See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/274403946

An Application of PSO in Optimal Load Shedding Considering Voltage Stability

Conference Paper · August 2012

CITATION READS
1 849

4 authors, including:

Mohammad Mahdi Hosseini Biyouki Roohollah Fadaeinedjad

Amirkabir University of Technology Kerman Graduate University of Technology
31 PUBLICATIONS   115 CITATIONS    67 PUBLICATIONS   737 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Hamid Reza Esmaeilian

Kerman Graduate University of Technology
17 PUBLICATIONS   184 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Unit Commitment with Considering Energy Efficiency in the Smart Grid View project

A fuzzy Analysis to connect the large-scale distant wind farm to grid in probabilistic multi objective transmission expansion planning View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohammad Mahdi Hosseini Biyouki on 04 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 6th Global Conference on Power Control and Optimization, Las Vegas, USA, 6-8 August 2012

AN APPLICATION OF PSO IN OPTIMAL LOAD SHEDDING CONSIDERING

VOLTAGE STABILTY

M. M. Hosseini Bioki1, M. Rashidinejad2,R. Fadaeinedjad1and H.R. Esmaeilian1

1
Department of Electricaland Computer Engineering, Kerman Graduate University of Technology, Kerman, Iran
2
Department of Electrical Engineering,Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran IAEEE, Kerman
Branch, Kerman, Iran
m.hosseinibioki@kgut.ac.ir

Abstract alert,emergency, in extremis and restorative, load

Optimal power system load shedding in restructured
power system considering market issues and
voltage stability usingParticle Swarm Optimization
(PSO)is presented in this paper. A multi-objective
function that comprises economic and technical
sub-optimization problems is considered to provide
an optimal load shedding scheme with
maximumGenerating Company (GenCo) profit, and
as a consequence maximum social welfareas well as
maximum loadability limit. Particle swarm
optimization (PSO) is utilized to find the optimal
scheme of load shedding when a component outage
occurs. The proposed methodology is obtained
using modifications in MATPOWER 4.1 software
integrating continuation power flow and PSO
algorithm. In the smart market (SM) procedure, the
generators offers and dispatchableloads bids have
been considered where the Independent System
Operator (ISO) as the smart market operator
decides on the market clearing price and generators
rescheduled amount of power generation in pre-
contingency as well as post-contingency situations.
The proposed methodology is applied to a modified
IEEE 30-Bus test system. The results obtained show
the effectiveness of the proposed method in
procurement of an optimal load shedding satisfying
both GenCo and ISO aims to maximize profit and
social welfare as well as maintaining the power
system voltage stability margin.
Keywords: Continuation power flow, optimal load
shedding pricing, particle swarm
optimization (PSO).
1. Introduction
Secure and economic operation of power systemin
restructured environment involves balance of
generation and load, continuity of response to its
energy demand, quality of the power delivery, cost
minimization or profit maximization of entities
attending the power market, and maximization of
social welfare. Any disturbance in power system
Like generator or line contingency, sudden increase
in power system load or any other component
outage leads to insecure operation or voltage
instability of power system.Voltage stability is
considered as the ability of a power system to
maintain steady acceptable voltages at all buses in
the system under normal operating conditions and
after being subjected to a disturbance from agiven
initial operating condition [1]. Considering
classification of power system as normal,
shedding is applied when the system is in the
emergency or in extremis state and the system is
driven to collapse [2]. Load shedding (LS) is
generally categorized in two well-known
methodologies of under-frequency load shedding
(UFLS) and under-voltage load shedding (UVLS).
UFLS or UVLS are performed when the frequency
or voltage falls below a specified frequencyor
voltage threshold using under-frequency or under-
voltage relays. The load shedding procedure curtails
an amount of load in a manner that the active and
reactive generation and the demand become
balanced and a widespread system black-outis
prevented[3]. The main factors considered in load
curtailment procedure are the location, amount, and
time of load cut.
Load shedding implementation can be categorized
into three main classifications [4-6]. The first
procedure involves shedding a fixed amount of load
which is similar to UFLS [7]. This procedure
involves time simulation analysis and studying
instability from dynamic aspects of power
system.One of the difficulties with this approach is
integrating a time domain simulation to an
optimization problem [8]. The second approach to
load shedding considers shedding an amount of
load with dynamic characteristics. However, this
method involves precise modeling of dynamic load
parameters. The third category utilizes optimal
power flow (OPF) equations considering static
model of power system to determine the minimum
load shedding. This static approach has the
advantage of proposing a good approximation of
system voltage stability, since the dynamics
associated with voltage stability are often slow. The
fundamental idea of this approach is finding a
feasible solution to the power flow equations [9,
10]. Load shedding considering static model of
power system is presented in previous
researchesand is solved using many mathematical
techniques such as linear programming (LP), non-
linear programing, and interior point methods [11-
13]. In some other researches, evolutionary
algorithms such as genetic algorithm (GA) [14, 15],
particle swarm optimization (PSO)[4-6, 16], and ant
colony optimization(ACO) [17] have been utilized
to tackle the load shedding problem. The
advantages of these evolutionary algorithms are
their accuracy in obtaining feasible solution and
considering all problem constraints. However, in
 6th Global Conference on Power Control and Optimization, Las Vegas, USA, 6-8 August 2012
the restructured power market, beside the secure
operation of power system as the main purpose, the
participating entities like GenCo and TransCo profit
maximization must be considered. On the other
hand, ISO’s aim to maximize social welfare is
obtained through minimizing power market entities
cost as well ascustomer payment minimization
considering operational constraints and supply
limits.In a competitive environment, the locational
marginal prices (LMPs) are determined according
to the GenCo offers and lines congestions. When a
generator contingency occurs, the GenCos are
obliged to pay the penalty of load shedding which is
in term of expected energy not supplied (EENS) or
in a one hour snapshot of time domain the expected
power not supplied (EPNS). GenCos also must
provide the generation costs and the congestion
charges [18].
Congestion in the power system is a consequence of
occurrence of a generator or line outage and
insufficient transmission lines capacity to transmit
required power from generators to load demands at
a specific location. This leads to locational marginal
price (LMP) difference in the system buses. The
LMP increase in the congested line buses causes a
change in the market equilibrium point where the
customers’ payments increase in comparison with
the local generation cost. Congestion charge (rent)
is the charge collected by the ISO for investment in
network reinforcement and is defined as difference
of LMPs in the buses of a congested line multiplied
by the power flow from that line. The congestion
charge is formulated as follows [19, 20]:
nB
C cong ,ij = ∑ (λ
i≠j
i − λ j )Pij , Pij ≥ 0 (1)
where C cong ,ij is the congestion charge of branch
ij in $ / h , n B is the number of buses, λi and
λ j are the LMPs of buses i and j in $ / MW h ,
and Pij is the power flow of line ij in MW .
When a line outage occur the access and usage
revenue that was obtained by the TransCo
decreases, while the congestion charges collected
by ISO increases. The EPNS expenses due to a line
outage may be partially recovered through the
increment of congestion charges.However, this
paper proposes a steady state load shedding scheme
where a multi-objective function tomaximize
technical and economic issues of restructured power
system is considered. The objective function
considers two sub-optimization problems: The
GenCo profit maximization and as a consequence
social welfare maximizationand the loadability limit
maximization of the system as an index for voltage
security margin (VSM) as a power system
component outage occurs.In the GenCo profit
maximization sub-optimization problem, the smart
market procedure is utilized where the ISO as the
smart market authority receives GenCo’s generators
offers blocks and dispatchable loads bids blocks as
price-sensitive loads to establish the market clearing
price and determinegeneration of each generatoras
well as amount of dispatchable loads according to
the system parameters.In the proposed scheme, as a
contingency occurs, under the smart market
environment, the minimum load shed that satisfies
the optimization objective function to maximize
GenCo profit and maximizing loadability limit as
an index ofVSM is obtained.
2. Loadability limit as a voltage stability index
Loadability limit of a power system can be
considered as the voltage stability index of the
power system [21]. One of the commonly used
methods to evaluate voltage stability of a system is
continuation power flow (CPF). At the voltage
stability limit of a power system P-V curve, the
Jacobian matrix of power flow equations becomes
singular. CPF implements successive power flow
solutionsconsidering anincremental load profile.
The CPF procedure consists of prediction and
correction steps. Considering a determined solution,
a tangent predictor is utilized to estimate the next
solution for a specified pattern of load increase. In
the next step, the corrector step determines the
precise solution using Newton-Raphson method
through CPF. Once again, a new prediction is made
for a specified load increment considering the new
tangent vector. Then the corrector step is applied
again. This process terminates when the critical
point of P-V curve is reached. A load increment
factor for active and reactive power of demand is
applied to execute CPF procedure.
3. Problem Formulation
In a restructured power system, the ISO tries to
maximize the social welfare through minimizing
market participants’ costs. So when a contingency
occurs in this market-based power system, while
executing optimal shedding of fixed loads, the
objective function considered is maximization of
GenCo profit considering non-linear constraints and
the voltage stability of the system. This multi-
objective function is comprised of two sub-
optimization problems. The first one is the GenCo
maximum profit which is obtained from subtracting
generation costs, EPNS expenses, and congestion
charges from sold power revenues, which is
expressed as in (2).The second part is the maximum
loadability limit of the system which is calculated
through integration of CPF, as expressed in(3):
nG nG nB
f1 = ∑i =1
RGenCo − ∑
i =1
C GenCo − ∑ EPNS −
i =1
nB (2)
∑
i =1
C cong ,ij
i≠j
f 2 = Psys (3)
where nG is the number of buses with generator,
RGenCo is the revenue of the GenCo in $ / h ,
C GenCo is the cost of the generator in $ / h ,
 6th Global Conference on Power Control and Optimization, Las Vegas, USA, 6-8 August 2012

EPNS is the expected power not supplied in $ / h , state, S imax

and C cong ,ij is the congestion charge of branch ij in
$ / h , Psys is the maximum loadability limit of the
system in MW .The multi-objective function can
be formulated as follows:
⎧ f1 f2 ⎫
Maximize ⎨w 1 max + w 2 max ⎬ (4)
⎩ f1 f2 ⎭
where w 1 and w 2 are weighting factors whichare
determined based on a knowledge-based trial and
error procedure. f 1max and f 2max are the maximum
GenCo profit and the maximum loadability limit of
the system obtained from single-objective
optimization problems.Operating constraints of the
optimization problem are as follows:
(
PGc ,i − PDc ,i − ∆PDc ,i = ) pursing a common goal in their lives. The flocking
nB
∑ (
V ic . V jc . Y ij .Cos θ ij − δ ic + δ cj
i =1
, j is apparent power limit of line
min max
ij ,V i and V i are lower and upper limits of
voltage. Equation (9) implies that load shedding
amount is restricted between the pre-contingency
value and a minimum amount of PDmin
,i . So, the load
shedding in each bus can’t be greater
than PDn ,i − PDmin
,i .
4. Solution Methodology
Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) is utilized in
this paper to solve this complicated optimization
problem because of itsadvantages over other
evolutionary algorithms. This technique is based on
social behavior of a group of animals, such as a
flock of birds, a school of fish, or a group of people
(5) behavior of birds represents optimization of a
) certain objective function. PSO is initialized by
generating a population of random solutions which

( )
is called a swarm. Each agent’s position is
QGc ,i − Q Dc ,i − ∆Q Dc ,i = represented by its x, y axis position and also its
nB (6) velocity is expressed by the x axis and y axis
− ∑ (
V ic . V jc . Y ij .Sin θ ij − δ ic + δ cj ) velocity (vx and vy). The position and velocity
i =1 information of each agent represents the
modification of each agent’s position. Each agent
,i ≤ PG ,i ≤ PG ,i
PGmin c max
(7)
knows its best value so far (pbest) and its x,y
QGmin
,i ≤ QGc ,i ≤ QGmax
,i (8) position. Moreover, each agent knows the best
value so far in the group (gbest) among pbests.
,i ≤ PD ,i ≤ PD ,i
PDmin c n
(9)
Each agent tries to modify its position using the
S ic, j ≤ S imax
,j (10) following information: The current positions (x,y),
the current velocities (vx, vy), the distance between
V i min ≤ V ic ≤ V i max (11) the current position and pbest, and the distance
where superscript n and c are indexes of normal between the current position and gbest. This
modification can be represented by the concept of
andcontingency states, PGc ,i is active power
velocity (modified value for the current positions)
generation in contingency state, PDc ,i is load active [22]. In a D-dimensional search space, the position
of i-th agent can be represented by
powerdemand in contingency state, ∆PDc ,i is
vector s m = ( s m 1 ,..., s md ,..., s mn ) and the velocity
amount of loadactive power shed, V ic and V jc are of i-th agent can be proposed by
buses voltages in contingency state, Y ij is v m = (v m 1 ,...,v md ,...,v mn ) . The best previous
admittance of line ij , θij is admittance angle of experience of agent m is proposed by
pbest m = ( pbest m 1 ,..., pbest md ,..., pbest mn ) and
line ij , δ ic and δ cj are voltage angle in buses i and
the best value among all the experiences of all
j in contingency state, QGc ,i is reactive power agents in the group is stored in
gbest m = ( gbest m 1 ,..., gbest md ,..., gbest mn ) .
generation in contingency state, Q Dc ,i is load
Velocity of each agent can be modified by (12):
reactive power in contingency state, ∆Q Dc ,i is k +1
v md = ω v md
k
+ c1 rand 1 × ( pbest md − s md
k
)+
shed, PGmin (12)
c 2 rand 2 × ( gbest d − s md )
amount of load reactive power ,i and k

PGmax
,i are minimum and maximum active power
where v mk is velocity of agent m at iteration k, ω is
generation, QGmin max
,i and QG ,i are minimum and
weighting function, c1 and c 2 are weighting
maximum reactive power generation, PDmin
,i is coefficients, rand is a random number between 0
minimum amount of load to be supplied, PDn ,i is and 1, s mk is current position of agent m at iteration
k, pbest m is pbest of agent m, and gbest is gbest of
load active power demand in normal state, S ic, j is
the group. c1 and c 2 try to pull each agent toward
apparent power flow of line ij in contingency
pbest and gbest position[5]. According to the early
 6th Global Conference on Power Control and Optimization, Las Vegas, USA, 6-8 August 2012
examinations c1 and c 2 are often set to 2.0 which is
also applicable to power system optimization
problems.Velocity of an agent can be changed using
three vectors mentioned in (12). The velocity is
usually limited to a certain maximum value.
The new position of agent m considering the current
position of it (searching point in the solution space)
can be obtained using the following equation:
k +1 k +1
s md = s md
k
+ v md (13)
The weighting function ω is obtained from (14)and
is utilized in PSO algorithm to improve its
performance through providing a balance between
global and local explorations. This leads to
averagely fewer iterations to obtain a sufficiently
optimal solution.
ω max − ω min
ω k +1 = ω max − × iter (14)
itermax
where ω max is initial weight, ω min is final weight,
itermax is maximum iteration number, and iter is
current iteration number. PSO using (12)and (14) is
called inertia weights approach (IWA). As
generally developed, ω max and ω min are set to 0.9
and 0.4. The advantages of PSO over other
algorithms is lower sensitivity to the nature of the
optimization problem objective function,
derivative-free characteristic unlike many
conventional techniques, easy implementation for
all kinds of optimization problems, etc. In the
proposed algorithm, the system initial data,
generators offers, and dispatchable loads bids to
participate in the smart market procedure are
provided. Then, the generation quantity and price of
each generator and the quantity and price of
dispatchable loads are obtained through the smart
market procedure. In the PSO algorithm, the control
variables which define the dimensions of an agent
include the load shedding of each bus. It should be
noted that in the load shedding procedure, after a
component outage, dispatchable loads are cut
before the fixed loads if their LSMP (Load
Shedding Marginal Pricing) is higher than the fixed
loads and vice versa. Also, the amount of load shed
in each bus is limited to 50% of the load demand in
that bus, which implies that PDmin ,i = 0.5PD ,i . It is
n
also supposed that the decrement or increment of
the active power generation of all generators is
limited to 20% of their initial generation expressed
,i = 0.8 × PG ,i and PG ,i = 1.2 × PG ,i .
by PGmin n max n revenue of GenCo is 10998 $/h, the generation cost
5. Simulation Results
The modified IEEE 30 bus test system shown in
Fig. 1 is considered as the case study to evaluate the
effectiveness of the proposed method. Initial
operating conditions of the system are shown in
Table 1. The system is composed of three areas. In
order to show the importance of loads in the load
shedding procedure, area 1 buses are given load
importance coefficients of 2 ( γ i = 2 ), area 2 buses
load importance coefficients are equal to 1.7
( γ i = 1.7 ), and area 3 buses load importance
coefficients are considered to be 1.3 ( γ i = 1.3 ). The
modified system has three 30 MW dispatchable
loads in buses 7, 15, and 30. As a contingency in
the system occurs, these price-sensitive loads may
be removed or remain in the system according to
the settled LMP of each bus. According to the pre-
contingency operating conditions and after
executing OPF and smart market, generator 2
generates 48.78 MW of the total generation of
202.16 MW among 6 generators.Therefore, it seems
that outage of thisgenerator may have a
considerable effect on the stability of the system
and causes ISO to shed an amount of fixed and
dispatchable loads to prevent widespread blackout
in the system.After executing the smart market
procedure, the dispatchable loads amount is
determined to be 47.3 MW which is added to 161.6
MW fixed loads of the system and constitute the
total load of the system.If no dispatchable load is
considered in the smart market procedure, the fixed
loads demands are increased to1.4 times of the
initial demands to balance loads and generation. In
the normal operation of the system, the GenCo’s
revenue from the sold energy is 11303 $/h and the
generation cost of the generators belonging to
GenCo is 2123.4 $/h. The congestion charges are
566.2926 $/h which must be paid by the GenCo. So
in normal operation condition of the system, the
profit of GenCo is 8613.5 $/h. The maximum
loadabilitylimit of the system in the normal state is
561.6439 MW. In the normal state, if no
dispatchable load is considered in the system,
executing smart market results in a total profit of
5652.2 $/h. The revenue of the GenCo in this case
is 10929$/h and the generation cost of the
generators is 5025.5 $/h. The congestion charges
are decreased to a value of 251.3259 $/h. The
maximum loadability limit of the system at no
dispatchable load decreases to 491.6439 MW. It
seems that considering dispatchable loads in normal
state of system leads to increase in GenCo revenue
and profit as well as increment in congestion
charges but a decrease in generation cost and
maximum loadability limit of system is
noticeable.As contingency of G2 occurs,
performing single objective optimization problem
using PSO to maximize GenCo profit ( f 1 ) results in
a total profit of 1626.383 $/h. In this case, the
is 5039.5 $/h, and the congestion charges
are174.917 $/h. The maximum loadability limit of
the system in the single objective optimization
problem ( f 2 ) is 562.7143 MW. In the multi-
objective optimization problem, considering the
normalizing coefficients w 1 and w 2 to be 0.75 and
0.25, the PSO algorithm integrating smart market
procedure reveals the minimum load shedding that
maximizes GenCo’s profit and social welfare as
well as maintaining system voltage stability. As the
 6th Global Conference on Power Control and Optimization, Las Vegas, USA, 6-8 August 2012

LSMPs of dispatchable loads buses are high in the Table 1. Initial operating condition
case of G2 contingency and results in a significant Voltage Demand Generation
EPNS expenses, no dispatchable load is dispatched. magnitude (with dispatchable loads) power
Bus Vi PD,i QD,i PG,i(M QG,i
In the multi-objective optimization problem, the No. (pu) (MW) (MVAr) W) (MVAr)
obtained GenCo revenue is 10954 $/h. The 1 1.041 0 0 28.25 2.85
generation cost of GenCo is 5039.5 $/h and the 2 1.039 5.0448 2.952 48.78 7.57
congestion charges are 190.4377 $/h. The minimum 3 1.021 22.318 11.159 0.00 0.00
total load shed that satisfies the multi-objective 4 1.023 8.834 1.859 0.00 0.00
5 1.027 0 0 0.00 0.00
optimization problem is 59.843 MW which is 6 1.025 0 0 0.00 0.00
presented in details inTable 2. In this situation the 7 1.014 0 0 0.00 0.00
profit of GenCo is 1575.9 $/h. The obtained 8 1.020 13.948 13.948 0.00 0.00
maximum loadability limit in this situation is 9 1.037 0 0 0.00 0.00
532.458MW. As it is shown in Table 2, after the 10 1.043 6.741 2.324 0.00 0.00
11 1.037 0 0 0.00 0.00
contingency of G2, LMPs of the buses with less
12 1.023 13.018 8.718 0.00 0.00
than 0.5PDn ,i show an increase of about 12 $/MWh. 13 1.059 0 0 43.89 23.72
14 1.008 7.2069 1.859 0.00 0.00
LMPs of the buses with about 50 percent of load to 15 1.005 0 0 0.00 0.00
be shed, is however almost constant. This 16 0.991 4.068 2.092 0.00 0.00
demonstrates the effect of applying appropriate 17 0.969 10.461 6.741 0.00 0.00
optimal load shedding on holding the LMPs of 18 0.971 3.7197 1.046 0.00 0.00
buses to be constant. 19 0.956 11.042 3.952 0.00 0.00
20 0.955 2.557 0.813 0.00 0.00
21 1.05 3.390 2.169 0.00 0.00
6. Conclusions 22 1.052 0 0 25.91 17.85
Market-driven power system load shedding 23 1.028 22.318 11.159 23.04 20.85
considering voltage stability using PSO is discussed 24 1.032 10.112 7.788 0.00 0.00
in this paper. Restructured power system concerns 25 1.049 0 0 0.00 0.00
26 1.030 4.068 2.673 0.00 0.00
including social welfare maximization through cost 27 1.070 0 0 32.29 19.33
minimization of entities and customers of the power 28 1.030 0 0 0.00 0.00
system beside the voltage stability of the power 29 1.05 2.789 1.046 0.00 0.00
system are taken into consideration when a power 30 1.039 0 0 0.00 0.00
Total - 151.643 82.306 202.16 97.16
system component outage occurs. Effect of a
contingency in the power system on different
Table 2. Load curtailment in the case of G2
economic aspects of power system is analyzed. A
contingency
multi-objective function to provide intelligent-based Load data Loadshed
optimal power system load shedding is presented (no dispatchable load) ( G2 contingency)
including both the technical and economic aspects Load
Bus PD,i LMPb LMPa
shed Load %
of load shedding. The proposed method is executed No. (MW) ($/MWh)
(MW)
($/MWh)
under the smart market environment of 1 0 57.877 0 - 70.782
MATPOWER 4.1 and is applied to a modified 2 7.062 58.029 0.729 10.3 71.154
IEEE 30 bus test system with satisfactory results. 3 31.245 59.044 5.993 19.1 71.717
4 12.368 59.027 1.593 12.8 71.565
The obtained results demonstrates the capability of 5 0 58.918 0 - 71.209
the proposed method to procure an optimal load 6 0 59.352 0 - 71.303
shedding with minimum load cuts considering 7 0 59.782 0 - 71.268
GenCo maximum profit while maintaining voltage 8 19.528 59.492 6.324 32.3 71.387
9 0 60.307 0 - 71.442
stability of the system. 10 9.438 60.799 1.086 11.5 71.514
11 0 60.307 0 - 71.442
12 18.226 72.000 3.549 19.4 72.000
13 0 72.000 0 72.000
14 10.089 72.830 1.731 17.1 73.310
15 0 72.591 0 72.968
16 5.695 73.992 1.671 29.3 73.424
17 14.646 75.385 7.317 49.9 74.288
18 5.207 75.708 0.767 14.7 75.292
19 15.460 77.151 7.683 49.7 76.215
20 3.580 77.290 1.510 42.1 76.314
21 4.746 60.911 0.946 19.9 71.160
22 0 60.931 0 - 70.992
23 31.245 68.978 11.754 37.6 72.294
24 14.158 64.426 4.905 34.6 72.048
25 0 62.059 0 - 70.934
26 5.695 63.279 1.672 29.3 72.329
27 0 60.191 0 - 69.767
28 0 59.356 0 - 70.857
29 3.905 61.558 0.603 15.4 70.328
30 0 62.542 0 - 69.929
Fig. 1. Modified IEEE 30 bus test system
Total 212.3 - 59.843 28.18 -
 6th Global Conference on Power Control and Optimization, Las Vegas, USA, 6-8 August 2012
References
[1] P. Kundur, J. Paserba, V. Ajjarapu, G.
Andersson, A. Bose, C. Canizares, N.
Hatziargyriou, D. Hill, A. Stankovic, and C.
Taylor, "Definition and classification of power
system stability IEEE/CIGRE joint task force
on stability terms and definitions," Power
Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 19, pp.
1387-1401, 2004.
[2] P. Kundur, N. J. Balu, and M. G. Lauby, Power
system stability and control vol. 4: McGraw-
hill New York, 1994.
[3] H. Bevrani, A. Tikdari, and T. Hiyama, "Power
System Load Shedding: Key Issues and New
Perspectives," World Academy of Science,
Engineering and Technology, vol. 65, pp. 177-
182, 2010.
[4] N. Sadati, T. Amraee, and A. Ranjbar, "A
global Particle Swarm-Based-Simulated
Annealing Optimization technique for under-
voltage load shedding problem," Applied Soft
Computing, vol. 9, pp. 652-657, 2009.
[5] T. Amraee, A. Ranjbar, B. Mozafari, and N.
Sadati, "An enhanced under-voltage load-
shedding scheme to provide voltage stability,"
Electric power systems research, vol. 77, pp.
1038-1046, 2007.
[6] T. Amraee, B. Mozafari, and A. M. Ranjbar,
"An improved model for optimal under voltage
load shedding: particle swarm approach," in
Power India Conference, 2006 IEEE, 2006, p.
6 pp.
[7] C. W. Taylor, "Concepts of undervoltage load
shedding for voltage stability," Power Delivery,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 7, pp. 480-488,
1992.
[8] R. Balanathan, N. C. Pahalawaththa, U. D.
Annakkage, and P. W. Sharp, "Undervoltage
load shedding to avoid voltage instability,"
Generation, Transmission and Distribution,
IEE Proceedings-, vol. 145, pp. 175-181, 1998.
[9] S. Granville, J. C. O. Mello, and A. C. G.
Melo, "Application of interior point methods to
power flow unsolvability," Power Systems,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 11, pp. 1096-1103,
1996.
[10] X. Wang, G. C. Ejebe, J. Tong, and J. G.
Waight, "Preventive/corrective control for
voltage stability using direct interior point
method," Power Systems, IEEE Transactions
on, vol. 13, pp. 878-883, 1998.
[11] T. Q. Tuan, J. Fandino, J. C. Sabonnadiere, H.
Vu, and B. Heilbronn, "Determination Of Load
Shed Using Linear Programming To Avoid
Voltage Instability," in Athens Power Tech,
1993. APT 93. Proceedings. Joint International
Power Conference, 1993, pp. 553-557.
[12] E. De Tuglie, M. Dicorato, M. La Scala, and P.
Scarpellini, "A corrective control for angle and
voltage stability enhancement on the transient
time-scale," Power Systems, IEEE
Transactions on, vol. 15, pp. 1345-1353, 2000.
View publication stats
[13] T. S. P. Fernandes, J. R. Lenzi, and M. A.
Mikilita, "Load Shedding Strategies Using
Optimal Load Flow With Relaxation of
Restrictions," Power Systems, IEEE
Transactions on, vol. 23, pp. 712-718, 2008.
[14] W. M. Al-Hasawi and K. M. El Naggar,
"Optimum steady-state load-shedding scheme
using genetic based algorithm," in
Electrotechnical Conference, 2002. MELECON
2002. 11th Mediterranean, 2002, pp. 605-609.
[15] M. Tarafdar Hagh and S. Galvani, "A multi
objective genetic algorithm for weighted load
shedding," in Electrical Engineering (ICEE),
2010 18th Iranian Conference on, 2010, pp.
867-873.
[16] M. T. HAGH and S. GALVANI,
"Minimization of load shedding by sequential
use of linear programming and particle swarm
optimization," Turk J Elec Eng & Comp Sci,
vol. 19, pp. 551-563, 2011.
[17] W. Nakawiro and I. Erlich, "Optimal Load
Shedding for Voltage Stability Enhancement
by Ant Colony Optimization," in Intelligent
System Applications to Power Systems, 2009.
ISAP '09. 15th International Conference on,
2009, pp. 1-6.
[18] M. Shahidehpour, H. Yamin, and Z. Li, Market
operations in electric power systems: Wiley
Online Library, 2002.
[19] T. Krause and G. Andersson, "Evaluating
congestion management schemes in liberalized
electricity markets using an agent-based
simulator," in Power Engineering Society
General Meeting, 2006. IEEE, 2006, p. 8 pp.
[20] T. Krause. (2005). Congestion management in
liberalized electricity markets theoretical
concepts and international application.
Available: http://www.eeh.ee.ethz.ch
[21] M. Rezaie Estabragh, M. Mohammadian, and
M. Rashidinejad, "An Application of Elitist-
Based Genetic Algorithm for SVC Placement
Considering Voltage Stability," International
Review on Modeling and Simulations
(I.RE.MO.S.), vol. 3, pp. 938-947, 2010.
[22] K. Y. Lee, Modern heuristic optimization
techniques: theory and applications to power
systems vol. 39: Wiley-IEEE press, 2008.