been used

widely in voltage stability analysis [17]. Its mathematical formulation:

f ( x, ) = 0

Q g min Q g ( x , ) Q g max

(9)

vector, R is a parameter, f R n is the power

flow equations, Q g R n g is ng -dimensional generator reactive power vector. f ( x, ) is a piece wise

differentiable function because of generator reactive

power constraints. Therefore it has a piece wise continuous Jacobian matrix. Same as in the power flow

computation, handling the reactive power inequality

constraints in the continuation power flow computation

is done by the PV-PQ bus type switching logic. Therefore, if an unreasonable bus type switching logic is

used, the trajectory tracing may start from an unstable

equilibrium point and follow a wrong trajectory to get

totally wrong results. Sometimes the abnormal branch

switching phenomena would be happened.

P-V Curve(bus 190)

1.3

Voltage(p.u.)

1.25

1.2

1.15

1.1

1.05

1

0.95

0

Lamda

10

15

outage

Voltage

PV Curve(bus 50)

1.06

1.04

1.02

1

0.98

0.96

0.94

0

10

20

30

40

LoadMW

system

2 is shown in Fig. 4. The abscissa is the parameter , 1

p.u. equals to 100MW. For IEEE 118 test system, we

got Fig. 5 by using SL2 in whole CPF computation. The

starting point of this PV curve is an infeasible solution

of Case 1. The load at bus 50 is increased while the

generation at slack bus is increased. Different with the

normal PV curve, the curves in fig. 4 and fig. 5 are

starting from their lower parts to their upper parts. The

bus voltage magnitudes increase instead of decrease

with load increasing. The maximal transfer powers

obtained are much bigger than the actual values. These

results are definitely wrong.

7 CONCLUSIONS

The impacts of bus type switching logic on power

flow computation are investigated in this paper. When

the limitation of the convergence region of the Newton

method and the bad impacts of the unsuitable initial

state are ignored, the power flow divergence indicates

that the corresponding operational state of power system is unstable in static sense. The type identification

divergence of the voltage regulated buses is a kind of

divergence of power flow computation in which the

power mismatches maintain at a small value while the

types of some voltage regulated buses keep switching.

The numerical results of a practical system and IEEE

118 standard test system are shown to indicate that

using some supplementary logics will result in converging to an unstable solution. The bus type identification

divergence in power flow computation is an important

index of limit induced bifurcation voltage instability.

When the unreasonable PV-PQ switching logics are

used in CPF computation, the wrong PV curves and

load margins can be obtained, which are dangerous for

on-line voltage stability assessment. According to a

classical static voltage stability criterion, the stability

constraints for load flow solution are given. Even

though load flow problem considering generator reactive power limits can be written a special form of optimization problem, we suggest that it is solved by the

traditional way with help of heuristic switching logic.

REFERENCES

[1] W. F. Tinney, C. E. Hart, Power Flow Solution by

Newtons Method, IEEE Trans. PAS, Vol.86, no.

11, 1967,pp.1449-1460.

[2] Stott B, Alsac O, Fast Decoupled Power Flow,

IEEE Trans. PAS vol 93, no. 3, 1974, pp. 859-869.

[3] S. Abe, N. Hamada, A Isono, et al, Load flow convergence in the vicinity of a voltage stability limit,

IEEE Trans On PAS, Vol.97, no.6, 1978, pp.19831993.

[4] S. Iwamoto, Y. Tamura, A Load flow calculation

method for ill conditioned power systems, IEEE

Trans On PAS, vol.100, no.4, 1981, pp. 1736-1743.

[5] Y. Tamura, H. Mori, S. Iwamoto, Relationship

between voltage instability and multiple load flow

Page 6

PAS, 1983, PAS-102(5): 1115-1125.

[6] M. Dehnel, H W Dommel, A method for identifying weak nodes in non-convergent load flows,

IEEE Trans. On Power systems, Vol.4, No. 2, Nov.

1989, pp.801-807.

[7] P. R. Bijwe, S M Kelapure, Nondivergent Fast

Power Flow methods, IEEE trans. On power systems, Vol.18, no. 2, May, 2003, pp.633-638.

[8] J. E. Tate, T. J. Overbye, A comparison of the

optimal multiplier in polar and rectangular coordinates, IEEE trans. On power systems, vol. 20, no.

4, Nov. 2005, pp. 1667-1674.

[9] A. J. Flueck, J. R. Dondeti, A New Continuation

Power Flow Tool for Investigating the Nonlinear Effects of Transmission Branch Parameter Variations,

IEEE Trans. On Power Systems, Vol. 15, No. 1,

Feb. 2000, pp. 223~227.

[10]I. Dobson, L. M. Lu. "Voltage Collapse Precipitated

by the Immediate Change in Stability When Generator Reactive Power Limits are Encountered", IEEE

Trans. On Circuits and Systems-I: Fundamental

Theory and Applications. Vol. 39, No. 9, September, 1992, pp. 762~766.

[11]H. D. Chiang, A.J. Flueck, K.S. Shah and N. Balu,

''CPFLOW: a practical tool for tracing power system

steady-state stationary behavior due to load and gen-

Vol. 10, No. 2, May 1995, pp. 623-634.

[12]P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control,

McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. ISBN 0-07-035958.

[13]Y. Kataoka, A smooth power flow model of electric power system with generator reactive power

limits taken into consideration. IEEE International

Symposium on Circuits and Systems, ISCAS 2005.

23-26 May 2005 pp.5286-5289.

[14]C. D. Cournas, M. Karystianos, and N. G. Maratos,

Bifurcation points and loadability limits as solutions of constrained optimization problems, Proc.

IEEE PES summer Meeting, vol.3 July.16-20,2000,

pp.1883-1888.

[15]W. Rosehart, C. Roman, A. Schellenberg, Optimal

power flow with complementarity constraints,

IEEE trans. On power systems, vol. 20, no. 2, May,

2005, pp.813~822.

[16]C. Roman, W. Rosehart, Complementarity model

for generator buses in OPF-based Maximum loading

problems. IEEE trans. On power systems, vol. 20,

no. 1, Feb. 2005, pp.514~516.

[17]J. Zhao, H-D Chiang, H. Li, A new contingency

parameterization CPF model and sensitivity method

for voltage stability control, IEEE PES General

meeting 2005, July, San Francisco.

Page 7

- Design and Optimization of Multipass Heat Ex ChangersHochgeladen vonFelipe Resendiz Nuñez
- Transient Stability Analysis Using MiPowerHochgeladen vonBhavik Prajapati
- Load Flow Analysis of 37-Bus SystemHochgeladen vonJr Mendoza
- Optimal Reactive Power Planning Based on Improved Tabu Search AlgorithmHochgeladen vonchuchomat87
- Australian Reduced Model 14 Generator System PSSE Study ReportHochgeladen vonnooralhud
- Comparison of Power Flow Algorithms for Inclusion in on-Line PoweHochgeladen vonAmany Hamdy
- ERACS Power Network ModelHochgeladen vonAnwar Salim
- Path-Based Distribution Network Modeling Application to Re Configuration for Loss ReductionHochgeladen vonBandar Al- Otaibi
- AAA1Hochgeladen vondebasishmee5808
- TET 4115_2015 Assignment 7Hochgeladen voneh2asham1
- contingency analysisHochgeladen vonゴンサレス ジョンマーク
- genetic alogorithmHochgeladen vonRama Subrahmanyam
- V3I8IJERTV3IS080738Hochgeladen vonBhuvneshRathore
- CTPS LESSON 1.docxHochgeladen vondivya1587
- Load Flow GSHochgeladen vonZufar Amanullah Masnan
- Lecture 11Hochgeladen vonPranav Kharbanda
- 12Vol5No4Hochgeladen vonAlluri Appa Rao
- TET 4115_2015 Solution to Assignment 8Hochgeladen voneh2asham1
- TET 4115_2015 Assignment 8Hochgeladen voneh2asham1
- 1702.08372Hochgeladen vonNjegosJankovic
- JMESTLoadFlowPaperHochgeladen vonvjvijay88
- InTech-Optimal Location and Control of Multi Hybrid Model Based Wind Shunt Facts to Enhance Power QualityHochgeladen vonRavi Desai
- LOAD FLOW STUDIES OF RADIAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS.docxHochgeladen vondallisrinivas14
- 42AW Conference PaperHochgeladen vonrudreshsj86
- 01266588.pdfHochgeladen vonjaach78
- Mini Proj FinalHochgeladen vonMary Morse
- Load Flow StudiesHochgeladen vonSwayamdeep Singh
- File ServeHochgeladen vonashok
- Teknik SwitchingHochgeladen vonJamal Darusalam
- Abdel Akher2014Hochgeladen vonItalo Chiarella

- SoCo Power Quality PolicyHochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- RUS USDA C84 Voltage TolerancesHochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- AFH INCIDENT ENERGYHochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- SG3150U PQ Curve at Various Voltage 20181120Hochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- C84-1Considerations Distr GenHochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- Impact of IEEE 1584 2018 Empirical Model to Existing AFHHochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- 105 c Coleman Cable Colcblc00001 8 7Hochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- Cable assemblyHochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- Circuit Protection Methods 1492 Wp001_ en pHochgeladen vonFábio Seabra
- EMC for Systems and Installations - Part 3Hochgeladen vonmojingyan
- VD CalcHochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- GEK-34053G (1).pdfHochgeladen vonRajeel
- BUS_Ele_Tech_Lib_Class_R_Fuses.pdfHochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- aluminum-universal-angle-bus-conductor-uabc.pdfHochgeladen vongerrzen64
- DCM-Physical Station ServiceHochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- CT Open circuitHochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- starter diagramHochgeladen vonlam nguyen
- HHRG Schematic Gen 2 & 3Hochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- TB1102 GE_ATSWhitepaper 9-17-15Hochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- Generator ReactancesHochgeladen vonLora Bishop
- Generator Controls Voltage StabilityHochgeladen vonhhipower
- ABC vs Acb Phase Seq t60 Get-8431bHochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- 32Hochgeladen vonsharptr
- Extraneous and False Load Flow SolutionsHochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- new method of Load FlowHochgeladen vonSARITHA S
- Load Flow Analysis of Radial Distribution NetworkHochgeladen vonGopinath Ramalingam
- 1000 v Breaker PlugsHochgeladen vonkcirrenwod
- Luk Sich Paper 2004Hochgeladen vonfurkandar
- 4.Fault Gas Generation in Ester based Transformer Fluids and Dissolved Gas Analysis(DGA).pdfHochgeladen vonkcirrenwod

- topbook.pdfHochgeladen vonSURAJ RANJAN SAHOO
- cat-2018-syllabus_0Hochgeladen vonAJAY
- Geometry Theorems & Concepts - MATHS BY AMIYA.pdfHochgeladen vonpranshu Chaudhary
- Quality-I is Safety-ll - The Integration of Two Management Systems - Sasho Andonov (CRC, 2017)Hochgeladen vonTita Eric
- application lesson finalHochgeladen vonapi-245023409
- secular humanism - handoutHochgeladen vonapi-286657372
- Lecture 8Hochgeladen vonJaka Septian Kustanto
- Ber BasicsHochgeladen vonsunilsheelavant
- Exercise 1 PROBLEMS ON NUMBER SYSTEM , LCM AND HCFHochgeladen vonQUANT ADDA
- Signals and Systems Analysis Using Transform Methods and Matlab[1]Hochgeladen vonDiego Rubén
- 8-5Hochgeladen vonksr131
- Intro to MatlabHochgeladen vonHesham Fadl-Allah Mohamad
- Practical Data Analysis With JMPHochgeladen vonrajv88
- grade 2 geometryHochgeladen vonapi-278376363
- Improving Performance of Back propagation Learning AlgorithmHochgeladen vonInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development - IJSRD
- dchangela-pride- final draftHochgeladen vonapi-428005905
- Algorithm HeaveHochgeladen vonuacci
- CSC263 Assignment 1 2014Hochgeladen voniasi2050
- Power Sets and Cardinality of Infinite SetsHochgeladen vonMichael Jacamile
- Engineering GraphicsHochgeladen vonAby Abraham
- Trigonometry Condensed Formula SheetHochgeladen vonRiza Azari
- Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 9, 2015Hochgeladen vonAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Square Root and Cube RootHochgeladen vonmecitfuturedreams
- XII Maths Chapterwise Advanced Study Material 2015 17Hochgeladen vonAshok Pradhan
- PID Controller Tuning by using Fuzzy Logic Control and Particle Swarm Optimization for Isolated Steam TurbineHochgeladen vonGRENZE Scientific Society
- George the Slug 2Hochgeladen vonAndrewBayang
- Basics of Counting & Summation - Kamal Lohia _ MBAtious _ CAT Study Materials, MBA Preparation, BANK PO Examinations, SSC, IBPSHochgeladen vonShreesh Kumar
- Ask a PhilosopherHochgeladen vonvimipa
- Design of a genetic algorithm for a NP-hard optimisation problemHochgeladen vonMatthew Sparkes
- ch13.pdfHochgeladen voncathy