2019 IEEE International Conference on Power, Electrical, and Electronics and Industrial Applications (PEEIACON) 29 November - 01 December,

2019, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Coherency Based Reduction of a Large Power System

Using PSS/E
Md. Zahid Hasan, *Nahid-Al-Masood, Abdul Hasib Chowdhury, and Azharul Haque
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering
Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology
Dhaka, Bangladesh
zahidhasaneee14@gmail.com , *nahid@eee.buet.ac.bd (Corresponding author), hasib.buet92@gmail.com
azharulhaq2295@gmail.com

Abstract— This paper presents coherency-based reduction of a before aggregation so that time domain behavior of the
large power system network in PSS/E. It consists of methodology network remains same before and after reduction.
of network reduction in PSS/E. Reduction has been done on New PSS/E has a built network reduction tool itself [5]. Coherency
England IEEE 39-Bus System. Coherent generators are identified of generators has also been found out using the dynamic
by applying fault and noticing their swing equation. Static
simulation using this software.
reduction has been done by aggregating the coherent generators
in PSS/E. For dynamic reduction, generator parameters have
been modified manually. Results of static reduction and dynamic II. THEORITICAL BACKGROUND
reduction have been compared with the exact model. The reduced
The entire process of coherency based network reduction is
equivalent model will give a better understanding on a large
power system and analysis will be easier. done in 3 steps – identifying the coherent generators,
aggregation of coherent generators and finally reduction of
Index Terms— Network Reduction, coherency based reduction, network [2]. The following subsection contains the description
PSS/E. of these three steps.
I. INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, the size of a power system is increasing day by
day. The more days go, the more complex it becomes to
represent the power system network of a country. It is easier to
represent and understand the large power system network in a
reduced equivalent model rather than the very exact model.
Representing in a simpler network gives a better understanding
on its behavior. There are a lot more advantages of network
reduction. For example, when we have interest on a specific
part of the network, for example, if a fault occurs, we focus on
that specific part. So, the rest of the network which are distant
form the fault area need not to analyzed in details while
simulating the whole network [1]. A reduced equivalent model
might be helpful in this regard. For that reason, we need to
learn the techniques of reduction of network. Larger power
system will require larger numbers of variables while reduced Figure 1. New England IEEE 39-Bus System [9]
network will have fewer variables. In this paper, we are going A. Identifying the coherent generators
to discuss the methods of building a reduced equivalent model
of a very large power system network in PSS/E and validate A coherent group of generators is defined as a group of
the results by comparing voltages of the remaining buses with generating unit oscillating with the same angular speed and
terminal voltage in a constant complex ratio for a set of
the original network. Time domain simulation in both original
disturbance [6].
and reduced network will be performed in PSS/E.
Network reduction can be classified in two types on the basis
.
of purpose [4]. First type network reduction is done for power = = (1)
.
flow calculation and planning studies. This is called static
reduction. In static reduction loads and generators are Considering the voltage magnitude of the coherent buses to
aggregated with their own kinds. So, the system network be constant,
reduces to some extent. Another purpose is analyzing system − = = (2)
dynamics. For this purpose, dynamic reduction is needed.
Dynamic reduction needs modifying the generator parameters

978-1-7281-5561-6/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE 83

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 19,2020 at 04:42:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This paper determines the coherent generators by
performing time domain simulation in PSS/E. A bus fault is
applied in the internal subsystem and after some time the fault
is removed. Then the rotor angle vs. time characteristics of all
generators are observed in PSS/E. The rotor angles of different
generators are usually different from one another. But a group
of generators shows alike swing angles. These generators are
called coherent generators. Thus, the groups of coherent
generators are identified.
Due to changes in the operating condition of the power
system the dynamics of the generators results in different
coherent groups. Therefore, the coherency of the generators is
affected by the duration, location, type, and magnitude of the
disturbance [7].
B. Dynamic aggregation of generators
Coherent group of generators are aggregated into an
equivalent generator. The aggregation of coherent generator
buses is based on the Zhukov’s method. The voltage of the
equivalent bus is defined as the average voltage of the coherent
generator buses, which can be mathematically expressed as [1].
∑ applied in the internal subsystem and rest of the network is
, = (3)
∑ ,
, = (4)
The mechanical and electrical power of the equivalent
generator are the sum of the mechanical and electrical power of
all the generators in the same coherent group, separately. They
can be represented as follows.
=∑ (5)
=∑ (6)
From mechanical view point, the rotors of
electromagnetically coherent generators can be treated as if they
are rotating on one common rigid shaft. A group of such
generators can be replaced by one equivalent generator with
inertia constant Ma and damping constant Da given by [2].
=∑ M (7)
D =∑ D (8)
The transient reactance of the equivalent generator can be
obtained by paralleling the transient reactance of all the
coherent generators as shown below.
= (9)
∑ of the inertia and damping constants of the coherent generators.
,
= (10)
∑
, relation [5].
C. Reducing Network
While eliminating load buses and aggregating generator
buses, two things must be kept in mind [8]. The voltages and
currents of the retained nodes do not change. Secondly, the
active and reactive power of equivalent node must be equal to
the sum of the active and reactive power injections at the
aggregated nodes. Then, the aggregated equivalent model is
84
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 19,2020 at 04:42:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
constructed by equivalencing the admittance matrix. The
admittance matrix equation can be expressed as follows.
= (11)
Where IR and VR are the current injection and voltage at the
nodes to be retained. ID and VD are node current injection and
voltage at the nodes to be deleted. Equation of VD and I D can
be obtained as follows [8].
= − (12)
I = Y −Y Y V +Y Y I (13)
III. METHODOLOGY
While analyzing a large system, the behavior of a certain
part of the system is point of interest. Such a part of the large
system is called internal subsystem (area) and the rest of the
system is referred to as external subsystem. [3] A fault is
reduced.
For time domain simulation of the network in PSSE/E, the
generators have to be converted into constant MVA loads.
PSS/E has a tool for it named “Convert/Reconstruct Loads and
Generators”. Then dynamic data (data of Generator models,
Exciter models, Turbine Generator models), which is a .dyr file,
is loaded. Then the simulation is run. If there is no problem
with the system, a line will appear in the output bar - “INITIAL
CONDITION CHECK OK". After running for a while, a fault
is applied in the internal subsystem. The simulation runs for
faulted condition until fault is cleared. When the fault is cleared,
the simulation is run again and the rotor angles of all the
generators are observed in PSS/E plot. Thus, coherent
generators are identified.
The New England IEEE 39 Bus System has 39 bus, 10
generators and 28 transmission lines. Bus 1,2,25,30,37,39 is the
internal subsystem which is the area of interest. We will keep
this area like before and everything else will be reduced as
much as possible. We have given a fault in bus no 30 to find out
the coherent groups of generators. We have found 2 groups of
generators- (a) Bus no: 33, 34, 36; (b) Bus no: 35, 38.
Now, these groups of coherent generators are needed to be
aggregated. While aggregation, the inertia and damping
constant of the coherent generator can be expressed as the sum
The obtained constants are of different MVA bases than the
system MVA base. So, the M and H constants are then
converted to the equivalent system base value by the following
∗
, = (14)
∗
, = (15)
The transient and sub-transient d and q axis reactance
of equivalent generator can be obtained by paralleling the
corresponding reactance value of all the coherent generators.
The reactances of generators are also converted into system
base given below.
= (16)

In the equivalent machine, d and q axis time constants,

and , are kept as the same as those of the original
machines.
In PSS/E network reduction tool, generators are converted
into negative loads by netting process. There is tool for netting
generators with loads which in PSS/E. Netting generation can
be found as power flow à equivalence network à
NETG/GNET. The numbers of buses can be given as input Figure 2. Faulted Bus Profile
manually for which netting process will be conducted. Every
bus numbers are separated by a comma.
An electrical equivalent of the network is constructed by
performing a reduction operation on the admittance matrix.
There is a tool for building reduced electrical equivalent named
“Build Electrical Equivalent (EEQV)”. This tool can be
accessed by the path is power flow à equivalence network à
EEQV. One bus from each coherent group remains and the
other buses are reduced. In the Building Electrical Equivalent
(EEQV) window, the numbers of buses that need to reduced
can be given manually. The bus numbers of all load buses and
generator buses of coherent groups can be written manually.
PSS/E assigns identifier ‘99’ for the equivalenced branches and
equivalent loads.

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The test network has 39 bus, 10 generators, 19 loads and 34 Figure 3. Active Power Response of the Internal Subsystem
transmission lines interconnecting them. After reduction, it has
reduced to 20 bus, 7 generators, 16 loads and 27 transmission The rotor angle response of the generator of a bus in the
lines. The voltages of the buses remain almost same before and internal subsystem is given below (smooth graph is for original
after reduction. network and dotted graph is for reduced network):
TABLE I. STATIC NETWORK REDUCTION
Component Original After Reduction
Bus 39 20
Generator 10 7
Load 19 16
Branch 34 27

To assess the accuracy of the equivalent model, a bus fault

is applied on the bus number 30 and cleared after 0.1s.
Simulation is performed on the original and equivalent system
respectively for 2.0s. The faulted bus profile and active power
response of the internal subsystem are as shown in the Fig. 1
and Fig. 2. Figure 4. Rotor angle response of Bus number 37
The efficiency of the equivalent model can be measured in
terms of reducing the number of buses. The term is called
Reduction Ratio (RR) [8], which is given below.

% = × 100% (17)

Reduction Ratio achieved in this paper is 48.72%.

85

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 19,2020 at 04:42:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 V. CONCLUSIONS
This paper proposes a methodology for reducing a large-
scale power system and building an equivalent network in the
PSS/E program. The network reduction is done on the New
England 39 Bus System. Dynamic simulations are performed
to assess the accuracy of the reduced equivalent model on the
equivalent system and the original system respectively. The
number of buses, generators, loads and branches in the original
network are 39,10,19,34 respectively. In the reduced network,
the numbers are 20,7,16 and 27 respectively. The reduction
ratio is 48.72%. Results of dynamic simulations in original and
reduced network show that the reduced equivalent network has
high accuracy in representing the dynamic characteristics of the
original system.

REFERENCES
[1] Machowski, Jan & Bialek, J.W. & Bumby, J.R. (1997). Power System
Dynamics and Stability.
[2] Yang, J.P. & Cheng, G.H. & Xu, Z.. (2005). Dynamic Reduction of
Large Power System in PSS/E. Proceedings of the IEEE Power
Engineering Society Transmission and Distribution Conference. 2005. 1 -
4. 10.1109/TDC.2005.1546815.
[3] Djukic, Dj. S. and Tomislav Šarić. “Dynamic model reduction: An
overview of available techniques with application to power systems.”
(2012).
[4] S. M. Ashraf, B. Rathore and S. Chakrabarti, "Performance analysis of
static network reduction methods commonly used in power systems,"
2014 Eighteenth National Power Systems Conference (NPSC),
Guwahati, 2014, pp. 1-6. doi: 10.1109/NPSC.2014.7103837
[5] Ahmed, Ashik & Ullah, Md. (2010). Dynamic Equivalence of a Large
Power System Using Power System Simulator for Engineers (PSS/E).
Journal of Engineering and Technology. 8. 14-31.
[6] Padiyar, K. R., 2008. Power System Dynamics Stability and Control.
Hyderabad: BS Publications
[7] T. N. Preda, K. Uhlen, D. E. Nordgård and T. Toftevaag,"External grid
representation for assessing fault ride through capabilities of distributed
generation units," 2012 3rd IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid
Technologies Europe (ISGT Europe), Berlin, 2012, pp. 1-9. doi:
10.1109/ISGTEurope.2012.6465743
[8] Amare, Mulugeta Hadis. “Aggregation of Power grid Models.” (2017).
[9] http://psdyn.ece.wisc.edu/IEEE_benchmarks

86

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Exeter. Downloaded on June 19,2020 at 04:42:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.