ECE 476

Power System Analysis

Lecture 15: Power Flow

Prof. Tom Overbye

Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
overbye@illinois.edu
Announcements

Please read Chapter 6

HW 6 is 6.9, 6.18, 6.34, 6.38, 6.48, 6.53; this one must
be turned in on Oct 20 (hence there will be no quiz that
day); (there is no HW due on Oct 12 and no quiz)

1
Voltage Regulation Example: 37 Buses
A
SLA C K3 4 5
MVA
A

MVA

2 1 9 MW
1 .0 2 pu RA Y 3 4 5
5 2 M var
System Losses: 11.51 MW A A A
sla ck

1 .0 2 pu SLA C K1 3 8
T IM 3 4 5
MVA MVA MVA

1 .0 1 pu RA Y 1 3 8
A
A

MVA
A
1 .0 3 pu
T IM 1 3 8
MVA
MVA
1 .0 0 pu 3 3 MW A

1 .0 3 pu
1 3 M var
1 5 .9 M var 1 8 MW
A MVA
A
1 .0 2 pu RA Y 6 9
MVA
MVA 5 M var 3 7 MW
A
1 7 MW A

1 .0 2 pu T IM 6 9 P A I6 9 1 3 M var
1 .0 1 pu MVA 3 M var MVA
A

2 3 MW 1 .0 1 pu GRO SS6 9 A
A
7 M var
MVA
MVA
FERNA 6 9
MVA A
1 .0 1 pu WO LEN6 9
2 1 MW
M O RO 1 3 8
A
MVA

MVA
H ISKY 6 9 7 M var
A
A
4 .8 M var
1 2 MW MVA
A MVA

5 M var 2 0 MW 1 .0 0 pu MVA
8 M var A
1 .0 0 pu BO B1 3 8
P ET E6 9 A

MVA DEM A R6 9
1 .0 0 pu A A
MVA
H A NNA H 6 9 5 8 MW
MVA MVA
5 1 MW 4 0 M var
4 5 MW
1 5 M var A
1 .0 2 pu BO B6 9
1 2 M var
2 9 .0 M var
UIUC 6 9 0 .9 9 pu
MVA

1 4 .3 M var
1 .0 0 pu 1 5 7 MW 5 6 MW
1 2 .8 M var A

4 5 M var
A
MVA 1 3 M var LY NN1 3 8
A
0 MW
MVA
0 M var
A
A
MVA A
MVA
MVA 5 8 MW A
1 4 MW
0 .9 9 7 pu BLT 1 3 8 MVA
3 6 M var MVA 1 .0 0 pu 4 M var
0 .9 9 pu A M A NDA 6 9 A
A

A
3 3 MW SH IM KO 6 9 1 .0 2 pu
H O M ER6 9
MVA
MVA A
MVA
1 0 M var 0.0 Mvar 1 .0 1 pu
BLT 6 9
7 .4 M var
MVA
A 1 .0 1 pu
1 5 MW
3 M var
A

MVA
H A LE6 9
MVA

A 9 2 MW 1.010 pu 1 5 MW
5 M var
1 .0 0 pu 1 0 M var
MVA
A

A
A
3 6 MW A
1 .0 1 pu
6 0 MW MVA 1 0 M var 7 .2 M var MVA
MVA
A
A
MVA
1 2 M var
1 .0 0 pu 1 .0 0 pu P A T T EN6 9 MVA

2 0 .8 M var A
MVA

4 5 MW 1 4 MW RO GER6 9
MVA
1 .0 0 pu WEBER6 9 0 M var
LA UF6 9 2 M var
1 .0 2 pu
2 3 MW
2 2 MW 0 MW
A A
6 M var 1 4 MW A

2 0 MW 1 5 M var 0 M var
MVA MVA 3 M var MVA
9 M var
1 .0 2 pu JO 1 3 8 JO 3 4 5
LA UF1 3 8 1 .0 2 pu SA V O Y 6 9 3 8 MW
1 .0 0 pu
3 M var
1 .0 1 pu BUC KY 1 3 8 A

A MVA A

1 5 0 MW
MVA 1 .0 1 pu SA V O Y 1 3 8 MVA
A A
0 M var
MVA MVA

1 5 0 MW
A
0 M var
MVA
1 .0 3 pu
1 .0 2 pu A

MVA

Display shows voltage contour of the power system, demo

will show the impact of generator voltage set point,
reactive power limits, and switched capacitors 2
Solving Large Power Systems

The most difficult computational task is inverting

the Jacobian matrix
inverting a full matrix is an order n3 operation, meaning
the amount of computation increases with the cube of the
size size
this amount of computation can be decreased substantially
by recognizing that since the Ybus is a sparse matrix, the
Jacobian is also a sparse matrix
using sparse matrix methods results in a computational
order of about n1.5.
this is a substantial savings when solving systems with
tens of thousands of buses
3
Newton-Raphson Power Flow

Advantages
fast convergence as long as initial guess is close to
solution
large region of convergence
Disadvantages
each iteration takes much longer than a Gauss-Seidel
iteration
more complicated to code, particularly when
implementing sparse matrix algorithms
Newton-Raphson algorithm is very common in
power flow analysis
4
Modeling Voltage Dependent Load

So far we've assumed that the load is independent of

the bus voltage (i.e., constant power). However, the
power flow can be easily extended to include voltage
depedence with both the real and reactive load. This
is done by making PDi and Q Di a function of Vi :
n
Vi Vk (Gik cos ik Bik sin ik ) PGi PDi ( Vi ) 0
k 1
n
Vi Vk (Gik sin ik Bik cos ik ) QGi QDi ( Vi ) 0
k 1

5
Voltage Dependent Load Example

In previous two bus example now assume the load is

constant impedance, so
P2 (x) V2 (10sin 2 ) 2.0 V2
2
0
Q2 (x) V2 (10 cos 2 ) V2 (10) 1.0 V2 0
2 2

Now calculate the power flow Jacobian

10 V2 cos 2 10sin 2 4.0 V2
J ( x)
10 V2 sin 2 10 cos 2 20 V2 2.0 V2

6
Voltage Dependent Load, cont'd

0
Again set v 0, guess x (0)

1
Calculate
V2 (10sin 2 ) 2.0 V2
2 2.0
f(x )
(0)

V2 (10 cos 2 ) V2 (10) 1.0 V2
2 2
1.0
10 4
J (x )
(0)

0 12
1
0 10 4 2.0 0.1667
Solve x (1)
1.0

1 0 12 0.9167
7
Voltage Dependent Load, cont'd

With constant impedance load the MW/Mvar load at

bus 2 varies with the square of the bus 2 voltage
magnitude. This if the voltage level is less than 1.0,
the load is lower than 200/100 MW/Mvar
160.0 MW -160.0 MW
120.0 MVR Line Z = 0.1j -80.0 MVR

0.894 pu
One 1.000 pu Two -10.304 Deg

160.0 MW 160 MW
120.0 MVR 80 MVR

8
Dishonest Newton-Raphson

Since most of the time in the Newton-Raphson

iteration is spend calculating the inverse of the
Jacobian, one way to speed up the iterations is to
only calculate/inverse the Jacobian occasionally
known as the Dishonest Newton-Raphson
an extreme example is to only calculate the Jacobian for
the first iteration
( v 1)
Honest: x x (v) ( v ) -1
- J (x ) f (x )(v)

Dishonest: x(v1) x( v ) - J (x(0) )-1 f (x( v ) )

Both require f (x(v ) ) for a solution
9
 Dishonest Newton-Raphson Example

Use the Dishonest Newton-Raphson to solve

f ( x) x 2 - 2 0
1
df ( x )
(0)
x (v )
f ( x (v)
)
dx
x ( v ) 1 (v) 2
(0) (( x ) - 2)
2x
(v) 1
x ( v 1) x (0) (( x ( v ) )2 - 2)
2x

10
Dishonest N-R Example, contd

x ( v 1)
x (v) 1 (v) 2
(0) (( x ) - 2)
2x
We pay a price
Guess x 1. Iteratively solving we get in increased
(0)

v x ( v ) (honest) x ( v ) (dishonest) iterations, but

0 1 1 with decreased
computation
1 1.5 1.5 per iteration
2 1.41667 1.375
3 1.41422 1.429
4 1.41422 1.408
11
Two Bus Dishonest ROC

Slide shows the region of convergence for different initial

guesses for the 2 bus case using the Dishonest N-R
Red region
converges
to the high
voltage
solution,
while the
yellow region
converges
to the low
voltage
solution
12
Honest N-R Region of Convergence

Maximum
of 15
iterations

13
Decoupled Power Flow

The completely Dishonest Newton-Raphson is not

used for power flow analysis. However several
approximations of the Jacobian matrix are used.
One common method is the decoupled power flow.
In this approach approximations are used to
decouple the real and reactive power equations.

14
Decoupled Power Flow Formulation

General form of the power flow problem

P ( v ) P ( v )
(v)
V P (x( v ) )
f ( x (v)
)
Q ( v ) Q ( v ) V Q(x( v ) )
(v )

V
where
P2 (x( v ) ) PD 2 PG 2

P (x )
(v )

P (x(v ) ) P P
n Dn Gn
15
Decoupling Approximation

P ( v ) Q ( v )
Usually the off-diagonal matrices, and
V
are small. Therefore we approximate them as zero:
P ( v )
0
(v )
(v )
P ( x )
f ( x (v)
)
Q V
( v ) ( v )

Q ( x (v)
)
0
V
Then the problem can be decoupled
P ( v ) 1 Q ( v ) 1
(v)
(v)
P(x
(v)
) V Q ( x (v)
)
V 16
Off-diagonal Jacobian Terms

Justification for Jacobian approximations:

1. Usually r x, therefore Gij Bij
2. Usually ij is small so sin ij 0
Therefore
Pi
Vi Gij cos ij Bij sin ij 0
Vj
Qi
Vi V j Gij cos ij Bij sin ij 0
j

17
Decoupled N-R Region of Convergence

18
Fast Decoupled Power Flow

By continuing with our Jacobian approximations we

can actually obtain a reasonable approximation that is
independent of the voltage magnitudes/angles.
This means the Jacobian need only be built/inverted
once.
This approach is known as the fast decoupled power
flow (FDPF)
FDPF uses the same mismatch equations as standard
power flow so it should have same solution
The FDPF is widely used, particularly when we only
need an approximate solution
19
FDPF Approximations
The FDPF makes the following approximations:
1. G ij 0
2. Vi 1
3. sin ij 0 cos ij 1
Then
1 P ( x (v)
) (v) 1 Q ( x (v)
)
B
(v )
(v )
V B
V V (v )
Where B is just the imaginary part of the Ybus G jB,
except the slack bus row/column are omitted
20
FDPF Three Bus Example

Use the FDPF to solve the following three bus system

Line Z = j0.07

One Two

200 MW
100 MVR
Line Z = j0.05 Line Z = j0.1

Three 1.000 pu 34.3 14.3 20

Ybus j 14.3 24.3 10
200 MW
100 MVR
20 10 30

21
FDPF Three Bus Example, contd

34.3 14.3 20
24.3 10
Ybus j 14.3 24.3 10 B
10 30
20 10 30
0.0477 0.0159
B 1
0.0159 0.0389
Iteratively solve, starting with an initial voltage guess
(0)
2
(0)
0 V 2 1
V 1
3 0 3
2
(1)
0 0.0477 0.0159 2 0.1272

3
0 0.0159 0.0389
2 0.1091

22
FDPF Three Bus Example, contd
(1)
V 2 1 0.0477 0.0159 1 0.9364
V 1 0.0159 0.0389 1 0.9455
3
Pi (x ) n PDi PGi
Vk (Gik cos ik Bik sin ik )
Vi k 1 Vi
2
(2)
0.1272 0.0477 0.0159 0.151 0.1361

3 0.1091 0.0159 0.0389 0.107 0.1156
(2)
V 2 0.924
V
3 0.936
0.1384 0.9224
Actual solution: V
0.1171 0.9338
23
FDPF Region of Convergence

24
DC Power Flow

The DC power flow makes the most severe

approximations:
completely ignore reactive power, assume all the voltages
are always 1.0 per unit, ignore line conductance
This makes the power flow a linear set of
equations, which can be solved directly
B 1 P

25
DC Power Flow Example

26
 DC Power Flow 5 Bus Example

One Five Four Three

A A

360 MW 520 MW
MVA MVA
A

0 Mvar 0 Mvar
MVA

slack

1.000 pu 1.000 pu A A
1.000 pu 80 MW
0.000 Deg -4.125 Deg MVA MVA
-1.997 Deg 0 Mvar
1.000 pu
0.524 Deg

1.000 pu Two
-18.695 Deg

800 MW
0 Mvar

Notice with the dc power flow all of

the voltage magnitudes are 1 per unit.

27
Power System Control

A major problem with power system operation is

the limited capacity of the transmission system
lines/transformers have limits (usually thermal)
no direct way of controlling flow down a transmission
line (e.g., there are no valves to close to limit flow)
open transmission system access associated with industry
restructuring is stressing the system in new ways
We need to indirectly control transmission line
flow by changing the generator outputs
Similar control issues with voltage

28
Extreme Control Example: 42 Bus
Tornado Scenario
Indirect Transmission Line Control

What we would like to determine is how a change in

generation at bus k affects the power flow on a line
from bus i to bus j.
The assumption is
that the change
in generation is
absorbed by the
slack bus

30
Power Flow Simulation - Before

One way to determine the impact of a generator change

is to compare a before/after power flow.
For example below is a three bus case with an overload
131.9 MW

124%

One Two

200.0 MW 200 MW
68.1 MW 68.1 MW
71.0 MVR 100 MVR

Z for all lines = j0.1

Three 1.000 pu

0 MW
64 MVR

31
Power Flow Simulation - After

Increasing the generation at bus 3 by 95 MW (and hence

decreasing it at bus 1 by a corresponding amount), results
in a 31.3 drop in the MW flow on the line from bus 1 to 2.
101.6 MW

100%

One Two

105.0 MW 200 MW
3.4 MW 98.4 MW
64.3 MVR 100 MVR

92%
Z for all lines = j0.1
Limit for all lines = 150 MVA
1.000 pu
Three
95 MW
64 MVR

32