Electrical Power & Energy Srstems Vol. 18, No. 3, pp.

143 151, 1996

Copyright ! i 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd
Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
0142-0615(94)00016-6 0142-0615/96/$15.00 + 0.00

ELSEVIER

Impact of power wheeling on

composite system adequacy
evaluation
R Billinton and F Gbeddy
Power Systems Research Group, University of
Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan,
Canada S7N 0W0

has also encouraged the wheeling of power in the case of

One of the many possible uses and benefits of interconnec-
joint ownership by several utilities of large, high capital
tion between neighbouring electric power systems is the
plants where the wheeling technique is used to transport
opportunity to wheel energy through the transmission
power/energy back to the plant's owners for marketing.
facilities of one system in order to serve another system.
Wheeling of energy/power is not limited to intercon-
Wheeling of energy can also occur within a system when an
nected systems, it can also be practised in stand-alone
independent power producer serves a load located at some
utility systems having independent power production
other point in the system. Power wheeling transactions are
facilities in the form of Non-Utility Generators (NUGs)
recognized to have a definite impact on the utility's system
or cogeneration facilities. The local utility, for one reason
losses depending upon the system topology, the amount of
or the other, may not be the actual recipient of the energy
power~energy wheeled and the wheeling distance involved.
produced from the NUGs and this energy is therefore not
These factors currently form the basis for determining
used directly to supplement system supplies from con-
service charges associated with power wheeling. Quantifi-
ventional generating locations'. It is possible, however,
cation of the reliability impacts of power wheeling is also
for the energy produced by the NUG to be sold directly to
important in order to understand fully the impacts of
another customer located at a different point in the
wheeling options. This paper discusses the effects of power
system. It therefore becomes necessary to wheel the
wheeling on the composite power system adequacy indices
power/energy from the independent power production
of two test systems. The impacts associated with both
facility to the prospective customer over the transmission
intra-system and inter-system power wheeling are illu-
facilities of the local utility. The term 'wheeling' in this
strated. The results presented were obtained using a
paper is used to denote the transmission of electrical
basic" computational tool for composite power system
energy/power from one producer to a second party over
adequacy assessment.
the transmission facilities of a third party. Wheeling in
interconnected systems is denoted as inter-system power
Keywords." interconnections, power wheeling, composite
wheeling. Intra-system power wheeling is used to denote
system adequacy
wheeling of energy/power from NUGs at one part of a
utility system to a customer at another part of the same
system.
I. Introduction Power wheeling transactions are recognized to have a
One of the many possible uses and benefits of inter- definite impact on the utility system losses 2 '3 depending
connection between neighbouring electric power systems upon the system topology, the amount of power/energy
is the opportunity to wheel energy through the transmis- wheeled and the wheeling distance involved. These
sion facilities of one system in order to serve another factors currently form the basis for determining service
system. The most common application of the wheeling charges associated with power wheeling3. Quantification
technique involves the distribution of power from gen- of the reliability impacts of power wheeling is also
erating companies to rel~Ltivelysmall private, municipal important in order to understand fully the impacts of
or public etc. utilities which then market the power. The wheeling options. The effects of power wheeling on
development of large generation facilities in recent years composite generation and transmission system adequacy
is illustrated in this paper. These effects are examined in
Received 14 January 1993; accepted subject to revisions 28 July regard to the individual load point and overall system
1994; accepted 4 October 1994 adequacy indices of two test systems. The single line

143
144 Impact of power wheefing on composite system adequacy. R. Billinton and F. Gbeddy

2 x 40MW ( ~ ) ~) I x 40 MW
1 x 20 MW
1 xlOMW
BUS 1 [ 3 I I
4x 20MW
2x5MW
BUS 2
BUS I~0- 33 " ~ BUS 21 22

I
20 MW
1 6

BUS 3 I I ' I" BUS4

85 MW 40 MW

BUS 6 91 2°~Mw

20 MW
Figure 1. Single line diagram of the RBTS
diagrams of the Roy Billinton Test System (RBTS) 4 and
the IEEE-Reliability Test System (IEEE-RTS) 5 used in
these studies are shown respectively in Figures 1 and 2.

II. Composite system analysis

The modelling techniques used to represent intra-system Figure 2. Single line diagram of the IEEE-RTS
and inter-system wheeling situations have been developed
to suit the structure of the COMREL program 6-9 used
the NUG and the customer other than the transmission
for the analyses discussed in this paper. The COMREL
facilities of the utility, an agreement with the utility is
program is a basic computational tool developed by the
required to use its transmission facilities in order to
Power Systems Research Group at the University of
transport the power from the NUG to the prospective
Saskatchewan for composite power system reliability
customer. When an agreement is reached, the required
analysis. The program is based on the contingency
power to be wheeled will be injected into the utility's
enumeration approach and proceeds by a systematic
power system at the NUG location and then passed on to
selection, evaluation and classification of outage contin-
the customer's load in accordance with the terms of the
gencies according to predetermined failure criteria. The
contract. Apart from a few instances, such as those
level of outage contingency to be considered is pre-
involving small hydro sources which are site specific in
specified in order to minimize the computational require-
nature, NUGs are usually located close to system load
ments. The program is equipped to take corrective or
points. For the purposes of this study, the NUG is
remedial actions, such as generation rescheduling, in
assumed to be introduced at a utility system load point
order to alleviate capacity deficiencies or line overload
which is designated as the 'wheeling source'. The load to
conditions that may be associated with certain outage
be served by the NUG is considered to be located at
contingencies. If a problem persists, load curtailment is
another load point somewhere in the same system. This
effected at appropriate load points as dictated by a load
load point is designated as the 'wheeling sink' in this
curtailment philosophy.
discussion. No additional buses are therefore introduced
The load curtailment philosophy used in the
COMREL program is based on the classification of Intermediate
toad at every system load point as either firm load or Tapped power system Injected
curtailable load. Based on individual load point require- wheeling power wheeling power
ments, curtailable load may represent some percentage of
total load at the bus. In these studies 20% of the load at
I
each system load point is considered to be curtailable
load. If load curtailment is required, curtailable load is
interrupted first, followed by firm load if necessary.

I1.1 Intra-system power wheeling

Load
A NUG facility located in the supply jurisdiction of a
power utility may be required to supply a prospective
customer with electrical energy at another part of the Figure 3. Illustration of power wheeling in inter-
utility system. As there is no direct connection between connected systems
 Impact of power wheeling on composite system adequacy. R. Billinton and F. Gbeddy 145

Wheeling Buffer Intermediate equivalent increase in load at the designated wheeling

sink BUS p o w e r system sink. The incremental component of load at the wheel-
ing sink is regarded as firm load representing the
wheeling load to be served. This leads to a reduction in
|
the proportion of curtailable load at that load point, thus
providing appropriate signals that indicate an increase in
the firm component of load at the load point. The
Wheeling Tie Load incremental component of firm load is expected to be
load lines served by the dedicated NUG at the wheeling source.

Figure 4. Interconnection configuration of the wheel- 11.2 Inter-system power wheeling

ing sink
into the utility system when modelling an intra-system
power wheeling situation. Existing system load points are
modified to accommodate the wheeling transactions.
When a PQ-bus is selected to serve as a wheeling
source, its characteristic,; are redefined as a P V-bus
with scheduled power generation appropriately assigned.
The introduction of a certain wheeling power capacity at
the wheeling source is matched simultaneously with an
Figure 3 illustrates the concept of power wheeling in
interconnected systems.
The wheeling source in Figure 3 represents the system
providing the energy to be wheeled whilst the wheeling
sink represents the system receiving the energy. These two
systems are not directly interconnected, but are both
connected to a third system situated between them
which is denoted as the Intermediate Power System
(IPS). An agreement with the IPS is required in order
for its transmission facilities to be utilized to transport the

I n t r a - w h e e l i n g from BUS I lntra-wheeling from BUS1

160
140 ~
-Z~- ~--¢~-- ~ - - Z ~ - - ~ - - - z ~ - - ~ - - ~ 160 _~_.~...~._.Z~_..~.4~/..~_.~._,~
140'
13
120 120 z
= 100 100 #
80 DIEGO
r"

8o ~ H
z 60
/ /
/ u3 60 /
40 -0-0-[3-[]-0-[3-0 Z
W 401 ~-O~E3~D
W
20
,..;~....~---.,~....&-.-~-..& -.-~.-.,~-.-&--.& 20 --.~---.~---X---.~---~---)~---,---X.---.3.--~
OC v . . . . . . . ~ 0' v~ m = ~ t~ i == == v == == ==
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Wheeling p o w e r (MW) Wheeling p o w e r {MW)
Intra-wheelincl from BUS 3 n t r a - w h e e l i n g from B U S 2
160 160 ~--~- - -L~--~ - -~--¢~- -~---~ --Z~-~- ~
~r-~- - ~ - ~ - - -Z~--~-." -Z~--~--~--~- --Z~
140 ~ Legend
140
Legend
• BUS 2
120 L
>.
12o ff • BUS2
I00 13 BUS 3
t- 100 // 13 BUS 3
x BUS 4
80
o _Bp_S.S_ 80 ~.12k~E]~'O x BUS 4
60
z
uJ A BUS 6
U3
z
uJ
60 .cro~o~° O BUS 5
uJ 401 -13"13-13-13--13--O--E3-O-E3-13 LU 401 y A BUS 6
20 ~..-,~...~--.~-..~---~..-x-.- ~.-.,~--.x---x zo-_~...~...~...~_..~.._x...x..-x--~ .
0 ~ ~ C ~ {~ ~ - - C" - - j ' - ' ~ ' ' ' ~ - ' ' ~
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Wheeling p o w e r (MW) Wheeling p o w e r (MW)
160 Intra-wheeling from BUS 6 160j~ I n t r a - w h e e l i n g from B U S 6
R~
1404
140~
120 12o
>. \
c- I00 ~

80 '\ 80 ',,

z
60 "k 60 ~ \,
uJ ,,=,
w 40t -D- ~ _ n _ r - l _ ~ _ D_ D_O_13 40 +-O-~,, D - D - D - D - D - D - D - °
20 i.~...~.., ...~i..~...x...~...~_._~...x
" 20
~---x.- -x---~-- -x- --x ---x--- x- --x---x.-- -x"
0~, ,., v ,., v w v v ~, ~ ~ 0=
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Wheeling p o w e r (MW) Wheeling p o w e r (MW)

Figure 5, Variation in EENS with intra-system wheeling Figure 6. Variation in EENS with intra-system wheeling
power to supply wheeling load at bus 2 of the RBTS power to supply wheeling load at bus 3 of the RBTS
146 Impact of power wheeling on composite system adequacy. R. Billinton and F. Gbeddy

wheeling power from the wheeling source to the sink. lines with adequate transmission capacity to transport the
Once an agreement is reached, wheeling power can be entire range of wheeling power considered are assumed to
injected into the IPS and passed on to the wheeling sink at exist for interconnecting the wheeling source and the sink
the respective interconnection points in accordance with with the IPS. The failure rates of these tie lines are
the terms of the contract. The wheeling source is modelled assumed to be zero thus implying 100% availability.
as an imaginary generating bus, which is directly con- Wheeling load is considered to be external to the utility
nected to the IPS. The energy/power to be provided (i.e. system demand in both the intra-system and inter-system
the wheeling power) is assumed to originate from this power wheeling analyses. The wheeling load (or the
imaginary bus which is external to the IPS. The wheeling wheeling component of load) at the sink is therefore not
power is modelled as a 100% available generating unit utilized when computing the system peak load.
located at the wheeling source. The rated capacity of the
unit is assumed to be equal to the contracted wheeling III. S y s t e m s t u d i e s
power. The wheeling sink is also assumed to be an The objective of the analyses in this paper is to examine
imaginary load bus which is connected to the IPS through the impact of wheeling operations on the composite
a buffer bus with tie lines as shown in Figure 4. In an ideal system indices of the power system which renders the
wheeling situation, the wheeling sink should be able to wheeling service. In the intra-system wheeling analysis,
receive all the energy/power contracted for wheeling; this refers to the local utility's power system whilst in the
hence curtailment effects occurring in the IPS should inter-system wheeling analysis this refers to the inter-
not affect the sink. However, this condition is difficult mediate power system. The DC load flow feature of the
to satisfy in all situations. The configuration shown in COMREL program was used as the network solution
Figure 4 is used to connect the wheeling sink to the IPS as technique during the power wheeling studies in order to
it minimizes the load curtailment impacts experienced at avoid the problem of accounting for system losses arising
the wheeling sink resulting from outage events occurring from power wheeling operations. Outage contingency
in the IPS. The entire wheeling load at the sink is enumeration was limited to independent overlapping
considered to be firm load and it is assumed to be outages up to the 4th level for generating units and up
always equal to the input power from the wheeling to the 3rd level for transmission lines (or transformers).
source. The percentage of curtailable load at the wheeling Combined generator-line outages involving up to two
sink is therefore specified to be zero and load curtailment generating units and one line, and one generating unit
actions are confined as much as possible to the IPS. Tie and two lines were also considered.

Load points
I n t r a - w h e e l i n g from BUS 8=>16
I n t r a - w h e e l i n g from BUS 16 =>8 in the Load points.
800 n o r t h region 8OO in the
--~- --ZX--6-- - ~ - - ~ " .Z~--~- - -Z~--~-- -~ Legend .._~...~._~.. _~._..~. _.&.--~ - - ~ - "-6 n o r t h region
7O0 700,
• BUS 13 Legend
600 600
>- [ ] BUS 14 • BUS 13
"- 500 -- 500
• BUS 15 ...0..0_-0__0.--0---0--0--0--0--0 r l BUS 14
..-•- - • . - -•-- -•----•- - 0 - - • - - • " - • - " • .~ 4004
400 l O BUS 16 • BUS 15
Ch
z 300 A BUS 18 300 O BUS 16
UJ m I I m mm m m I I |
x BUS 19 200, L A BUS 18
200~._.;_..v_v.__v..-n-v.-~.-.~:::y:~
_ . . ~ . . . . X . - - - K - - -" X " " ~2 BUS 20 x BUS 19
I00
~ _..~.._Q-
~ - ~ = -O-.-O-.-O---O-.O---O-'-O
~=~-_=~-_.-~_.-~.-.~..m v BUS 20
01
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Wheeling power (MW) Wheeling power (MW)
Load points
Load points
in the
in the
south region
south region
60 r • Legend
Legend
A BUS1
50 x--x A US.____1
B
+ BUS 2 II~IL~_~:~:_~__ ~_~=u__._ + BUS 2
40~--+--*=
i~_m...m.--m...m.-.m---m---m-m----
- - ~m x BUS 3 4o~..i...m--m..m'-71zT..l.-.l~l=lz: x BUS 3
o Bu;- 30 .................. 0 BUS 4
V BUS 5
~7 BUS 5
• BUS 6
,,,,,, 20 • BUS 6

• BUS 8
• BUS 8
O BUS 9
O BUS 9
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 [] BUS I0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Wheeling power (MW) [3 BUS I0
Wheeling power {MW}

Figure 7. Variation in EENS with intra-system wheeling F i g u r e 8. V a r i a t i o n in EENS w i t h i n t r a - s y s t e m w h e e l i n g

power f r o m b u s 16 t o b u s 8 o f t h e I E E E - R T S power f r o m bus 8 t o b u s 1 6 o f t h e I E E E - R T S
 Impact of power wheeling on composite system adequacy."R. Billinton and F. Gbeddy 147

Results of the analyses utilizing the RBTS and the
IEEE-RTS respectively as the study systems are pre-
sented and illustrated. In the studies performed, up to
50 MW and 100 MW of power was wheeled through the
RBTS and the IEEE-RTS respectively• This produces
different impacts on the load point and the overall
power system adequacy indices ~. The impacts on the
Expected Energy Not Supplied (FENS) indices at the
various load points of the test systems are discussed
below. Additional indices such as the probability and
frequency of load point failure were also determined in
these studies• The effects on the severity index of both
test systems are also considered to illustrate the impacts
on overall power system adequacy. All the results
shown are annual indices which reflect the variations
in load level over a year. A 4-step (10% load step) load
model was used for the RBTS analysis and a 7-step (5%
load step) load model was used for the analysis of the
IEEE-RTS. The wheeling load was, however, kept
constant at all load levels as its dedicated supply was
considered to be continuously available in the same
amount throughout the study period.
IV. Discussion of results
IV.1 Load point indices
IV.1.1. Intra-system wheeling results
Figure 5 shows variations in the FENS indices at various
load points when up to 50 MW of power is wheeled from
different parts of the RBTS to supply wheeling loads
located at bus 2 in the system.
It can be observed from Figure 5 that the inadequacy
indices for most of the RBTS load points remained
virtually unaffected throughout the power wheeling
scenario in most cases studied• This shows that the
RBTS is able to accommodate the range of wheeling
power to bus 2 without causing any significant adverse
impacts on adequacy at the system load points. Wheeling
from load points in the southern section of the RBTS to

I n t e r - w h e e l i n g from BUS I I n t e r - w h e e l i n g from BUS 1

160 160 _z~..Zy_~ . 4 ~ _ ~ . . . Z ~ . ~ _ ~ . . ~
140' 140 ~ /
t. 120
lOO (- 100 ,,E]/
,£3
~ so 3; 80 /D~
ffl
z 6O / t/3
z 60 .d
.~3. ~_.o__~_ 4:~-o-a3' "' j 3 ~ j 3-
w 40( LU
401
20 --~--x---~---~---~---~---~---x--~---x 20 _.X.. -X- --X-- -X- - -X- - -X--'X- - "X" - -X- - -X

0 5 I0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 L0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Wheeling power (MW) Wheeling power (MW)
I n t e r - w h e e l i n g from BUS 3 i n t e r - w h e e l i n g from BUS 2
160 . 160 ~.~.
~-~ - ~X---~---£~-~- - -~---~- -~--~- -~
140 ~ Legend 140 ' -~.--Z~,--~.--ZX---~---~--~-- .A
Legend
~. 120 • BU.S 2 120 I~
>.
• BUS 2
100 o B_U__S_~ 100 P"
o B_U_S_~
80 x BUS 4 80
¢n 60 O ~ rl~D~13" ,~ x _B_US_~_
u~ 60 O BUS 5
Z . . . . .
W
O _B.U_S.5_
w 401 " "O-d3._D._E3__D..O_.O_.O_D A BUS 6 w 401 /
X..-X A BUS 6
20 i--x---x--.~_._~...~...~...~...~...~..x 20 .x._.x_..x..-x---x- --x-- - x " ,3:)
Op_i.~--r-'--.---#r~r-~...- .~ . . 1,, .
0 .5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Wheeling power (MW) Wheeling power (MW)
160 I n t e r - w h e e l i n g from BUS 6 160 I n t e r - w h e e l i n g from BUS 6
140 ~ 140 z
~. 120 ~ 120
-- 100 ", 100 "

60 ', tn 60 •
Z
w 40 " "O-43-43- -O--O- -O--C]--(3 Zww 401 -t-I-~q-o-E] ---E]-O-O-E]'-E]-O
20 -....
; ¢- ' " x:"\ "'~'-- ~-'-':~'-)1----~''~'-"x-'-~. 20 i..~..-~--~- -~---x---x---x --x---x- --x
0 ~- . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0
0 5 10 15 20 ;!5 30 35 40 45 50 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Wheeling power (MW) Wheeling power (MW)

Figure 9. V a r i a t i o n in EENS w i t h i n t e r - s y s t e m w h e e l i n g Figure 10. V a r i a t i o n in EENS w i t h the i n t e r - s y s t e m

p o w e r for w h e e l i n g o p e r a t i o n s w i t h the sink c o n n e c t e d w h e e l i n g o p e r a t i o n s w i t h the sink c o n n e c t e d to b u s
to bus 2 of t h e R B T S 3 of the R BTS
148 Impact of power wheeling on composite system adequacy. R. Billinton and F. Gbeddy

the northern parts of the system generally assures a more
effective redistribution of power flow in the RBTS net-
work. This accounts for the system's ability to cope with
the entire range of wheeling power capacity considered.
Approximately 90% of the RBTS load is located in the
southern section of the system. Wheeling power imports
in the south can therefore be used effectively to supply the
loads in that part of the system with minimum transmis-
sion requirements. This reduces, to some extent, the
dependence of the southern section of the system on
conventional generation supplies which have to be trans-
ported from the north (i.e. from buses 1 and 2) over
transmission facilities which are exposed to the risk of
failure. Meanwhile the wheeling load located in the
northern section of the RBTS is also supplied effectively
from the conventional generation sources located in that
part of the system. Wheeling from bus 6 produces sig-
nificant drops in the value of the indices at that load
point, because the wheeling supply made available at the
bus is used to supplement utility supply both during
normal system operation and when the load point is
isolated from the conventional generation sources. Sup-
plying a wheeling load located at bus 2 from additional
generation supplies provided at the swing bus (i.e. bus 1)
results in a deterioration in adequacy at bus 3 where
about 46% of the RBTS load is located. This effect
becomes most significant when the wheeling load intro-
duced exceeds 35MW, at which stage more frequent
swing bus overload conditions experienced cause a
considerable increase in both the number of load curtail-
ment events and the amount of load curtailed at bus 3.
Similar observations can be made from Figure 6 which
shows the impacts on EENS indices at the load points
when intra-system power wheeling operations are carried
out to supply wheeling loads located at bus 3 of the
RBTS.
The impact on the indices when the wheeling opera-
tions involve only buses within the heavily loaded section
of the RBTS are observed to be relatively minimal
compared with when the wheeling loads are supplied
directly from bus 2, a conventional generation supply
location in the north. Wheeling from the north section of
the RBTS is generally not suitable, because the extra
transmission capacity available in that part of the system
is not adequate to transport the increased supply require-
ments of the south region effectively (created by the
added wheeling load) from the generating facilities in
the north. In all the cases shown, the load point indices
at bus 6 remained virtually unaffected throughout the
entire wheeling scenario except when the wheeling power
is from that bus. This is expected because wheeling
operations beyond the radial link do not address the
isolation problems basically responsible for inadequacy
at the bus.
Variations in the EENS indices at the load points of the
IEEE-RTS when up to 100 MW of power is wheeled from
bus 16 (in the north region) to bus 8 (in the south region)
are shown in Figure 7. Similar results obtained for

I n t e r - w h e e l i n g from BUS 17=>8 I n t e r - w h e e l i n g from BUS 8=>17

Load points Load points
800 in the 8OO in the
_ . ~ . ~__~__ _z~__~. _z~--~- - ~ - - ~ - - ~ north region north region
700~ 7OO __~.. _~r_~__~__~_..~5..-~- - - ~ "~z~'-'~
Legend Legend
600 600
• BUS 13 • BUS 13
r-I BUS 14 500
- ~ ~ ~ ~ n BUS 14
• BUS 15 400 • BUS 15
U3 u3
z 300 O BUS 16 z 300 O BUS 16
I.U i i m m lm mm mm llm
LU A BUS 18
_..~....s~-.-~....J~--'>-l~ A BUS 18
• m -- I -- I mm iN --
200 200 r.__K3....~_-~.._~
- .... .-- x BUS 19 x BUS 19
100 100
~7 BUS 20 BUS 20
0 0
0 102030405060708090100 I020304050607080901Q0
Wheel!ng power (MW) Wheeling power (MW]
Load points
in the Load p o i n t s
south region in t h e
south region
60501 AqL-, Legend Legend
~0~0~ A BUS____Z
A BUS 1
+ BUS 2
~---~'~--$~ ÷. . . . -- l .l.-l-I I.. + BUS 2
4omlm...m..m.l...m....im...m..m . . . . x BUS 3 >. 40 . Ii_.m...i..a.-a.--m--- m --m-'m'a
x _B_US_]
.c O BUS 4
30 : ~ A~...~...~...4j~_~ v BUS S O BUS 4
v _Bp..S__S
u~
Z 20
• BUS
-...........6 Z 20
UJ LU • .B...U...S...)
'" @ _B_U_.S...7 LU

10
¢' _BUS.._7
IO • BUS 8
• BUS 8
° ) ,T q 3i ~ , O . , I- o - ,I 4 3 1I - - oI - - oI = ' OI - ~I i
o BUS 9
o o BUS 9
0 102030405060708090100 D BUS 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Wheeling power (MW) D BUS I0
Wheeling power (MW,I

Figure 1 I . V a r i a t i o n in EENS w i t h i n t e r - s y s t e m w h e e l - Figure 1 2. V a r i a t i o n in EENS w i t h i n t e r - s y s t e m w h e e l -

ing p o w e r f r o m bus 17 to bus 8 of the IEEE-RTS ing p o w e r f r o m bus 8 to bus 17 of I E E E - R T S
 Impact of power wheeling on composite system adequacy. R. Billinton and F. Gbeddy 1 49

wheeling in the opposite', direction are also shown in
Figure 8.
It can be observed from Figure 7 that wheeling from
bus 16 in the north to bus 8 in the south region of the
IEEE-RTS causes a considerable deterioration in ade-
quacy at several load peints, particularly in the south
region. This is expected, because as noted in Reference 1,
the south region is a net generation-importing area and is
highly dependent on sul~plies from the north-eastern
parts of the IEEE-RTS. ]Introducing a wheeling load in
the south region therefore increases that region's depen-
dency on supplies from the north and consequently
increases the pressure on transmission facilities respon-
sible for transporting the increased supplies to the (sOuth)
region. On the other hand, the effects of wheeling in the
opposite direction from bus 8 to bus 16 as shown in
Figure 8 are observed to be generally minimal and
virtually negligible at a number of load points• This
occurs because introduction of a wheeling source in the
south region makes generation supplies more readily
available to the region a:ad reduces the region's depen-
dence on supplies from the north. Generally, adequacy
at load points directly bavolved in the wheeling oper-
ation are the ones most affected, although the effects
can spread to immediate neighbouring load points as
well. Whilst an improvement in adequacy is noticed at
the wheeling source, the wheeling sink and the load
points surrounding it generally experience a deterio-
ration in adequacy.
IV.1.2. Inter-system wheeling results
Figures 9 and 10 show variations in the EENS indices at
the load points when up to 50 MW of power is wheeled
through the interconnected RBTS with the wheeling sink
connected to bus 2 and to bus 3 respectively. Similar
results for the IEEE-RTS are shown in Figures 11 and 12
when up to 100 MW of power is wheeled through the
system with buses 8 and 17 serving as the interconnection
points of the wheeling source and the sink.
It can be observed that the results shown by these
figures are fairly similar to those obtained in the case of
intra-system wheeling. The worst impacts in the case
of the RBTS are obtained when the wheeling source is
connected to any of the two generation buses in the
northern part of the system. In the case of the IEEE-
RTS, the worst wheeling impacts result when the wheeling
power has to be tapped from the net generation-importing
(south) region. It can therefore be concluded that the
provision of additional generation supplies to satisfy
effectively the increased demand resulting from an intro-
duced wheeling load is significantly influenced by the
availability of sufficient composite generation and trans-
mission capacity in the system, and this is reflected in the
calculated reliability indices.
IV.2 System indices
IV.2.1. Intra-system wheeling results
Figure 13 shows variations in the overall system severity

(a) I n t r a - w h e e l i n g to BUS2 (a) l n t r a - w h e e l i n g to BUS8

52
•~ 9Ol- . _ _ - ~ "~ sl From
E° 8o":, ....... ~,--~-..l..~.mm-m-.ll ~o so 17 BUS 16
70 " ~ 49 • BUS 19
• ~_V.s.~g
x 50 " x 47

45 I p ~ ' - m - - i - ml" ~ _ _ i - - 0 " ~ " -

"E 20 ~I...t..41I~t_H_.I__ 1 Wheeling
I0 , I , , , , ' ' ' I ~ 4 3 ~
u~ 5 I0 15 20 ;!5 30 35 40 45 50
From ~ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
A BUS 1
Wheeling power (MW) Wheeling power (MW)
x BUS 2
[] _B_U__S__3
(b) Intra-wheeling to BUS3 (b) I n t r a - w h e e l i n g from BUS 8
• BUS 5
~" 210 I ~"
o 53
• BUS 6
52
• 170 "T= 51
150 50 To
130 1 ~ . x i x 49 [ ] BUS 16
110 ~ ~ 48 • BUS 19
_~.ICI
41,
+ ".-..e
x 901 ~ - l l - -•- -•- -I I - - - ~ - ~ "~ 46 • .B..U_.S..2.0_
"~ 70 -'.
s0 ~'. ~ 4s n

I I I I I I I I I I
>o io , , ",~-~~P-i~~F-+,e-9, ~ 43
cy~ 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Wheeling p o w e r MW) Wheeling power CMW)
Figure 1 3. Variation in severity index w i t h intra-system Figure 1 4. Variation in severity index w i t h intra-system
w h e e l i n g p o w e r within the RBTS w h e e l i n g p o w e r within the IEEE-RTS
1 50 Impact of power wheeling on composite system adequacy. R. Billinton and F. Gbeddy

index when up to 50MW of power is wheeled from
different locations to supply wheeling loads located at
buses 2 and 3 of the RBTS respectively.
It can be observed that wheeling from and to different
parts of the RBTS produced different and varying degrees
of impact on overall system adequacy. A slight drop in
the value of the severity index is noticed when wheeling is
done from most parts of the system to supply a wheeling
load at bus 2. This indicates slight improvements in
overall system adequacy compared with the level of
system adequacy that existed prior to the start of the
wheeling operations. Wheeling operations involving only
buses located in the heavily loaded southern section also
produce similar or no effects on the severity index.
Wheeling from either bus 1 or bus 2 in the north is
generally undesirable as this results in a deterioration in
the level of overall system adequacy. As noted earlier, this
condition is due to capacity limitation problems experi-
enced by the lines responsible for bulk power movement
from the north to the south. The lines are therefore
unable to accommodate effectively the entire range of
wheeling power imposed on the RBTS.
The variations in overall system severity index when up
to 100MW of power is wheeled from and to different
parts of the IEEE-RTS are shown in Figure 14.
The impacts obtained for the various wheeling opera-
tions considered are observed to be sensitive to the
proximity of the wheeling source and sink locations to
the swing bus (i.e., bus 23). Capacity deficiencies are
noted to be accountable for the bulk of inadequacy in
the IEEE-RTS TM and these frequently lead to swing bus
overload conditions mainly affecting load points,
particularly in the north region ~. Hence introduction
of a wheeling source close to the swing bus tends to
suppress the occurrence of swing bus overload condi-
tions, thus prOducing a considerable improvement in
overall system adequacy. When the wheeling source is
located farther away from the swing bus or the wheeling
load is introduced close to the swing bus, reduced levels
of improvement in overall system adequacy are obtained.
Referring to the single-line diagram of the IEEE-RTS
shown in Figure 2, bus 20 is directly connected through
a double circuit to bus 23 which served as the swing
bus in these analyses. Bus 19 is farther away from the
swing bus than bus 20, and bus 16 is still farther
away from it than the previous two buses. It can there-
fore be seen from Figure 14a that relatively lower severity
index values are obtained as the wheeling source is
introduced nearer to the swing bus. Introduction of
wheeling loads farther away from the swing bus also
produces similar effects on the system severity index as
shown in Figure 14b.

(a) Sink connected to BUS 2 (b) Source connected to BUS2

i) System load up by 10% i) System load up by 5%
170I 215 / ii

•-.E 160
\ ~.-- ; ¢" 17s
.>-IF= 15s ~'~
,,'/ E ~

>~ ~,
> ~
~ 13s
I~].,,B~"
.,~"
~ 115
j •
1451
o l'S ;o ~s ~o ~s ~0 ~s ~o
i'o 9s- ~ io 1's 2'0 2's 3o ~s 40 .s 5o
Wheeling power (MW) Wheeling power (MW)

ii) System load up by 5% ii) Normal system load

11o 200 Legend
Legend
"o~ 180 / !
~".i.-, lOS~ • Stand-alone • Stand-alone
RBTS
t-- G
•~.F= 160 i
! / RBTS
.~ .E IOO [] Wheeling [] Wheeling
•~ E 140 to BUS 3
from BUS 3
E

>~ 9o
95
x Wheeling
from BUS 5
>~. 120
~ 100
...~.~_.~_~..~.~r x Wheeling
t_o_B_US__S_
85 ., ,,,,, ,.,~, 80, | i i

s 1o is 2% ~s ~o ~s ~o is •50
5 10 15 0 5 30 35 40 5 0
Wheeling power (MW) Wheeling power (MW)

iii) Normal system load iii) System load down by 5%

100 19° F II
x~'~ 1701 /1
-o ~ 150[_ 71
•- ¢ 91
~'F= 13o t / i
"i~
m ~ ~
80
75 70 ~ • I , , , , • • • J-
5, ~
10 i~5 2 ~0 25
~ 30
~ , 40
35 I 45
~ 50 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Wheeling power (MW) Wheeling power (MW)

Figure 1 5. Comparison of severity index variations w i t h inter-system w h e e l i n g p o w e r t h r o u g h the RBTS operating

at different system peak load levels
 Impact of power wheeling on composite system adequacy: R. Billinton and F. Gbeddy
IV.2.2. Inter-system w h e e l i n g results
Severity-index variations,; for wheeling operations in
interconnected systems ;ire generally similar to those
obtained for intra-system wheeling. Figure 15 shows the
effects on the system severity index when wheeling opera-
tions involving bus 2 are undertaken by the RBTS when
operating at three different peak load levels. The different
peak load levels were obEained by varying load propor-
tionally at all the system load points. Similar results were
obtained for the analysis utilizing the IEEE-RTS as
the IPS. These analyses were performed to determine the
relative magnitude of the effects associated with different
wheeling options at different IPS peak load levels. The
severity index value for the stand-alone system at each
load level served as the datum for these comparisons.
It can be observed from Figure 15a that the severity
index values obtained beyond 15 MW of power wheeling
through the RBTS are lower than the corresponding
values for the stand-alone system when the RBTS is
operating at any of the peak load levels considered.
This is an indication that wheeling beyond 15 MW of
power for this (wheeling) option is favourable to the
RBTS. A comparison of the adequacy gains resulting
from the wheeling transactions shows an increase in the
adequacy gains at higher peak load levels. It can therefore
be concluded that wheeling options that are favourable to
the IPS generally tend to be more attractive and beneficial
when the IPS is subjected to a higher system load stress.
On the other hand, Figure 15b shows typical results of
wheeling transactions whose impacts adversely affect the
level of adequacy in the IPS throughout the wheeling
scenario studied for the interconnected RBTS. These
wheeling operations are considered to be unfavourable
wheeling options for the IPS. It can be observed that the
severity index values shown in these figures increase
steadily with wheeling power, and that they consistently
remain above the corre,,~ponding values for the stand-
alone system. The rate,, at which the severity index
increases is generally not uniform, but can be observed
to be higher at higher peak load levels. This is expected
because when the IPS system demand is increased, the
effect of transmission capacity constraints on wheeling
operations become more intensified and this produces
higher severity index values.
V. Conclusions
The concept of quantitatively assessing the impact of
wheeling on composite power system adequacy is dis-
cussed in this paper. It has been shown by utilizing the
COMREL program that a wide range of impacts on load
point and overall system indices is produced by different
wheeling options. The reliability impacts associated with
wheeling options can eit]her lead to an improvement or a
deterioration in the load point adequacy and overall
1 51
system adequacy and in some cases may have relatively
little effect on the indices of the system rendering the
wheeling service. The impact on the indices due to a
specific wheeling operation depends largely on the exist-
ing composite generation and transmission system con-
figuration of the utility system.
The studies clearly illustrate that it is extremely impor-
tant to assess quantitatively the reliability implications
of wheeling operations prior to establishing formal
contracts. The investigations should cover detailed
examination of load point and overall system adequacy
prior to wheeling in order to provide a datum against
which to assess the implications of possible wheeling
options.
Vl. References
1 Billinton, R and Gbeddy, F 'Effects of non-utility generators
on composite system adequacy evaluation' IEEE/PES
Summer Meeting Seattle, WA, July 1992, Paper 92 SM
442 4 PWRS
2 Mukerji, R, Neugebauer, W, Ludorf, R P and Catelli, A
'Evaluation of wheeling and non-utility generation (NUG)
options using optimal power flows' IEEE Power Eng. Rev.
Vol 12 No 2 (1992)
3 Noyes, RGenerationofsteamandelectricpowerNoyesData
Corporation, Park Ridge, New Jersey (1978)
4 Billinton, R, Kumar, S, Chowdhury, K, Chu, K, Debnath, K,
Goel, L, Khan, E, Kos, P, Nourbakhsh, G and Oteng-Adjei, J
'A reliability test system for educational purposes--Basic
data' IEEE Trans. Power Syst. Vol 4 No 3 (1989) pp 1238
1244
5 IEEE Committee Report 'IEEE reliabilitytest system' IEEE
Trans. Power Appar. Syst. Vol PAS-98 (1979) pp 2047-2054
6 Billinton,R 'Composite systemadequacy assessment--The
contingency enumeration approach' IEEE (Power
Engineering Society) Tutorial Course, Course Text 90EH
311-1-PWR: Reliability assessment of composite generation
and transmission systems (1989) pp 29-35
7 Medieherla, T K P 'Reliability evaluation of composite
generation and transmission systems' Master's thesis,
University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon (1982)
8 Kumar, S 'Adequacy evaluation of composite power
system' Master's thesis, University of Saskatchewan,
Saskatoon (1984)
9 Khan, E 'Fast adequacy assessment of composite power
systems' Master's thesis, University of Saskatchewan, Sas-
katoon (1988)
10 BiUinton,R and Allan, R N Reliability evaluation of power
systems Plenum Press, New York & London (1984)
11 Billinton, R and Li, W 'Hybrid approach for reliability
evaluation of composite generation and transmission sys-
tems using Monte-Carlo and enumeration technique' lEE
Proc. C, Vol 138 No 3 (1991) pp 233-241