You are on page 1of 5


1 Example of contingency analysis for two line outages
As an example, let us consider outage of two lines in the IEEE-14 bus system. Towards this goal,
let us assume that line no. 3 (let it be considered as line ‘e-f’) and 17 (let it be considered as line
‘g-h’) have been taken out of the system. Subsequently, for any line ‘i-j’ (in the set of lines which
are still remaining in the system), the factors LOSFM1 and LOSFM2 are calculated as follows.

Lij,ef + Lij,gh Lgh,ef
LOSF M 1 = (5.63)
1 − Lef,gh Lgh,ef

Lij,gh + Lij,ef Lef,gh
LOSF M 2 = (5.64)
1 − Lef,gh Lgh,ef
Now, under the assumption of DC power flow, for contingency calculation, the impedances are
replaced by corresponding reactances. Therefore, for calculating the quantities Lef, gh , Lgh, ef , Lij, ef
and Lij, gh , the expressions given in equations (5.41), (5.42), (5.54) and (5.57) have been used respec-
tively, with the impedances replaced by the corresponding reactances. After obtaining the values of
these four quantities, the factors LOSFM1 and LOSFM2 have been calculated from equations (5.63)
and (5.64). The calculated values of these two factors for all the lines remaining in the system are
shown in columns 5 and 6 of Table 5.3. Please note that for lines 3 and 17, thes two factors have
no relevance and therefore, these values have been indicated as zero in this table for these two lines.
After obtaining these two factors, the change in power flow in line ‘i-j’ are calculated from equation
(5.62) using the information of pre-outage power flow in line no. 3 and 17. For ready reference, the
pre-outage power flows of line 3 and 17 are given in columns 3 and 4 of Table 5.3 respectively. After
calculating the change in power flow of any line ‘i-j’, its post-outage power flow is obtained by adding
its pre-outage power flow to the change in power flow. Again, for ready reference, the pre-outage line
power flows for all the lines are given in column 2 of Table 5.3. The calculated post-outage power
flows in all the lines are given in column 7 of this table. Please note that, as line no. 3 and 17 are now
out of the circuit, the post-outage power flows in these two lines are zero. Finally, for the purpose
of comparison, complete AC power flow solution of the IEEE-14 bus system has been obtained after
removing line no. 3 and 17 from the system. The line power flows obtained through AC power flow
study are shown in the last column of Table 5.3. From the results given in last two columns it is
observed that there is some difference between the power flows calculated by complete AC power
flow analysis and contingency analysis. Moreover, comparison of Tables 5.2 and 5.3 shows that this
difference is more for double line contingencies as compared to that for single line contingency.

5.6 Contingency ranking and selection
From the results of the Tables 5.1 and 5.2 it can be observed that the sensitivity factors give
reasonably close estimates of real power flows in the lines in the event of outage of a generator
or a line. However, the sensitivity factors give the estimate of only the real power flows over the
lines. On the other hand, in several situations, it is also equally important to consider the bus


2189984 0.0994 13 0.0655 -0.8655 0.2664 0.286078 -1.0655 0.0373 20 0.8655 0. The final list of contingencies for which full AC power flow analysis is to be carried out.) Line Pline Pline Pline P3 P17 LOSFM1 LOSFM2 no.0389 0.02499615 0.2157 16 0.0655 -0.2304 0.8655 0.4758 -0. To break this dilemma.0862 10 0.3491 0.8655 0.7464 0. a.0866967 0.0655 0.01 -0.0237 0.2053 -0.3: Contingency calculation for outage of line no.8655 0.670894 0.0237 0. a middle path is followed.3898 0.0107 -0.218 9 0.9991 0.0994397 0.5508 0.0233 0.072 -0.0655 -0.7059 6 -0. the choice of the performance index is very important.0655 0.10236675 0.0655 0 0 0 0 4 0. It should adequately reflect the severity of any particular contingency.2177 0.0097 -0.3662 0.5314 0. On one hand.8655 0. (ori) (cal) (ACLF) 1 1.25162275 0.0857 0.0655 -0.8655 0.5111 -0.0238 0.0023 15 0.0655 -0.15114105 0.0237 0.8655 0. we have a contradicting situation here.8655 0.0177 -0.025 1.1533 voltage variations as well as the reactive power flows over the lines in the event of any outage. for accurate estimation of the effects of any outage. all the outage studies are carried out using the sensitivity factors.2558 14 0.2893 0.0025 0. full AC power flow analysis needs to be carried out. The PI should be such that it should satisfy the following criteria.9803 5 0. Thus.6262 0.1585 8 0.9864 3 0. all the outage cases are ranked according to a suitably chosen performance index (PI).8655 0. the full AC power flow analysis is considerably slower than the sensitivity based methods and these are not suitable for analyzing thousands of potential outage cases within the time frame required by on-line contingency analysis.004 -1.u.8655 0.0655 0.0655 0 0.3668 11 0.0655 0 0. slower.0655 0 0. for contingency ranking.8655 0.2689 0.2174 0. Once the outage cases are ranked and sequentially arranged in decreasing order of the performance index.0655 0 0 0 0 18 -0. should 246 .8655 0.0852 0.0833 19 0.5152 0.0655 -1.5449 2 0.8655 0.1236 12 0.34544575 0.0123 0.0655 0. In these situations.1063 0.0383912 0.0069 17 0.1544092 -1.938764 0.7068 0. However.8655 0. the top few outage cases are analyzed further in detail using the AC power flow analysis. the full AC power flow analysis needs to be carried out as the sensitivity factors are not able to estimate the changes in bus voltage and the reactive power flows in the lines.3998 0.44687535 1. Initially.507 0.8655 0.2005 0.1579 0.8655 0.1156 0.0237 -0.0678 0.0655 -0.8655 0. Based on the results of the sensitivity analysis.0655 0 0. for fast evaluation of contingencies.1902 7 -0. b.8655 0. Table 5.4444 -1.0647353 -0.7805 0.5427 0.0655 0.0655 -0.0655 -0.00655035 0. Therefore. sensitivity based methods need to be used whereas.9363717 0.8655 0. 3 and 17 (all powers are given in p.0274 -0.0777 0.22554875 0.358 0.8655 0.

equation (5. n Pj P I = ∑ Wj [ ] (5. To achieve the above objectives. if a contingency C1 causes many lines to be slightly overloaded and another contingency C2 causes some lines to be heavily overloaded. However. different performance indices are used. there is a chance of misranking.67).66). n3 Pj P I = ∣Hd1 ∣ + ∣Hd2 ∣ + ∑ Wj [ n1 n2 ] (5. The PI should consider both real and reactive power variation in the system. some of the most prominent performance indices used are discussed.66). n2 Pj P I = ∣Hd1 ∣ + ∑ Wj [ n1 ] (5. The PI can be categorized into two groups. c. then C2 is more severe than C1 . ‘L’ is the number of lines in the system.68) j∈SL Pj max In equation (5. SL denotes the set of overloaded lines. To prevent this. not be too short or too long. the PI given in equation (5. then the effect of second highest overloaded line is also taken into account as shown in equation (5.65).67). 5. Below.65) j=i Pj max In equation (5.66) j∈SL Pj max In equation (5.1 MW ranking methods i) The simplest form of the PI is. Now. For example.66).6. Pj and Pj max are MW flow and MW capacity of the line ‘j’ respectively and ‘n’ is a suitable index. L n Pj P I = ∑ Wj [ ] (5.68). a two term PI can be used as shown in equation (5. ∣Hd1 ∣ is the change in power flow in the highest overloaded line while n1 and n2 are suitable indices. ∣Hd2 ∣ denotes the change in power flow in the second highest overloaded 247 .68). let us look at the various indices from these two categories. In case the highest overload in two cases of contingency are same. the performance indices from these two categories need to be suitably combined.67) j∈SL Pj max In equation (5. Even with the PI of equation (5.65) is prone to masking phenomenon in which a contingency causing many lines to be heavily loaded with no lines being overloaded is ranked higher than a contingency causing few lines to be overloaded with the remaining lines being lightly loaded. However. this masking phenomenon can be removed if the summation in equation (5. However.66) may identify C1 to be more severe than C2 . for considering both real and reactive power variations. i) MW ranking method (in which the changes in real power flows only are considered) and ii) reactive power or voltage security ranking (in which the variations of voltage magnitude or reactive power only are considered).65) is taken over only the set of overloaded lines as shown in equation (5. Of course.

this same philosophy can be extended further to include more number of lines for the calculation of PI. ∆Vinom = Vi − Vinom . if both the highest and second highest overloading conditions are same for two contingencies.72) Wvi in the weighting factor for bus ‘i’ and S1 in the set of all buses at which the voltage limits have been violated.73) i∈S1 ∆Vinom where. Vilim = Vimax if Vi > Vimax = Vimin if Vi < Vimin (5.70) i=1 2 ∆Vi 1 Where. Similarly.2 Voltage security/reactive power ranking methods These are several PIs suggested for properly ranking the voltage /reactive power contingencies. Some of them are: i) N 2 αi ∆Vi P Iv = ∑ [ lim ] (5. Vimax . ∆Vi = Vi − Visp . ∆Vilim = (Vimax − Vimin ) .line. ∆Vilim 248 .71) i∈S1 Vilim where. ∆Vi = − 1. Of course.69) j∈SL Pj max As before. Vimin = Maximum and minimum limit of voltage magnitudes of bus ‘i’ αi = User selected weighting factor P Iv = Performance index corresponding to voltage security N = number of buses in the system ii) ∣Vi − Vilim ∣ P Iv = ∑ Wvi (5.∣Hd3 ∣ denotes the change in power flow in third highest overloaded line. if necessary. iii) P Iv = ∑ Wvi (∆Vi )2 (5. then the third highest overloaded line is taken into account separately. n4 Pj P I = ∣Hd1 ∣ + ∣Hd2 ∣ + ∣Hd3 ∣ + ∑ Wj [ n1 n2 n3 ] (5. Visp = Nominal or specified voltage of bus ‘i’. 5.6. 2 Vi = post-contingency voltage magnitude of bus ‘i’.

One popular way of combining the above discussed real power and reactive power ranking method is to use the 1P1Q method. From the next lecture. ∆Vilim = (Vimax − Vimin ) 2 2 iv) 2 2 N dmax N dmin P Iv = ∑ [ max ] + ∑ [ imin ] i (5. we conclude our discussion of contin- gency analysis.77) ⎢ i=1 ⎢ V − V min ⎥ i i ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ 2 ⎦ ∆Vi is the post-contingency change in bus voltage magnitude of bus ‘i’.76) 1 amax i = nom (Vimax − Viamax ). a decoupled power flow is used and after one iteration. With these descriptions of contingency ranking methods. Vi − V amax dmax i = if Vi > Viamax Vinom = 0 otherwise (5. (one P-Q computation and one Q-V computation). amin i = 1 Vinom (Viamin − Vimin ) V i Viamax and Viamin are the higher and lower volatage alarm limits for bus ‘i’. the bus voltages are noted and with these bus voltages.78) i=1 ∆Vimax The value of ‘m’ is taken to be very large (≈ 20) to avoid the masking effect. After calculating the real power and reactive power performance indices separately.75) Vimin − Vi dmin i = nom if Vi < Viamin Vi = 0 otherwise (5. the combined PI is calculated by adding the appropriate real power and reactive power indices together. 249 . In this method. we will start our discussion of stability analysis. It generally appears that there is sufficient information available (in the bus voltages) to arrive at a reasonable values of the performance indices. v) ⎡ ⎤2 ⎢ ⎥ N ⎢ o nom ⎥ ⎢ V + ∆V − V ⎥ P Iv = ∑ ⎢ i max ⎥ i i (5.74) i=1 ai i=1 ai Where. vi) 1 N m m ∆Vi P Iv = [∑ Wi ∣ ∣ ] (5. 1 1 Vinom = (Vimax + Vimin ). the line power flows are calculated.