New criteria for Voltage Stability evaluation in
interconnected power system
Lavanya Neerugattu
MTech Student, Dept.Of EEE
Email: nlr237@gmail.com
VNR Vignana Jyothi Institute of Engineering & Technology, Bachupally, Hyderabad.
Abstract---The voltage instability is a serious issue in the
modern power systems with rapid voltage droop due to
stressed system with increased loading. Many techniques have
been given to predict the voltage collapse and maintain the
voltage stability of a power system. The Voltage stability index
(VSI) is a feature for solving voltage stability problems. In this
paper, a new index is proposed and the performance of the
new index with other indices is discussed. The effectiveness of
the proposed method is demonstrated through numerical
studies on IEEE 30 bus system, using several scenarios of load
increase. The process known as continuation load flow is used.
The proposed voltage stability index is based on the difference
between the present bus voltage level and the voltage at the
nose point where the Jacobian becomes singular for the same
load condition. A stable system may suffer voltage collapse
when a contingency occurs. This paper analyses these cases. A
new sensitivity factor between reactive power injection and
improvement to the voltage stability margin is discussed.
Keywords- voltage stability, continuation load flow, voltage
stability index, nose point.
I. INTRODUCTION
P ROBLEMS related to voltage stability in power systems
are one of the major concerns in power system operation
and future planning. Voltage stability is the ability of a
power system to maintain acceptable voltages at all buses
in the system under normal condition and after being
subject to a disturbance [1], [5] and [9]. A power system is
said to have voltage instability when a disturbance causes a
progressive and uncontrollable decrease in voltage level.
During the last several decades, voltage stability problem
has been given more attention primarily due to a number of
blackouts that occurred in many developed countries. Some
well-known examples of voltage stability incidents were
reported in France, Belgium, Sweden, USA, and Japan [2],
[3]. As Electrical Energy systems become more complex
and heavily loaded, along with economical and
environmental constraints, voltage instability becomes an
increasingly serious problem, when systems operate close
to their limits. Voltage instability is essentially a local
phenomenon; however its consequences may have
widespread cascaded impact. The study of voltage stability
has been analyzed under different approaches that can be
basically classified into dynamic and static analysis. The
static voltage stability methods use steady state model for
the analysis, such as power flow model or a linearized
dynamic model. The dynamic analysis implies the use of a
Dr .G.S Raju
Former Director IT, BHU
Visiting Professor
model characterized by nonlinear differential and algebraic
equations which include generator dynamics, OLTC
transformers, SVC, etc, through transient stability
simulations [4]. Although stability studies, in general,
require a dynamic model of the power system, in this paper
analysis of voltage behaviour has been approached using
both static and dynamic techniques, which have been
widely used for voltage stability analysis [1]. An accurate
knowledge of how close the actual system‟s operating point
is from the voltage stability limit (nose point) which is a
measure of the voltage stability margin is crucial to
operators. Therefore, to find voltage stability indices have
become an important task for many stability studies. These
indices provide reliable information about proximity to
system voltage instability. The voltage stability index
proposed here and its comparison with existing methods
will be highlighted in this paper, through results obtained
from simulating on IEEE 30 bus system.
II. VOLTAGE STABILITY INDICES
The status of voltage stability in a power system can be
known through voltage stability indices. These indices can
reveal the critical bus of a power system in an
interconnected network or evaluate the voltage stability
margins of a system. The indices used to examine the
system stability are briefly described in this section.
1) L-index: Kessel et al. [5] developed a voltage stability
index based on the solution of the power flow equations.
The L index is a quantitative measure for the estimation of
the distance of the actual state of the system to the stability
limit. The L index describes the stability of the complete
system and is given by:
𝑉𝑖
𝐿 = 𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑗 ∈𝛼 𝐿 𝐿𝑗 = 𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑗 ∈𝛼 𝐿 1 − 𝑖∈𝛼 𝐺 𝐹𝑗𝑖 𝑉 (1)
𝑗
Where Fji is matrix giving relationship between generator
and load bus voltage. Lj is a local indicator that identifies
the buses where collapse may occur. The L index varies in
the range between 0 (no load) and 1 (voltage collapse). For
a given operating condition, using the load-flow results, the
voltage-stability L index is computed.
1
2) Modal analysis: Gao et al. [6] proposed a method that to bus R of voltage ER through an equivalent reactance X as
computes the smallest Eigen value and associated shown in Fig.1.
eigenvectors of the reduced Jacobian matrix of the power From the equivalent system,
system based on the steady state system model. The Eigen
Es ER
values are associated with the modes of voltage and PR = sin δ (4)
X
reactive power variation. If all the Eigen values are
positive, the system is considered to be voltage stable. If E s E R cos δ−E 2R
one of the Eigen values is negative or zero, the system is QR = (5)
𝑋
considered to be voltage unstable. A zero Eigen value of the
reduced Jacobian matrix means that the system is on the Where PR, QR load connected to bus R
border of voltage instability. The corresponding system
Jacobian matrix becomes singular. The potential voltage ES is the infinite bus voltage and
collapse situation of a stable system can be predicted
X is equivalent reactance
through the evaluation of the minimum positive Eigen
values. The magnitude of minimum Eigen value provides a Take PR, QR equations for evaluating the Voltage margin,
measure to know how close the system is to voltage Put ER=V at maximum loading point (nose point).
collapse. By using the bus participation factor, the weakest
bus can be determined, which is the greatest contributing 𝑑𝑄 E s cos δ−2V
= =0
factor for a system to reach voltage collapse situation. The 𝑑𝑉 𝑋
reduced Jacobian matrix is as given below 𝐸𝑆
𝑉= cos 𝛿 (6)
2
Δ Q = JR Δ V
JR= [J4 - J3J1-1J2] (2) 𝑉2
𝑄= (7)
𝑋
Δ V= JR-1 Δ Q 𝑄
Bus participation factors: 𝑋= (8)
(4𝑄 2 +𝑃 2 )
JR= ξ Λ η
𝑄
𝑃𝑘𝑖 = 𝜉𝑘𝑖 ∗ 𝜂𝑖𝑘 (3) 𝑉𝐿 = (9)
(4𝑄 2 +𝑃 2 )
Where
JR = Reduced Jacobian matrix
Voltage Margin = ER - VL
K = bus number
Where VL is voltage at bus R at nose point
i = Eigen value number
ER is the present bus voltage
ξ = right Eigen vector matrix of JR
Λ = diagonal Eigen value matrix of JR 4) P-V and Q-V curves:
η = left Eigen vector matrix of JR The P-V curves are the commonly used graphs for
The most vulnerable bus K is that for which P ki is predicting voltage security. They are used to determine the
maximum. loading margin of a power system. The power system load
is gradually increased and, at each increment, it is necessary
3) The Proposed Method: In this study, Voltage margin to recomputed power flows until the nose of the PV curve
method is employed as indicator to solve the Voltage is reached. The margin between the voltage at collapse
stability problem. Where the Voltage margin is minimum point and the current operating voltage is used as voltage
that bus is considered as weak bus and the voltage margin stability criterion [7].
is a measure to know how close the system is to voltage
collapse. Voltage margin of a bus is computed using the
equivalent system representation at that bus.

Fig.2:
Fig.1: Equivalent system at Bus K PV curve of a load bus in the power system

The system external to bus R supplying a load of P R+jQR is With Q-V curve, it is possible for the operators, to know is
represented by an infinite bus of voltage E S<δS connected the conditional reactive power that can be supplied by the

2
weakest bus before reaching minimum voltage limit. The
reactive power margin is the MVAR distance from the
operating point to the bottom of the Q-V curve. The Q-V
curve can be used as an index for voltage instability. The
point where dQ/dV is zero is the point of voltage stability
limit [3].

Fig.5: PV curve of load bus22 in IEEE 30 bus system

The voltage stability margin can be calculated with P-V

Fig.3: QV curve of a load bus in the power system
III. TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The voltage stability analysis is performed on IEEE 30 bus
system. This system has 6 generator buses, 24 load buses.
This system is simulated by using Newton Raphson Load
flow method.
curve. This shows the bus voltage levels as the loading
factor „k‟ increases. The loading factor is 1 for base case
and is gradually increased, in all generator and load buses
of the system, until maximum loading point is reached,
maintaining constant power factor for each load. As the
power system load is gradually increased, the voltages at
the buses decrease.
b) Comparison of three methods with results:
The table 1 shows that Values of L-index, Eigen values and
Voltage margin of the IEEE 30 bus system at the weak
bus22 by increasing the loading factor „k‟. It is clear that
critical voltage, Eigen values, Voltage margins gradually
decrease and the L-index increases up to nose point.

Table.1: stability indices are computed at bus22

6 Loading Voltage Power Eigen L-index Voltage
factor K V(pu) PL values margin
(MW)
1 1 0.8347 30 0.42620 0.19799 0.38748
2
2 1.1 0.8082 33 0.40674 0.23730 0.36098
2
3 1.2 0.7789 36 0.38435 0.28372 0.33178
2
4 1.3 0.7461 39 0.35787 0.34015 0.29898
5
Fig.4: Single line diagram for IEEE 30 bus system 5 1.5 0.6621 45 0.28195 0.51018 0.21495
3
6 1.6 0.6007 48 0.21619 0.66472 0.15348
a) Continuation load flow method: 0
7 1.65 0.5545 49.5 0.15802 0.80330 0.10732
After simulating the IEEE30 bus system, load flow is 0
8 1.68 0.5076 50.4 0.08723 0.96970 0.06047
conducted for the base case to obtain the bus voltages. By 6
observing Bus voltages the weakest bus is identified as Bus 9 1.684 0.4798 50.52 0.03810 1.08379 0.03268
22. For confirming that this is the most vulnerable bus to 5
initiate voltage collapse of the system, the methods i.e.,
Eigen value, L- index and voltage margin methods are
used. For finding the nose point of the system (more
loadability at this bus) Continuation load flow method [8] is
used. The analysis shows that the L-index for bus22 is the
highest and the participation factor for the lowest Eigen
value is highest for bus22. This confirms that bus22 is the
critical bus.
Fig.6: Stability indicator L and its relation to the critical
voltage

3
Figure: 6 shows that bus 22 exhibits the highest Lj index, Table.2: Continuation load flow with shunt capacitor at
which indicates that it is the most vulnerable bus in the bus22
system. The L-index and the voltage at bus 22 (critical bus)
S.NO. Loading Voltage Power Eigen L-index Voltage
are plotted as a function of loading factor. factor K V(pu) PL(MW) values margin

1 1 0.8797 30 0.4322 0.1203 0.4324

chart of Bus participations

2 1.1 0.8532 33 0.4135 0.1721 0.4060
0.18
0.16
3 1.2 0.8242 36 0.3921 0.2133 0.3770
Bus participations

0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08 4 1.3 0.7919 39 0.3671 0.2627 0.3447
0.06
0.04
0.02 5 1.5 0.7114 45 0.2982 0.4057 0.2642
0
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Bus 6 1.6 0.6563 48 0.2442 0.5238 0.2090

7 1.65 0.6197 49.5 0.2040 0.6138 0.1724

Fig.7: Bus participation factors in the least stable mode for

critical operating case. 8 1.68 0.5916 50.4 0.1702 0.6904 0.1444

9 1.684 0.5820 50.52 0.1586 0.7183 0.1347

At the critical operating point, the smallest Eigen value is
0.0381. This value is considered the least stable mode for
the critical operating point and is used to determine the bus
participation factors. Figure shows the bus participation
d) Sensitivity Index:
factors calculated by using equation (3) for the least stable
mode for the critical operating point. The critical bus of this Fig.9. shows the “Sensitivity of Voltage margin to Reactive
system is bus 22 because this bus has the highest power injection”.
participation factor. ∆𝑽𝑴
Sensitivity Index 𝑺𝒊 = (12)
∆𝑸
c) Reactive Power Compensation to improve stability Where ΔVM = Increase in Voltage margin
margin: ΔQ = Change in reactive power injection
sensitivity curve

Adding shunt capacitor at the vulnerable bus will improve 0.02

the voltage margin. 0.018

0.016

The MVAR value of Shunt capacitor can be obtained by

sensitivity index(ΔVm/ ΔQ)

0.014

0.012
definition given below: 0.01

𝑉2 0.008

𝑀𝑉𝐴𝑅 = (10) 0.006

𝑋𝑐 0.004

0.002

0
1
𝑋𝑐 =
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

Where Voltage (pu)

𝜔𝑐
1
Capacitor 𝐶= (11) Fig.9: Voltage sensitivity curve
(2𝜋𝑓 𝑋𝑐 )

When the voltage reaches to collapse point, the sensitivity

Fig.8: Improvement of stability margin is more at that point.

e) Contingency case:
1
0.9
0.8
PV curve with Stable operating systems can suffer voltage instability
shunt capacitor
0.7 under contingencies.
Voltage (pu)

PV curve
0.6 without shunt
0.5 capacitor
0.4 Fig.10. shows two cases where the system remains stable
0.3
0.2
and unstable after it suffers a contingency of generation trip
0.1 out and a line outage. When the load is 1.5 times the base
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
load, the system which is stable before contingency
Load factor K experiences voltage instability after the contingency. When
the load factor is 1.3. Voltage stability is maintained both
before and after contingency.

4
 This shows that a voltage stable system under normal
conditions can become unstable under contingency
0.9 condition.
0.8 PV curve
PV curve with without
0.7
contingency contingency IV. SUPERIOURTY OF THE PROPOSED
0.6
METHOD
V (pu)

0.5
0.4
0.3
1. The Voltage margin computation at each bus is done
0.2 using the locally available signals V, P, Q at that bus
0.1
0
only. All the existing methods used to study voltage
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
stability require complete data of the network.
Loading factor K
2. The system operator can readily use this method to
evaluate the vulnerability of each bus for voltage
Fig.10: PV curves with & without Contingency
collapse using online data which is available to him.
Table.3: Continuation load flow at contingency case at 3. The voltage margin computed by this method will
Bus8 and line 15-23 provide the system operator with useful information
about how much load can be added to the bus before
S. Loading Voltag Power Eigen L-index Voltage
NO factor K e PL(M values margin the system suffers voltage instability.
V(pu) W)
4. Unlike other methods using the Eigen value of the
1 1 0.8160 30 0.3988 0.2254 0.3688
system Jacobian or the L-index which compares the
2 1.1 0.7855 33 0.3759 0.2436 0.3383 present bus voltage with the open circuit voltage to
3 1.2 0.7510 36 0.3486 0.3316 0.3038 arrive at the voltage stability index, the proposed
4 1.3 0.7109 39 0.3146 0.4067 0.2637
method gives the magnitude of the bus voltage at
which the system looses the voltage stability.
5 1.5 0.5921 45 0.1936 0.6888 0.1449

f) Time domain analysis: V. CONCLUSION

This paper presents a study and analysis of the performance

0.8
0.7
of the system static voltage collapse indices. All the other
case1
0.6 indices applied to IEEE 30 bus system gave similar results.
0.5 case2 The study indicated that the bus 22 of IEEE 30 bus system
V (pu)

0.4
is identified as the weakest bus in the system. “Sensitivity
0.3
0.2
Index of Voltage margin to Reactive power injection”, is
0.1 calculated. The authors conclude that the proposed method
0 to calculate voltage margin is faster and more elegant.
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
time (sec)

Fig.11. shows the voltage at bus22 as a function of time

following a contingency for the two cases of system
loading mentioned above. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Fig.11: Time domain analysis for contingency cases The authors gratefully thank Dr.M.Ramamoorty,
Distinguished Professor, for his continuous guidance and
For this time domain analysis[10], the following involvement in the project. The first author is fortunate to
assumptions are made, work under him, who is an inspiring creative researcher par
excellence. We are with feelings from the bottom of hearts
1. All P and Q are kept constant at load bus. express our indebtedness. It is a rewarding experience and
2. Except slack bus, all other generators have we look forward in future also seeking his help and to share
blocked their governors. his ideas to sincerely try to implement. The first author is
3. All electrical transients are neglected. happy to record her sincere thanks for the encouragement
4. Generator bus voltages are held constant. and support extended by Dr.K.Anuradha, Head of the EEE
Department and Prof.C.D.Naidu, Principal of the Institute.

5
 REFERENCES

[1] P.Kundur “Power System Stability and Control” McGraw-Hill, New

York, 1994
[2] “Voltage Stability of Power Systems: Concepts, Analytical Tools and
Industry Experience”, IEEE Committee Vol.IEEE/PES 93TH0358-2-
PWR 1990.
[3] K. Takahashi and Y. Nomura “The Power System Failure on July 23rd
1987 in Tokyo” CIGRE SC-37 Meeting 37.87(JP) 07(E) 1987.
[4] J.C. Chow, R. Fischl and H. Yan “On the Evaluation of Voltage
Collapse Criteria” IEEE Trans., PWRS-5, pp. 612-620, May 1990
[5] P.Kessel, H.Glavitsch “Estimating the Voltage Stability of a Power
System” IEEE, Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol.PWRD-1, N3,
July 1986
[6] B.Gao, G.K.Morison, P.Kundur “Voltage Stability Evaluation Using
Modal Analysis” IEEE, Transactions on Power Systems, Vol.7, N4,
November 1992
[7] Editor/Coordinator: Claudio Canizares “Voltage Stability Assessment:
Concepts, Practices and Tools” IEEE/PES Power System Stability
Subcommittee Special Publication, August 2002.
[8] V. Ajjarapu and C. Christy, "The continuation power flow: A tool for
steady state voltage stability analysis", IEEE Trans. on Power
Systems, vol. 7,110. 1, February 1992, pp. 416-423.
[9] C. W. Taylor, “Power system voltage stability”, McGraw Hill, NY,
1994.
[10] Transient electromechanical process in electrical systems book by
Prof. V. A. Venikov, MEI, MIR publications 1970.