This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
5.1 Introduction
The relatively recent availability of high voltage power electronic switching has led to the development of HVDC transmission and FACTS technologies. Although the original purpose of the former was a return to d.c. transmission for large distances, most of the recently commissioned schemes are actually backtoback; their purpose is the interconnection of asynchronous power systems. The FACTS technology, on the other hand, has developed to enhance the controllability of the synchronous transmission system, thus permitting its operation closer to the stability limits. The basically different reasons for the existences of HVDC and FACTS have important consequences in the load flow solutions. This chapter describes the incorporation of these two power electronic technologies in conventional load flow solutions whenever possible, and describes alternative methods of solution when such incorporation makes the load flow convergence difficult.
5.2 Incorporation of FACTS Devices
Chapter 3 has described the functions and steadystate models of the main FACTS devices already in use or under serious consideration by electricity suppliers. The need to work plant and transmission systems harder in the new deregulated environment is likely to increase substantially the use of FACTS controllers. Accordingly, their behaviour must be adequately represented in power system modelling. As the variety of power electronic controllers in the network interact with each other, the reliability of the solution takes precedence over the computational burden. Moreover, the conditions leading to the acceptability of decoupled load flows do not necessarily apply when the network operates under power electronics control. Therefore, iterative methods with strong convergence characteristics are to be preferred. Similarly, the use of a sequential solution between the a.c. network and each of the FACTS devices present does not yield quadratic convergence because only the voltage phasors are used as state variables, while the conditions of the controllable devices are only updated at the end of each Newton iteration. This often leads to diverging solutions. Thus, the original full NewtonRaphson simultaneous technique, described in Chapter 4, is used here to incorporate FACTS devices in the load flow solution.
130
5
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
Some FACTS devices present no special problem, as their steadystate behaviour is adequately represented by the standard load flow specifications. This is the case of static VAR compensation, whether of the TCR or STATCON types, which can be specified by a zero active power and constant voltage magnitude, like the conventional synchronous condensers. In general, however, the incorporation of FACTS devices requires special consideration and is described in this section.
5.2.1 Static tap changing
The following transfer admittance matrix of a twowinding transformer with complex taps on the primary and secondary windings has been developed in section 3.2.2 [l].
When applied to inphase tap changing, the following substitutions must be made in Equation (5.1): T , = T: = T,LO", and
u, = u; = UVLO".
For a tap changer connected between terminals k and m, to control the voltage magnitude at bus k, the extra linearized load flow equations required at nodes k and m are:
Finally, at each iteration, the tap controller is updated by the following equation
(5.3)
5.2.2
Phaseshifting (PS)
A transformer admittance matrix for phaseshift use has been described in section 3.2.3. Its incorporation in Newton's load f l o w solution requires an enlarged Jacobian, because the active power flowing from node k to node m, Pkm, is not used as a control variable in the conventional formulation of the NewtonRaphson solution. Therefore, either d,, or & , must be added to the state variables.
132
5
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
The power equations at node k are:
Pk
=  v k V m B ( I ) sin(8k  Om),
(5.9)
(5.10)
Qk
= viB(~) k V k V m B ( I ) c o s ( 8 k  o m ) .
The power mismatches required to incorporate a TCSC in the load flow solution are contained in the following matrix equation (written for a specified power flow from k

Apk APm
A Qk
AQm
(5.11)
Apkm
(5.12)
(5.13) (5.14) The presence of series compensators can cause illconditioning of the Jacobian matrix if zero voltage angle initialization is adopted. To avoid illconditioning, it is recommended to treat the TCSC as a fixed reactance until a specified voltage angle difference appears across the reactance. From then on, the control equations of the series compensator are included in the iterative process.
5.2.4 Unified power flow controller (UPFC) [3,4]
A UPFC, connected between nodes m and k, can be designed to control the active and reactive power flows between rn and k, as well as the voltage at node k. In its simplest form, a loss free UPFC can be specified in the load flow solution as a P m k r Qmk (at node m) and a P m k . l v k l generator (at node k). No special modification is thus needed in the standard load flow solution with this model. Upon convergence, a sequential assessment of the UPFC parameters needs to be made to ensure that the control limits are not exceeded. This method, however, is not applicable to cases when the UPFC is only used to control one or two of the variables. A more flexible and reliable method is next derived with reference to the
5.2
INCORPORATION OF FACTS DEVICES
133
converter I1
1 2 converter ++
P
V ~ R0vR
t t
vcR
t t
ecR
Figure 5.2
Unified power f l o w controller [4] (0 1998 IEE)
The power conditions at the terminals of the series converter are:
134
5
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
where
Ykk = Gkk
+ jBkk = zii + z&!,
+ jBmm = ZFi,
+ jBvR = Z;R.I
Y m m = Gmm
Y v= ~G,R
Ykm= Ykm = Gkm+ jBkm = z,d,
Ideally, the UPFC neither absorbs active power from nor injects it into the a.c. system and the d.c. link voltage, Vdc, remains constant. However, to keep v d c constant, the equal ) to the d.c. power shunt converter must supply an amount of active power ( P V ~ ( v d c l 2 ) , which is equal to the power supplied by the series converter ( P c ~ ) i.e. ,
PvR
+ PcR = 0.
(5.23)
As stated in the Introduction, the state variables representing the UPFC must be added to the network nodal voltage magnitudes and angles to permit a unified solution by the NewtonRaphson method. In this way, the UPFC state variables are adjusted automatically to satisfy specified power flows and voltage magnitudes. When the UPFC controls the voltage magnitude at node k (to which the shunt converter is connected), as well as the active power transfer from m to k and the reactive power injection at node m (which is specified as a P, Q bus), the following matrix equations applies:
(5.24)
where APbb represents the mismatch introduced by the presence of Equation (5.23). If voltage control at node k is not required, the third column of the Jacobian in Equation (5.24) is replaced by partial derivatives of the nodal and UPFC mismatch powers with respect to the nodal voltage magnitude vk. Correspondingly, in the variables vector the shunt source voltage magnitude increment, A V V ~ / V , is ,~ replaced , by the nodal voltage magnitude increment at node k, AVk/Vk. In this case, V,R is kept constant at a value within the specified limits.
5.3 INCORPORATION OF HVDC TRANSMISSION
135
If a limit violation takes place in one of the voltage magnitudes of the UPFC sources, the voltage magnitude is fixed at that limit and the regulated variable is freed. In line with the basic load flow solution, in the absence of controlled buses or branches, 1 p.u. voltage magnitude for all P Q buses and 0 voltage angle for all buses, provide a suitable starting condition. However, if controllable devices are included in the analysis, good initial estimates can be obtained by assuming a loss free UPFC and zero voltage angles in Equations (5.15) to (5.18). From Equations (5.17) and (5.18) for specified P m , Qm:
(5.25)
(5.26)
where
C1 = Qmref
if
vO,
= v:.
Also, in a lossfree UPFC, the active power absorbed by the shunt converter ( P v ~ ) must be equal to the power ( P c ~delivered ) by the series converter, i.e.
PvR
= pcR
(5.27)
combining (5.27) with (5.19) and (5.21), after some reduction leads to:
(5.28)
When the shunt converter operates as a voltage controller, the voltage magnitude of the shunt source is initialized at the required voltage level and then updated at each iteration. If the shunt converter is not used as a voltage controller, the voltage magnitude of the shunt source is kept at a fixed value within its limits during the iterative process.
5.3 Incorporation of HVDC Transmission
The operating state of a combined a.c.HVDC power system is defined by the vector
[V,8, KIT,
where V is a vector of the voltage magnitudes at all a.c. system busbars; 3 is a vector of the angles at all a.c. system busbars (except the reference bus which is assigned 8 = 0); i is a vector of d.c. variables. Chapter 4 has described the use of 7 and as a.c. system variables and the selection of d.c. variables X is discussed in section 5.3.1. The development of a NewtonRaphson based algorithm requires the formulation of n independent equations in terms of the n variables.
e
136
5 LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
The equations which relate to the a.c. system variables are derived from the specified a.c. system operating conditions. The only modification required to the usual real and reactive power mismatches occurs for those equations which relate to the converter terminal busbars. These equations become:
Pf&  Pterm(ac)  Pterm(dc> = 0
QZm
(5.29) (5.30)
 Qterm(aC)  Qterm(dc) = 0
where Pterm(ac)is the injected power at the terminal busbar as a function of the a.c. system variables; Pterm(dc) is the injected power at the terminal busbar as a function of the d.c. system variables;
P;:,,, is the usual a.c. system load at the busbar; and similarly for Qterm(dC) and Qterm(aC). The injected powers Q,rm(dc) and P,rm(dC) are functions of the converter a.c. terminal busbar voltage and of the d.c. system variables, i.e.
Pterm(dC) = f ( v t e r m 9 3 Qterm(dc) = f ( v t e r m ,
(5.31) (5.32)
9
The equations derived from the specified a.c. system conditions may, therefore, be summarized as:
(5.33)
ABterm (
7 9
8, z)
=0,
AG(v,8)
(5.35)

ADterm (7, 8, @

Wte,,X)

5.3 INCORPORATION OF HVDC TRANSMISSION
137
53.1 Converter model
The selection of variables 7 and formulation of the equations require several basic assumptions which are generally accepted in the analysis of steady state d.c. converter operation. These are:
(i) The three a.c. voltages at the terminal busbar are balanced and sinusoidal.
(ii)
The converter operation is perfectly balanced.
(iii) The direct current and voltage are smooth.
(iv) The converter transformer is lossless and the magnetizing admittance is ignored.
Converter variables Under balanced conditions, similar converter bridges, attached to the same ax. terminal busbar, will operate identically regardless of the transformer connection. They may, therefore, be replaced by an equivalent single bridge for the purpose of singlephase load flow analysis. With reference to Figure 5.3, the set of variables illustrated, representing fundamental frequency or d.c. quantities, permits a full description of the converter system operation. An equivalent circuit for the converter is shown in Figure 5.4, which includes the modification explained in section 5.3 as regards the position of angle reference. The variables, defined with reference to Figure 5.4, are:
V,,,,L4
EL II/
converter terminal busbar nodal voltage (phase angle referred to converter reference); fundamental frequency component of the voltage waveform at the converter transformer secondary;
Figure 5.3 Basic d.c. converter (angles refer to a.c. system reference)
Figure 5.4 Singlephase equivalent circuit for basic converter (angles refer to d.c. reference)
138
5
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
I,, I ,
0
a
Vd
Id
fundamental frequency component of the current waveshape on the primary and secondary of the converter transformer, respectively; firing delay angle; transformer offnominal tap ratio; average d.c. voltage; converter direct current.
These ten variables, nine associated with the converter, plus the a.c. terminal voltage magnitude Vterm,form a possible choice of X for the formulation of Equations (5.31), (5.32) and (5.34). The minimum number of variables required to define the operation of the system is the number of independent variables. Any other system variable or parameter (e.g. P d c and Qdc) may be written in terms of these variables. Two independent variables are sufficient to model a d.c. converter, operating under balanced conditions, from a known terminal voltage source. However, the control requirements of HVDC converters are such that a range of variables, or functions of them (e.g. constant power), are the specified conditions. If the minimum number of variables is used, then the control specifications must be translated into equations in terms of these two variables. These equations will often contain complex nonlinearities, and present difficulties in their derivation and program implementation. In addition, the expressions used for Pdc and Q d c in Equations (5.29) and (5.30) may be rather complex and this will make the programming of a unified solution more difficult. For these reasons, a nonminimal set of variables is recommend, i.e. all variables which are influenced by control action are retained in the model. This is in contrast to a.c. load flows where, due to the restricted nature of control specifications, the minimum set is normally used. The following set of variables permits simple relationships for all the normal control strategies: [a] = [ V d , I d , a, cos(Y,#IT. Variable 4 is included to ensure a simple expression for Qdc. While this is important in the formulation of the unified solution, variable 4 may be omitted with the sequential solution as it is not involved in the formulation of any control specification; cosa is used as a variable rather than (Y in order to linearize the equations and thus improve convergence.
d.c. per unit system To avoid per unit to actual value translations and to enable the use of comparable convergence tolerances for both a s . and d.c. system mismatches, a per unit system is also used for the d.c. quantities. Computational simplicity is achieved by using common power and voltage base parameters on both sides of the converter, i.e. the a.c. and d.c. sides. Consequently, in order to preserve consistency of power in per unit, the direct current base, obtained from ( M V A B ) / V B , has to be 4 times larger than the alternating current base [ 5 ] . This has the effect of changing the coefficients involved in the a.c.d.c. current relationships. For a perfectly smooth direct current and neglecting the commutation overlap, the r.m.s. fundamental components of the phase current is related to Id by the
5.3 INCORPORATION OF HVDC TRANSMISSION
139
approximation,
(5.36)
Translating Equation (5.36)to per unit yields ls(p.u,) = &Id(p.u.), n and if commutation overlap is taken into account, as described in Chapter 3, this equation becomes:
4
(5.37)
where k is very close to unity. In load flow studies, Equation (5.37) can be made sufficiently accurate in most cases by letting:
k = 0.995.
Derivation of equations The following relationships are derived for the variables defined in Figure 5.4. The equations are in per unit.
(i)
The fundamental current magnitude on the converter side is related to the direct current by the equation
(5.38)
(ii)
The fundamental current magnitudes on both sides of the lossless transformer are related by the offnominal tap, i.e.
I , = a I,.
(5.39)
(iii) The d.c. voltage may be expressed in terms of the a.c. source commutating voltage referred to the transformer secondary, i.e.
(5.40)
The converter a.c. source commutating voltage is the busbar voltage on the system side of the converter transformer, Vterm.
(iv)
The d.c. current and voltage are related by the d.c. system configuration,
f ( v d , Id)
= 0,
(5.41)
e.g. for a simple rectifier supplying a passive load,
v d
 I d & = 0.
(v) The assumptions listed at the beginning of this section prevent any real power of harmonic frequencies at the primary and secondary busbars. Therefore, the real power equation relates the d.c. power to the transformer secondary power in terms of fundamental components only, i.e.
VdId
= Els
COS
II/.
(5.42)
140
5
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
(vi) As the transformer is lossless, the primary real power may also be equated to the d.c. power, i.e. (5.43) VdId = VtermIp cos 4. (vii) The fundamental component of current flow across the converter transformer can be expressed as I , = B, sin II/  BtaVtem sin& (5.44) where j B , is the transformer leakage susceptance.
So far, a total of seven equations have been derived and no other independent equation may be written relating the total set of nine converter variables. Variables I , , I,, E and can be eliminated as they play no part in defining control specifications. can be combined into Thus, Equations (5.38), (5.39), (5.42) and (5.43)
+
Vd
 klaVterm COS 4 = 0,
(5.45)
where kl = k ( 3 a / ~ r ) . The final two independent equations required are derived from the specified control mode. The d.c. model may thus be summarized as follows:
B(z,Vtermlk = 0,
where
(5.46)
R(1) = Vd  klavte, cos 4,
R(2) = Vd
N 3 )=f
 klavtem C O S a + J3rI d x , ,
W d ?I d ) ,
R(4) = control equation,
R ( 5 ) = control equation,
and
= [vd,I d r a , cosa, $IT.
V,,, can either be a specified quantity or an ax. system variable. The equations for Pdc and Qdc may now be written as:
Qterm(dc1
= V t e d p sin 4 = Vte,kla I d sin4
(5.47)
and (5.48) or (5.49)
5.3 INCORPORATION OF HVDC TRANSMISSION
141
Incorporation of control equations Each additional converter in the d.c. system contributes two independent variables to the system and thus two further constraint equations must be derived from the control strategy of the system to define the operating state. For example, a classical twoterminal d.c. link has two converters and, therefore, requires four control equations. The four equations must be written in terms of the ten d.c. variables (five for each converter). Any function of the ten d.c. system variables is a valid (mathematically) control equation so long as each equation is independent of all other equations. I n practice, there are restrictions limiting the number of alternatives. Some control strategies refer to the characteristics of power transmission (e.g. constant power or constant current), other introduce constraints such as minimum delay or extinction angles. Examples of valid control specifications are:
(i) Specified converter transformer tap,
a

 0.
(ii)
Specified d.c. voltage
Vd
 vsp= 0.  Isp = 0.
(iii) Specified d.c. current
Id
(iv)
Specified minimum firing angle cos  cos a m i n = 0. Specified d.c. power transmission
Vdld
(v)
P : : = 0.
These control equations are simple and are easily incorporated into the solution algorithm. In addition to the usual control modes, nonstandard modes, such as specified a.c. terminal voltage, may also be included as converter control equations (see section 5.3.3). During the iterative solution procedure, the uncontrolled converter variables may go outside prespecified limits. When this occurs, the offending variable is usually held to its limit value and an appropriate control variable is freed.
Inverter operation All the equations presented so far are equally applicable to inverter operation. However, during inversion, it is the extinction advance angle ( y ) which is the subject of control action and not the firing angle a. For convenience, therefore, equation R(2) of (5.46) may be written as
(5.50)
This equation is valid for rectification or inversion. Under inversion, v d , as calculated by Equation (5.50), will be negative. To specify operation with constant extinction angle, the following equation is used: cos(7r  y )  cos(7r  y ” ) = 0 where ysP is usually y minimum for minimum reactive power consumption of the inverter.
142
5
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
5.3.2 Solution techniques
The converter model developed in section 5.3.1 is to be incorporated with a fast decoupled a s . load flow algorithm with the minimum possible modification of the latter in order to retain its computational advantages. The solution is first discussed with reference to a single converter connected to an a.c. busbar. The extension to multiple or multiterminal d.c. systems is relatively trivial and is discussed in section 5.3.4.
Unified solution [6,7] The unified method gives recognition to the interdependence of a.c. and d.c. system equations and simultaneously solves the complete system. Referring to Equation (5.33,the standard NewtonRaphson algorithm involves repeat solutions of the matrix equation:
(5.51)
where J is the matrix of first order partial derivatives.
APterm
= PSL  Pterm(ac)  Ptem(dc),
(5.52)
(5.53)
AQterm =
QZm
 Qterm(aC)  Qterm(dc),
and Pterm(dc) = f(Vterm,
Qterm
(5.54)
(dc 1 = f ( Vterm
9
(5.55)
Applying the a.c. fast decoupled assumptions to all Jacobian elements related to the a.c. system equations, yields:
(5.56)
where all matrix elements are zero unless otherwise indicated. The matrices [B’] and [B”] are the usual singlephase fast decoupled Jacobians and are constant in value. The other matrices indicated vary at each iteration in the solution process. A modification is required for the element indicated as Byi in Equation (5.56). This element is a function of the system variables and, therefore, varies at each iteration.
5.3 INCORPORATION OF HVDC TRANSMISSION
143
The use of an independent angle reference for the d.c. equations results in aPterm(dc)/Wem = 0, i.e. the diagonal Jacobian element for the real power mismatch at the converter terminal busbar depends on the a.c. equations only and is, therefore, the usual fast decoupled B’ element. In addition, aR/aOter, = 0, which will help the subsequent decoupling of the equation. In order to maintain the block successive iteration sequence of the usual fast decoupled a.c. load flow, it is necessary to decouple Equation (5.56). Therefore, the Jacobian submatrices must be examined in more detail. The Jacobian submatrices are: 1
DD= a APterml avterm
Vterm
(aptem (ac) /avteml+
Vterm
1
1 ( apterm (dc)/aVterm1Vterm
Following decoupled load flow practice 1 DD = 0 + ( a p t e m (dc)/aVterm
Vtem
1 9
and since
144
5
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
In the above formulation, the d.c. variables X are coupled to both the real and reactive power ax. mismatches. However, Equation (5.56) may be separated to enable a block successive iteration scheme to be used. The d.c. mismatches and variables can be appended to the two fast decoupled a.c. equations, in which case the following two equations result:
,
(5.57)
(5.58) AZ
The iteration scheme illustrated in Figure 5.5 is referred to as PDC, QDC and the significance of the mnemonic should be obvious. The algorithm may be further simplified by recognizing the following physical characteristics of the a.c. and d.c. systems:
0 0 0
The coupling between d.c. variables and the ax. terminal voltage is strong. There is no coupling between d.c. mismatches and a.c. system angles. Under all practical control strategies, the d.c. power is well constrained and this implies that the changes in d.c. variables j z do not greatly affect the real power mismatches at the terminals. This coupling, embodied in matrix AA' of Equation (5.57) can, therefore, be justifiably removed.
These features justify the removal of the d.c. equations from Equation (5.57) to yield a P, QDCblock successive iteration scheme, represented by the following two equations:
[ABIV] = [B'J[AS],
(5.59)
Programming considerations for the unified algorithms In order to retain the
efficiency of the fast decoupled load flow, the B' and B" matrices must be factorized only once before the iterative process begins. The Jacobian elements related to the d.c. variables are nonconstant and must be reevaluated at each iteration. It is, therefore, necessary to separate the constant and nonconstant parts of the equations for the solution routine.
5.3 INCORPORATION OF HVDC TRANSMISSION
145
Calculate Pterm (dc) and d.c. residuals ( R ) Yes
1
1
I
Form d.c. iacobian matrix Forward reduction of vector AFI V Solve reduced equation for Pt,,, and A P
1
b
lP=11
b
Back substitute for A 3
m
I
I
UDdate Hand 8
1
t
P=O
1 I
I
I
I
+=
1
]
Calculate A d(a.c. system only) Calculate Qterm (d.c.) and d.c. residuals (A)
1
Forward reduction of vector AGI V
I
Solve reduced equation for V,,,, and AX
+
1 No
a
I
I
I
t
Figure 5.5
i
Flow chart for unified a.c.d.c. load flow
146
5
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
Initially, the a.c. fast decoupled equations are formed with the d.c. link ignored (except for the minor addition of the filter reactance at the appropriate a.c. busbar). The reactive power mismatch equation for the ax. system is: (5.61) where AQ:,,, = Q : , and B” is the usual constant a.c. fast decoupled Jacobian. After triangulation down to, but excluding, the busbars to which d.c. converters are attached, Equation (5.61) becomes
 Qterm(aC)is the mismatch calculated in the absence of the
d.c. converter,
[

=m [
’
(5*62)
where (AQ/V)” and (AQterm/Vterm)” signify that the lefthand side vector has been processed and matrix B”’ is the new matrix B” after triangulation. This triangulation (performed before the iterative process) may be achieved simply by inhibiting the terminal busbars being used as pivots during the optimal ordering process. The processing of AQ indicated in the equation is actually performed by the standard forward reduction process used at each iteration. The d.c. converter equations may then be combined with Equation (5.62) as follows:
(5.63) where
The unprocessed section, i.e.
[ (W”+
K
AQ;iy)]
BB”
[ A : ; ]
(5.64)
may then be solved by any method suitable for nonsymmetric matrices. The values of AX and AVtem are obtained from this equation and AVtermis then used in a back substitution process for the remaining A T to be completed, i.e. Equation (5.62) is solved for AV.
5.3 INCORPORATION OF HVDC TRANSMISSION
147
The most efficient technique for solving Equation (5.64) depends on the number of converters. For six converters or more, the use of sparsity storage and solution techniques is justified, otherwise all elements should be stored. The method suggested here is a modified form of Gaussian elimination where all elements are stored but only nonzero elements processed.
Sequential method [5,8] The sequential method results from a further simplification of the unified method, i.e. the ax. system equations are solved with the d.c. system modelled simply as a real and reactive power injection at the appropriate terminal busbar. For a d.c. solution, the a.c. system is modelled simply as a constant voltage at the converter ax. terminal busbar. The following three equations are solved iteratively to convergence:
[ A F / v ] = [B’][A8], [AQi/v] = [B”][Av],
(5.65) (5.66) (5.67)
[R] = [A][AT].
This iteration sequence, referred to as P , Q,DC,is illustrated in the flow chart of Figure 5.6 and may be summarized as follows:
AF/v, solve Equation (5.65) and update 8. (ii) Calculate AD/v, solve Equation (5.66) and update 7. (iii) Calculate d.c. residuals, R, solve Equation (5.67) and update E.
(i)
Calculate
(iv) Return to (i). With the sequential method, the d.c. equations need not be solved for the entire iterative process. Once the d.c. residuals have converged, the d.c. system may be modelled simply as fixed real and reactive power injections at the appropriate converter terminal busbar. The d.c. residuals must still be checked after each a.c. iteration to ensure that the d.c. system remains converged. However, in order to establish a direct comparison between the unified and sequential algorithms, the d.c. equations continue to be solved until both a s . and d.c. systems have converged. This ensures that the sequential technique is an exact parallel of the corresponding unified algorithm. Alternatively, the d.c. equations can be solved after each real power as well as after each reactive power iteration and the resulting sequence is referred to as P , DC,Q, DC. As in the previous method, the d.c. equations are solved until all mismatches are within tolerance.
5 . 3 . 3
Control of converter ax. terminal voltage
A converter terminal voltage may be specified in two ways:
(a) By local reactive power injection at the terminal. In this case, no reactive power mismatch equation is necessary for that busbar and the relevant variable (i.e.
148
5
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
(all a.c. busbars)
.
i
Calculate A g(total svstem) and d.c. residuals Ti Yes
i
Solve equation 5.65 and update (8)
.
i 1
t
1
Solve equation 5.i6 and update (8)
*
) and d.c. residuals R
Converged
IF l
I
Calculate d.c. mismatches
t
I
Form d.c. jacobian matrix
I
1
t
I Solve eauation 5.67 and udate K
I
LTJ
P=Q=O
Figure 5.6 Flow chart for sequential a.c.d.c. load flow
AV,,,) is effectively removed from the problem formulation. This is the situation where the converter terminal busbar is a PV busbar.
(b) The terminal voltage may be specified as a d.c. system constraint. That is, the d.c. converter must absorb the correct amount of reactive power so that the terminal voltage is maintained constant.
5.3 INCORPORATION OF HVDC TRANSMISSION
149
With the unified method, the equation
Vterm
SP
 Vterm 0
(5.68)
is written as one of the two control equations. This would lead to a zero row in Equation (5.67) and, therefore, during the solution of Equation (5.67) some other variable (e.g. tap ratio) must be specified instead. Although d.c. convergence is marginally slower for the PDC, QDC iteration, the d.c. system is overconverged in this iteration scheme and the overall convergence rate is practically unaffected. With the sequential method, Equation (5.68) cannot be written. The terminal busbar is specified as a PV busbar and the control equation
Q m r:;
(dc)  Qterm (dc) = 0
is used, where Q&, (dc) is taken as the reactive power required to maintain the voltage constant. The specified reactive power thus varies at each iteration and this discontinuity slows the overall convergence.
5.3.4
Extension to multiple and/or muititerminal d.c. systems
The basic algorithm has been developed in previous sections for a single d.c. converter. Each additional converter adds a further five d.c. variables and a corresponding set of five equations. The number of a.c. system Jacobian elements which become modified in the unified solutions is equal to the number of converters. As an example, consider the system shown in Figure 5.7. The system represents the North and South Islands of the New Zealand system, 220 kV a.c. system. Converters 1 and 2 form the original 600 MW, 500 kV d.c. link between the two islands. Converter 3 represents a 420 MW aluminium smelter. A further threeterminal d.c. interconnection has been added (Converters 4,5 and 6 ) to illustrate the flexibility of the algorithm.
'd 2 +
'd 6
t
Figure 5.7
Multiterminal d.c. system
150
5
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
Normally, Converter 4 will operate in the rectifier mode with Converters 5 and 6 in the inversion mode. The reactive power d.c. Jacobian for the unified method has the structure, shown in Figure 5.8, where BSOD is the part of B" which becomes modified. Only the diagonal elements become modified by the presence of the converters. Off diagonal elements will be present in BboD if there is any a.c. connection between converter terminal busbars. All off diagonal elements of BB" and AA" are zero. In addition, matrix A is block diagonal in 5 x 5 blocks with the exception of the d.c. interconnection equations. Equation R ( 3 ) of (5.46) in each set of d.c. equations is derived from the d.c. interconnection. For the sixconverter system, shown in Figure 5.7, the following equations are applicable. vdi v d 2  Idl(Rd1 R d 2 ) = 0,
+
+
vd3
Id1
= 0,
 Id2 = 0,
vd4 vd5
+ v d 6  l d 4 R d 4  l d 6 R d 6 = 0,
 vd6
 I d s R d ~+ l d 6 R d 6 = 0 , I d 4  I d s  I d 6 = 0.
This example indicates the ease of extension of the multiple converter case.
Avterrn 6
A
(30 x 30)
Figure 5.8 Matrix equation for a multiterminal configuration
5.3 INCORPORATION OF HVDC TRANSMISSION
151
5.3.5
d.c. convergence tolerance
The d.c. p.u. system is based upon the same power base as the a.c. system and on the nominal open circuit a.c. voltage at the converter transformer secondary. The p.u. tolerances for d.c. powers, voltages and currents are, therefore, comparable with those adopted in the a.c. system. In general, the control equations are of the form
where X may be the tap or cosine of the firing angle, i.e. they are linear and are thus solved in one d.c. iteration. The question of an appropriate tolerance for these mismatches is, therefore, irrelevant. An acceptable tolerance for the d.c. residuals which is compatible with the a.c. system tolerance is typically 0.001 p.u. on a 100 MVA base, i.e. the same as that normally adopted for the ax. system.
5.3.6 Test system and results
The A.E.P standard 14bus test system is used to show the convergence properties of the ax.d.c. algorithms, with the a.c. transmission line between busbars 5 and 4 replaced by a HVDC link. As these two buses are not voltage controlled, the interaction between the a.c. and d.c. systems will, therefore, be considerable. Various control strategies have been applied to the link and the convergence results for the various algorithms are given in Table 5.1. The number of iterations ( i , j ) should be interpreted as follows:
0 0
i is the number of reactive power voltage updates required.
j is the number of real power angle updates.
Although the number of d.c. iterations varies for the different sequences, this is of secondary importance and may, if required, be assessed in each case from the number of a.c. iterations. In this respect, a unified QDC iteration is equivalent to a Q iteration and a DC iteration executed separately. The d.c. link data and specified controls for Case 1 are given in Table 5.2 and the corresponding d.c. link operation is illustrated in Figure 5.9. The specified conditions for all cases are derived from the results of Case 1. Under those conditions, the a.c. system in isolation (with each converter terminal modelled as an equivalent a.c. load) requires (4,3) iterations. The d.c. system in isolation (operating from fixed terminal voltages) requires two iterations under all control strategies.
Unified cases The results in Table 5.1 show that the unified methods provide fast
and reliable convergence in all cases. For the unified methods 1 and 2, the number of iterations did not exceed the number required for the a.c. system alone.
152
5
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
Table 5.1 Convergence results
Case specification Specified d.c. link constraints mrectifier and ninverter end
1
Number of iterations to convergence (0.1 M W M V A R ) Unified methods (5 variables)
PDC.QDC2 P, QDC
Sequential methods
(5 variables)
P.Q,DC2P.DC,Q,DC
(4 variables)
1P,Q,DC2P,DC.Q.DC
2 3 4
5
6
7
UrnPdrnYnVdn UmPdnian Vdn UmPdmanVdn UmPdniYn vdri UmPdrnYnan amPdmUmYn
~ m I Yn d Vdn
8
9
10
amVdmYnPdn Case 1 with initial condition errors 50 per cent error 80 per cent error
4,3 4,3 4,3 4,3 4,3 43 4,3 4,3 4.3 5,4'
4,3 43 4.3 4,3 43 4,3 4,3 4,3 4,3
6,5"
4,3 494 4,4 4,4 494
4.3 5s 5,s 44
44
4,3 43 4,4 4,3
5,4"
44 4,4 44 4,4 4,4
43 Failed Failed 44
494
43
493 44 44
1,6*
44
44 494 4,4 44
43
43 44
43 43
Where 'indicates a false solution.
Table 5.2 Characteristics of d.c. link
~ ~ ~~
Converter 1 a.c . busbar d.c. voltage base Transformer reactance Commutation reactance Filter admittance Bi d.c. link resistance Control parameters for Case 1 d.c. link power Rectifier firing angle (deg) Inverter extinction angle (deg) Inverter d.c. voltage
Converter 2
Bus 5
1 0 0 kV 0.126 0.126
Bus 4 1 0 0 kV
0.0728 0.0728 0.629
0.478 0.334a
5 8 . 6 MW 7
1 2 8 . 8 7
10
kV
"Filters are connected to ax. terminal busbar. Note: All reactances are in p,u. on a 100 MVA base.
Bus 5 V = 1.032 a=2.8% Bus 4 V = 1.061 R = 0.334
dvd
+Id =454.2
0
1
t P = 58.60 0 = 18.79
I
= 129.022 Vd=128.87$.
P = 58.31 u = 10.33 Q = 16.78 All angles are in degrees. D.C. voltages and current are in kV and Amp respectively. D.C. resistance is in ohms. A.C. powers (P,Q)are in MW and MVARs.
a = 7.0 u = 17.32
y = 10.0

Figure 5.9 d.c. link operation for Case 1
5.3 INCORPORATION OF HVDC TRANSMISSION
153
Sequential cases The sequential method ( P , Q, DC) produces fast and reliable convergence although the reactive power convergence is slower than for the a.c. system alone. With the removal of the variable 4, &,(dc) converges faster but the convergence pattern is more oscillatory and an overall deterioration of a.c. voltage convergence results. convergence is good in all cases With the second sequential method (P, DC,Q, DC), except 2 and 3, i.e. the cases where the transformer tap and d.c. voltage are specified at the inverter end. However, this set of specifications is not likely to occur in practice. Initial conditions for d.c. system Initial values for the d.c. variables E are assigned from estimates for the d.c. power and d.c. voltage and assuming a power factor of 0.9 at the converter terminal busbar. The terminal busbar voltage is set at 1.0 p.u. unless it is a voltage controlled busbar. This procedure gives adequate initial conditions in all practical cases as good estimates of Pter,(dc) and V d are normally obtainable. With starting values for d.c. real and reactive powers within 35096, which are available in all practical situations, all algorithms converged rapidly and reliably (see Case 9). Effect of a.c. system strength In order to investigate the performance of the algorithms with a weak a.c. system, the test system described earlier is modified by the addition of two a.c. lines, as shown in Figure 5.10. The reactive power compensation of the filters was adjusted to give similar d.c. operating conditions as previously. The number of iterations to convergence for the most promising algorithms are shown in Table 5.3 for the control specifications corresponding to Cases 1 to 4 in the previous results. The different nature of the sequential and unified algorithms is clearly demonstrated. The effect of the type of converter control is also shown. For Case 11, both the d.c. real power and the d.c. reactive powers are well constrained by the converter control strategy. Convergence is rapid and reliable for all methods. In all other cases, where the control angle at one or both converters is free, an oscillatory relationship between converter a.c. terminal voltage and the reactive power of the converter is possible. This leads to poor performance of the sequential algorithms. To illustrate the nature of the iteration, the convergence pattern of the converter reactive power demand and the ax. system terminal voltage of the rectifier is plotted in Figure 5.1 1.
Bus 5
ix
Bus 4
0
rl
I
Filters
Figure 5.10 d.c. link operating from weak a.c. system
s.
Filters
154
5
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
Table 5.3
Numbers of iterations for a weak ax. system
xi = 0.3
X;
Case specification r n rectifier n inverter
= 0.4
Unified P , QDC
Sequential
P , Q , DC (i) (ii)
Unified P , QDC
(i)
Sequential
P , Q , DC
(ii)
(i) Using the five variable formulation; (ii) using the four variable formulation.
Q term
(MVAR)
28 26,24 22 20
1
$el?
 0.96 1 \
Y
L
nnl 18  o .0
A
I
I
I
I
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Q term
(MVAR) 28
 1.o 26  0.98
24 22
 0.96
 0.94 20 18  0.90 0.92 0
1
1 2 3 4
Figure 5.11 Convergence pattern for a.c.d.c. load flow with weak ax. system. (a) Sequential methods ( P , Q, DC five variable); (b) Unified method ( P , QDC)
A measure of the strength of a system in a load flow sense is the short circuit to converter power ratio (SCR)calculated with all machine reactances set to zero. This short circuit ratio is invariably much higher than the usual value. In practice, converter operation has been considered down to an SCR of 3. A survey of existing schemes shows that, almost invariably, with systems of very low SCR,some
5.3 INCORPORATION OF HVDC TRANSMISSION
155
form of voltage control, often synchronous condensers, is an integral part of the converter installation. These schemes are, therefore, often very strong in a load flow sense. It may, therefore, be concluded that the sequential integration should converge in all practical situations although the convergence may become slow if the system is weak in a load flow sense.
Discussion of convergence properties The overall convergence rate of the
ax.d.c. algorithms depends on the successful interaction of the two distinct parts. The a.c. system equations are solved using the wellbehaved constant tangent fast decoupled algorithm, whereas the d.c. system equations are solved using the more powerful, but somewhat more erratic, full NewtonRaphson approach. The powerful convergence of the NewtonRaphson process for the d.c. equations can cause overall convergence difficulties. If the first d.c. iteration occurs before the reactive power voltage update, then the d.c. variables are converged to be compatible with the incorrect terminal voltage. This introduces an unnecessary discontinuity which may lead to convergence difficulties in the sequential method. In the unified approach, the powerful convergence of the d.c. equations is dampened by the reflection of the a.c. mismatches onto the changes in d.c. variables. This gives faster and better behaved convergence. The solution time of the d.c. equations is normally small compared with the solution time of the a.c. equations. The relative efficiencies of the alternative algorithms may, therefore, be assessed by comparing the total numbers of voltage and angle updates. In general, those schemes which acknowledge the fact that the d.c. variables are strongly related to the terminal voltage give the fastest and most reliable performance. The unified methods are the more reliable and the P,QDC solution is the most efficient. Of the sequential methods, the (P, Q,D C ) solution is only marginally inferior to the unified method. When the busbar to which the converters are attached is voltage controlled (as is often the case) the two approaches become virtually identical as the interaction between ax. and d.c. systems is much smaller. The only computational difference between a unified and a comparable sequential iteration is that the d.c. Jacobian equations for the unified method (Equation (5.64)) is slightly larger. The difference is one additional row and column for each converter present. In terms of computational cost per iteration, the corresponding unified and sequential algorithms are virtually identical.
(i)
(ii)
In cases where the a.c. system is strong, both the unified and sequential algorithms may be programmed to give fast and reliable convergence. If the a.c. system is weak, the sequential algorithm is susceptible to convergence problems. Thus, in general, the unified method id recommended due to its greater reliability.
5 . 3 . 7
Numerical example
The complete New Zealand primary transmission system was used as a basis for a planning study which included an extra multiterminal HVDC scheme, i.e. involving six converter stations, as illustrated in Figure 5.7.
156
5
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
Representative input and output information obtained from the computer is given in the following pages.
DEPARTYENT OF ELECTRICAL k ELECTRONIC ENCINEER.ING. UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY, NEV ZEALAND
SYSTEM NO.
3
23 YAR 90
XAIIYUN N U Y B U OF ITEUTIONS 10 POVEL TOLELANCE 0.00100 PRINT WT INDICAML 000000000 SYSTEI YVA B A S E 100.00 D.C. L W T INDICATOR 6 NUIBER OF A.C. SYSTENS 2 80 218 S L A C K BUSBALS
B U S
BUS 104 108 118 127 128
NUIBEL OF BUSES
NUIBEL OF LINES NUIBER OF TUNSFUPlERS
114 206 19
D A T A C E N E U T I O N IINIYU IAXIXUY SHUNT nv EVIL IVAL IVAL SUSCEPTANCE
NAYE
TYPE VOLTS
LOAD IV IVB
AVIEIOIE220 BDINOILE220 BUY220 CWIl220 CUJMZ220
0.00 1 1.0520 1 1.0520 97.20 0 1.0030 329.60 0 1.0520 0.00 0 1.0520 0.00 0.00 0.00 95.30
0.00 220.00 34.40 500.00 500.00 0.00 540.00 46.60 500.00 500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 95.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 600.00 0.00 0.00 80.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.OOO 0.000
O.Oo0
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
129 CLUTAA220 1 1.0300 138 CMLDINE220 0 1.0210 0 1.0270 143 HyBS220
0.OOO
LINE
D A T A
BUS
104 104 104 108 118 118 127 127 128 128
NAME
AVIEIOIE220 AVIEIOIE220 AVIEMOIE220 BENOS220 BUY220 BUY220 CUJMl220 CUJI1220 cu)I2220 CUlU2220
BUS
NAIE
BENYORE220 BENIOLE220 VAITAKI220 TVIZEL220 ISLINGTON220 LANILM2220 1OXBuICH220 TVIZEd220 ROXBUILCH220 TVIZEG220
LESISTANQ 0.00330 0.00330 0.00150 0.00370 0.00210 0.00110 0.00770 0.00820 0.00770 0.00820
LEACTANCE SUSCEPTANCE
108 108 268 255 167 181 218 255 218 255
0.01630 0.01530 0.00730 0.02610 0.01651 0.00861 0.04450 0.09260 0.04450 0.09260
0.02298 0.02298 0.01052 0.06954 0.05285 0.02751 0.07251 0.16746 0.07251 0.16746
5.3 INCORPORATION OF HVDC TRANSMISSION
T l A N S F O I I E I BUS
6 6 6 10 10 21
157
D A T A
I E A C T M C E TAP CODE
NAME BWTHOlPEl10
BUS
7 7 7 II II 22 22 22 22 24 40 40 49 55 55 55 59 63 67
NAME
BWTHWE220 BIRITHOlPE220 BWTHOlPM20 EDGUXnBEZZO EDCECOMBE220
HAWANIS220 HAWANIS220
LESISTANCE
0.00400 0.00400 0.00170 0.00400 0.00400 0.00170 0.00170 0.00410 0.004 I 0 0.00090
BWrmOlF'ElIO
BIRITHOlPEl10 EDCECOIBEIlO EDCECOMBEllO HAWAIIISI10 21 HAYWAIDS110 2 1 HAWALDSI10
HIWhM5110
0.09560 0.09560 0.04SW 0.09560
0.09560
1.OW 1.OW
0
0
0
1.ooO
1.OOo 1.ooO
1.040 1.000
HAWANIS220
HAWAMS220
?I 23
39
39 48 54 54 54 58 PMIOSEIIO 62 STLATSOLDIIO 66 TUUTENGAIIO
HFNDEISON110 IAlSDENIIO MAUDENIIO HEVPLYI7HlIO OTAHIJWI10 OTAHIJWI10 MAHIJWI10
HENDEISONZ20 IAlSDW220 IAISDM220 NEWLTITY220
OTAWUlN220
o.oo0oo 0.00000
0.00080 0.00700 0 00700 0.00160 0.000w 0.00200 0.00080
I
OTAHWU220 OTARllWU220
PEIROsc220 STUtfUlD220
TAIUTI)IGAZ20
0.05140 0.05140 0.10120 0.10120 0.01840 0.05500 0.05500 0.02480 0.04100 0.04100 0.04550 0.02750 0.05260 0.02530
0 0 0 0
0
1.000
1.OOo
1.053
0
0
1.OOO
1.OW
0 0
0 0
1.OW 1.000 l.OW 1.000
1.OW
1.ooO
1.OOO
0 0 0 0 0
WUhTIUNS
I r ~ ~ ~ + Y M + V D 5 r V W + Y D 7 * V D ~ W 9 + Y DIIIIID2 l ~ l D l .III21D3 .III3ID4 .IDIIDS .IIISIW .LD61D7 .III7ID8 .IIIBIW .NI9IDlO .u)lO=O I I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25.5800 o.oo00 0 . m o.oo00 o.oo00 o.oo00 o.oo00 o.oo00 o.Ooo0 o.oo00 0 0 0 0.0000 o.Ooo0 0.0019 o.oo00 o.oo00 o.oo00 o.oo00 o.oo00 o.oo00 o.oo00 # 1 0 0 0 0 o.oo00 o.oo00 o.ooO0 1o.oooo 0.M)Oo 2o.oooo o.oo00 o.oo00 o.oo00 o.oo00 8 @ 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0.0000 0.OOOO 0.0000 O.oO00 3.oo0020.oooO 0.0000 O.oo00 O.oo00 O.Oo0o 0 0 0 0 8 @ 0 0 I 1
.
,
11
~,~~kID4+IDS+IDb+ID7+ID8~ID9+IDlO:O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~)~~IDkiD4+ID5rIW+I7+lD8+ID9+IDlO~O ) ( O 1  1 4 0 0 0 0
pC CONVEITEI WlBEl
1
INPUT DATA
PC CONVEXTU WMBEl
co1(yElTEl
6
lNPWf
7
CONVElTEl ATTACHED TO BUS NUIBEI I08
ATTACHED To BUS N U I B U
NOMINAL DC VOLTAGE
I A X I I U I DC VOLTAGE MINIIUI DC VOLTAGE IAIIIUI DC CUuEm
l10.00oOo
150.00000
0.00000 O.oo00
0.08970 0.08970
10.00000 110.00000
NOIINAL DC VOLTAGE IAIINI DC VOLTAGE MINIllll DC VOLTAGE I A I I N I DC CUUENI
90 * 00000 140.00000 0.00000
0.0000
Dc LINT VOLTAGE (KV)
COMIUTATION UACTAWCE (P.U.) N N S F W E l LEIcIANlZ (P.U.) FIIINC MCLE:MINIIW (Dffi) MAIIIW (OK) RUlSMUEl TAP:IINIIUI (P.C.) MAIIIUI (P.C.) INQEIFN FILTEL UACTANWCE (P.U.) W U I B E I OF BUDGES I N SEIIES
COIIVIATIMI LEICIANCE (P.U.)
hlNslolIll UACTANQ (?.U.) FILING AffiU:MINIIUI (DED)
IAIIIUI
0.07000
0,07000
8.o0000 150.00000 0.00000
(DED)
0.00000 0.00000 0.00000
I .m 4
ComElTot P O ~ I FACIOI
CONVEllUl C O W L ANGLE NNSFOUEI TAP
10.00000

T U N S M U U T Y : I I N I I U I (P.C.) IAXIIUI (P.C.) INCWEW F I L T U IEACTANCE ( P . U . ) WIBU OF WIDGES IN SUlEs
0.00000
o.Ooo00 0.70000
2
CowVEIlEl Dc POVEI ( I V ) T E U I N A L IEACIIVE P O W
500.00000
(IVAI)
AC TEUINAL VOLTACE ( K V ) W N V U I U DC CUuEIlf (KA)
CONVUTU P O W FACT01 DC Llm VOLTACE (KV) COwVUTEl COwTlOL AWCLE T U N S M U U TAP CONVUIU. DC POVU (IV) TEUINAL IEACTIYE POYE1 (IVAI) AC m l I N A L VOLTAGE (KV) CONVUTEI DC CVuEnr (KA)
220.00000 8.00000
158
5
LOAD FLOW UNDER POWER ELECTRONIC CONTROL
ITERATIONS
SOLUTION CONYEICED IN 7 PD ANTI 6VQ
WAD
IV
IVAl
W
CE)IEUTION IVAL 791.80
AC W S S S IV IVN
IISIATCH
IV
#VAL
SWVMS IVM
4496.80
1518.60
5226.58
194.91 306.06
534.87 182.89 7 (BUNTHOlPE220)
37.85
@'ELATING STATE OF COIwELTEl Q WICM IS AlTACWED M BUS CONVELlEL IS OPEUTING IN THE MVELTION NODE TKE CUKfLOL ANGLE IS TKE EXTINCTION ADVANCE ANGLE
DC p m SUPPLIED m THE AC SYSTEI
CDNVEIIEI AC VOLTACE (YVOLTS) 87.94
=
IV
CONTML ANGLE (DW
8.00
TUNSMUE1 TAP (PEL CENT) 8.26
COIImATION ANGLE
(DGS)
22.45
DC C W T (KANPS)
I .406
DC VOLTAGE (I(VOLTS)
220.00
W
LIM TUIINAL POVEL = 309.23 IV n o 1 TUNSFDUEL M COmFITEI = 309.23 IV REACTIVE P D V U O F FILTElS =
L TUNSFEQ
207.61 I V A L 125.89 IVAt 142.86 IVAL
BUS DATA
BUS
NAlE
V O L T S 1.052
ANGLE 4.78
CENEMTION IV IVAl
220.00 33.87
MAD
IV
0.00
IVAl 0.00
SHUNT IVAL
0.00
BUS
108
NAIE
W
IVN
104 AVIEIOU220
~ ~ ~ 1 0 ~ 41.89 ~ 2 2 10.17 0
108 BENIOLC220 268 VAITAKI220 IISIATCH 108 BMIOLC220 1.052 4.43 540.00 88.04 97.20 0.00
0.00
41.89 136.22 o.oO0
10.17 13.53
o.Oo0
104 AVIEIDlE220 41.83 7.88 104 AVIEIOU220 41.83 7.88 255 W 1 2 E 6 2 2 0 26.47 6.87 IISIAtCW 5OO.oO0 110.672
118
BUY220
0.968 12.95
0.00
0.00 329.60
95.80
0.00 167 ISLINCMN220 120.18 181 LAhDf02220 209.41
IISIATCU
4.019
76.16 19.64 4.002
5.4
References
1. FuertesEsquivel, C R and Acha, E, (1996). NewtonRaphson algorithm for the reliable solution of large power networks with embedded FACTS devices, Proceedings of the IEE on Generation, Transmission and Distribution, 143 (3,pp. 447453. 2. FuertesEsquivel, C R, Acha, E and AmbrizPerez, H, (1998). A thyristor controlled series compensator model for the power flow solution of practical power networks, IEEE Trunsuctions Winter Power Meeting, Paper 98WM 162. 3. Gyugyi, L, (1992). A unified power flow control concept for flexible a.c. transmission systems, Proceedings of the IEE, 139, (4), pp. 323333. 4. FuertesEsquivel, C R and Acha, E, (1998). The unified power flow controller: A critical f the comparison of NewtonRaphson UPFC algorithms in power flow studies, Proceedings o IEE on Generation, Transmission and Distribution, 144 (9,pp. 437444. 5. Sato, H and Amllaga, J, (1969). Improved loadflow techniques for integrated a.c.d.c. systems, Proc. IEE, 116. (4), pp. 525532.
5.4 REFERENCES
159
6. Braunayal, D A, Kraft, L A and Whysong, J L, (1976). Inclusion of the converter and transmission equations directly in a Newton power flow, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, PAS75, (1). pp. 7688. 7. Arrillaga, J, Harker, B J and Turner, K S, (1980). Clarifying an ambiguity in recent a.c.d.c. f the IEE, 127, Pt.C(5), pp. 324325. loadflow formulations, Proceedings o 8. Reeve, J, Fahmy, G and Stott, B, (1976). Versatile loadflow method for multiterminal HVDC systems, IEEE PES Summer Meeting, Paper F76354 1. Portland.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.