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

net/publication/229901329

Incorporation of a new wind turbine generating system model into

distribution systems load flow analysis

Article  in  Wind Energy · May 2009

DOI: 10.1002/we.299

CITATIONS READS
31 393

3 authors, including:

Bahtiyar Dursun Mehmet Hakan Hocaoglu

Istanbul Ticaret University
55 PUBLICATIONS   1,061 CITATIONS   
125 PUBLICATIONS   1,864 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

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

Afrika Çalışmaları View project

GREENDC View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Bahtiyar Dursun on 01 May 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

WIND ENERGY
Wind Energ. 2009; 12:375–390
Published online 29 October 2008 in Wiley Interscience
(www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/we.299

Research Incorporation of a New Wind Turbine

Article Generating System Model into
Distribution Systems Load
Flow Analysis
Ulas Eminoglu*, Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Nigde University, Nigde,
Turkey
Bahtiyar Dursun*, Department of Energy Systems, Gebze Institute of Technology, Kocaeli, Turkey
M. Hakan Hocaoglu*, Department of Electronics Engineering, Gebze Institute of Technology, Kocaeli,
Turkey

Key words: This paper describes a new model for wind turbine generating systems (WTGSs) that is
distributed widely used as distributed generation sources. The model is developed by using the
generation;
wind turbine
bi-quadratic equation, which is generally used for the calculation of the line voltages in
generating systems; distribution systems’ load flow analysis, and facilitates computation of real and reactive
radial distribution power outputs of the WTGSs for a specified wind speed and terminal voltage. The devel-
systems; oped model is validated with an experimental setup composed by an induction generator
forward/backward coupled with an induction motor as a prime mover. In addition to that, measured values
sweep algorithms,
load flow analyses
are also compared with the calculated values, obtained by using the turbine models found
in the literature. The incorporation of the developed model into some well-known distribu-
tion systems’ load flow algorithms is detailed. The effect of WTGSs on the power losses,
voltage profile of radial distribution systems are evaluated for the sample test systems.
Additionally, the performance of the load flow algorithms with the new model are
examined and found to be robust and reliable. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 14 January 2008; Revised 28 May 2008; Accepted 13 September 2008

Introduction
Load flow analysis is an important issue in power system planning and operational studies. In the last few
decades, efficient and reliable load flow solution techniques, such as Gauss-Seidel and Newton-Raphson,1,2
have been developed and widely used for power system operation, control and planning in the transmission
level. Although there was no need for the load flow analysis in the distribution level historically, development
in the distribution automation such as using real-time application programs, i.e. SCADA systems, and instal-
lation of distributed generators (DGs) necessitate the power flow analysis in the distribution level as well.
However, it has repeatedly been shown that the conventional Newton-Raphson and Gauss-Seidel algorithms
may become inefficient in the analysis of distribution systems, because of the special features of such
networks, i.e. radial structure, high R/X ratio and unbalanced loads. These characteristic features make the

* Correspondence to: M. Hakan Hocaoglu, Department of Electronics Engineering, Gebze Institute of Technology, Kocaeli 41400,
Turkey.
E-mail: hocaoglu@gyte.edu.tr

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

376 U. Eminoglu, B. Dursun and M. H. Hocaoglu

distribution systems’ power flow computation different and somewhat difficult to analyse as compared
with the transmission systems when the conventional power flow algorithms are used.3 As a result, a robust
and efficient power flow solution method that must be able to contain the special features of distribution
systems is required.
Recently, many researchers have paid attention to obtain the load flow solution of distribution networks,
and accordingly, various methods are available in the literature to carry out the analysis of balanced and unbal-
anced radial distribution systems.4–13 Methods developed for the solution of radial distribution systems
may be divided into two categories. The first type of methods, i.e. developed in Zhang and Cheng, as well as
Teng,4,5 is utilized by proper modification of existing methods such as Newton-Raphson and Gauss-Seidel. On
the other hand, the second group of methods6–13 is based on forward and/or backward sweep processes using
Kirchoff’s Laws or making use of the well-known bi-quadratic equation. Because of its low memory require-
ments, computational efficiency and robust convergence characteristics, forward/backward sweep-based algo-
rithms have gained the most popularity for distribution systems’ load flow analysis. These sweep-based
algorithms generally take advantage of the radial network topology and consist of forward and/or backward
sweep processes. The forward sweep mainly consists of node voltage calculations by using Kirchoff’s Laws6,7
or the bi-quadratic equation8–13 from the sending end to the far end of a feeder and laterals, and the backward
sweep is primarily branch current and/or power summation from the far end to the sending end of the
feeder and/or laterals.
Distributed generations are defined as the generation that is dispersed throughout a utility’s service
territory and either connected to the utility’s distribution system or grid isolated. DG technologies
include photovoltaics, wind turbines, fuel cells, small- and micro-sized turbine packages and so on. These
technologies are entering a period of rapid expansion and commercialization. During the last decade, many
electric power systems around the world have been deregulated and DG is predicted to play an increasing
role in the electric power system in the near future. The introduction of DG sources on distribution
systems can significantly impact the flow of power and voltage condition at customers and utility equipment.14
These impacts include:
• Voltage support and improved power quality;
• Loss reduction;
• Transmission and distribution capacity release; and
• Improved utility system reliability.
In fact, power system operation may be adversely impacted by the introduction of DGs if certain minimum
standards for control, installation and placement are not maintained. For proper installation and placement,
realistic load flow analysis has to be performed. Hence, DGs must be included to the power flow analysis with
their representative features.
One of the most favoured energy sources for DGs is the wind-driven energy production systems, i.e.
wind turbine generating systems (WTGSs).15 The use of WTGSs has been gaining popularity worldwide for
electricity generation since it is clean, environmentally friendly and a free source. Its most important feature
is that it removes dependency to other countries in the energy sector since it is locally available. It is
also acknowledged that they are competitive with the conventional bulk electricity generation systems on cost
account.
Because of its importance and advantages among various distributed generation sources, the effects of
the wind farms on the grid should be properly investigated. Accordingly, these types of DG sources
must be modelled with adequate details but without causing any computational burden for the analysis.
Recently, several models have been developed for WTGSs in the literature,16–19 the effect of these models
on the system characteristics, i.e. power flow convergence and voltage stability limits are also rigorously
analysed.20
Feijoo and Cidras16 were the first to attempt to model the WTGSs. Their models are based on the steady-
state model of the induction machine that is widely used in WTGSs in electricity generations. They proposed
two different models for load flow analysis. Their first model is called PQ model, whose reactive power is

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we
Distribution Systems Load Flow Analysis 377

expressed as a function of the WTGS’s mechanical power input, i.e. wind speed. The other model is
called RX, whose active and reactive power are calculated by using induction machines equivalent circuit
parameters.
Divya and Rao17 also developed models of various types of WTGSs based on a steady-state model of the
induction machine using classical slip formulation that relates the terminal powers with the speed of the
machine. In the model, active power is obtained from the manufacturer-supplied power curve of the WTGS.
In this model, the slip equation of the induction machine is written in a quadratic form and solved numerically.
Cutsem and Vournas18 expressed induction machine powers using the slip of the machine. As a result, a closed
form of expression for the machine’s output active and required reactive powers are provided as a function of
terminal voltage and the rotor slip.
In the study of Hatziargyriou et al.,19 the authors have developed a probabilistic model for the wind turbines.
In the model, induction generator is considered as a special load type that absorbs reactive power from the
network, so reactive power is expressed as a positive sign and an active power negative sign. Coath and Al-
Dabbagh20 investigated the effect of steady-state wind turbine generator models such as squirrel-cage induction
generator, doubly fed induction generator and direct-drive synchronous generator on power flow convergence
characteristics and voltage stability limit. In addition to these, various modelling approaches of wind-driven
power generating systems are compared by giving particular emphasis to the power systems stability problems.
It has also been pointed that the wind turbine modelling is far from mature and needs to be validated
particularly for stability studies.21
Although the most favourite type of the generators sold today for the WTGSs is the double-fed induction
generator type of machines, the installed capacity of the WTGSs is overwhelmingly based on the traditional
fixed speed induction generators.22 Therefore, modelling of this type of generators is still an important task;
for this reason, in the first part of this paper, an analytical model for fixed-speed induction machine-based
WTGSs is developed, and then the validity of the model is tested on a laboratory-scale test system. The results
are also compared with the results of the existing WTGS models.16–18 Second, the incorporation of the model
into the distribution systems’ sweep-based load flow algorithms is described. The effect of WTGSs on the
power losses, voltage profile of radial distribution systems and on the performance of the sweep-based load
flow algorithms are thoroughly analysed in the last section of the paper.

Modelling of the Wind Turbine Generating Systems

In recent years, wind energy systems have been attracting the most attention because of the fact that they are
an environmentally friendly technology and have become cost-competitive compared with conventional forms
of power generation.23 A wind turbine system is a system that converts the wind turbine’s mechanical energy
obtained from the wind into electrical energy through a generator. In a wind turbine, energy conversion from
the wind is described by a cubic relation of the wind speed

1
Pm = ρπ R 2C p( β, λ )u3 (1a)
2
wr R
λ= (1b)
u
where r is the density of air (kg/m3), Cp is the power coefficient, b is the pitch angle of rotor blades (degree),
u is the wind speed (m/s), R is the rotor radius (m), and wr is the angular velocity (rpm). It has been shown
that (Cp) is dependent on the tip speed ratio, l, and the pitch angle, b.15 The relationship between power
coefficient and the tip speed ratio for a typical system is given in Figure 1 for different pitch angles.
The induction generators are generally used in wind turbine for electricity generation and modelled with
standard equivalent circuit from using the concept of a rotating transformer.16–19 Consequently, they are gener-
ally modelled by a five- or six-element circuit that is closely related to the physical system and whose values

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we
378 U. Eminoglu, B. Dursun and M. H. Hocaoglu

Figure 1. Characteristic curves of a wind turbine for different pitch angles

remain constant by ignoring magnetic saturation and thermal nonlinearity. Recently, several models have been
developed for WTGS, especially for induction machines16–18 that are the most used electrical generators for
the systems.22
Feijoo and Cidras16 proposed two models based on the steady-state equivalent circuit of the induction gen-
erator. According to the authors, wind farms with asynchronous generators can be modelled as PQ or RX buses
in the load flow analysis. When the WTGS node is modelled as a PQ bus, produced active and consumed
reactive power is defined, as given in Table I. It could be seen that generated active power is expressed as a
function of the wind speed as in equation (1). On the other hand, consumed reactive power is calculated with
a quadratic equation that depends on active power and is given in equation (2a). The other model in the paper
is called the RX bus model, in which active and reactive powers are calculated by using equivalent circuit
parameters of the induction machine. While active power is defined by equation (2b), which is based on slip
formulation, consumed reactive power is, again, expressed as a function of the machine slip as given in equa-
tion (2c). Both are solved iteratively using a Newton-type algorithm. The implementation of the RX model
into forward–backward sweep-based algorithms is found to be problematic, and therefore excluded from this
study, and the PQ model is used for the analyses.
Divya and Rao17 developed models of various types of WTGSs based on the steady-state model of the used
electrical machines. In the model that is developed for stall-regulated, and fixed-speed induction, machine-
driven WTGSs’ mechanical input power is obtained from the power curve, generally provided by wind turbine
manufacturers or calculated by equation (1). By taking mechanical power as equal to the machine’s electrical
power, Pe, the slip equation of the induction machine is written in a quadratic form and solved using equation
(2d). Consequently, reactive powers on the machine terminal are computed by using the terminal voltage and
the calculated slip of the machine using equivalent circuit parameters of the machine, i.e. rotor and stator
leakage reactance, magnetizing reactance and resistances as given in equation (2e).
Cutsem and Vournas18 proposed various types of induction-machine modelling based on slip relation. Two
different Thevenin equivalent circuits are formed by using the general equivalent circuit of the induction
machine given in Figure c of Table I. Thevenin circuits are driven first, as seen from the terminal (A-A’) and

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we
Distribution Systems Load Flow Analysis 379

Table I. Induction machine models

Reference Equivalent circuit Model Equations

Feijoo and j(X1+X2) Rr+Rs PQ model P from equation (1)

Cidras16 X − Xm X 2
Qe ≈ V 2 c + 2P (2a)
v -jXm Xm
Xc Xm V
RX model (1 − s )
P = − I r2 Rr (2b)
s
(a) Q = f (s ) (2c)
Divya and Rao17 R1 Xl1 Xl2 PQ model P from equation (1)
− b ± b 2 − 4ac
s = min
2a
v Xm R2/s

a = Pe R12 ( X l1 + X m ) + Pe ( X m X l 2 + X l1( X l 2 + X m ))
2 2
(2d)
− V R1( X l 2 + X m )
2 2

(b)
b = 2 Pe R1 R2 X m2 − V R2 X m2
2

c = Pe R22 ( X l1 + X m ) + Pe ( R2 R1 ) − V R1 R22
2 2 2

 X m X l 2 s 2 ( X m + X l 2 ) + X l 1s 2 ( X m + X l 2 )  V 2
2

 + R 2( X m + X l1 )
2

Qe = (2e)
[ R1R2 + s( X m2 − ( X m + Xl 2 ) ( X m + Xl1 ))]
2

+ [ R2( X m + Xl1 ) + sR1( X m + Xl 2 )]

2

Cutsem and Rs Xs Xr PQ model jX m ( Rs + jX s )

Vournas18
A B
R1 + jX1 = (2f)
I Ir Rs + j ( X s + X m )
v
( Rs + jX )
Xm Rs/s
r
jX m r
Re + jX e = (2g)
A ’ ’
B Rr
+ j ( X m + Xr )
s
(c)
( Rs + Re )V 2
Rs+Re(s) Xs+Xe(s) Pe = (2h)
A ( Rs + Re )2 + ( X s + X e )2
I
( X s + X e )V 2
V Qe = (2i)
( Rs + Re )2 + ( X s + X e )2

A’
(d)
R1 Xl+Xr
B
Ir

V1 R2/s

B’

(e)

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we
380 U. Eminoglu, B. Dursun and M. H. Hocaoglu

then from the rotor (B-B’). Both equivalent circuits are given in Table I. The equivalent circuit parameters are
then used to calculate the active and reactive powers of the machine as given in equations (2h) and (2i), given
that the slip is already known. All developed models and their equations for WTGSs mentioned above are
tabulated in Table I.
As summarized above, although there exist some sound induction generator models for the load flow
analysis in the literature, their implementation into the forward–backward sweep-based algorithms are found
to be problematic in terms accuracy, convergence ability and most importantly on the complexity.

A New Model for WTGS

Let us consider the induction motor equivalent circuit referred to the stator side as given in Figure 2. The real
and reactive power at the bus-r can be written as follows
VsVr V2
Pm = cos (θ Zsc − δ s + δ r ) − r cos (θ Zsc ) (3a)
Z sc Z sc
VsVr V2
Qr = sin (θ Zsc − δ s + δ r ) − r sin (θ Zsc ) (3b)
Z sc Z sc
where Vs and Vr stand for the magnitude of the stator voltage and referred rotor voltage, respectively. Zsc is
the magnitude of the short-circuit equivalent impedance. Ps and Qs stand for the terminal active and reactive
powers of the machine, respectively. qZsc, ds and dr show the phase angle of the short-circuit equivalent
impedance and voltages, respectively. Equations (3a) and (3b) can be rewritten as
Pm Z sc Vr
cos (θ Zsc − δ s + δ r ) = + cos (θ Zsc ) (4a)
VsVr Vs
Qr Z sc Vr
sin (θ Zsc − δ s + δ r ) = + sin (θ Zsc ) (4b)
VsVr Vs
using trigonometric identity
cos2(θ Zsc − δ s + δ r ) + sin 2(θ Zsc − δ s + δ r ) = 1 (5)
and substituting equations (4a) and (4b) into equation (5), we get the bi-quadratic equation in terms of stator
and referred rotor voltage and short-circuit equivalent impedance as follows
Vr4 + 2Vr2( Pm Rsc + Qr X sc ) − Vs2Vr2 + ( Pm2 + Qr2 ) Z sc2 = 0 (6)
By recognizing the fact that Qr = 0, the equation can be reduced to
Vr4 + 2Vr2 Pm Rsc − Vs2Vr2 + Pm2 Z sc2 = 0 (7)

Figure 2. Induction motor equivalent circuit

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we
Distribution Systems Load Flow Analysis 381

It is seen from equation (7) that the squared voltage of bus-r, V r2, has two solutions, and can be written as

( 2 Rsc Pm − Vs2 ) − 4 Pm2 Z sc2

2
−2 Rsc Pm Vs2
Vr2 = + − (8a)
2 2 2

( 2 Rsc Pm − Vs2 ) − 4 Pm2 Z sc2

2
−2 Rsc Pm Vs2
Vr2 = + + (8b)
2 2 2
where Rsc and Xsc are the real and imaginary parts of the equivalent short circuit impedance of the machine.
From the equivalent circuit, given in Figure 2, the reactive power balance can be written as in equation (9) as
follows
Pm2 Vs2
Qs = X sc + (9)
Vr2 X m
Substituting the voltage [equation (8)] into the reactive power balance [equation (9)], one can get
( 2 Rsc Pm − Vs2 ) − 4 Pm2 Z s2c
2
Vs2 2 X sc Rsc Pm X scVs2 X sc
Qs = − + + (10a)
Xm 2 Z sc2 2 Z sc2 2 Z sc2

(2 Rsc Pm − Vs2 ) − 4 Pm2 Z s2c

2
Vs2 2 X sc Rsc Pm X scVs2 X sc
Qs = − + − (10b)
Xm 2 Z sc2 2 Z sc2 2 Z sc2
Similarly, the active power balance can be written as
Pm2 Vs2
Ps = Pm + Rsc + (11)
Vr2 Rm
Substituting equation (8), into equation (11) results in

( 2 Rsc Pm − Vs2 ) − 4 Pm2 Z sc2 + P

2
Vs2 2 Rsc2 Pm RscVs2 Rsc
Ps = − + + m (12a)
Rm 2 Z sc2 2 Z sc2 2
2Z sc

(2 Rsc Pm − Vs2 ) − 4 Pm2 Z sc2 + P

2
Vs2 2 Rsc2 Pm RscVs2 Rsc
Ps = − + − m (12b)
Rm 2 Z sc2 2 Z sc2 2
2Z sc
Equations (10) and (12) have a straightforward solution and depend on terminal voltage magnitude, mechani-
cal power input and the equivalent circuit parameters of the induction machine. It is noted that for the induc-
tion generators, the mechanical power is negative because of the change on the flow of power that is transferred
from ‘rotor’ (bus-r) to the ‘stator’ (bus-s). Since there are two solutions of real and reactive power outputs of
the developed model, the required root of the equation, given in equations (10) and (12), must be
determined.
The variation of the active and reactive power output of the generator with different mechanical power input
(Pm) are provided in Figure 3, calculated using both expressions, for a hypothetical machine. From Figure 3,
depending on terminal voltage for each mechanical input, there are two possible solutions for the output active
and reactive powers. For the reactive power, one of these coincides with the unstable equilibrium point of the
machine. Accordingly, reactive power obtained by using equation (10a) is too high when compared with the
mechanical power for each terminal voltage level and is not feasible for the induction generator modelling.
On the other hand, the solution of equation (10b) remains on the feasible region. The same observation could
be made from the variation of the active powers, given in Figure 3(b). Therefore, the solution of equations
(10b) and (12b) are unique for the reactive and active power outputs of the induction generator, respectively.
They can facilitate the computation of real and reactive powers of the induction generator for a specified wind
speed and terminal voltage.

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we
382 U. Eminoglu, B. Dursun and M. H. Hocaoglu

Figure 3. Variation of the reactive power demand (a), and generated active power (b) of the generator with the
mechanical power for different terminal voltages (Vs)

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we
Distribution Systems Load Flow Analysis 383

Test Case
To validate the developed model for WTGSs, an experimental setup composed by an induction generator
coupled with a controlled induction motor is used. The output active and reactive powers of the induction
generator obtained by the developed model, given in equations (10b) and (12b), are compared with the mea-
sured ones. The other models developed in the literature, namely the PQ model of Feijoo and Cidras,16 and
the slip-based equations of Divya and Rao17 and Cutsem and Vournas18 are also considered for the comparison.
The parameters of the induction generator, used in the experimental setup, are given in Table II. The equiva-
lent circuit parameters of the test machine are obtained by applying standard no load and blocked rotor tests.
The developed model is tested for different mechanical torques of the generator as well as the different
terminal voltages, and the variation of the generated active and reactive powers of the generator are provided
in Figure 4 with the values that are calculated by using different models. It is seen from Figure 4a that the
generated active power obtained by using developed model is in close agreement with the measured values of
the experimental setup and those of models developed in Feijoo and Cidras, Divya and Rao and Cutsem and
Vournas.16–18 The same observation could be made from Figure 4b, in which the variation of the reactive power
demand of the generator with respect to the terminal voltage is given. It is found that all models successfully
estimate the reactive power demand of the machine and provide a meaningful figure for the generated active
power when compared with the measured values. Therefore, it can be concluded that models are robust and
facilitates the computation of real and reactive power outputs of the induction generator for a specified wind
speed and the terminal voltage by recognizing that machine equivalent circuit parameters are available.
It is also clear from the results that the proposed model concurs with the literature and the experimentally
obtained data. On the other hand, the models proposed in Feijoo and Cidras and Divya and Rao16–17 neglect
the active power losses of the generator by equating mechanical power input with the output power of the
generator. That introduces loss of accuracy in the produced active, and consequently, reactive power estima-
tions. In addition, the Feijoo and Cidras model16 calculates reactive power with an approximate formula.
Although Feijoo and Cidras provide an exact nonlinear equation for the reactive power that is a function of
rotor slip, this system of equations is difficult to be implemented in distribution systems’ load flow analysis.
Meanwhile, the Divya and Rao model17 requires calculation of machine slip by using a second degree equation
that has multiple solutions and has a very complicated structure with multiple formulas that cause computa-
tional burden in load flow analysis. In addition, however, the equation given in Cutsem and Vournas18 is more
reliable in terms of accuracy; it requires prior knowledge of the rotor slip, which is not readily available in
this type of study. Consequently, they are not suitable for the implementation for the load flow analysis.

Load flow analysis including WTGSs

Incorporation of WTGSs into the distribution systems load flow analysis
Because of its low memory requirements, computational efficiency and reliable convergence characteristic,
forward/backward sweep-based algorithms have gained the most popularity for distribution systems load flow

Table II. Induction generator circuit parameters

Type of parameters Values

Power (kW) 1.5

Voltage (V) 380
R1 (ohm) 1.656
R2 (ohm) 1.656
X1 (ohm) 7.384
X2 (ohm) 7.384
Rm (ohm) 1230
Xm (ohm) 101.5

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we
384 U. Eminoglu, B. Dursun and M. H. Hocaoglu

Figure 4. (a) Variation of the generated active power, and(b) reactive power demand of the generator with the terminal
voltages (Vs) for the test system

analysis in recent years. These sweep-based power flow algorithms can be classified in two categories that are
Kirchoff’s formulation and bi-quadratic equation-based algorithms. For a distribution line model, given in
Figure 5, Kirchhoff’s Voltage Law can be written in complex form as
Vs = Vr + I s Z (13a)

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we
Distribution Systems Load Flow Analysis 385

Vr = Vs − I s Z (13b)

where V̄ s and V̄r stand for phase voltages at bus-s and bus-r, respectively. I¯s represents the line current and Z̄
is the line impedance. In Kirchoff’s formulation-based sweep algorithms developed in Thukaram et al. and
Shirmohammadi et al.,6,7 the forward sweep is mainly node voltage calculation from the sending end to the
far end of a feeder or laterals using equation (13b) for each branch, and the backward sweep is primarily
the branch current calculation from the far end to the sending end using Kirchoff’s Current Law (KVL).
For the same line, the quadratic equation, given in equation (6), can be written in terms of line sending and
receiving ends voltage magnitudes and line receiving end power as follows

Vr4 + 2Vr2( Pr R + Qr X ) − Vs2Vr2 + ( Pr2 + Qr2 ) Z 2 = 0 (14)

The maximum real root of equation (14) gives the line receiving end voltage magnitude. The quadratic equa-
tion can also be written in terms of line sending end powers instead of receiving end powers, as given in
Haque8

( Ps2 + Qs2 ) Z 2
Vr = Vs2 − 2 ( Ps R + Qs X ) + (15)
Vs2

where PS and QS stand for the line sending end active and reactive powers, respectively. The second type of
sweep algorithms, i.e. given in Haque; Eminoglu and Hocaoglu; and Cespedes,8,9,13 is developed by solving
equation (14) or using equation (15) for every branch in the forward sweep process and branch power is updated
in the backward process for the load flow solution of radial distribution networks. Moreover, there are some
sweep-based algorithms10–12 utilized by modification of the quadratic equation, equations (14) and (15),
in different forms due to its requirements of special solution techniques that may be computationally
expensive.
From the formulation of the sweep-based algorithms given in equations (13)–(15), it is clearly seen that
they only require the node powers and the main substation voltage to be known in order to calculate the
node voltages. Accordingly, the developed WTGS model can easily be incorporated into the load flow
analysis because of the fact that active and reactive powers of WTGSs are a function of its terminal voltage
and mechanical power input for a specified wind speed, and both are available during each iteration. Thus, it
can be modelled as a PQ-bus for each iteration with its active power injected into its connected bus, and the
power outputs of the WTGS can easily be computed in each iteration by using equations (10b) and (12b). The
incorporation of the developed WTGS model into the load flow analysis is summarized step by step as
follows

• Step 1. Initialize the bus voltages of the system, and mechanical power of the WTGSs for a specified wind
speed by using equation (1), and the iteration counter, i.e. it = 1.

Figure 5. A simple distribution systems branch

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we
386 U. Eminoglu, B. Dursun and M. H. Hocaoglu

• Step 2. Calculate active and reactive power outputs of WTGSs using equations (10b) and (12b).
• Step 3. Calculate loads and WTGSs currents by using equation (16).

I= ( V ) (
P + jQ *
I=
P + jQ *
V ) (16)

• where V is the node voltage, obtained at ith iteration, P and Q are the active and reactive power of the loads
and WTGS, and the symbol * refers to complex conjugate operator.
• Step 4. Calculate active and reactive power transferred from each branch including losses and each line
currents by using loads and WTGSs powers and currents, respectively.
• Step 5. Calculate each line receiving end bus voltages using forward voltage formulation of the particular
load flow algorithm.
• Step 6. If the convergence tolerance is reached, go to Step 7; otherwise, set the iteration counter as
it = it + 1 and go to Step 2.
• Step 7. Print results.

Application of WTGS to the Radial Distribution Systems

Two distribution networks (33-bus and 69-bus radial test networks) are used to evaluate the effect of
WTGS on the power losses, voltage profile of radial distribution systems and on the performance of the
load flow algorithms. A number of sweep-based algorithms are used and they all have been coded in
MATLAB. Single-line diagram of the test systems and their data can be obtained from their respective
references provided in Table III, in which the load flow result of the test systems with and without WTGS
are depicted.
In load flow analyses, initial voltage magnitude at all buses is considered to be the same as the source bus
(1.0 pu) for both test systems and a tolerance of 10–4 on convergence criteria is used. A WTGS is connected
with a proper compensation system that keeps the power factor higher than 0.95 to the bus that has minimum
voltage magnitude in the test systems, namely bus-33 of the 33-bus system and bus-65 of the 69-bus test system
through a transformer whose parameters are taken from Divya and Rao.17 The wind speed of the WTGS is
considered to be fixed and its mechanical power input is selected as Pm = 1.0 MW.
From Table III, it is clearly seen that the inclusion of a WTGS significantly alters the power intake from
the main substation and total power losses of the test system are also decreased. Moreover, the voltage mag-
nitude of the bus that is WTGS-connected is increased because of the injected active power. Figure 6 shows

Table III. Load flow result of the test systems with and without WTGS

33-bus system8 69-bus system12

With WTGS Without WTGS With WTGS Without WTGS

Ploss (MW) 0.2302 0.3693 0.195 0.2250

Qloss (MVAr) 0.1564 0.2473 0.090 0.1022
WTGS active power generation (MW) 0.9465 0.9502
WTGS reactive power demand (MVAr) 0.3945 0.4069
Substation input (MW) 3.9986 5.0843 3.0469 4.027
Total system active load (MW) 4.715 4.715 3.8021 3.8021
Total system reactive load (MVAr) 2.3 2.3 2.6945 2.6945
WTGS bus voltage V33 V33 V65 V65
(pu) 0.91895 0.87849 0.95462 0.90919
Compensation system reactive power 0.372 – 0.384 –
(MVAr)

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we
Distribution Systems Load Flow Analysis 387

Figure 6. Voltage profiles of the 33-bus test system

the bus voltage magnitude of 33-bus test system for different mechanical power of the WTGS that is connected
to bus-33. It can also be seen from the figure that the inclusion of WTGS not only causes the increase of its
connected bus voltage, but also causes the increase of the voltage magnitude at all buses of the system. The
increase at the voltage magnitudes goes up with the increase in the mechanical power, as a result of injected
active power of the WTGSs.
Table IV shows the voltage magnitudes of the 33-bus test system that has a WTGS and solved by
using different types of forward/backward sweep-based algorithms. From the load flow solutions, it is
seen that all voltages obtained using different sweep-based algorithms are in close agreement when
WTGS is included with the proposed model. All sweep algorithms are converged in almost the same
voltages. The absolute difference between voltage magnitudes is lower than 10–5 pu. This is also observed
for the 69-bus test system. The effect of the proposed WTGS modelling method on the convergence ability
of sweep algorithms is also evaluated for the variation of the WTGS injected power and with the increase
of the WTGS numbers in the distribution systems. First, the convergence characteristics of the sweep-based
algorithms are evaluated with the increase of the WTGS mechanical power as a result of its injected
active power, which is varied from 0 to 1.5 MW. The variation of the iteration number of the algorithms
is given in Figure 7(a).
As seen from Figure 7, the incorporation of WTGS with the proposed model into the load flow analysis
does not significantly affect the convergence characteristics of the algorithms. Although a small increase on
the required iteration number is observed when the mechanical power of the WTGS is increased, the changes
are insignificant. It is also seen that the iteration number of the methods based on the quadratic equation9–12 is
generally small when compared with the KVL-based sweep algorithm,6 and convergence properties of the
quadratic equation-based algorithms are less affected with the variation of the WTGS injected power. Second,
the convergence characteristics of the sweep algorithms are evaluated for the different number of WTGSs
located at different buses in 33-bus test systems. Similarly, it is observed from Figure 7(b) that the iteration
number of the sweep algorithms is not significantly affected with the increase of the WTGS number, and the
required iteration numbers of the sweep algorithms remained almost constant for the test systems. It is noted

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we
388 U. Eminoglu, B. Dursun and M. H. Hocaoglu

Table IV. Voltage magnitudes of the 33-bus test system with one WTGS

Bus No Voltage magnitude (pu)

Sweep Sweep Sweep Sweep Sweep

algorithm6 algorithm9 algorithm10 algorithm11 algorithm12

1 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000

2 0.99694 0.99694 0.99694 0.99694 0.99694
3 0.98233 0.98233 0.98233 0.98233 0.98233
4 0.97446 0.97446 0.97446 0.97446 0.97446
5 0.96667 0.96667 0.96667 0.96667 0.96667
6 0.94711 0.94711 0.94711 0.94711 0.94711
7 0.94361 0.94361 0.94361 0.94361 0.94361
8 0.93876 0.93875 0.93875 0.93875 0.93876
9 0.93247 0.93249 0.93247 0.93247 0.93247
10 0.92664 0.92664 0.92664 0.92664 0.92664
11 0.92578 0.92577 0.92577 0.92577 0.92578
12 0.92427 0.92427 0.92427 0.92427 0.92427
13 0.91814 0.91814 0.91814 0.91814 0.91814
14 0.91587 0.91587 0.91587 0.91587 0.91587
15 0.91445 0.91448 0.91445 0.91445 0.91445
16 0.91308 0.91308 0.91308 0.91308 0.91308
17 0.91105 0.91105 0.91104 0.91104 0.91105
18 0.91044 0.91046 0.91044 0.91044 0.91044
19 0.99641 0.99641 0.99641 0.99641 0.99641
20 0.99283 0.99283 0.99283 0.99283 0.99283
21 0.99212 0.99212 0.99212 0.99212 0.99212
22 0.99149 0.99149 0.99149 0.99149 0.99149
23 0.97874 0.97874 0.97874 0.97874 0.97874
24 0.97206 0.97206 0.97206 0.97206 0.97206
25 0.96873 0.96873 0.96873 0.96873 0.96873
26 0.94498 0.94497 0.94497 0.94497 0.94498
27 0.94213 0.94213 0.94213 0.94213 0.94213
28 0.92920 0.92920 0.92920 0.92920 0.92920
29 0.91987 0.91987 0.91987 0.91987 0.91987
30 0.91582 0.91581 0.91581 0.91581 0.91582
31 0.91688 0.91691 0.91688 0.91688 0.91688
32 0.91758 0.91760 0.91758 0.91758 0.91758
33 0.91895 0.91897 0.91894 0.91894 0.91895

that the KVL-based algorithm developed in Shirmohammadi et al.7 have nearly the same characteristics with
the algorithm given in Thukaram et al.;6 therefore, it is not considered in the comparison. Similarly, quadratic
equation-based algorithms developed in Haque8 and Cespedes13 that show nearly the same convergence char-
acteristic with the algorithms given in Eminoglu and Hocaoglu; Luo and Semlyen; and Rajicic et al.9–11 are
not given in the figure.

Conclusions
In this paper, a new model for wind turbine generating units, used as distributed generation sources, is provided.
The model is developed by using a well-known bi-quadratic equation that is used for the calculation of the
line voltages in some distribution system load flow analysis. Derived analytical model is experimentally veri-
fied with a laboratory-scaled system, and results are also compared with the results of the turbine models
developed in the literature. It is concluded that the developed model is robust, concurs with the literature and
facilitates the computation of real and reactive power outputs of WTGSs for a specified wind speed and

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we
Distribution Systems Load Flow Analysis 389

Figure 7. (a) Variation of the iteration number of the algorithms for different mechanical power of WTGS and (b)
different number of WTGS

terminal voltage easily. The incorporation of the developed model into distribution systems’ load flow algo-
rithms is also described, and the effect of WTGSs on the power losses, voltage profile of radial distribution
systems and on the performance of the load flow algorithms are evaluated. It is also concluded that the incor-
poration of WTGSs with the proposed model into the load flow analysis does not significantly affect the
convergence characteristics of the distribution system load flow algorithms and it can be easily included to the
distribution systems’ load flow analysis. That is because of the fact that active and reactive power of the pro-
posed model are a function of its terminal voltage and mechanical power input (i.e. specified wind speed), and
both are available during each iteration in load flow calculations.

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we
 390 U. Eminoglu, B. Dursun and M. H. Hocaoglu

References
1. Stevenson WD. Elements of Power System Analysis (4th edn). McGraw-Hill: New York, 1982.
2. Tinney WG, Hart CE. Power flow solutions by Newton’s method. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems
1967; PAS-86: 1449–1457.
3. Tripathy SC, Prasad GD, Malik OP, Hope GS. Load flow solutions for ill-conditioned power systems by a Newton-like
method. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems 1982; PAS-101: 3648–3657.
4. Zhang F, Cheng CS. A modified Newton method for radial distribution system power flow analysis. IEEE Transactions
on Power Systems 1997; 12: 389–397.
5. Teng JH. A modified Gauss-Seidel algorithm of three-phase power flow analysis in distribution networks. Electrical
Power and Energy Systems 2002; 24: 97–102.
6. Thukaram D, Banda HMW, Jerome J. A robust three-phase power flow algorithm for radial distribution systems.
Electric Power Systems Research 1999; 50: 227–236.
7. Shirmohammadi D, Hong HW, Semlyen A, Luo GX. A compensation-based power flow method for weakly meshed
distribution and transmission networks. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 1988; 3: 753–762.
8. Haque MH. Load flow solution of distribution systems with voltage dependent load models. Electric Power Systems
Research 1996; 36: 151–156.
9. Eminoglu U, Hocaoglu MH. A new power flow method for radial distribution systems including voltage dependent load
models. Electric Power Systems Research 2005; 76: 106–114.
10. Luo GX, Semlyen A. Efficient load flow for large weakly meshed networks. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems
1990; 5: 1309–1316.
11. Rajicic D, Ackovski R, Taleski R. Voltage correction power flow. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 1994; 9:
1056–1062.
12. Satyanarayana S, Ramana T, Sivanagaraju S, Rao GK. An efficient load flow solution for radial distribution network
including voltage dependent load models. Electric Power Components and Systems 2007; 35: 539–551.
13. Cespedes RG. New method for the analysis of distribution networks. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 1990; 5:
391–396.
14. Willis HL, Scott WG. Distributed Power Generation: Planning and Evaluation. Marcel Dekker Power Engineering
Series: New York, 2000.
15. Heier S. Grid Integration of Wind Energy Conversion Systems. Wiley: New York, 1998.
16. Feijoo A, Cidras J. Modeling of wind farms in the load flow analysis. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2000; 15:
110–115.
17. Divya KC, Rao PSN. Models for wind turbine generating systems and their application in load flow studies. Electric
Power Systems Research 2006; 76: 844–856.
18. Cutsem TV, Vournas C. Voltage Stability of Electric Power Systems. Kluwer Academic Publishers Springer: Boston,
1998; 99–104.
19. Hatziargyriou ND, Karakatsanis TS, Papadopoulos M. Probabilistic load flow in distribution systems containing
dispersed wind power generation. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 1993; 8: 159–165.
20. Coath G, Al-Dabbagh M. Effect of steady-state wind turbine generator models on power flow convergence and voltage
stability limit. Proceedings of AUPEC 2005: The Australasian Universities Power Engineering Conference, Hobart,
Tasmania, Australia, 2005.
21. Coughlan Y, Smith P, Mullane A, O’Malley M. Wind turbine modeling for power system stability analysis-A system
operator perspective. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2007; 22: 929–936.
22. Akhmatov V, Eriksen PB, A large wind power system in almost island operation—a Danish case study. IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems 2007; 22: 937–943.
23. Denny E, O’Malley M. Wind generation, power system operation, and emissions reduction. IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems 2006; 21: 341–347.

Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Wind Energ 2009; 12:375–390
DOI: 10.1002/we

View publication stats