24th International Conference & Exhibition on Electricity Distribution (CIRED)

12-15 June 2017

Session 3: Operation, control and protection

Voltage stability monitoring methods for

distribution grids using the Thevenin
impedance ISSN 2515-0855
doi: 10.1049/oap-cired.2017.0297
www.ietdl.org

Stefan Polster ✉, Herwig Renner

Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria
✉ E-mail: stefan.polster@tugraz.at

Abstract: This study focuses on a method to monitor voltage stability in sub-transmission grids with a real-time calculation
of the Thevenin impedance seen from the concerned bus requiring only information of the system topology, phasor
measurement units (PMU) and SCADA data. The voltage stability status is assessed by an impedance stability index
and a power stability index based on the maximum power transfer to the load according to the Thevenin theorem. Due
the influence of the non-linear behaviour of generation units, especially synchronous generators, it is necessary to
adjust the magnitude of the calculated Thevenin impedance according to their operational status. This problem is
approached by adding an additional impedance at the generator bus, whereby its magnitude is calculated with two
algorithms. The validation and a comparison of these algorithms are achieved by simulations with IEEE-9-bus-network
topology.

1 Introduction
The increasing amount of generation power, mainly renewable
sources, connected at distribution grid level and the slow network
development, which cannot keep pace with the installed capacity,
requires a change in the operation of distribution grids. The grid
operators must become more informed about the system status to
react flexible on load flow situations pushing the system to its
limits and to maintain a sufficient security of supply. It is therefore
indispensable to use the possibilities of acquiring real-time data, so
far mostly used in high voltage and super grids, in all voltage
levels to identify the operation limits and operation margins in real
time.
Voltage stability becomes also a more and more a limiting factor
in distribution grids, due the increasing share of power controlled
load and in general higher loaded lines. So far research addressing
voltage stability mainly focused on using offline data, power flow
results and simulated active power – voltage curves (PV) curves
for load buses. As shown in [1], a static relationship explorer and
historical data can be used to estimate a transmission margin of
active power correlating to the operation state of the instability
point. Other approaches are based on neural networks providing a
forecast of the loadability [2, 3]. The needed training cases must
be provided by offline load flow calculations with different
switching status and load distribution. The accuracy of the
obtained forecast is depending on the number of samples. In
addition to monitoring voltage stability, [4] offers a risk-based
monitoring and preventive control method combining offline PV
curves of critical buses and (n − 1) line contingencies with online
data from PMUs.
A different approach for online voltage stability monitoring
without any offline calculation and historical data is to calculate
the Thevenin impedance of the concerned load bus [5, 6] by using
PMU and SCADA data and the system topology. However, there
is still a lack of analyses related to performance and validity of the
Thevenin impedance based methods. It was already demonstrated
in [7] that the Thevenin impedance actually seen from the load
bus is not the equivalent impedance for short circuit calculations,
since the latter does not take operational limits of generation units
into account. In the same paper, an algorithm was proposed that
improves the performance of the Thevenin-based methods. In this
paper, this approach is traced further and compared with a second
algorithm described below.
In Section 2, the basic idea behind the Thevenin-based approaches
and the existing algorithm from [7] is summarised and the new
algorithm is proposed. Section 3 focuses on the implementation of
the results of the algorithms into the network topology. The
analysis and results comparing both algorithms are shown in
Section 4. The paper finishes with the conclusion in Section 5.
2 Method description
2.1 Recapitulation of online voltage stability monitoring
based on the Thevenin impedance
The basic idea of the Thevenin-based methods is to use data of the
network topology, SCADA systems and online measurements
from PMUs to estimate the accurate equivalent Thevenin
impedance of the network seen from the concerned load bus.
According to circuit theory, any network connected to an arbitrary
bus can be reduced to an equivalent voltage source ETh and the
equivalent impedance ZTh seen from the bus. Assuming a load ZL
at the concerned bus, the maximum loadability at the bus is
reached when the magnitudes of load and Thevenin impedance are
equal as






Z
=
Z
(1)
L Th
The load impedance can be determined by the ratio of load voltage
VL and the load current IL. The resulting representative network is
shown in Fig. 1.
Considering the Thevenin condition for maximum loadability (1)
an impedance stability index (ISI) is established in [8] as




Z

ISI =
L



(2)
ZTh
The value of the ISI reaches 1 for the maximum loadability and drops
below 1 for further increasing load. Depending on the composition

CIRED, Open Access Proc. J., 2017, Vol. 2017, Iss. 1, pp. 1535–1539
This is an open access article published by the IET under the Creative Commons 1535
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
 A more detailed description is given in [7], resulting in four
different magnitudes of Z′ depending on the operational state of
the generator

⎧
⎪
⎪
0 no limits reached
⎪
⎪ Vrated
2
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ active power dispatch
⎪
⎨ 4PG, max
|Z ′ | = 4Vrated (3)
⎪
⎪ over excitation limit
⎪
⎪ IG
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 4V
⎪
⎩ rated armature current limit
IG,rated
Fig. 1 Thevenin equivalent circuit
The impedance angle of Z′ can be chosen freely, but for obtaining
reasonable results it was chosen in the previous work near the
of the load, a voltage collapse can occur in this situation for constant angle of the main transmission elements or pure inductive.
power or constant current loads.
However, these relations are only valid, if all generators are
assumed as ideal sources supplying infinite active and reactive 2.3 Virtual generator bus
power to the system. If any generator reaches its capability border,
the load contribution no longer depends simply on the grid This algorithm for calculating the adjustment impedance focuses on
topology. Therefore, the Thevenin-based instability monitoring the idea that the generator bus voltage is hold at its rated value as
obtains wrong results if no adjustment impedance Z′ is introduced long as the feeding generator does not reach any limitation. After
between the source representing the generator and the generator reaching a limit the voltage at the generator bus changes in general
bus. The magnitude of the adjustment impedance can be and the generator cannot be assumed as an ideal source anymore.
calculated using two different algorithms, which are described in The proposed approach to implement this behaviour is to
the two following sub items. introduce a virtual generator bus, at which the ideal voltage source
representing the unlimited generator is connected. Therefore, the
magnitude of the voltage at the virtual bus VG,virtual can be
2.2 Generator parameter-based adjustment assumed as the rated voltage VG,rated at any time. The actual
physical generator bus is connected to the virtual one by the
This approach takes a closer look onto the generator parameters adjustment impedance Z′ as shown in Fig. 3. This impedance can
defining the capability border for an over-excited synchronous be calculated with the PMU measured parameters bus voltage VG
generator and therefore limiting the reactive power supplied by and generator stator current IG
the generator. The concerning parameters are the maximum
exciter current If, the maximum stator current IG and the available VG,virtual − VG
turbine power Pt. The turbine power must be taken into account, Z′ = (4)
IG
although it is not limiting the reactive power of the generator, but
leads to a change of the active power distribution between the
generators connected to the system and therewith influences the
voltage profile of the load buses. In Fig. 2, the section of the
capability diagram defined by the mentioned parameters is
presented.
The basic concept of the parameter-based algorithm is to assume
the generator as an ideal source behind Z′ feeding a single load ZG
directly connected to the generator bus, whereby Z′ must be
chosen in a way, that at the instant of maximum loadability the
maximum value for the considered limiting parameter is reached.
The magnitude of Z′ is then calculated by expressing it as a
function of the rated generator bus voltage Vrated and the
concerned parameter under the condition of maximum loadability.

Fig. 3 Connection between virtual and actual generator bus

Fig. 2 Generator capability diagram Fig. 4 Relation between measured phasors, VG,virtual and Z′

CIRED, Open Access Proc. J., 2017, Vol. 2017, Iss. 1, pp. 1535–1539
1536 This is an open access article published by the IET under the Creative Commons
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
 The weakness of this simple equation is that the phasor angle of to estimated maximum apparent load power at any instant (11),
VG,virtual is unknown. This obstacle can be overcome by assuming [9, 10]
the phasor angle jZ′ of Z′ as given parameter. Fig. 4 shows the
relation between the measured phasors VG, IG, the voltage VG,virtual ETh = VL,k + ZTh,k · IL,k (10)
and the impedance Z′ .
To derive the magnitude of Z′ (5) has to be squared and written by

2 

     

E

Z
− imag Z sin d + real Z cos d
separated real and complex part resulting in (6) with the magnitude Th Th Th Th
Smax     2 (11)
of Z′ as only unknown variable 2 imag ZTh cos d − real ZTh sin d



VG,rated =
VG + Z ′ · IG
(5) A power-based stability index (SSI) can be introduced with the
  2 estimated maximum apparent load power Smax
2
VG,rated = VG cos wVG + Z ′ IG cos wIG + wZ ′
(6) S
  2 SSI =

max

(12)
′ SL
+ VG sin wVG + Z IG sin wIG + wZ ′

By solving (6), the phasor Z′ can be calculated as shown in (7) and The SSI is in general more robust to errors in the estimation of the
(8), whereby the phasor angle jZ′ is a free parameter, which Thevenin impedance. This can be proven by calculating the error
restrictions are discussed below. It must be noted that negative propagation for the estimated maximal apparent load power
results of the equation are not reasonable corresponding to the magnitude error ΔZTh. The resulting
deviation is used to calculate the relative error in Smax. The SSI

is more accurate than the ISI as long as (13) is fulfilled
−VG · a + VG2 (a2 − 1) + VG,rated
2
′
Z = ewZ ′ ·i (7)   2 
IG 1 − ZTh
2
/ ZTh + DZTh
    ,1 (13)
a = cos wVG − wIG − wZ ′ (8) 2 1 + cos (wZTh − d)

Due to the significant impact of the angle jZ′ on the phasor Z′ and
therefore on the calculated Thevenin impedance, it becomes
crucial to find a proper rule to choose it.
The approach used in this paper is based on the idea that the
voltage drop at the generator bus is caused by a limitation of the
reactive power of the generator. This reactive power limitation is
also valid for the generated reactive power of the virtual source
and it should therefore always equal the reactive power delivered
from the generator bus to the network. To fulfil these limiting
conditions, the additional impedance Z′ is assumed to be purely
resistive.
3 Implementation
The condition is always valid, since the term including the
Thevenin impedance and the magnitude error is in any case
positive and the trigonometric part has also only positive values
for the reasonable angle differences.
4 Analysis of the Thevenin impedance
The accuracy of the algorithms described above is tested in the 9-bus
network shown in Fig. 6. The limiting parameters of the generators
SG1 and SG2 and the line impedances are given in Tables 1 and 2.
The generator SGref represents the connection to the transmission
grid and its parameters are chosen in such a way that it is working
as slack node.

The additional impedance Z′ modelling the limitation of real

generators is integrated into the network as shown in Fig. 5.
The adjusted Thevenin impedance is calculated by using the
admittance matrix Y of the network inclusive all loads represented
by their impedance and Z′ for each generator as derived in [9].
The Thevenin impedance ZTh of the load bus k is shown in (9),
whereby the impedance matrix Z is the inverse of Y and ZL,k the
load impedance at bus k

ZL,k · Z(k, k)
ZTh,k = (9)
ZL,k − Z(k, k)

Reconsidering the resulting equivalent Thevenin circuit, Fig. 1, it is

possible to calculate the equivalent Thevenin voltage ETh (10) and

Fig. 6 Simulated 9-bus network

Table 1 Limiting parameters synchronous generators

Limiting parameters SG1, SG2 SGref

PG,max, p.u. 0.03 3.1

IG,rated, p.u. 0.15 3.2
Ef,rated, p.u. 1.3561 15
Fig. 5 Implementation of Z′ into the network

CIRED, Open Access Proc. J., 2017, Vol. 2017, Iss. 1, pp. 1535–1539
This is an open access article published by the IET under the Creative Commons 1537
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
Table 2 Line impedances (based on 110 kV)
Line impedances R, Ω X, Ω
Z13, Z25 0.1 1
Z34, Z36, Z45, Z57, Z68, Z78 1 10
Z8ref 5 50
The simulation parameters are based on a global per unit system
with the base power of 100 MVA. The rated generator terminal
voltage is assumed to be equal to the grid’s nominal voltage. All
values given are referred to this per unit system further on.
As a reference for the proposed methods, a dynamic simulation is
performed increasing the reactive power of load 4, respectively load
6, until a voltage collapse occurs and evaluation of the described
stability indices and voltage stability criteria. These simulations are
repeated with different magnitudes and power factors of the
neighbouring loads to show their influence on the accuracy of the
algorithms.
A detailed description of the used generator models, load models
and voltage stability criteria can be found in [7, 11, pp. 305–310].
The following figures focus on the load at bus 4, whereby the load
increases with a rate of 0.002j/s starting at t = 50 s from
SLoad4 = (0.1 + 0.01j). The magnitude and power factor of the
SLoad6 and SLoad7 are varied. Fig. 7 shows exemplary the time
elapsed of the impedances seen at bus 4, the actual load power
SLoad4 and the estimated maximum power Smax4 for
SLoad6 = Sload7 = (0.01 + 0.01j).
In Fig. 8, the actual ISI is plotted as a function of increasing load
power with constant power factor at the neighbouring loads. The
blue-dashed line indicates the theoretical value of the indices for
maximum loadability. The green and red lines are the actual ISI at
the time instant of maximum SLoad4. The deviation between the
theoretical and actual value increases with the apparent power of
Fig. 7 Time course of impedances at load bus 4, estimated max. load power
and actual load power. The dashed lines indicate the instant of ISI = 1, red
for the parameter-based method, green for the virtual generator bus method
Fig. 8 ISI of load bus 4 at the instant of maximum apparent load power as
function of apparent power of loads 6 and 7 at a power factor of cos j = 0.7
CIRED, Open Access Proc. J., 2017, Vol. 2017, Iss. 1, pp. 1535–1539
1538 This is an open access article published by the IET under the Creative Commons
Fig. 9 SSI of load bus 4 at the instant of maximum apparent load power as
function of apparent power of load 6 and 7 at a power factor of cos j = 0.7
Fig. 10 SSI of load bus 4 at the instant of maximum apparent load power as
function of the power factor of load 6 and 7 at a magnitude of 0.1 p.u.
the neighbouring loads and lead to quite inaccurate results for the
ISI due the influence of these loads on the Thevenin impedance ZTh.
The SSI is more robust increasing neighbouring loads since the
deviation in the Thevenin impedance ΔZTh caused by these loads
is influencing the result less, as was shown above and can be seen
in Fig. 9.
The methods were also evaluated on their accuracy depending on
the power factor of neighbouring loads. Therefore, the power factor
was varied from 0.25 to 1 at a power magnitude of 0.1. In Fig. 10, the
results for the SSI are plotted, where it can be seen that the deviation
between estimation and theory increases with the share of active
power load in the system. Since the qualitative course of the ISI
equals the SSI in this case, similar as in Figs. 8 and 10, it can be
desisted from showing it.
These simulations were also done focusing on load bus 6 to
evaluate the influence of the slack node, represented as SGref in
the model. The results showed that the accuracy decreases slightly
with electrical decreased distance to the slack node. However, the
influence of the neighbouring loads on ISI and SSI was qualitative
the same as at load bus 4.
5 Conclusion
This paper proves on the one hand, that the parameter-based method
to estimate the Thevenin impedance is also working for meshed
topologies. On the other hand, it was shown that the virtual bus
method provides also a useable estimation of the Thevenin
impedance with the advantage, that it is not necessary to know
any generator parameters at all and it is also suitable for any kind
of energy source connected to the network.
However, the magnitude and power factor of neighbouring loads
cause a rather high error in the estimation of the Thevenin
impedance, so that the actual calculated ISI is not accurate enough
to be used in a voltage stability monitoring. Therefore, it was
shown that the SSI and its error propagation regarding the
Thevenin impedance provide a reasonable benchmark to detect an
approaching voltage instability.
Summing up, the virtual bus method is able to provide an online
voltage stability monitoring system based on PMU measurements
and system topology. Its slightly worse accuracy compared with
the parameter-based method is outweighed by the easier available
information and its usability for all kind of sources without the
need of adjusting the algorithm.
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
6 References
1 Fan, Y., Liu, S., Qin, L., et al.: ‘A novel online estimation scheme for static voltage
stability margin based on relationships exploration in a large data set’, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., 2015, 30, (3), pp. 1380–1393
2 Liu, S., Xu, Z., Tang, G., et al.: ‘A SIPSS-Lasso-BPNN scheme for online voltage
stability assessment’. IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting, 2014, 2014
October, pp. 1–5
3 Zhao, J., Zeng, Y., Wei, W., et al.: ‘Fast assessment of regional voltage stability
based on WAMS’. IEEE Asia-Pacific Conf. Circuits Syst. Proc., APCCAS,
2008, no. 1, pp. 635–638
4 Putranto, L.M., Hara, R., Kita, H., et al.: ‘Risk-based voltage stability monitoring
and preventive control using wide area monitoring system’. 2015 IEEE Eindhoven
PowerTech, PowerTech 2015, 2015
5 Maharjan, R., Kamalasadan, S.: ‘Voltage stability index for online voltage stability
assessment’. North American Power Symp., 2015
CIRED, Open Access Proc. J., 2017, Vol. 2017, Iss. 1, pp. 1535–1539
This is an open access article published by the IET under the Creative Commons
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
6 Duong, D.T., Uhlen, K.: ‘Online voltage stability monitoring based on PMU
measurements and system topology’. 2013 3rd Int. Conf. Electric Power and
Energy Conversion Systems 2013, 2013, pp. 4–9
7 Polster, S., Duong, D.T., Renner, H., et al.: ‘Voltage stability monitoring using
a modified Thevenin impedance’. PowerTech Manchester 2017, forthcomming
2017
8 Begovic, M., Milosevic, B., Novosel, D.: ‘A novel method for voltage instability
protection’. Proc. Annual Hawaii Int. Conf. System Sciences, 2002, 2002
January, pp. 802–811
9 Duong, D.T., Uhlen, K., Løvlund, S.: ‘A method for real time voltage stability
monitoring in sub-transmission networks’. Proc. 2014 Power Systems
Computation Conf., PSCC 2014, 2014
10 Wang, Y., Pordanjani, I., Li, W., et al.: ‘Voltage stability monitoring based on the
concept of coupled single-port circuit’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2011, 26, (4),
pp. 2154–2163
11 Machowski, J., Bialek, J.W., Bumby, J.R.: ‘Power system dynamics: stability and
control’ (2nd ed. Re. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2008)
1539