CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION
The electric power business is rapidly becoming market driven. However, because of
the increasingly intimate role that electric plays in the national economy, security
remains to the most important aspect of power system operation which cannot be
compromised in a market-driven approach. Recent developments based on the
standard market design (SMD) in restructured electric power system provide an
opportunity for electricity market participants, such as generation companies,
transmission companies, and distribution companies to exercise least-cost or profit-
based operations. In a competitive electricity market, the ISO coordinates the SMD
attributes with market participants for satisfying hourly load demand, limited fuel and
other resources, environmental constraints, and transmission security requirements.
In competitive electricity market, customers expect a least-cost and high-quality
supply of electric energy, which may require additional investments and more
sophisticated operation techniques for enhancing power system security. The
sophistication could in part mitigate severe consequences in the event of cascaded
power system contingencies, which might otherwise result in dramatic property and
human losses, and severely impede the growth in the national economy.
The reliability of a power system is generally judged in terms of the systems
adequacy and security. The term adequacy refers to the systems capacity to meet the
load demand within the components ratings and voltage limits at any time. The term
security refers to the systems ability to withstand the impact of sudden changes due to
equipment outage, such as the loss of a generator, transmission line, etc. The security
of the system is defined in terms of a list of contingencies (i.e., transmission-line and
generator outages) which may cause insecure operation. Clearly, as the system
conditions changes, this list also changes. In order to determine the list of
contingencies, exhaustive load flow analyses should be performed to determine the
impact of each contingency on the set of contingencies which may create problems.
Power system security involves practices designed to keep the system operating when
the components fail.
Examples
1. A generating unit may have to be taken off-line because of auxiliary equipment
failure.
2. By maintaining the proper amount of spinning reserve, the remaining units on the
system can take the deficit without too low a frequency drop or need to shed load.
3. A transmission line may be damaged by a storm and taken out by automatic
relaying.
When one failure results in another failure in the system, it is called cascading failure
which leads to system blackout.
For Good quality of power transfer from source to load operator must have to follow
these constraints.
1. Reliability:-
2. Security:-
3. Stability:-
4. Economic:-
5. etc
The third method security function is security-constrained optimal power flow. In this
function, a contingency analysis is combined with an optimal power flow which seeks
to make changes to the optimal dispatch of generation, as well as other adjustments, so
that when a security analysis runs, no contingencies result in violation.
To understand the above functions, we shall divide the operating states of the power
system into four types:
1. Optimal dispatch
2. Post-contingency
3. Secure dispatch
4. Secure post-contingency
1. Optimal dispatch: It is the state that the power system is in prior to any contingency.
It is optimal with respect to economic operation but it may not be secure.
2. Post-contingency: It is the state of the power sytem after contingency has occurred.
We shall assume here that this state has a security violation (transmission line or
transformer outside its flow limit or bus voltage outside limit).
3. Secure dispatch: It is the state of the power system with no contingency outages but
with corrections to the operating parameters to account for security violation.
4. Secure post-contingency: It is the state of the power system when contingency
analysis is applied to base operating condition with corrections.
It is illustrated with an example. Suppose a trivial power system consisting of two
generators, a load and double circuit line with both generators supplying load. Figure
shows that the system is in economic dispatch that is 500 MW from unit 1 and 700
MW from unit 2 is in optimal dispatch. Further, the two double circuit lines can carry
a maximum of 400 MW so that there is no loading problem with respect to the base
operating condition.

Fig. Optimal dispatch

Figure shows the post-contingency state. Suppose one of the circuits making double
circuit line is opened due to a failure. The circuit will be as shown in figure below.
Then there is an overload in the remaining circuit.
Fig. Post contingency
If we dont have this condition to arise and we shall correct this by lowering the
generation on unit 1 to 400 MW, then the secure dispatch is as shown in

Fig. Secure dispatch

Now, if the contingency analysis is done, the secure post-contingency is as shown in
Figure Thus, by adjusting the generation on unit 1 and unit 2, the post-contingency
state is prevented from having an overload. Programs which make control adjustments
to the base or pre-contingency condition to prevent violations in post-contingency
conditions are called Security Constrained Optimal Power Flow (SCOPF).

Fig. Secure post-contingency

System security
It is classified into three major functions which are carried out in an operation control
centre.
1. System monitoring (SCADA, state estimation).
2. Contingency analysis.
3. Security constrained OPF (SCOPF).
The system monitoring provides the operators of the power system with pertinent up-
to-date information on the conditions of the power system. Generally speaking, it is
the most important function of the three. From the time that utilities went beyond
systems of one unit supplying a group of loads, the effective operation of the system
required that critical quantities be measured and the values of the measurements be
transmitted to a central location.
Such systems of measurement and data transmission, called telemetry systems, have
evolved to schemes that can monitor voltages, currents, power flows, and the status of
circuit breakers, and switches in every substation in a power system transmission
network. In addition, other critical information such as frequency, generator unit
outputs and transformer tap positions can also be
Tele metered. With so much information tele metered simultaneously, no human
operator could hope to check all of it in a reasonable time frame. For this reason,
digital computers are usually installed in operation control centres to gather the
telemetered data, process them, and place them in a database from which operators
can display information on large display monitors.
More importantly, the computer can check incoming information against pre-stored
limits and alarm the operators in the event of an overload or out-of-limit voltage.
State estimation is often used in such systems to combine tele metered system data
with system models to produce the best estimate of the current power system
conditions or state. It is discussed in detail in the other sections.
Such systems are usually combined with supervisory control systems that allow
operators to control circuit breakers and disconnect switches and transformer taps
remotely. Together, these systems are often referred to as SCADA systems, standing
for Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition system.
The second major security function is the contingency analysis. The results of this
type of analysis allow systems to be operated defensively. Many of the problems that
occur on a power system can cause serious trouble within such a quick time period
that the operator could not take action fast enough. This is often the case with
cascading failures. Because of this aspect of system operation, modern operation
computers are equipped with contingency analysis programs that model possible
system troubles that arise. These programs are based on a model of the power system
and are used to study outage events and alarm the operators to any potential overloads
or out-of-limit voltages. For example, the simplest form of the contingency analysis
can be put together with a standard power-flow program as described in this chapter.
Several variations of this type of contingency selection, and automatic initializing of
the contingency power flows using the actual system data and the distributed factors
are discussed in this chapter.
Literature survey

1. Zhihong Jia et.al.[] Here in this paper author discussed about the two available
methods of contingency ranking and screening as continuation power flow
(CPF) and Generalized curve fit (GCF). The new method proposed in this
paper was derived from GCF and the result of the proposed approach was
compared with CPF method. The method calculate the voltage stability margin
considered branch outage . The result based on the IEEE 300 bus and IEEE-
600 bus power system as well as utility system 197 bus and 1254 bus were
presented. Here computation and simulation was performed using IPFLOW
and VSTAB.

2. G.C.Ejebe et. al. [ ] proposed a new method called Generalized curve

fit(GCF) and ranking for voltage stability analysis and compare it with existing
methods like CPF based method, Multiple load flow method, Test function
method, V-Q curve fitting method(VQF). The proposed method use to
compute the stable branch and get an approximation to the saddle-node
bifurcation point was obtained by the use of curve fitting technique. In the new
method rather than computation and tracing the P-V and P-Q curve. An
approximation to the role of the curve was determined , it was shown that the
newly proposed method has the best performance in terms of accuracy and
computation time. All the method were evaluated using a 234-bus and 901 bus
power system.

3. Robert Fischl et.al.[34] presented the theory and method for systematically
finding the performance index(PI) which was used in automatic contingency
selection (ACS) algorithm. The author solved how to select the set of
weighting coefficients in the currently used PIs for analyzing either the real
power flow or node voltage magnitude problems in order to circumvent some
of the contingency ranking problem .Even more information it was shown how
to select the threshold values of the PI which guarantee proper classification of
the contingencies .Author discussed about the method for finding PI value
using standard SUMI method. One such algorithm was given together with an
illustrative example.
4. K.W.Chan et. al. [ ] described the security analysis methods adopted by
OASIS with an explanation and justification of why they can selected or
developed. An on-line dynamic security contingency screening and ranking
system for large complex power system, online algorithms for system
instability studied (OASIS) was developed. Result and discussion of the trails
carried at the national grid control center NGCC) were also presented.

5. P.R.Bijwe et.al.[ ] developed an efficient no iterative method for ranking line

outage contingencies in an AC-DC system based on overload and voltage
deviation performance indices. The method was based on the calculation of
complex line outage current compensations using a coupled AC-DC load flow
Jacobian-Matrix. The proposed method was further extended for the
calculation of line outage distribution factor which could be very useful for
reducing the computational modal for handling bus-type switching results
from reactive power limit violations was also developed. Result for a modified
IEEE 14 bus system was obtained with the proposed method and compare with
those obtained by rigorous AC-DC load flow.

6. G.B.Jasman et. al. [ ] presented a new technique for ranking outage in power
system. The method of outage simulation by power system injection was used
in this paper and the result of the outage was then further analyzed to
determine the level of voltage instability of the network as a result of the
outage. Result was tested on a 9-bus system.

7. Chung-Liang chang et.al.[ ] developed a new approach using the outage

statistics of Taiwan power system was proposed for probabilistic contingency
selection . Two different ways could be approached for probabilistic
contingency selection. One could multiply the Pip index or the PIv index by
probability of that event to get a probabilistic index. The full ac load flow were
performed according to the order of this index. This approach suffers from the
major drawback of being unable to give a reasonable physical meaning for the
index. This limits used of index among power engineers. In this paper Pip
index and PIv index were preserved for each outage event. Generator Q limit
were considered in the study and the effect of voltage considered in the study
and the effect of voltage condition on contingency selection was investigated.
8. Iraj Dabbaghehi et. al. [ ] presented a computationally efficient automatic
voltage contingency selection algorithm developed for implementation at the
AEPs new system and center in Columbus,ohm. The methodology was based
on the quantification of the real-time system wide impacts of the transmission
branch (line and transformer) outage on the load bus voltage profile via the
fast computation of a quadratic system performance index(PI) for every branch
and subsequent sorting of the result according to the severity of effect. An
application of the algorithm to the AEP EHV-line data base was presented as
an illustration.

9. L.D.Arya et.al.[] described a technique for ranking line outage causing voltage
limit violation taking into account the post outage correctability of the network
during contingency selection process. A computationally efficient algorithm
for ranking line outage has been developed taking into account the post outage
corrective capability of the power network and avoiding masking in
optimization and ranking solution to such a problem is computationally
extremely demanding. Two set of compensated shift factor were derived on
IEEE-25,30,91 bus system.

10. A.Mohamed et.al.[ ] presented a fast and accurate technique for ranking
transmission line outage according to the severity of their effects on busbar
voltages. To simulate each contingency case the proposed technique used the
DC formulation with compensation method to compute the post outage angle
and super decoupled load flow formulation and compensation method to
derive the post outage voltage. The aim was to reducing the number of line
contingency cases necessary for the assessment of the voltage security level of
a power system. The result were tested on 14-bus ,24-bus 59bus system.

11. F.Albuyeh et.al.[36] showed that there was little correction between the
contingencies that produce line overload and those that result in unacceptable
voltage profiles. The author provides different approaches for ranking of
contingency analysis and among all the methods reported in the paper, the
distribution factor method by El-Abiab and Stagg was the most widely used.
Fast decoupled power flow used to calculate the performance indices for every
outage. Iterative linear power flow (ILPF) was substituted for the fast
 decoupled load flow, but the result of case study was not accurate as that
obtain by ne iteration of the fast decoupled method. The technique presented
here by author was especially flexible for the purpose of accuracy and speed
and that can be trend very easily by just varying the number of iteration. The
main reason for having contingency selection in analyzing online security was
to minimize the computational requirement.

12. S.N.Singh et.al. [ ] suggested simple and efficient method for optimal selection
of weights along with higher order performance indices for voltage
contingency selection. Here author also reviewed existing performance indices
for voltage contingency selection. The proposed performance indices were
able to eliminate misranking and masking effects. The proposed algorithm has
been tested on IEEE-14 bus system and a practical 75-bus Indian system.

13. P.R.Bijwe et. al. [ ] presented a new point for line capability of the power
system for determination of optimum post outage generation corrections a
noval efficient method which was the corner stone of the ranking procedure
presented in this paper. The sat of GSDFs and loss formulas were therefore
applicable for all optimization overload ranking results for the 25 and 95 bus
system with and without post outage corrective rescheduling had obtained.

14. Chong Suk Song et. al.[ ] proposed a algorithm by utilizing the formulation of
PTDFs and LODFs tp calculate the generation shift so that power flow on
transmission line that violate security limits due to single and multiple outage
event were adjusted to its security limits. This paper used the MATLAB
software to build the application where an algorithm was used to suppress the
overloading on a line following a single line and multiline fault or during a
heavy load condition. This program was applied on the new England 10
generator 39-Bus system.

15. Amit Kumar Chowdhury et. al. [ ] discussed about security aspects of power
system by evaluating the severity o transmission line outage. The severity of
contingency was measured using a scalar index called voltage performance
index 1P-1Q method and fast decouple load flow were used as approximation
and exact load flow method for voltage security assessment respectively. The
 result of severity of line was evaluated and tested on IEEE-5 bus ,14bus , 30
bus and compare using these load flow method.

16. L.D.Arya et.al.[ ] described a method for security control i.e. line overload ,
alleviation using the switching under a line outage condition. This assessment
was made in pre-contingencies case using the line outage distribution factors.
The author represented a newly developed method which quickly calculate line
flow after a contingency and switched line. The algorithm had implemented on
a 6 bus 11 line and 25 bus test system with help of PC-AT using turbo
PASCAL.

17. Yung-Chung Chang et. al. [ ] presented two sensitivity factors in terms of the
generation shift distribution factor (GSDF) to improve some defects of the
conventional formula for the line outage distribution factor (LODF). The
sensitivity factor were established by using the concepts of generation change
and power injection to simulate the outaged line flow and one of them was
then applied to the case of line addition. A transfer factor was derived to
calculate the power flow of the added line very quickly from the relationship
between the OPF and GSDF. The proposed method had tested by means of a
standard system compare with the conventional OPF in the line outage case
and with DC load flow in line addition case.
 Chapter-3
Contingency analysis

Definitions of Contingency Analysis -

An unpredictable condition in the power system is known as contingency. The
impact of the occurrence of contingency should be evaluated. This process usually
called contingency analysis. -
Contingency is the loss or failure of one or more components in the power system.
Contingency can also be defined as a specified set of events occurring within a short
duration of time. -
Contingency analysis is abnormal condition in electrical network. It put whole
system or a part of the system under stress. -
Contingency is expressed as a unwanted even occurring in the power system of a
short duration of time. -
The security of the system s defined in terms of a list of contingencies (transmission
line and generator outage) which may cause insecure operation. -
The contingency analysis is referred to the interim measures to recovers power
system services following an emergency or system disruption. -
Contingency analysis can also be considered as a method of treating uncertainty that
explores in the power system operation based on a what if type of analyses.
-
The process of investigating whether the system is secure or not in a set of proposed
contingencies is called contingency analysis. -

Power system consists of numerous of electrical equipments and failure of any of

these leads to power failure and affects the system parameters to go beyond its
operating limits. It may lead to obstruct the secure operations and reliability of power
systems. Power system needs to be operationally secure i.e. with minimal probability
of blackout and equipment damage the power system is said to be normal when the
power flows and bus voltages are within operating and acceptable limits despite there
are changes in load and or in available generation.
Ejebe and Wollenberg introduced the concept of contingency. The unpredictable
events in the power system operations are termed as contingency. Contingency in a
power system leads to instability of entire power system, and affects the reliability,
security and continuity. An outage refers to the temporary suspension of power. And
contingency can be defined as the possible circumstance or outage which is possible
but cannot be predicted with certainty. A contingency is basically an outage of a
generator, transformer and or line, and its effects are monitored with precise security
limits. From this perspective, security is the probability of a power systems operating
point remaining in a viable state of operation.
The rapidly increasing and unending demand for electric energy has made the task
more difficult and challenging for power engineers, since they have to decide and
think so as to have an efficient, secure and reliable power dispatch to the consumer
without any interruption.
Contingency analysis is one of the most talked issues in security assessment of any
power system because with the existing complex infrastructure and with no extensive
development of power stations, it is obvious that most of existing power systems
cannot cope with the increase in demand. Contingency analysis should be performed
for the unexpected and severe events that may occur in power system and preventing
other related cascade accidents.
Contingency is expressed as an unwanted event occurring in the power system for a
short duration of time, which actually specifies the loss or outage of one or more
components of power system. At the time of outage of any components or equipment
in the power system, contingency analysis shows an indication, of what might be the
position of power system. It is fundamentally a software application run on power
management system, simulating a speculative test on a list of notional cases, which
would create power flow, voltage or reactive power violation in the system. These
cases are recognized and ranked in order of their severity using contingency ranking
approaches.
Since contingency analysis involves the simulation of each contingency on the base
case model of the power system, three major difficulties are involved in this analysis.
First is the difficulty to develop the approximate power system model. Second is the
choice of which contingency case to consider and third is the difficulty in computing
the power flow and bus voltages which lead to enormous time consumption in the
energy management system.
Contingency analysis is one of the most important tasks encountered by the planning
and operation engineers of bulk power system. Power system engineers use
contingency analysis to examine the performance of the system and to assess the need
for new transmission expansions due to load increase or generation expansions. In
power system operation contingency analysis assists engineers to operate at a secured
operating point where equipment are loaded within their safe limits and power is
delivered to customers with acceptable quality standards. Real time implementation of
power system analysis and security monitoring is still a challenging task for the
operators.
In general the state of the system is determined on the basis of ability to meet the
expected demand under all levels of contingencies. The objective of contingency
analysis is to find voltage violations or line overloads under such contingencies and to
initiate proper measures that are required to alleviate these violations. Exhaustive load
flow calculations are involved in ascertaining these contingencies and determining the
remedial actions. The necessity for such tool is increasingly critical due to the
emerging complexity of power systems that results from network expansions and the
fact that the power systems are pushed to operate at their limits due to financial and
environmental constraints.
The different methods used for analyzing these contingencies are based on full AC
load flow analysis or reduced load flow or sensitivity factors. But these methods need
large computational time and are not suitable for on line applications in large power
systems. It is difficult to implement on line contingency analysis using conventional
methods because of the conflict between the faster solution and the accuracy of the
solution.

METHODS OF CONTINGENCY ANALYSIS

There are various methods used for contingency analysis purpose. Methods based on
AC power flow calculations are considered to be deterministic methods which are
accurate compared to DC power flow methods. In deterministic methods line outages
are simulated by actual removal of lines instead of modeling. AC power flow methods
are accurate but they are computationally expensive and excessively demanding of
computational time. Because contingency analysis is the only tool for detecting
possible overloading conditions requiring the study by the power system planner
computational speed and ease of detection are paramount considerations. A brief
description of these methods is given below.
DC LOAD FLOW METHOD OF CONTINGENCY ANALYSIS
This method is based on DC power flow equation to simulate single or multiple
contingencies. These equations are N-1 in number, where N is the number of buses. In
this method the line resistances are neglected, only real power flows are modeled
ignoring the reactive power flows. This results in a linear model of the network to
facilitate performing multiple contingency outages using the principle of super
position.
Each transmission line is represented by its susceptance Bij.
Impedance

Inverse of impedance

In this method only the real part of the power flow equations are considered, that is
the effect of reactive power Q is neglected and all the bus voltages are assumed to be 1
p.u. the matrix B' is computed on the basis that all the resistances are zero from
equation

Where xij is the reactance of the line connecting buses i and j.

The angles and real powers are solved by iterating Equation

Z-MATRIX METHOD OF CONTINGENCY ANALYSIS

This method makes use of bus impedance matrix associated with both base case
system and the system modified by either line removals or additions [22]. Z-matrix of
a system can be obtained by inverting the bus admittance matrix or it can be
constructed by using available algorithms. The fundamental approach to contingency
analysis using z-matrix method is to inject a fictitious current in to one of the buses
associated with the element to be removed, of such value that the current flow through
the element equals the base case flow; all the other bus currents are set equal to zero.
In effect, this procedure creates throughout the system a current flow pattern that will
change in the same manner as the current flow pattern in the AC load flow solution
when the element in question is removed.
This method is more accurate compared to DC load flow method and the results are
comparable to those obtained using AC power flow.

In this work, the effort has been given on contingency ranking. At starting the
contingency list is formed. Which contains those cases whose probability of getting
outage is found to be high? The list is generally large, is translated in to electrical
network changes, mostly generator and/or line outages. Contingency evaluation using
load flow is then carrying out on the following individual outage in decreasing order
of severity. The activity will be remained up to the point where no post contingency
violations are undergone.
Concept of contingency was introduced by Ejebe and Wollenberg. Contingency is
termed as a unpredictable event in the power system where outage is referred as
temporary suspension of power. Contingency therefore defined as possible
circumstance or as failure outage which is possible but cannot be predicted with
certainty. Contingency analysis need the simulation of each contingency for the given
power system model. In order to analyze the contingency analysis easier it comprises
of three important steps.
Contingency analysis procedure
Contingency creation/definition it is the initial step of contingency analysis. It is
made up of all set of viable contingencies that may happen in a power system. This
process consists of making contingency lists.
Contingency selection it is the second step in contingency analysis. It is the process
which includes finding of severe contingencies from all that may cause to violate bus
voltage and power through lines. Here in these procedure contingencies that list is
reduced by rejection of least severe contingencies and taking into consideration of
most severe outages. In this process the performance index has been used to find the
most severe ones.
Contingency evaluation- is is the third step and the most significant step as it includes
necessary control and security actions which are required in order to reduce the efforts
of most severe contingencies in a power system.
Power engineers need to concentrate in this analysis for power security purpose to
fulfill the motive of supplying power without any interruption i.e. continuity of
supply.
A power system is monitored through the supervisory control and data acquisition
(SCADA) system installed at control center. SCADA collects real-time data from
remote terminal units (RTUs) or now days by using Phase Measurement Unit
(PMUs) installed in substations and power plant and distributed throughout the power
system. The data acquired typically include watt, VARs, Volts, amps, kilowatt hours,
frequency, circuit breaker status, and tap changing and phase shifting transformer
settings. These data are transmitted to the system control center and stored in the
SCADA/EMS real-time database. The system operator the monitors and controls the
system in real time with the help of a state estimator (SE) program. The SE
periodically computes an estimate of operating state of the sub network of interest,
which is almost always a part of a large network. For the purpose of contingency
analysis, the complete model computed by SE consists of the monitored sub network
and an external equivalent that approximately the effect of the surrounding global
network.
Let us consider that n power system components are there in a power system, and if
one component, i.e. one generator or a one line in a transmission system fails or
outage (single failure), then this event is called n 1 contingency analysis. Whereas if
two components, i.e. two lines in a transmission system or, a generator and a
transmission line in the system fail or, outage (two failures), then this event is called n
2 contingency analysis.
The problem of studying thousands of possible outages becomes very difficult to solve
if it is desired to present the results quickly. One of the easiest ways to provide a quick
calculation of possible overloads is to use linear sensitivity factors. These factors
show the approximate change in line flows for changes in generation on the network
configuration and are derived from the dc load flow.
 Chapter-4
Contingency selection

Security assessment is an important and integral part of EMS (Energy management

system) installed in a modern energy control center. In the security assessment
function the contingency ranking is one of the most important components. Because
of the need to study thousands of cases in a short span of time computationally it is
also very demanding.
Contingency selection is carried out so as to reduce the number of contingencies that
need to be analyzed by full AC load flow, while assessing the power systems security
for quickly for identifying those contingencies which may cause out-of-limit
violations. Two popularly used methods for contingencies selection are: ranking
methods and screening methods.
Ranking methods involve ranking of contingencies in approximate order of severity.
Contingencies are ranked based on the value of scalar performance index (PI), which
measures the system stress in some manner. Several PI based methods have been
suggested and tested for voltage security analysis. In ranking method, the performance
indices are explicitly expressed in terms of network variables and are directly
evaluated. It does not require computation of post-outage quantities, which in the
screening methods are evaluated by using some approximate solution approach.
Screening methods are approximate network solution to identify case causing limit
violation. First the network monitored quantities are calculated for all the contingency.
Ranking is done based on the results on the results of the approximate solutions. Some
of the methods used to find approximate solution with screening methods are the
distribution factors, DC load flow, linearized load flow, one iteration of AC load flow,
local solution methods etc.
Most of the work on contingencies selection algorithm utilizes the second order
performance indices which, in general, suffers from masking and misranking effects.
The lack of discrimination, In which the performance index for a case with many
small violations can be comparable in value to the index for a case with one huge
violation, is known as masking effect. By most of the operational standards, the latter
case in much more severe. Misranking of contingencies are mainly due to the
inaccuracies in the model used for computing the performance indices or monitored
quantities. Misranking is characterized by errors in the computed order of relative
severities of various contingencies. To some extent, the misrankng effect can be
avoided by using higher order performance indices. However, the eliminate the
misranking, the proper selection of weights for performance indices is required. Some
of the efforts in reducing these effects includes the work of happen et al. and Schafer
et. al. to capture critical contingences and optimal weights of the second order
performance index, the method uses an optimization technique, based on probabilistic
approach, to compute threshold value of PI.
Methods of performance indices
Ejebe et. al. for ranking of contingency according to their relative severities for both
line and voltage security analysis, suggested in 1979 the use of performance indices.
Various modified versions of ranking methods for voltage contingency selection have
been suggested by lauby et. al. medicheria et.al. and wasley et.al. The performance
indices, in general form, can be written as

PI= wi/2n[fi(z)]2n
Where fi(z) is a liner function of zi, where zi denotes the changes in bus voltage
magnitudes or generator bus injections with respect to their rating etc. The order of the
above performance index in 2n.
S.N.Singh and S.C.Srinivasan proposed voltage performance index (PIv) ,chosen to
quantify deficiency to out-of-limit-bus voltage, is defined as
PIv=

Where Vi and Visp are the post outage voltage mangnitude and specified
(rated)voltage magnitude, respectively, at bus-I ,n is the exponent of the function, and
N is the total number of buses in the system.Wvi is the weighting factor and

Any contingency case with voltage levels outside the limit yields a high value of PIv.
On the other hand, when all the voltages are within the limit, the voltage performance
index PIv is small. Thus, this index measures the severity of the out-of-limit bus
voltage, and for a set of contingences, this index provides a direct means of comparing
the relative severity if the different outages.
The on-line steady-state analysis of the power system requires the evaluation of the
effects of all possible contingencies on the system, for a power system of average size.
It is generally agreed that the analysis of several hundred contingencies is usually
adequate. Full ac analysis using a power flow for several hundred cases presents a
major computational burden and even with the use of fast efficient power flow
algorithms and techniques such as the matrix inversion lemma to simulate
contingencies, it requires substantial amounts of computer time. Since only a few of
the contingencies are security risks at any given time, an automatic contingency
selection method that ranks the contingencies and selects the most severe ones has
been sought.
Contingency ranking and selection methods much have two main properties to be
useful. The computational burden for the selection process and the subsequent AC
analysis of the selected contingencies must be less then, that for the AC analysis of all
the contingencies. This is measured by the ratio of the execution times for the
automatic contingency selection and that for the full AC analysis. The other desired
property is the accuracy of the ranking and hence the selection such that no
contingencies that present contingencies risk are overlooked. This is measured by the
capture ratio which compares the ranking obtained by the selection method to the
actual ranking as obtained by full AC analysis.
The main reason for having contingency selection in analyzing on-line security is to
minimize the computational requirement. However, this has to be balanced against the
accuracy of the total security.
The performance index(PI), based on normalized values of voltage deviation or line
overloads. The most accurate method available to estimate such performance indices,
and to rank them according to their severity, is the AC load flow. However, for several
hundred buses, full AC load flow requires prohibitively high CPU time. Hence, for
such real time application linear, noniterative approximate techniques have to be
employed.
P.R.Bijwe et.al. proposed approach the post-outage line flow are obtained in term of
generation correction (around base case conditions) using GSDFs and line outage
distribution factors. Using these post-outage line flow, the ranking performance index
for line overload is obtained in terms of generation correction. The performance index
is minimized subject to incremental power balance equation and inequality constraints
on generation correction. The efficiency of the proposed approach, however, stems
from the fact that linear analysis (normally used in contingency ranking) permits us to
optimize the generation corrections for every line outage contingency in the same base
case pre-outage condition itself. This allow us to use for all line outage contingency
optimizations and same set of GSDFs and loss formula coefficients. Although it must
be remembered that, the generation corrections for every contingency are found out in
the pre-contingency condition. These are actually applied in respective post-
contingency conditions. To solve the optimization problem a procedure similar to that
involved in classical ED (dispatch) is used. In this work overload ranking of only line
outages contingencies has been considered. The procedure can, however, be easily
extended to include generator outage contingencies. Corrective capability due to
generation rescheduling is considered.
contingencies selection is an important function in a modern energy management
system aimed at alleviating the computational burden involved in online security
analysis. To be specific, the purpose of a contingency selection package is to rank all
possible outages in the system according to their severities. Then, in on-line security
analysis, only the top N outage cases in the ranking list should be studied for more
details using a full AC power flow (FACPF) method.
It has been pointed out that two separate ranking lists are required for real power
problems and voltage problems, respectively, since the contingencies causing line
overloads do not necessarily cause bus voltage violations and vice versa. Thus, two
performance indices, which give measures for line MW overloads and for bus voltage
violations, respectively, are needed for real power and voltage contingency selection.
The performance indices in common use are of the following form

Pip=

PIv=

Where
Pi= MW flow in line i
Pimax= MW capacity limit of line i
Vj=voltage magnitude at bus j
Vjspec=specified nominal voltage at bus j (1)
Vjmax=maximum voltage magnitude at bus j (1.05 pu)
Vjmin=minimum voltage magnitude at bus j (0.95 pu)
p= set of lines used in the computation of PIp index
v= set of buses used in the computation of PIv index
Contingency analysis using sensitivity factors the problem of studying thousands of
possible outages becomes very difficult to solve if it is desired to present the result
quickly. One of the easiest ways to provide a quick calculation of possible overloads
is to use sensitivity factors. These factors show the approximate change in line flow
for changes in generation on the network configutation and are derived from the DC
load flow. These factor can be derived in a variety of ways and basically come down
to two types.
Generation shift factors
Line outage distribution factor
The generation shift factors are designed ali and have following definition
ali=
where l=line index, i=bus index,

it is assumed that the change in generation Pi is exactly compensated by an opposite

change in generation at the refrence bus, and that all other generators remain fixed.
The ali factor then represents the sensitivity of the flow on line l due to change in
generation at bus i. if the generator was generating Pio MW and it was lost, it is
represented by Pi, as the new

power flow on each line in the network could be calculated using a pre calculated set
of a factors as follows:

where , fi= flow on line l after the generator on bus I fails, f = flow before the failure.

The outage flow fi on each line can be compared to its limit and those exceeding their
limit are flagged for alarming would tell the operations personal that the loss of the
generator on bus I would result in an overload on line l. the generation shift sensitivity
factor are linear estimates of the changes in flow with a change in power at a bus.
Therefore, the effects of simultaneous changes on several generatin buses can be
calculated using superposition. The line outage distribution factors are used in a
similar manner, only they apply to the testing for overloads when transmission circuits
are lost. By definition, the line outage distribution factor has the following meaning:

Where ,
Dl,k= line outage distribution factor when monitoring line l after an outage on line k,
Fi= change in MW flow on line l,
Fk= original flow on line k before it was outaged i.e., opened , if one knows the power
on line l and line k , the flow on line l with line k out can be determined using d
factors.

Where fl and fk= pre outage flow on lines l and k , respectively , ft= flow on lone l
with line k out
By pre calculating the line outage distribution factors, a very fast procedure can be set
up to test all lines in the network for overload for the outage of particular line.
Furthermore, this procedure can be repeated for the outage of each line in turn, with
overload reported to the operations personnel in the form of alarm massages. The
generator and line outage be noted that a line flow can be used to program a digital
computer to execute a contingency analysis study of the power system.
Line Outage Distribution Factors (LODFs)
When there is a single-fault or a multi-fault that occurs in the system, the power is
being shifted to the adjacent transmission lines. This normally results in unfavorable
operation conditions where the transmission lines are being overloaded ie.
Transferring power above its capacity limit thereby resulting cascading faults. In order
to avoid such a situation, the overloaded lines need to be relieved from the extra load.
A security analysis study must be executed very quickly in order for it to be of any use
to the operators. This is where the computation of the distribution factors such as the
power transfer distribution factors and line outage distribution factors are required.
These factors, which are based on the DC power flow method, provide approximate
but quick solutions for the change in the power injections in the system.
In order to observe the effect of the line outage, the line outage distribution factors are
being assessed. This factor is being computed using the injection shift factors (ISFs),
which are the building blocks of the other distribution factors [3]. To shift the extra
power being transferred on the factors are being computed. The advantage of these
distribution factors is that since it is linear, quick computation is enabled and is
therefore widely used in security studies [2]. Also, since it is linear, superposition is
possible where different transactions can be superimposed onto each other. These
factors however vary with the change in the topology, when an outage occurs and
when there are change in the loadings on the lines in the system [4]. This would
require a formulation of the factors so that we would be able to compute these factors
at any loading conditions. The formulation of the PTDFs and LODFs is being
described in the next sub-section.
PTDF and LODF matrix formulation
A DC power model for the power system is being formulated where the conditions are
being assumed [5]:
1) All the voltages are considered to have a 1 p.u. agnitude.
2) Line resistance is neglected since it is small compared to
line reactance. The shunt reactance is being omitted.
3) Reactive power flow is disregarded.
For calculating the power flow on a transmission line ij l ,
(1) is being employed.
ij
ij
ij x
P
( )
= (1)
This would require the angle value of the from and to
buses which is obtained from (2).
= B1P (2)
However, this would require the calculation of the
inverse of B for every variation in loading. To facilitate this
process, (3) which is being derived in [6] is being utilized.
1()
ik jk
ij
ij X X
x
 = (3)
In order to use this formulation, the B matrix must be
composed. Since the line resistance is being neglected the Y
matrix is being transformed into the B matrix where the offdiagonal
terms Bij and diagonal terms Bii are being
formulated by (4) and (5) respectively.
B = 1 (4)
=
=
N
j ij
ii x
B
1
1 (5)
To the inverse of the B matrix, at the nth bus, which is the
slack bus, a zero entry is being inserted for the nth row and
column (X matrix). The PTDF matrix is being formulated
by (6).
PTDF B A X br = (6)
where Bbr is a nline by nline dimensional diagonal matrix
where the line reactance values are the diagonal entries and
A, is the nline by nbus dimensional the branch incidence
matrix where 1 and -1 stand for the for bus and to bus
respectively. (6) is the matrix formulation of (3) which is
being utilized in the application developed.
In order to compute the line flow on each transmission
line, the PTDF matrix is being multiplied by the power
injection matrix as seen in (7).
l inj f = PTDF P (7)
where Pinj is the vector of the power injected minus the
power consumed at the corresponding bus.
The convenience of this formulation is that we just need
to change the power injection and withdrawal values in the
power injection matrix which would enable the user to
compute the PTDFs for any variation in the loading of the
system. For a column j in the PTDF matrix, which
corresponds to bus j, displays the distribution of the power
on each line for a 1p.u, increase in a power injection on bus
j and a corresponding withdrawal from the slack bus.
i j i slack j slack PDTF PTDF PTDF = (8)
As seen in (8), to compute the PTDFs for an injection in
bus i and a corresponding withdrawal in bus j (a bus other
than the slack bus), we just need to subtract the jth column
from the ith column.
The computation of the LODFs is simply done by
deleting the line from the B matrix, inverting the matrix and
calculating the PTDF matrix. The procedure for the
computation of the distribution factors and adjustment of
line flows, ie. the generation shifts, are being shown in Fig. 1.
PTDF computation and generation shift algorithm.
2.2 Adjustment of Line Flow
For the case when the transmission lines surpass the
security limits, the power flow on these lines needs to be
curtailed. In order to do this, for normal conditions when
there is an increase in the loading of the system, the
formulated PTDF matrix is being used. For the single or
multi-line case, the LODF matrix is being utilized. When
there is a violation in the security limits of the transmission
line, generation needs to be shifted in order to reduce the
line flow on these lines. This is resolved by manipulating
the PTDF and LODF matrix entries. The set of generators,
for a shift in power from generator i to j, the maximum
PTDF value is being selected which means minimum
generation shift is required to bring back the line flow
under secure values. If the flow on the overloaded line is
negative, then the a positive maximum PTDF value is being
selected and vice versa.
 Chapter
Contingency Evaluation

Once contingency violations are identified, the system operator embarks on

determining control actions that could partially alleviate or totally eliminate their
threat. The control actions range from adjusting control transformers, changing the
network configuration, and modifying the economic schedule of units to a pre-
calculated set of load-shedding alternatives. It is customary for a system operator to
obtain decision support by running the EMS static security analysis. However, it is
usually more difficult to achieve credible decision support from EMS for the dynamic
security analysis of power systems. The immediate goal is to continue with improve-
ments in the computation of preventive and corrective control actions to assist
dispatchers in decision making. The primary tools for achieving this goal are
programs for solving various definitions of SCOPF problem. Reasonably satisfactory
SCOPF solution methods [30][32] have been developed for some problems and
better ones are constantly being sought. SCOPF programs are not yet used for
computing system control actions in real time, but operators in making decisions
about control actions are increasingly using them interactively. The trend is toward
expanding their role.
The preventive and corrective control actions for managing contingencies in SCOPF
represent a tradeoff between economics and security in restructured power systems.
A preventive dispatch for uncontrollable contingencies is included in the
precontingency (i.e., steady state) solution of SCOPF for maintaining the economics
and the secure operation of a system in the event of contingencies. However, the
preventive dispatch is conservative and could be expensive and even infeasible for
potentially dangerous contingencies.
The corrective actions represent postcontingency control actions for eliminating
system violations. Such contingencies are referred to as controllable contingencies.
The engine of SCOPF is the basic OPF problem, for which many solution methods
have been developed. In one of the leading approaches, based on variants of the
Newton power flow algorithm, contingency constraint violations obtained from CA
are entered into the base case problem, which is then solved in the usual way to
enforce them in the base case.
The alternative approach uses LP-based methods [33]. Although both approaches
enforce the violations identified in a cycle of CA, they do not guard against new
contingency violations produced by control actions. To check for new violations, it is
necessary to repeat the CA. This additional iterative loop makes SCOPF much more
costly than OPF.
However, if SCOPF is unable to meet the system security, load shedding will be
implemented as an emergency control alternative.

Difference between preventive and corrective action.

Type of action taken while contingency occur.

 Chapter-
Case Study
Case Study
IEEE-14 bus system-
The bus data and line data of the IEEE-14 bus test system are detailed in Appendix-A. The
system as show in fig. consists of 1 slack bus, 9 load bus and 4 generator buses. There are
three synchronous compensator used only for reactive power support. The active power
flow in each transmission line that has been obtained using FDFL (corresponding to the base
case loading condition is also show in fig).The state of the system corresponds to the pre-

contingency state.
Single Line Diagram of IEEE-14 bus syste
IEEE-118 bus system-
The bus data and line data of the IEEE-118 bus test system are detailed in Appendix-B. The
system as show in fig. consists of 1-slack bus, 91-load bus, 35-synchronous condenser, 117-
line (Branches), 9 -Transformers and 19-generator buses. The active power flow in each
transmission line that has been obtained using FDFL (corresponding to the base case loading
condition is also show in fig).The state of the system corresponds to the pre-contingency
state.

Fig. Single Line diagram of IEEE-118 bus system.

Problem define Here in the case study we have two cases IEEE-14 bus and IEEE-118 bus
system on which we have to define N-1 contingency listing on which we perform
contingency listing , then ranking and after that find out the most critical Pre-contingency
and define post outage redial action to make system more secure and reliable in real time.

Contingency listing-
IEEE-14 bus system-
For this system, all the single line outages and single generator (except slack) outages have
been considered. Thus a total of 23 contingency cases (19 branch outages and 4 generator
outages) were analyzed. The outage of line 6-5 has not been considered as it is same as the
line outage of generator -5, already considered in the contingency list. The performance
indices have been computed using the net work solution from an exact load flow (FDFL)
method.
The voltage performance index (PIV) and power performance index PIp have been computed
for each contingency. For exponential value n=1 using distribution factor and the exact load
flow method respectively PIv of some of the contingencies are presented in table for
calculation of PIp, PIv given in above tables all the weighs have been considered as unity.

S.No. Contingency name

1 Line -1 outage
2 Line -2 outage
3 Line -3 outage
4 Line -4 outage
5 Line -5 outage
6 Line -6 outage
7 Line-7 outage
8 Line-9 outage
9 Line-10 outage
10 Line-11 outage
11 Line-12 outage
12 Line-13 outage
13 Line-14 outage
14 Line-15 outage
15 Line-16 outage
16 Line-17 outage
17 Line-18 outage
18 Line-19 outage
19 Line-20 outage
20 Generator-2 outage
21 Generator-3 outage
22 Generator-4 outage
23 Generator-5 outage
IEEE-18 bus system
For this system, all the single line outages and single generator (except slack) outages have
been considered. Thus a total of 23 contingency cases (6 branch outages, 6 generator
outages,6 load outage,5 Transformer outages) were analyzed. The performance indices have
been computed using the net work solution from an exact load flow (FDFL) method.
The voltage performance index (PIV) and power performance index PIp have been computed
for each contingency. For exponential value n=1 using distribution factor and the exact load
flow method respectively PIv of some of the contingencies are presented in table for
calculation of PIp, PIv given in above tables all the weighs have been considered as unity.

S.No. Contingency name

1 Line -4 outage
2 Line -8 outage
3 Line -133 outage
4 Line -144 outage
5 Load -9 outage
6 Load -5 outage
7 Trasformer-8 outage
8 Trasformer-3 outage
9 Trasformer-9 outage
10 Load-80 outage
11 Line-178 outage
12 Line-110 outage
13 Transformer-1 outage
14 Trasformer-5 outage
15 Load-5 outage
16 Load-9 outage
17 Load-83 outage
18 Generator-18 outage
19 Generator-40 outage
20 Generator-1 outage
21 Generator-5 outage
22 Generator-7 outage
23 Generator-19 outage

Contingency ranking
IEEE-14 bus system-

Contingency
name From To PIP Ranking PIV Ranking
 1 1 2 71.82 1 2.752 7
2 2 3 1.294 3 2.087 10
3 2 4 0.4901 22 1.9646 11
4 1 5 0.6026 17 1.0923 19
5 2 5 0.5339 21 1.1699 18
6 3 4 0.8024 6 1.2368 17
7 4 5 0.5496 20 6.1611 2
8 4 7 0.4043 23 5.1387 4
9 7 8 35.371 2 3.3923 5
10 4 9 0.5664 19 2.6689 8
11 7 9 0.857 5 5.7732 3
12 9 10 0.6849 9 0.5243 21
13 6 11 0.6158 16 3.1795 6
14 6 12 0.7676 7 0.9152 20
15 6 13 0.8649 4 0.028 22
16 9 14 0.6712 12 10.344 1
17 10 11 0.6739 11 2.223 9
18 12 13 0.6769 10 1.2923 16
19 13 14 0.6941 8 0.0074 23
20 G2 G2 0.5701 18 1.4467 12
21 G3 G3 0.6712 13 1.3972 13
22 G6 G6 0.6712 14 1.3972 14
23 G8 G8 0.6712 15 1.3972 15

IEEE-118 bus system

S.No. contingency name PIV ranking PIP Ranking

1 Line -4 outage 3.41E+01 12 1.42E+02 13
2 Line -8 outage 3.41E+01 15 1.41E+02 16
3 Line -133 outage 3.42E+01 11 1.44E+02 10
4 Line -144 outage 3.41E+01 13 1.42E+02 12
5 Load -9 outage 3.41E+01 17 1.39E+02 17
6 Load -5 outage 3.40E+01 19 1.38E+02 19
 7 Trasformer-8 outage 3.42E+01 9 1.41E+02 14
8 Trasformer-3 outage 3.46E+01 5 1.55E+02 4
9 Trasformer-9 outage 3.73E+01 3 1.59E+02 3
10 Load-80 outage 3.43E+01 8 1.35E+02 20
11 Line-178 outage 3.43E+01 7 1.33E+02 23
12 Line-110 outage 3.40E+01 18 1.47E+02 5
13 Transformer-1 outage 3.41E+01 16 1.45E+02 8
14 Trasformer-5 outage 3.70E+01 4 1.84E+02 2
15 Load-5 outage 3.32E+01 23 1.34E+02 21
16 Load-9 outage 3.45E+01 6 1.45E+02 9
17 Load-83 outage 3.86E+01 2 1.47E+02 6
18 Generator-18 outage 3.95E+01 1 1.94E+02 1
19 Generator-40 outage 3.37E+01 22 1.45E+02 7
20 Generator-1 outage 3.41E+01 14 1.34E+02 22
21 Generator-5 outage 3.38E+01 21 1.41E+02 15
22 Generator-7 outage 3.39E+01 20 1.39E+02 18
23 Generator-19 outage 3.42E+01 10 1.42E+02 11

Contingency ranking by Distribution factor

Distribution factor based ranking of contingency IEEE-14 bus system

PI line outage PI genrator outage
S.No. Contingency
name LODF Ranking GODF Ranking
1 Line -1 outage 47.633 1 24.734 1
2 Line -2 outage 45.084 2 24.538 2
3 Line -3 outage 37.978 3 0.19 18
4 Line -4 outage 31.978 5 0.179 19
5 Line -5 outage 26.648 20 0.172 20
6 Line -6 outage 29.088 8 0.679 5
7 Line-7 outage 31.785 6 1544 4
8 Line-8 outage 27.93 18 0.453 17
9 Line-9 outage 29.119 7 0.472 15
10 Line-10 outage 32.064 4 0.581 6
11 Line-11 outage 28.805 10 0.49 9
12 Line-12 outage 28.601 11 4.85 3
13 Line-13 outage 28.851 9 0.491 8
14 Line-14 outage 28.398 15 0.484 12
15 Line-15 outage 27.964 19 0.457 16
16 Line-16 outage 28.205 17 0.477 13
17 Line-17 outage 28.384 16 0.474 14
18 Line-18 outage 28.551 13 0.487 11
19 Line-19 outage 28.422 14 0.494 7
20 Line-20 outage 28.593 12 0.489 10
Result and Discussions
 CHAPTER- 8
Conclusion
In future smart grids, with distribution network having loops more frequently, current
transmission contingency analysis (TCA) which usually neglects the distribution
power flow variations after a contingency may leave out severe outages. With more
distribution management system deployed on the distribution side, a new transmission
CA method based on global power flow (GPF) analysis which integrates both the
transmission and distribution power flow is proposed in this work (named as GTCA)
to address the problem.
Contingency analysis has been an integral part of power system planning and
operations dynamic contingency analysis is often performed with offline simulation
studies. Due to its intense of computational effort. Due to large number of possible
system variations, covering all combinations in planning studies is very challenging.
Contingency must be chosen carefully to cover a wider group of possibilities, while
ensuring system security. This work proposes a method to classify dynamic
contingency into different clusters, according to their behavioral patterns, in particular,
with respect to voltage recovery patterns. The most severe contingency from each
cluster becomes the representative of other contingencies in the corresponding cluster.
Using the information of contingency clusters, a new concept called dynamic voltage
control area (DVCA) is derived. The concept of DVCA will address the importance of
the location of dynamic reactive reserves. Simulations have been completed on the
IEEE-14 bus system to test the validate the methods.
Computation of worst operation scenarios under uncertainty for static security
management deals with day-ahead static security assessment with respect to a
postulated set of contingencies while taking into account uncertainty about the next
day system conditions. Capitanescu et.al. proposed a heuristic approach to compute
the worst-case under operation uncertainty for a contingency with respect to
overloads. Capitanescu formulate this problem as non-convex nonlinear bi level
program that we solve approximately by a heuristic approach which relies on the
solution of successive optimal powerflow (OPF) and security- constrained optimal
power flow (SCOPF) problems of a special type. The method aims at revealing those
combinations of uncertainties and contingencies for which the best combination of
preventive and corrective action would not suffice to ensure security. Extensive
numerical results on a small, a medium, and a very large system prove the interest of
the approach.
Fast and accurate contingency selection and ranking method has become a key issue
to ensure the secure operation of power system. In this work multi-layer feed forward
artificial neural network (MLEEN) and radial basis function network (RBFN) are
proposed to implement the online module for power system static security assessment.
The security classification, contingency selection and ranking are done based on the
composite security index which is capable of accurately differentiating the secure and
non-secure cases. For each contingency case as well as for base case condition, the
composite security index is computed using the full load flow analysis.
With the global trend towards deregulation in the power system industry, the volume
and the complexity of the contingency analysis result in the daily operation and
system studies have been increasing. Not only has deregulation resulted in much large
system model sizes, but also CA is computed more frequently in the restructured
power market to monitor the states of the system under what if situations in order to
accommodate the maximum number of power transfer. The net impact to these
changes is a need for more effective and efficient visualization for CA results to help
with the comprehension of the essential security information, information which
would be buried in the enormous and complex CA data sets. The traditional display
for CA results in an EMS is often a tabular list showing the violated buses and
transmission elements, along with the corresponding contingency name, element
value, limit and perhaps the percentage violation. However, when the number of
elements in the list becomes excessive it can be difficult to build a mental connection
between the violated elements and the contingencies causing the violations, or to
understand the underlying problems in the system.
References for dissertation
1. Zhihong Jia and B.Jeyosurya, Contingency Ranking for On-line voltage stability
assessment IEEE Transaction on Power system, Vol.15, No.3, Aug.2000, p.p. 1093-
1097.
2. G.C.Ejebe, G.D.Irisari, S.Makhtari, O.Obtodina, P.Ristanovia, J.Tong, Methods for
Contingency Screening and Ranking for voltage stability analysis for Power system
IEEE Transaction on Power system, Vol.11, No.1, February 1996, p.p. 300-356.
3. Robert Fischl, Thomas F.Halpin , Albert Guvenis The Application of Decision Theory
to Contingency selection IEEE Transaction on Circuits and System, Vol.CAS-29,
No.11, November 1982, p.p. 712-722.
4. K.W.Chan, R.W.Dunn, A.R.Dainels, J.A.Padget, A.O.Ekwue, P.H.Buxton, M.J.Rawlins,
On-line Dynamic-Security Contingency Screening and Ranking IEE Proc-Gener.
Transm. Distrib, Vol.144, No.2, March 1997, p.p.132-138.
5. P.R.Bijwe, J.Nanda, K.L.Puttabuddhi, Ranking of line outage in an AC-DC system
causing overload and voltage problems IEE Proceedings-c, Vol.138, No.3, May
1991,p.p 207-211.
6. G.B.Jasmon, L.H.C.C.Lee, New Contingency Ranking Technique Incorporating a
Voltage Stability Criterion IEE Proceedings-C, Vol.140, No.2, March 1993, p.p.87-89.
7. Chung-Liang, Yuan-Yilh Hsu, Deterministic and Probabilistic Contingency selection
Journal of the Chinese Institute of Engineers, Vol.12, No.6, 1989, p.p.771-780 .
8. Iraj Dabbaghchi, Guillermo lriearri, AEP Automatic Contingency Selector : Branch
outage Impact on Load bus voltage Profile IEEE Transaction on Power system,
Vol.PWRS-1, No.2,May 1986, p.p.37-43.
9. L.D.Arya, S.C.Choube, D.P.Kothari, Line Outage Ranking for Voltage Limit Violation
with Corrective Rescheduling avoiding making ELSEVIER ,Electrical Power and
Energy system 23(2001) p.p.887-846.
10. A.Mohamed, G.B.Jasmon Voltage Contingency Selection Technique for Security
Assessment IEE Proceeding, Vol.136,Pt.C, No.1, January 1989,p.p.24-28.
11. F.Albuyeh, A.bose, B.Heath, Reactive Power Considerations In Automatic
Contingency Selection, IEEE Transaction on Power Apparatus and System, Vol.PAS-
101, No.1 January 1982, p.p.107-111.
12. S.N.Singh, S.C.Srivastava, Improved Contingency Selection Algorithm for Voltage
Security Analysis, Electrical Machines & Power System, 1998, 26:8, p.p.855-871.
13. P.R.Bijwe, D.P.Kothari, L.D.Arya, Overload Ranking of Line Outage with Post-Outage
Corrective Rescheduling, Electrical Machines & Power System, 1994, 22:5, p.p.557-
568.
14. Chong Suk Song, Chang Hyun Park, Minhan Yoon & Gilsoo Jang Implementation of
PTDFs and LODFs for Power System Security , Journal of International Council on
Electrical Engineering, 2011, Vol.1, No.1, p.p.49-53.
15. Amit Kumar Chowdhury, Surajit Mondal ,S.K.Mohboob Alam, Prof. Jagadish Pal
Voltage Security Assessment of Power System World Scientific News 21(2015)
p.p.83-97.
16. L.D.Arya, S.C.Choube, K.S.Mehta, K.N.Pawar, and D.P.kothari Post Contingency Line
Switching for Overload Alleviation or Rotation Electric Machine & Power System,
1995, 23:3, p.p.345-352.
17. Poornima Vinodiya and Dr.L.S.Titare Power System Contingency Ranking Using Fast
Decouple Load Flow Method, International Journal of Recent Research in Electrical
and Electronics Engineering, Vol.2, Issue 3, p.p.153-160.
18. Yung Chung Chang, Wei-Tzen and Chun-Chang Liu Improvements on the Line
Outage Distribution Factor for Power System Security Analysis, Elsevier Sequoia,
Electric Power System Research, 26, 1993, p.p. 231-236.
19. Namami Krishna Sharma, Sudhir P. Phulambrikar, Manish Prajapati, and Ankita
Sharma Contingency Ranking and Analysis Using Power System Analysis
Toolbox(PSAT), Innovative System Design and Engineering, Vol.4, No.6, 2013,
p.p.59-63.
20. Satyanarayana Burada, Deepak Joshi and Khyari D.Mistry Contingency Analysis of
Power System by Using Voltage and Active Power Performance Index, IEEE
International Conference on Power Electronics, Intelligent Control and Energy
System, 2016, p.p.1-5.
21. Alexander J. Flueck, Renuka Gonella, and Jayabharath R. Dondeti, A New Power
Sensitivity Method of Ranking Branch Outage Contingencies for Voltage Collapse
IEEE Transactions on Power System, Vol. 17, No. 2, May 2002.
22. Parag Mitra, Vijay Vittal, Brian Keel and Jeni Mistry A systematic approach to n-1-1
analysis for power system security assessment, IEEE Power and Energy Technology
Systems Journal, 2016, p.p.1-16.
23. B. Stott, 0. Alsaq Fast Decouple Load Flow, Power Systems Laboratory, 1973,
p.p.859-869.
 24. Yilang Chen and Anjan Bose Direct Ranking For Voltage Contingency Selection,
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 4, No. 4, October 1989, p.p.1335-1344.
25. Zhihong Jia and B. Jeyasurya, Contingency Ranking for On-Line Voltage Stability
Assessment, IEEE Transaction On Power System, Vol.15, No.3, August 2000
p.p.1093-1097.
26. C.Subramani, Subhransu Sekhar Dash, M Arun Bhaskar and M.Jagdeshkumar
Simulation technique for voltage stability Analysis and contingency ranking in
power systems, Int. J. of Recent Trends in Engineering and Technology, Vol. 2, No.
5, Nov 2009, p.p. 264-267.
27. Chengjun Fu and Anjan Bose Contingency Ranking Based on Severity Indices in
Dynamic Security Analysis, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 14, No. 3,
August 1999, p.p. 980-986.
28. Brian L. Silverstein and Dennis M. Porter Contingency Ranking For Bulk System
Reliability Criteria Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 7. No. 3. August 1992,
956-964.

Appendix-A Bus data

bus_i type Pd Qd Gs Bs area Vm Va
1 3 0 0 0 0 1 1.06 0
2 2 21.7 12.7 0 0 1 1.045 -4.98
3 2 94.2 19 0 0 1 1.01 -12.72
4 1 47.8 -3.9 0 0 1 1.019 -10.33
5 1 7.6 1.6 0 0 1 1.02 -8.78
6 2 11.2 7.5 0 0 1 1.07 -14.22
7 1 0 0 0 0 1 1.062 -13.37
8 2 0 0 0 0 1 1.09 -13.36
9 1 29.5 16.6 0 19 1 1.056 -14.94
10 1 9 5.8 0 0 1 1.051 -15.1
11 1 3.5 1.8 0 0 1 1.057 -14.79
12 1 6.1 1.6 0 0 1 1.055 -15.07
13 1 13.5 5.8 0 0 1 1.05 -15.16
14 1 14.9 5 0 0 1 1.036 -16.04

Appendix- Generator data

bus Pg Qg Qmax Qmin Vg mBase status Pmax Pmin
1 232.4 -16.9 10 0 1.06 100 1 332.4 0
2 40 42.4 50 -40 1.045 100 1 140 0
3 0 23.4 40 0 1.01 100 1 100 0
6 0 12.2 24 -6 1.07 100 1 100 0
8 0 17.4 24 -6 1.09 100 1 100 0

Appendix-B Line data

fbus tbus r x b
1 2 0.01938 0.05917 0.0528
1 5 0.05403 0.22304 0.0492
2 3 0.04699 0.19797 0.0438
2 4 0.05811 0.17632 0.034
2 5 0.05695 0.17388 0.0346
3 4 0.06701 0.17103 0.0128
4 5 0.01335 0.04211 0
4 7 0 0.20912 0
4 9 0 0.55618 0
5 6 0 0.25202 0
6 11 0.09498 0.1989 0
6 12 0.12291 0.25581 0
6 13 0.06615 0.13027 0
7 8 0 0.17615 0
7 9 0 0.11001 0
9 10 0.03181 0.0845 0
9 14 0.12711 0.27038 0
10 11 0.08205 0.19207 0
12 13 0.22092 0.19988 0
13 14 0.17093 0.34802 0