You are on page 1of 8

DRPT2008 6-9 April 2008 Nanjing China

A novel approach for large-disturbance stability


control
Wei Gu, Ping Jiang

Abstract This paper presents a novel practical approach for (ii) it only work for first-swing stability analysis. Due to these
large-disturbance stability control. Firstly, the relation between disadvantages, energy function methods are still used as a
large-disturbance stability region LDSR and small-signal stabil- complement to the traditional TDS method. That to say, the
ity region SSSR is investigated. Then, a method to approximately
identify LDSR through shrinking the SSSR of the corresponding analysis results of energy function methods still need to be
post-disturbance, is proposed in terms with several rational examined through TDS method.
assumes. Finally, a scheme of large-disturbance stability control In contrast to large-disturbance stability analysis, small-
based on the strategy of optimal bifurcation control(OBC) is disturbance stability analysis approach, based on bifurcation
presented combined with the method of shrinking SSSR . WSCC theory, has been furtherly developed by Vaithianathan Venkata-
9-bus and NewEngland 39-bus system are use to illustrate and
test the proposed approach. subbramanian etc. Small-signal stability region SSSR , also
called as feasibility region, was presented to identify the
Index Terms Large-Disturbance Stability Region, Optimal stability region in parameter space. With SSSR the stability
Bifurcation Control, Optimal Hopf Bifurcation Control, Optimal
Saddle-Node Bifurcation Control, Small-Signal Stability Region control based on optimization theory can be easily realized.
This enlightens us that if we can get the accurate large-
disturbance stability region LDSR , the large-disturbance sta-
I. I NTRODUCTION bility control will be solved without difficulty.
VER the last fifteen to twenty years, utility engineers, The paper is organized as follows. Section II provides the
O consultants, and university researchers have intensely
studied large-disturbance stability [1][5]. Hundreds of tech-
detailed models of power systems, including generator, AVR,
PSS, loads and static Var compensator(SVC). Section III
nical papers have resulted, along with many conferences, provides outlines of differential-algebraic equations of power
symposiums, and seminars. Utilities have developed practical systems and bifurcation analysis. In particular, the concept
analysis techniques, and are now planning and operating of stability region is briefly described. Section IV presents
power systems to prevent instability for considerable large- a novel approach for large-disturbance stability control.
disturbance. The relations between SSSR and LDSR are developed. In
Large-disturbance stability control is also called as transient Section V, the proposed approach is applied to WSCC 9-bus
stability control. Although large-disturbance stability is fairly test system and NewEngland 39-bus test system to illustrate
well understood, there are many facets to the problem, rang- its validity. Finally, in Section VI, conclusions are duly drawn.
ing from stability analysis method to control scheme. The
physical characteristics and mathematical models of a wide
range of equipment are important. Now its research faces two II. P OWER S YSTEM M ODELING
bottlenecks: (i) time-consuming calculations. In the large-scale It is well known that a proper modeling of power system de-
power systems analysis, using more than one processor based vices, such as generators, loads, and regulators is fundamental
on parallel processing obviously will speed up the calculation. to properly understand and reproduce the instability scenar-
(ii) It is difficult to determine the stability region of a post-fault ios. The power system can be mathematically formulated as
power systems [3]. follows.
Time domain simulation(TDS) and energy function methods
are the main approaches to process the large-disturbance
A. Synchronous Generator
stability over the past twenty years [3], [4]. TDS approach
can be applied to any level of detail of power system models The two-axis model, describing the synchronous generator
and give visual description for all state variables. One of the dynamics can be given as:
main disadvantages of TDS approach, except time-consuming, i = i 1 (1)
is that it can not provide an index marking the degree of system  
Mi i = Pmi (Eqi Xdi Idi )Iqi
stability. Therefore, TDS approach is low-efficient for stability
 
control because it can not provide a quantity index. In contrast (Edi + Xqi Iqi ) Di (i 1) (2)
   
to TDS approach, energy function approach can provide a Td0i Eqi = Ef di [Eqi + (Xdi Xdi )Idi ] (3)
quantity index of the degree of stability, and it also avoids    
Tq0i Edi = Edi + (Xqi Xqi )Iqi (4)
the time-consuming step-by-step integrations. Energy function
methods also have disadvantages: (i) it only applicable to where i is the generator rotor angle; i is the generator
power system stability models which have energy functions; angular speed; Mi is the generator inertia constant;D is the

978-7-900714-13-8/08/ 2008 DRPT


DRPT2008 6-9 April 2008 Nanjing China
2

V pss VR max BSVC max


BSVC _ 0

Vref E fd VrefC  KR 

1  STC KA
1  STB 1  ST A
1  STR BSVC B

Vi BSVC min
V VRmin

Fig. 1. Simple Exciter Fig. 3. SVC model

V pss_ max
i 1) Static Load Models: For traditional stability studies,
KS 1  ST1 1  ST3 V pss
where the investigated time frame is at most around 10s after
1  ST 1  ST2 1  ST4
Pei the disturbance, the most commonly used model types are
V pss_ min static models. The most common model for voltage depen-
dency is:
Fig. 2. Power System Stabilizer
P = P0 (V /V0 )a (10)
Q = Q0 (V /V0 )b (11)
generator damping; Pmi is the mechanical power of prime
mover; Idi and Iqi are direct axis and quadrature axis cur- Where P0 and Q0 are the real and reactive powers consumed
  at a reference voltage V0 . The exponents a and b depend on
rents respectively; Edi and Eqi are transient direct axis and
 the type of load that is being represented, a = b = 0 means
quadrature axis electromotive force (EMF), respectively; Td0i
 a constant power load, a = b = 1 means a constant current
and Tq0i are direct axis and quadrature axis open circuit
  load, and a = b = 2 means a constant impedance load.
time constants, respectively; Xdi and Xqi are direct axis and
quadrature axis transient reactances; 2) Dynamic Load Models: Around half of all electric power
The interface equations between generators and network can used by the industry is used for operation of motors. So a
be given as follows: three-order model of induction motor is considered in this
paper:
Pgi Vi Idi sin(i i ) Vi Iqi cos(i i ) = 0 (5)
Qgi Vi Idi cos(i i ) + Vi Iqi sin(i i ) = 0 (6) TjL s = TM TE (12)
Where Pgi and Pgi are the generator output powers, Vi and Td0L eLR

= W1 eLR (13)

i are the magnitude and angle of bus voltage respectively; Td0L eLI = U1 eLI (14)
The dynamics of synchronous generator stator can be de-
scribed as follows: Here,
 
Eqi Vi cos(i i ) Rsi Iqi Xdi Idi = 0 (7)

Edi Vi sin(i i ) Rsi Idi + 
Xqi Iqi =0 (8) TM = KL [ + (1 )(1 s)P ] (15)
W1 = KZ (X X  )II + Td0L

eI s 2f0 (16)
Where Rsi is armature resistance of the machine.
U1 = KZ (X X  )IR Td0L

eR s 2f0 (17)
B. Excitation Control System 
Where, s is the rotor slip; TjL and Td0L are the rotor time
The reference [6] presents a simplified excitation system constant and transient open-circuit time constant, respectively;
and its corresponding mathematical model is shown in Fig. 1. eLR and eLI are the real and reactive part of transient
If TB and TC are set to zero, this model will be simplified electromotive force eL , respectively.
to the first order model:
TA Ef d = Ef d + KA (Vref Vt ) (9)
E. SVC Model
A simplified SVC model, which presented in reference [6],
C. Power System Stabilizer
is used in this paper and its mathematical model is shown in
The model of PSS(Power System Stabilizer) is shown in Fig. 3.
Fig. 2. In the dynamics calculation, the input machine speed
or electrical power is used to calculate the rates of change of
the PSS states. F. Network Models
The network Models can be written as:
D. Load Models

n
Modeling of loads is very complicated problem due to Pgi Pli Vi Vj (Gij cos ij + Bij sin ij ) = 0 (18)
the unpredictability of the compunding of devices (e.g. Flu- j=1
orescent, Compact Fluorescent Lamps, Refrigerators, Heater, n

Motor). There we will give the static and dynamic load models Qgi Qli Vi Vj (Gij sin ij Bij cos ij ) = 0 (19)
according to the traditional classification. j=1
DRPT2008 6-9 April 2008 Nanjing China
3

III. P OWER SYSTEM STABILITY p Stability Region Boundary p Stability Region Boundary

In this paper, only Saddle-node Bifurcation(SNB) and Hopf Optimal Control Point

Bifurcation(HB) are concerned. pc


Small-Disturbance Stability
Small-Disturbance Stability
Region
Region
A. Bifurcation Point Tracing
Direct method can be used to identify SNB and HB without P P ref P
calculating eigenvalues of Asys . Define = + j and ux
as the eigenvalue and right eigenvector of Asys , respectively. Fig. 4. Power system small-disturbance stability region and its control
Then,
Asys ux = ux (20)
Define u = [uTx uTy ]T , where uy = gy1 gx ux , Equations (20)
can be rewritten as:
Large-Disturbance Stability Region in
fx fy ux u Parameter Space
= ( + j) x (21)
gx gy uy 0 :SSSR boundary

:SSSR boundary of post-contingency


Define  :LDSR boundary of the same post-contingency

ux = uxR + juxI
(22)
uy = uyR + juyI Fig. 5. Power system large-disturbance stability region and its control
where uxR , uxI Rn and uyR , uyI Rm . Substituting
equation (22) in equation(21), rearranging and simplifying, we
( B s are the instable regions identified by these local bifur-
get: cations.).

0 = fx uxR + fy uyR uxR + uxI

0 = f u + f u u u
Fig. 4 shows the small-signal stability region, described in
x xI y yI xI xR
(23) two-dimensions space with uncontrollable parameters and

0 = gx uxR + gy uyR controllable parameters p.


0 = gx uxI + gy uyI
C. Optimal Bifurcation Control
Then considering system equilibrium constraint, Equations
(23) and normalization equations of the feature vector, we Combined with the definition of SSSR , small-signal sta-
bility control can be described as a question of optimal
have:
0 = f (x, y, , p) bifurcation control Assuring the uncontrollable bifurcation



parameters  ref , seeks for the optimal configuration of

0 = g(x, y, , p)

controllable parameters in small-signal stability region to make

0 = fx uxR + fy uyR uxR + uxI

the minimum control costs.
0 = f u + f u u u
x xI y yI xI xR As is shown in Fig. 4, the Optimal Control Point is the
(24)
0 = gx uxR + gy uyR
optimization result of optimal bifurcation control. There, we



0 = gx uxI + gy uyI have a assumption that An increase in stability index will



always result in corresponding increase in control costs or

uTxR uxR uTxI uxI = 1

T deteriorating some special performance indices. This assump-
uxR uxI uTxI uxR = 0 tion is most likely case in practice, such as the increase of load
For SNB, Equation (24) satisfies uxR = ux , uyR = uy , uxI = margin is likely to need the increase of reactive power compen-
uyI = 0, and = = 0; For HB, Equation (24) satisfies sation and the larger gain of AVR may improve the first-swing
= 0 and = 0. stability while deteriorating the damping performance in large
interconnecting power systems.
B. Stability Region IV. L ARGE -D ISTURBANCE S TABILITY C ONTROL BASED
Small-signal stability region SSSR , also called as feasi- ON O PTIMAL B IFURCATION C ONTROL A PPROACH
bility region, was presented by Vaithianathan Venkatasubbra- A. Relations between SSSR and LDSR
manian etc in references [7], [8]. According to the definition
Proposition 1: The post-contingency stability region in pa-
of Venkatasubbramanian, small-signal stability regionSSSR
rameter space is a subset of small signal stability region under
is the stability region in parameters space, which composed
the same contingency:
of all equilibrium states that can be researched quasi-statically
from the current operating point without loss of local stability.
LDSR SSSR (25)
SSSR = {BSNB BHB BSLIB BSIB }. If the singular-
induced bifurcation is not concerned, small-signal stability Proposition 2: The stability of power system may be de-
region can be rewritten as SSSR = {BSNB BHB BSLIB }. picted by the load level. If the system lies in sufficient small
DRPT2008 6-9 April 2008 Nanjing China
4

Start
load level, it will keep stable even suffering a sufficient large
disturbance. Contingency
Selecting
Proposition 3: The control strategy, which used to improve
the small signal stability of power system, will also improve
There is a Hopf bifurcation Yes
large-disturbance stability. after the contingency?

SD LD No

>0 (26)
p p
Cont
P SNB !0 Cont
P HB !0

Where SD and LD are the critical load factor in small No No


Cont Cont
disturbance and large disturbance, respectively. Here, the P SNB (n  1) H  ' P HB (n  1) H  '

improvement of large-disturbance stability represents in two Yes Yes

parts: (i) can keep stable status in a higher load level when Optimal SNB Control Optimal HB Control
suffering the same large disturbance; (ii) In the same load
level and the same large disturbance, the system changes from
instability to stability. Contingency analysis Yes Contingency analysis
Using TDS, stable Using TDS, stable
According to Proposition 1-3, a method to approximately No
No No
identify LDSR through shrinking the SSSR of the corre- Cont Cont Cont Cont
P SNB (n  1) P SNB ( n)  ' P HB (n  1) P HB ( n)  '
sponding post-disturbance is not difficult to gain. If the un-
controllable parameter is used to mark the stability margin,
End
we have:
SD > LD (27) Fig. 6. Flow Chat of Large-disturbance stability control based on optimal
bifurcation control method
Defining as a compensatory value reflecting the severity
degree of contingency, then we have:

SD = LD + (28) min C(p)




0 = f (x, y, Cont
SNB , p)

0 = g(x, y, Cont , p)


B. Formulation for Optimal Bifurcation Control

SNB

0 = f u + f y uy
x x
(31)
The large-disturbance stability control procedure is a non- s.t. 0 = gx ux + gy uy
linear constrained optimization problem and consists of an ob-

uTx ux = 1

jective function and a set of equality and inequality constraints,


Cont 


as follows: SNB Cont
h(x, y, SNB , p)  0

min C(p) min C(p)



0 = f (x, y, , p) 0 = f (x, y, Cont


HB , p)
0 = g(x, y, , p) (29)
Cont
s.t.
0 = g(x, y, HB , p)



(, p) LDSR
0 = fx uxR + fy uyR + uxI



h(x, y, , p)  0


0 = fx uxI + fy uyI uxR

0 = g u + g u
x xR y yR (32)
Substituting (28) into (29), we have: s.t.

0 = gx uxI + gy uyI


min C(p)
uTxR uxR uTxI uxI = 1





0 = f (x, y, SD , p) uxR uxI uxI uxR = 0
T T



Cont

0 = g(x, y, SD , p)
HB 
(30)
h(x, y, Cont , p)  0
s.t. Bifurcation Conditions HB



 SD


h(x, y, , p)  0 C. Systematic Approach for Large-Disturbance Stability Con-
SD
trol
In this paper, We only focus on the saddle-node bifurcation Fig. 6 depicts the flowchart of the proposed approach for
and Hopf bifurcation. Define the post-disturbance indices of large-disturbance stability control. This approach works as
SNB and Hopf bifurcation as Cont Cont
SNB and HB , respectively.
follows:
Using equations (24) to replace Bifurcation Conditions, 1) Initializations, typical contingency selecting;
equations (30) can be rewritten as equations (31) and equations 2) If there is no Hopf bifurcation after the typical contin-
(32): gency, then go to 3), otherwise go to 6);
DRPT2008 6-9 April 2008 Nanjing China
5

3) Calculate the Cont Cont


SNB , if SNB > 0, go to 5), otherwise
Cont
set SNB (n + 1) = < ;
4) Perform the optimal saddle-node bifurcation control
module;
5) Examine the stability at the current status of power
system using time domain simulation, if stable, go to SVC

End and the optimal bifurcation control procedure


finishes; Otherwise, set Cont Cont
SNB (n+1) = SNB (n+1)+,
then go to 4);
6) Calculate the Cont Cont
HB , if HB > 0, go to 8), otherwise
Cont
set HB (n + 1) = < ;
7) Perform the optimal Hopf bifurcation control module;
8) Examine the stability at the current status of power
system using time domain simulation, if stable, go to
Fig. 7. WSCC 9-bus test system
End and the optimal bifurcation control procedure
finishes; Otherwise, set Cont Cont
HB (n+1) = HB (n+1)+, TABLE I
then go to 7). O UTLINE OF OPTIMAL H OPF BIFURCATION CONTROL IN WSCC TEST
Two methods are used to estimate whether there is a Hopf SYSTEM
bifurcation after the typical contingency:
Control Parameters Gains of AVR, [KA1 , KA2 , KA3 ]
1) Approximate method: If the system presents an un-
Objective Functions Con K 0 )T W
C(KA ) = (KA
damped oscillations after the contingency, we think a A KA ,

Hopf bifurcation occur after the typical contingency. WKA = [1, 1, 1]


2) Accurate method: A bifurcation point tracing method Inequality Constraints 0.95  Vi  1.15,  Cont
HB

may be used to detect existence of Hopf bifurcation Optimization Algorithm Sequential Quadric Programming (SQP)
point. Step Size = 0.015(Norm
HB Cont
HB )
= 0.015(0.32 0.0) = 0.0064
How to determine the value of the ? If is too
large, the computational time will be decreased while the
optimization results will be conservative and uneconomical; If
is too small, the optimal procedure will be time-consuming 2) Typical Contingency Selection: As we know, the line
though a more economic result will be achieved. According to outage contingencies are easy to induce an oscillatory instabil-
computational experience to many different-scale systems, we ity in power systems. The post-contingency Hopf bifurcation
give the experiential values in different scenarios as follows: index introduced in Section IV. is computed to rank the
selected contingencies in the order of severity. The compu-
1) If the contingencies are serious disturbances, such as
tation results indicate that line 15-16 outage is the typical
three phases grounding fault etc,
contingency because of the minimum Cont HB .
= 0.05(Norm Cont
SNB SNB ) for optimal SNB control and 3) Large-Disturbance Stability Control based on Optimal
= 0.05(HB Cont
Norm
HB ) for optimal HB control; Hopf Bifurcation Control: Hopf bifurcation indices of pre-
2) Toward the sub-serious disturbances, such as unsymmet-
contingency and post-contingency are Norm HB = 0.32 and
ric faults and some line outage etc,
Cont = 0.0, respectively.
= 0.01(Norm Cont
SNB SNB ) for optimal SNB control and
HB
Table I depicts the control information for optimal Hopf
= 0.015(HB Cont
Norm
HB ) for optimal HB control.
bifurcation control, showing the control parameters, objective
functions, inequality constraints, optimization algorithm and
V. C ASES S TUDIES step size in one control step. Table II and Fig. 8 illustrates
The proposed approach for large-disturbance stability con- the detailed process of the proposed OHBC technique. Ob-
trol is applied to the WSCC 9-bus and NewEngland 39-bus serve that the overall control approach to ensuring the large-
test system [9]. disturbance stability is realized in three steps when Cont
HB =
0.0192; Optimal control results indicate that only the gain of
2
A. WSCC 9-bus Test Case AVR at generator 2 needs to be adjusted, thus KA = 118.675

Fig. 7 depicts the WSCC 9-bus test system used in reference


[10]. The proposed approach based on optimal bifurcation TABLE II
method will be applied to ensure system stability under N-1 O UTLINE OF OPTIMAL H OPF BIFURCATION CONTROL IN WSCC 9- BUS
contingency. TEST SYSTEM

1) Introduction of System Operation Status: All the system


Generators First Step Second Step Third Step
operation parameters are listed in reference [10], except the
1 100 100 100
gains of AVR KA1 = KA2 = KA3 = 100. We assume that
1 107.545 112.985 118.675
the current load level is 0 = 0.1 (0 = 0.0 stands for initial
load level). 1 100 100 100
DRPT2008 6-9 April 2008 Nanjing China
6

1.015
Gen1
Gen2
First Step Second Step Third Step Gen3

1.01

Generator Angular Speed (p.u.)


Cont Cont
P HB (1) 0.0064 P HB (3) 0.0192
Cont Cont
P HB (0) 0.0 P HB (2) 0.0128 1.005

1
Fig. 8. Optimal HB Control realized in three steps

1.015
0.995

1.01 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time (s)
Generator Angular Speed (p.u.)

Fig. 10. Time domain simulation after contingency in WSCC 9-bus test
1.005
system, with control

Load Factor = 0.04 Load Factor = 0.08


20 20

1
15 15

10 10

5 5

0.995

image

image
0 0

5 5
Gen1
Gen2 10 10
Gen3
0.99 15 15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time (s) 20 20
35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
real real

Fig. 9. Time domain simulation after contingency in WSCC 9-bus test (a) = 0.04 (b) = 0.08
system, without control
Load Factor = 0.12
20 Load Factor = 0.165
20

15
15

2
and control costs are 18.675. Then we set KA = 120 and
10
10

5
5

examine the control results through contingency analysis.


image

image
0
0

Fig. 9 and Fig. 10 depict the time domain simulation results 5


5

after line-outage contingency. Observe that, without control, 10

15
10

15

system will undertake an oscillatory instability when 7-8 line- 20


35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 20
35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

outage happens; with optimal HB control, system will remain real real

stable, though close to critical oscillations. (c) = 0.12 (d) = 0.165

Fig. 11. Eigenvalues in four different load levels for line 15-16 outage
B. NewEngland 39-bus Test Case
1) Introduction of System Operation Status: The static and
dynamic data of NewEngland 39-bus is gained from reference eigenvalues are in the left side of imaginary axis, that is to
[9]. Capacitors of 50 Mvar are added in Bus-12 and Bus-15, say, there is no Hopf bifurcation before SNB. So based on
respectively. Loads at Bus-4, Bus-12 and Bus-15 use induction the control strategy shown in Fig. 6, an optimal SNB control
motor model and constant impedance load model is used in the approach is used to solve this instability problem.
other loads. We assume that the current load level is 0 = 0.14 Table III depicts the control information for optimal saddle-
(0 = 0.0 stands for initial load level). node bifurcation control, showing the control parameters,
2) Typical Contingency Selection: In this paper, only line objective functions, inequality constraints, optimization algo-
outages contingency are concerned. When the terminal fault rithm and step size in one control step. Table IV and Fig. 12
in generators are not considered, the fault of line 15-16 outage illustrates the detailed process of the proposed OHBC tech-
is the typical contingency (In practice, the system will remain nique. Observe that the overall control approach to ensuring
stable in other line outage contingencies except this one.). the large-disturbance stability is realized in two steps when
3) Large-Disturbance Stability Control based on Opti- Cont
SNB = 0.045; Optimal control results indicate that only some
mal SNB Control: Saddle-node bifurcation indices of pre- of AVR reference set-point Vref need to be adjusted, showing
contingency and post-contingency are Norm SNB = 0.96 and in Table IV; control costs are 2.635.
Cont
SNB = 0.025, respectively. Fig. 13 and Fig. 14 depict the time domain simulation
Fig. 11 shows the eigenvalue plot in four different load results after line-outage contingency. Observe that, without
levels for the line 15-16 outage case. Observe that that one control, system will undertake an aperiodic instability when
eigenvalue crosses the imaginary axis for = 0.165, thus 15-16 line-outage happens; with optimal SNB control, system
leading to a saddle-node bifurcation. When < 0.165, all the will remain stable, though the equilibrium is close to voltage
DRPT2008 6-9 April 2008 Nanjing China
7

TABLE III 1

O UTLINE OF OPTIMAL SADDLE - NODE BIFURCATION CONTROL IN 0.95 0.9

N EW E NGLAND 39- BUS TEST SYSTEM 0.9


0.8
Voltage profile at bus 15
0.85
0.7

Control Parameters AVR reference set-point Vref 0.8

Bus Voltage (p.u.)


0.6

Rotor Slip (p.u.)


Objective Functions Con V 0 )T W
C(Vref ) = (Vref
0.75

ref Vref , Rotor slip of induction motor at bus 15 0.5


0.7
WVref = [1, 1, 1] 0.4
0.65
Inequality Constraints 0.95  Vi  1.15,  Cont
HB 0.3
0.6

Optimization Algorithm Sequential Quadric Programming (SQP) 0.55


0.2

Step Size = 0.01(Norm Cont


SNB SNB ) 0.5 0.1

= 0.01(0.96 0.025) 0.01 0.45 0


0 5 10 15 20 25 30
t (s)

TABLE IV
Fig. 13. Time domain simulation after contingency in NewEngland 39-bus
O UTLINE OF OPTIMAL SADDLE - NODE BIFURCATION CONTROL IN
test system, without control
N EW E NGLAND 39- BUS TEST SYSTEM
1 0.1

Bus Number AVR reference set-point Vref 0.09

Pre-optimization Post-optimization 0.9


0.08

30 1.2451 1.2451
0.8 0.07

31 1.3720 1.3720

Bus Voltage (p.u.)

Rotor Slip (p.u.)


Voltage profile at bus 15
0.06
32 1.3338 1.4038 0.7
0.05
33 1.3429 1.4451
34 1.6703 1.7534 0.6 0.04

Rotor slip of induction motor at bus 15


35 1.4137 1.4137 0.03
0.5
36 1.4027 1.4027 0.02

37 1.3316 1.3316 0.4 0.01


0 5 10 15 20 25 30
t (s)
38 1.3754 1.3838
39 1.2060 1.2060 Fig. 14. Time domain simulation after contingency in NewEngland 39-bus
test system, with optimal SNB control

stability limits.
the control scheme obtained through optimal bifurcation
VI. C ONCLUSION control method.
2) it can work for multi-swing stability control. Multi-
In this paper, a novel approach for large-disturbance stability
swing instability, which also called as oscillatory insta-
control is proposed in the engineering viewpoint. Firstly, the
bility, can be explained with Hopf bifurcation theory and
method of shrinking the SSSR of the corresponding post-
examined with TDS method.
contingency is proposed to calculate the approximate SSSR .
Only SNB and HB are concerned in SSSR boundary tracing. There are also some problems not solved ideally:
Then, a systematic approach and frame for large-disturbance 1) values of the varies according to the changes of
stability control, combining bifurcation control theory and contingency scenarios, system scale etc. Therefore, a lot
TDS method, are proposed. Finally, the results of applied of off-line pre-analysis is needed to get the value of ;
the proposed approach to two test systems demonstrate the 2) a good algorithm is also needed to solve this large-scale
validity. constrained optimization problem.
The advantages of the proposed approach are as follows:
1) it provides an approximate quantity index identifying A PPENDIX I
the degree of system stability. With the examination of E XAMPLE P ROOF OF P ROPOSITION 1-3
TDS method, this approach can ensure the validity of Proof: If the system remains stable when suffering a
large disturbance, it must have a stable equilibrium in post-
contingency, this ensures LDSR SSSR . With the operation
First Step Second Step
parameters in the boundary of SSSR , system can not remain
stable to the same large disturbance, that to say, LDSR <
SSSR . Thus, proposition 1 LDSR SSSR is true.
A Single Machine Infinite Bus test system, showing in
Cont Cont
Fig. 15, is used to demonstrate the propositions 2-3. Assuming
Cont
P SNB (0) 0.025 P SNB (1) 0.035 P SNB (2) 0.045
a three phases grounding fault occurring to the line B1-
B2 at the B1 side, the fault critical clearing time and load
level before the contingency are studied using time domain
Fig. 12. Optimal SNB Control realized in two steps simulation.
DRPT2008 6-9 April 2008 Nanjing China
8

R EFERENCES
[1] M. A. Pai, Energy Function Analysis for Power System Stability.
Norwell: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989.
[2] Y. Ni, S. Chen, and B. Zhang, Theory and Analysis of Dynamic Power
Systems. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2002.
[3] H.-D. Chiang, C.-C. Chu, and G. Cauley, Direct stability analysis of
Fig. 15. SMIB: single machine infinite bus test system electric power systems using energy functions: theory, applications, and
perspective, Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 83, no. 11, pp. 1497 1529,
1995.
TABLE V [4] V. Vittal, Consequence and impact of electric utility industry restructur-
L OAD FACTOR AND CRITICAL CLEARING TIME IN THE SAME ing on transient stability and small-signal stability analysis, Proceedings
of the IEEE, vol. 88, no. 2, pp. 196 207, 2000.
CONTINGENCY
[5] Y. Xue, Extended equal area criterion revised, IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 7, pp. 10121022, June 1992.
Load factor (p.u.) Critical clearing time (s) [6] Power System Toolbox Ver. 2.0: Dynamic Tutorial and Functions, Cherry
0 0.08 Tree Scientific Software, 1999.
[7] V. Venkatasubramanian, H. Schattler, and J. Zaborszky, Dynamics of
-0.1 0.17 large constrained nonlinear systems - a taxonomy theory, Proceedings
-0.2 0.23 of the IEEE, vol. 83, no. 11, pp. 1530 1561, 1995.
-0.3 0.30 [8] , Local bifurcations and feasibility regions in differential-algebraic
systems, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 40, no. 12, pp.
-0.4 0.37 1992 2013, 1995.
-0.5 0.46 [9] W. Gu, Optimal bifurcation control in power systems, Ph.D. disserta-
-0.6 0.56 tion, Southeast University, China, May 2006.
[10] Power System Analysis Toolbox: Documentation for PSAT version 1.3.0,
-0.7 0.71 Free Software Foundation, Federico Milano, 2004.
-0.8 0.96
-0.9 > 1.4

Through analyzing the results, showing in Table V and


Fig. 16, we can draw the two conclusions as follows:
1) The stability of power system may be depicted by the
load level. If the system lies in sufficient small load
level, it will keep stable even suffering a sufficient large
disturbance;
2) The control strategy, which used to improve the small Wei Gu received the B.Eng degree and the Ph.D. degree in Electrical
signal stability of power system, will also improve large- Engineering from Southeast University, China, in 2001 and 2006, respectively.
disturbance stability. He is now a lecturer in the School of Electrical Engineering, Southeast
University. His research interests are power system stability and control,
Thus, propositions 1-3 are demonstrate to be true. FACTS and power quality.

Load Factor = 0.0 (p.u.) critical clearing time = 0.08 (s) Load Factor = 0.3 (p.u.) Critical Clearing Time = 0.3 (s)
1.5 150 1.5 200
Voltage Profile at Bus B1
Voltage Profile at Bus B1
Rotor Angle Profile of Gen G1 Rotor Angle Profile of Gen G1

1 100 1 100
Bus Voltage (p.u.)

Rotor Angle (ang)

Bus Voltage (p.u.)

Rotor Angle (ang)

0.5 50 0.5 0

0 0 0 100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
t (s) t (s)

(a) = 0.00 (b) = 0.3


Ping Jiang received his B.Eng. from Southeast University, Nanjing, China in
1.5
Load Factor = 0.5 (p.u.) Critical Clearing Time =0.46 (s)

Voltage Profile at Bus B1


200 1.4
Load Factor = 0.8 (p.u.) Critical Clearing Time = 0.96 (s)

Voltage Profile at Bus B1


200 1982. He is now a professor in the School of Electrical Engineering, Southeast
1.2
Rotor Angle Profile of Gen G1
150
University. His research interests are power system operation and control,
1 100
power electronic and its applications in power systems.
1 100
Rotor Angle Profile of Gen G1
Bus Voltage (p.u.)

Bus Voltage (p.u.)


Rotor Angle (ang)

Rotor Angle (ang)

0.8 50

0.6 0

0.5 0
0.4 50

0.2 100

0 100 0 150
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
t (s) t (s)

(c) = 0.5 (d) = 0.8

Fig. 16. Time domain simulations for SMIB system, with different load
factors and critical clearing time