Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Conventional Optimal Power Flow Analysis Using the Matlab Optimization Toolbox

Conventional Optimal Power Flow Analysis Using the Matlab Optimization Toolbox

Ratings: (0)|Views: 47|Likes:
Published by Masud Alam
A. Pizano-Martínez, C. Fuerte-Esquivel, E. A. Zamora-Cárdenas, and J. Segundo-Ramírez
A. Pizano-Martínez, C. Fuerte-Esquivel, E. A. Zamora-Cárdenas, and J. Segundo-Ramírez

More info:

Categories:Types, Research
Published by: Masud Alam on Nov 19, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

12/04/2012

pdf

text

original

 
 Abstract
—This paper presents the solution of a conventionalOptimal Power Flow (OPF) model by using the optimizationtoolbox provided by Matlab. For the OPF model solution it isonly required to be defined into two separated M files: i) thegiven objective function and ii) the equality and inequalityconstraints sets, without the need of defining associated Gradientand Hessian expressions required by gradient search-basedalgorithms. Therefore the complexity degree related to theproposed OPF model implementation is similar to that requiredby commercial specialized packages for solving optimizationmodels, but with the advantage that Matlab is commonly theavailable software for research and academic purposes in electricengineering. This hugely reduces the time to the implementation,and for obtaining results, of a conventional OPF analysis of electric energy systems.The prowess and numerical accuracy of the proposedimplementation are demonstrated on the WSCC 3-machine, 9-bus test system and the Mexican 46-machine, 190-bus test system.
 Index Terms
— Electric energy systems, steady state, powerflow, optimal power flow, optimization, Matlab.
I. I
NTRODUCTION
 onventional power flow has been the analysis tool that isroutinely executed in control centers to assess the systemsteady state operating condition [1]. However, opposite toOptimal Power Flow (OPF) analysis, power flow analysiscannot deal with economic and security aspects in a unifiedreference frame. The concept of optimal power flow,introduced by Dommel and Tinney in the early 1960's [2], hasreceived great attention since its early application to powersystems analysis [3]. OPF is a nonlinear optimization problem,where a specific objective function must be optimized whilesatisfying operational and physical constraints of the electricpower system [4]. A large variety of optimization techniqueshave been employed to solve OPF problems, such as linear,nonlinear, quadratic, mixed integer programming, interior-point methods and Newton-based methods [2], [3] and [5].From the power systems planning viewpoint the OPFmodel solution provides the optimal settings for the variablesof a power network [2]. From the power system operation andcontrol viewpoints, an OPF solution gives an answer to adjust
A. Pizano-Martínez and E.A. Zamora-Cárdenas are with theDepartment of Electromechanical Engineering, Instituto Tecnológico Superiorde Irapuato, at Guanajuato, México. (e-mail:alpizano@itesi.edu.mx;eazamora@itesi.edu.mx).C.R. Fuerte-Esquivel is with the Faculty of Electrical Engineering,Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo, 58030 Morelia, México(cfuerte@umich.mx). J. Segundo-Ramírez is with Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosi,Centro de Investigación y Estudios de Posgrado de la Facultad de Ingeniería(CIEP-FI). (e-mail: j2ramirez@hotmail.com). 
available controls in order to meet the energy demand in themost economically manner while keeping within bounds allthe constraints imposed on the system. OPF studies are beingused more and more by engineers, but further applicationsranging from planning, operation and control of modern powersystems are of great interest and must be investigated [6]. Inorder to speed up the research of such those applications,researchers have put attention on commercial softwarepackages for solving a large variety of OPF models.Nowadays the commercial software packages commonlyused to solve OPF models are AMPL [7] and GAMS [8]. Onthe one hand, by way of example, AMPL software has beenemployed to; solve a OPF model with complementaryconstraints [9], identify and analyze saddle-node bifurcationsand limit-induced bifurcations of power systems [10], solvedifferent OPF models used to investigate the effects of reactive power limit modeling on Maximum System Loadingand Active and Reactive Power Markets [11]. More recently,AMPL has been applied to solve a OPF model that considersvoltage stability constraints in order to control voltage stabilityof power systems [12], among other applications. On the otherhand, GAMS software has been employed to; solve a voltagestability constrained OPF from a market-clearing point of view [13], compute the solution of a OPF model of FACTSsystems with static security constraints [14] and solve atransient stability constrained OPF model [15].This paper presents implementation and solution of aconventional OPF model by using the optimization toolbox of Matlab [16]. Section II of the paper shows the general OPFformulation. The power system components modeling and theexplicit OPF formulation are presented in Section III. Thecomputational implementation of the OPF model is describedin Section IV. The prowess of the proposed implementation isillustrated by means of numerical examples in Section V. Thework conclusions are given in Section VI.II. G
ENERAL
O
PTIMAL
P
OWER
F
LOW
M
ODEL
 Conventional OPF is considered as a non-linearprogramming problem where the objective is to minimize agiven cost function subjected to a finite set of equality andinequality constraints. The general OPF general formulation isgiven by,
Minimize ( )
 f 
y
(1)Subject to ()
=
0
 h y
(2)
( )
0
 g y
(3)
 y y y
(4)where
 f 
(
 y
) is a real-valued objective function in
n
(
 f 
:
 
n
1
)
C
Conventional Optimal Power Flow AnalysisUsing the Matlab Optimization Toolbox
A. Pizano-Martínez, C. Fuerte-Esquivel, E. A. Zamora-Cárdenas, and J. Segundo-Ramírez
 
 
to be minimized,
 h
(
 y
) is a set of 
real-valued functions in
n
 (
 h
:
 
n
) corresponding to equality constraints representingboth power flow mismatch equations and control equations,
 g
(
 y
) is a set of 
m
real-valued functions in
n
(
 g
:
 
n
m
)representing the set of inequality constraint functions whichprevents the dispatching of generation that otherwise will leadto violations of system limits. The vector of system variables
 y
S  
n
, in the search space
, includes the set of 
sv
statevariables
 x
(
 x
sv
) and the set of 
cv
control variables
u
 (
u
cv
), with lower and upper limits represented by
 y
and
y
,respectively. A point
 y
in
that satisfies the set of equality andinequality constraints is a feasible point
 y
, the infinite set of feasible points defines the feasible region
 F
. A feasible point
 y
is the optimum point
 y
*
sought if there is a neighborhood
 N 
of 
 
 y
*
such that
 f 
(
 y
*
)
≤ 
(
 y
) for any
 y
 N 
 F
.
 
The set of inequality constraints consisting of those variables andfunctions explicitly enforced to specified values at any stageof the search of 
 y
*
, and it is called active set
 A
. The set of inequality constraints that are active at the optimum solution iscalled binding set
 B
. All equality constraints are regarded asactive at any feasible point since they must be satisfiedunconditionally at the optimal solution
 y
*
of (1)-(4).III. P
OWER SYSTEM AND
O
PTIMAL
P
OWER
F
LOW
E
XPLICIT
M
ODELING
 In order to present the explicit structure of the OPFmathematical model, the previous general formulation (1)-(4)is developed according to the specific optimization modelconsidered in this work. The explicit OPF formulation is givenin polar coordinates and according to the model of each powersystem component, as follows.
 A. Power system Modelling
The most common components of a power system aregenerators, loads, shunt compensation elements, transmissionlines and transformers. These elements are modeled as givenbelow [17].
1) Generators
The generator is modeled as a controllable source of complex power,
gi gi gi
S P jQ
= +
(5)where
P
gi
and
Q
gi
are the active and reactive power generationlevels, with lower and upper bounds
gi
Q
,
gi
P
and
gi
P
,
gi
Q
,respectively. Since most of the based load of a power systemis provided by thermal units, they are considered in this work,such that the active power production cost is described by thefollowing quadratic function,
2
( ) ( ) ( )
gi i i gi i gi
C P a b P c P
= + +
(6)where
a
i
,
b
i
and
c
i
are the cost curve coefficients for thegeneration bus
i.
The voltage magnitude
i
upper and lowerbounds for the generation bus
i
are
gi
and
gi
, respectively.
2) Loads
The power demand is considered as constant complexpower consumption,
li li li
P jQ
= +
S
(7)where
P
li
and
P
li
are the active and reactive power at each loadbus
i
. The upper and lower bounds of the voltage magnitude
i
 for the load substation are
li
and
li
, respectively.
3) Shunt Compensation Element 
Shunt elements are mathematically described by means of amagnitude voltage dependent complex power,
inj injshi i i
P jQ
= +
S
(8)The terms
inji
P
and
inji
Q
are the active and reactive powerinjections, respectively, through the shunt compensationadmittance connected at the compensated bus
i
,
2
inji i i
P V G
=
(9)
2
inji i i
Q V B
=−
(10)where
i
is the voltage magnitude at the compensation nodewith upper and lower limits
shi
and
shi
, respectively. Thecompensation admittance is
Y=G+jB
, where
G
and
 B
are theshunt conductance and suceptance of the shunt compensator.
4) Transmission Lines
The transmission lines are represented by the π
equivalentcircuit of Fig. 1, where
 I 
 j
and
 E
 j
are the injected current andvoltage phasors at node
i
(
i=k,m
).
 R
,
 L
and
 B
c
are the seriesresistance, series inductance and the shunt suceptance. Thecurrent-voltage relation of the equivalent circuit is given by,
k kk km m mk mm m
=
 I Y Y E I Y Y E
(11)where,
( )2
kk mm km kk k
 Bc j G jB
= = + = +
Y Y y
(12)
km mk km km km
GjB
= = = +
Y Y y
(13)
22
()
km
 RG RL
ω 
=+
;
22
()
km
 L B RL
ω ω 
= −+
(14)The power injected at node
i
through the transmissionelement connected between nodes
i
and
 j
, where
i=k;m
,
 j=k,m, i
≠j
, is mathematically described as follows,
* *
( )
i i i i i i ii i ij j
P jQ
= + = = +
S E I E Y E Y E
(15)Applying the Euler’s identity to the voltage phasors
 E
i
and
 E
 j
,and then separating into real and imaginary parts, we obtain,
2
( ) ( )
inji i ii i j ij i j ij i j
P V G VV G Cos B Sin
θ θ θ θ 
= + +
(16)
2
( ) ( )
inji i ii i j ij i j ij i j
Q V B VV G Sin B Cos
θ θ θ θ 
= +
(17)
Fig. 1. Equivalent circuit of the transmission line
5) Conventional Transformers
In order to be able of simulating networks with transformershaving changers at off nominal tap ratio position at eitherprimary or secondary side, the two winding transformer is
 
modeled with complex taps on both primary and secondarywindings. The magnetizing branch non-linearity undersaturated conditions is also considered in the model to accountfor the core losses. The schematic equivalent circuit is shownin Fig 2.The primary winding is represented as an ideal transformerhaving complex tap ratios
v
:1 and
i
:1 in series with theimpedance
Z
 p
, where
v
=
i
*=
v
∠φ
tv
. The * denotes theconjugate operation. Also, the secondary winding isrepresented as an ideal transformer having complex tap ratios
v
:1 and
i
:1 in series with the impedance
 Z
s
, where
v
=
i
*=
 
v
∠φ
uv
. The transfer admittance matrix relating the primaryvoltage
 p
and current
 I 
 p
to the secondary voltage
s
andcurrent
 I 
s
in the two-winding transformer is given by [17],
P PP PS PP PS PS SP SS SP SS
G G B B jG G B B
= +
 I  I
(18)where
22 2
1( 1) 2 21 2
vPP
F U R F RGF
+ +=+
;
22 2
1 2 2( 1)1 2
vPP
F R F U R BF
+=+
 
22 2
1( 3) 2 41 2
vSS 
F T R F RGF
+ +=+
;
222
142(3)12
vSS 
FRFTR BF
+=+
 
( )
2 21 1
1cos( ) 2sin( ) 1 2
PS v v
G TU F F F
φ φ 
=+ +
 
( )
2 21 1
2cos( ) 1sin( ) 1 2
PS v v
 B TU F F F
φ φ 
= + +
 
( )
2 22 2
1cos( ) 2sin( ) 1 2
SP v v
G TU F F F
φ φ 
=+ +
 
( )
2 22 2
2cos( ) 1sin( ) 1 2
SP v v
 B TU F F F
φ φ 
= + +
 
2 21
1 R
v S v P eq
F T R U R
= + +
;
2 21
2
v S v P eq
F T X U X
= + +
 
1 0 0
R ( ) ( )
eq P S P S P S S P
 R R X X G R X R X B
=
 
1 0 0
( ) ( )
eq P S P S P S S P
 X R R X X B R X R X G
= +
 
0 0
1
S
 R R G X B
=
;
0 0
2
S
 R R B X G
=
 
0 0
3
P P
 R R G X B
=
;
0 0
4
P P
 R R B X G
=
 
1
tv uv
φ φ φ 
=
;
2
uv tv
φ φ φ 
=
 The active and reactive power injections at node
i
throughthe transformer connecting nodes
i
and
 j
, where
i=p,s, j=p,s,i
≠j
 ,
are respectively computed by using (16) and (17), butusing conductances and suceptances of (18).
Fig. 2. Equivalent circuit of the two winding transformer
 B. OPF Explicit Model
The OPF explicit formulation readily derives from theprevious power system model.
1) Objective Function
The objective function
 f 
(
 y
*
) is the minimization of the totalactive power generation cost. According with (6), theobjective function is formulated as follows,
21
( ) ( ) ( )
g
 N i i g i i g ii
 f a b P c P
=
= + +
 y
(19)where
a
i
,
b
i
and
c
i
are the cost curve coefficients for thegeneration bus
i
.
 N 
g
is the number of generators, whoseindividual generation power level is
P
gi
.
2) Equality Constraints
In order to represent the steady state, the energy balance of the power system must be unconditionally satisfied. This isenforced by means of the active and reactive power balance ateach bus according to the following equality constraint set,
0,1,2,...,( ) ,1,2,..., |0
gi li inj i j ibb ggk lk inj  j
P P Pi k N k Q Q Q
==== =
 h y
(20)where
 N 
b
is the number of buses. The active and reactivepower levels,
P
gj
and
Q
gj
, respectively, are provided by thegeneration controllable sources at the generation bus
 j
(
 j
=
i,k 
),as indicated by (5). The active
P
lj
and reactive
Q
lj
 
power loadsare the complex power consumption, as given by (7).
 j
i,k 
isthe set of nodes adjacent to node
 j
, whilst
P
inj j
and
Q
inj j
areactive and reactive power flows injected at bus
 j
through thenetwork elements, according to (9), (10), (16) and (17)
 
. It isvery important to point out that the generated reactive power
Q
gi
is a function of the system variables and does not have ascheduled value, therefore the reactive power balanceconstraint can be only stated for non generation buses (
 N 
g
).However, the reactive power balance at generation buses isachieved according to the procedure applied to handle thereactive generation limits, as explained below.
3) Inequality Constraints
Physical and operating limits constrain the practical steadystate operation of power systems components. The physicaland operating limits of generators and substations aremathematically described by the following inequality sets,
1,2,...,,1,2,...,
gi gi gigb j j j
P P Pi  j V V
===
(21)
{ }
( ) , 1,2,...,
gi gi gi g
Q Q Q i
= =
 g y
(22)It must be pointed out that the active power generation
P
gi
 and all the bus magnitude
 j
limits are simply inequalityconstraint on variables, whilst the generator reactive powerlimits are modeled as a set of functional inequality constraints.In other words, the reactive power generation level
Q
gi
in (22)is from (17) and (20), as given by the following function,
2
( ) ( )
gi li i ii i j ij i j ij i j j i
Q Q V B VV G Sin B Cos
θ θ θ θ 
= + +
(23)The relation (23) means that the reactive power balancegeneration bus
i
is always achieved when the generator isinside its reactive generation limits. When the generator hitseither its lower
Q
gi
or upper
gi
Q
bound the inequalityconstraint (22) is activated by the optimization algorithm, it

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->