Sandip Chanda et al.

/ International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

Improvement of Economic Aspect of Power Network Congestion Management by Swarm Intelligence based Multi-objective Algorithm
SANDIP CHANDA1*, ABHINANDAN DE2
2

Dept of EE, Techno India, EM4/1 Sector V, Kolkata, India. Dept of EE, Bengal Engg. & Science Univ., Shibpur, Howrah, India.

Abstract: This paper presents a methodology based on a rescheduling algorithm for congestion constrained cost optimization in Particle Swarm Optimization environment. For proper maintenance of security and reliability, the congestion level of lines should be restricted to a stipulated value considering stability and demand constraints. The algorithm, proposed in this paper is capable of limiting line congestion with a minimum management charge without any load curtailment and installation of FACTS devices and it also provides better operating conditions in respect of voltage profile, total line loss and security for the system during contingency. For contingency selection and ranking, a Line Loading Index has also been proposed in this paper. A comparative analysis considering conventional cost optimization has also been presented in this paper which shows the applicability of the algorithm to minimize congestion management cost .It has also been shown that the implementation of the proposed methodology can offer a net saving of congestion cost which may appear as social welfare for the market participants. The proposed algorithm has been shown to be tested on IEEE 30 bus test system and the results obtained, looked promising. Keywords-Congestion management; Rescheduling Algorithm; Contingency; Particle Swarm Optimization; I. Introduction: Due to restructuring and deregulation, the electric utility industries are undergoing rapid changes and are being pushed to operate at optimum stress condition. Thus in a deregulated electricity market transmission congestion has become almost inevitable where insufficient transmission capacity lines have to accommodate for all the requests of transmission service within the region, specially during contingencies like transmission line or generator outage. Moreover congestion of line may in effect lead to cascading failures of the system [1]. Hence congestion management is a challenging task for independent System Operator (ISO) for maintaining stability, security and reliability. An ISO may adopt different congestion management methods proposed by researchers over the years. A generation rescheduling method for alleviation of line overloads using PSO has been proposed in [2].The objective of the method is to minimize the rescheduling of generation to tackle line congestion, which may have a beneficiary impact from the economic considerations, but put less emphasis on the management of the congestion itself. A control method based on power flow tracing and generator re-dispatching has been proposed [3] but the adjustments of generators are not optimal. In [4], the authors have proposed a congestion constrained economic load dispatch using IPSO but the solution could only limit line congestions within the thermal limits of the lines rather than restricting line flows to a desired value. FDR PSO based zonal congestion management with optimal rescheduling of real and reactive power of generators has been depicted in [5] but the contingent conditions and their impact on power flows have not been considered. Penalty based Security constrained optimal power flow (SCOPFs) have been proposed in [6] and [7] where rescheduling cost have been minimized without ascertaining maximum allowable line flow or level of congestion. Moreover, the penalty method applied has to trace and calculate penalties for all the lines, the therefore time complexity of the algorithms may be very high at times. [8] and [9] proposed a voltage stability constrained Optimal Power Flow (OPF) to alleviate congestion, but the proposed generation schedule could not maintain a particular level of congestion during contingencies. Apart from rescheduling of generation, the line congestion can also be managed by employing FACTs devices and HVDC as cited in [10]- [12]. But the excess cost associated with these devices may prohibit their use in many existing systems. In [13], [14] load curtailment based congestion management has been proposed, but the value of lost load (VOLL) may restrict its practical implementation. In [15] a generator and load participation factor based congestion management technique has been proposed which curtails the specific loads contributing more to congestion. But sustained load curtailment may again be prohibitive in many

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4434

Sandip Chanda et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

systems. Dynamic control of congestion as reported in [16] may be too expensive and also require precise monitoring. In the present work, the congestion zones in a power network are first identified using a line loading index method described in section II. The computed line loading indices further assists to develop the ranking table where most congested (heavily loaded) lines can be easily identified. Tripping of one or more of these lines lead to even greater level of congestion in the remaining lines. The objective of the present work is to relieve congestion in these lines by formulating a penalty based congestion constrained OPF problem and solving the same using Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) technique as described in section II. The OPF solution attempts to reschedule the generators in such a way that the individual line flows are brought down to a desired level, not exceeding their loadability limits. The effectiveness of the proposed algorithm has been demonstrated on the modified IEEE 30 bus system under contingencies. The results indicate that the method proposed in this paper is efficient in limiting line congestion at the cost of a nominal congestion management charge without any load curtailment and installation of FACTS devices. The proposed method also provides better management of bus voltage profile, reduces the total line loss and improves the security of the system in the event of contingencies. The work in this paper has been divided into two sections. The first section is the theory containing problem formulation, implementation of the proposed methodology with PSO and the formulation of the proposed line loading index. Simulation and results to depict the applicability of the proposed methodology to minimize congestion, operating cost and to offer a net saving in respect of congestion management cost have been presented in the second part of the paper. II. Theory: The proposed methodology rests on proper formulation of the objective functions along with the constraints. The methodology has been primarily used with voltage security and line loss penalty based optimization along with conventional cost optimization and then it has been applied with the proposed congestion constrained cost optimization problem using PSO. The equality, inequality and security constraints , however remains same for the all the two algorithms and the proposed algorithm. A. Problem formulation: Objective function for conventional cost optimization: Minimize

F = CT
n =1

NG

$/hr

(1) (2)

2 Ci = APgi + BPgi + C

=No of generators A, B, C = cost co-efficient of generators Pgi = generation of ith generator in MW.
NG

Objective function for voltage and line loss penalty based optimization: Minimize

F = CT + p1xVmin + p 2 xPl max $/hr

n =1

NG

(3)

p1 =Penalty for voltage Vmin = Minimum bus voltage in p.u. to be allowed. p 2 =Penalty for line loss Pl max =Maximum limit of line loss to be allowed
Objective function for the proposed voltage , line loss and congestion penalty based optimization Minimize

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4435

Sandip Chanda et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

F = CT + p1xVmin + p 2 xPl max + p3 xPij max $/hr

n =1

NG

(4)

p3 =Penalty for congestion Pij max =Maximum line flow to be allowed between ith and jth bus.
The penalties are added only when the constrains violate their limit as in case of static penalty optimization. The constraints are common for all the above objective functions and are as follows: 1. Equality or power balance constraints:

PGi PDi Vi V j (Gij cos ij + Bij sin ij ) = 0

(5) (6)

QGi QDi Vi V j (Gij sin ij Bij cos ij ) = 0

i =1

i =1 n

PGi =Active power injected in bus i PDi =Active power demand on bus i Vi =magnitude of voltage of buse i V j = magnitude of voltage of buse j Gij =Conductance of transmission line from bus i to j Bij = Susceptance of transmission line from bus i to j
n=

no of buses

2. Inequality or generator output constraints:

min max Pgi Pgi Pgi

(7) (8)

min gi

Qgi Q

max gi

Pgi , Qgi = Active and reactive power of generator i respectively

min min Pgi , Qgi =Upper limit of active and reactive power of the generators max max Pgi , Qgi =lower limit of active and reactive power of the generators

3.Voltage constraint:

Vi min Vi Vi max Vi
max

(9)

, Vi

min

are upper and lower limit of Vi

4. Transmission constraint:

Pij max Pij Pij min Pij max , Pij min are the max and minimum line flow limits of Pij

(10)

B. Line loading index : The loadability limit of transmission lines are restricted by several constraints. In many cases the transmission capacity is limited by thermal capacity of the lines . However, it has been established in [17] [18] that in case of long EHVAC lines the synchronous (Angular) and static voltage stability limits play more predominant role in restricting the power flow through long lines . For such lines , the surge impedance loading (SIL) level can be considered as sufficiently accurate loadability limit. The SIL level for such lines is generally lower than the thermal capacity of the lines . SIL level of typical uncompensated 400KV line is in the range of 550-625 MW depending upon number of sub-conductors, bundle conductor configuration, tower structure etc., whereas thermal limit is of the order of 800-900MW.Hence in the present paper a line loading indexing method has been proposed to identify the congested lines in the system , which have power in the vicinity of SIL limit. The proposed method is more practical than the earlier security sensitivity indices method [3] which rely on the

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4436

Sandip Chanda et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

thermal limits of lines. The lines having high value of loading index represent the most congested lines in a system, and outage or further loading of these lines will lead to the worst possible contingencies of the system. The congestion level of a line can be judged by an index proposed as Line loading index =

Pij SIL

(11)

Pij = Line flow between ith and jth bus

SIL= surge impedance loading of the line It is quite imperative that the higher the value of this index, the higher is the congestion level and lower is its security level of that line.

C. Methodology implementation with PSO : PSO is a population based optimization method first proposed by Kennedy and Eberhart in 1995.[19]-[20]. This algorithm is motivated by social behavior of organisms, such as bird flocking. In PSO, a number of particles constitute a swarm, and each particle is a solution of the optimization problem. The position of each particle in represented by XY axis position and also velocity is expressed by Vx (velocity in x axis ) and Vy( velocity in Y axis). vik +1 = wVi k + c1 xrand1 (....) x( pbesti xik ) + c2 xrand 2 (....) x( gbest xik ) . (12)

xik +1 = xik + vik +1

(13)

Each particle knows its best value so far (pbest) and its XY position. This information is analogy of personal experience of each agent. Moreover each agent knows its best value so far in the group (gbest) among pbests.

pbest

t +1 i

pbestit = t +1 xi

if f ( xit +1 ) > pbestit if f ( xit +1 ) < pbest ti

(14)

t t gbestit +1 = best ( pbest1t +1 , pbest2+1 ............ pbest N+1 )

(15)

Each agent tries to modify its position using the following information : The current position (x,y). the current velocities(Vx,Vy). The distance between current position and pbest and the distance between current position and gbest.

III. Case study on modified IEEE 30 bus system : The feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed algorithm has been demonstrated in the modified IEEE 30 bus system shown in Fig. 1. The summary of relevant data from the modified IEEE 30 bus system is presented in Table IA and IB.A detailed description of the system is provided in appendix I along with parameter setting of adopted PSO.

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4437

Sandip Chanda et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

Fig.2 The standard IEEE 30 bus system TABLE IA: SYSTEM DESCRIPTION FOR CASE STUDIES

Sl. No 1 2 3 4 5

Variables Buses Branches Generators Generator buses Total demand (MW)

30 bus system 30 41 6 6 283.6

TABLE IB: GENERATOR COST CO-EFFICIENT OF IEEE 30 BUS SYSTEM

Bus no

Real Power output limit in MW Min Max 50 20 15 10 10 12 200 80 50 35 30 40

Cost Co-efficient a (US$/MW2) 0.00375 0.01750 0.06250 0.00834 0.02500 0.02500 b (US$/MW) 2.00 1.75 1.00 3.25 3.00 3.00 c (US$) 5000 1000 600 300 350 400

1 2 5 8 11 13

A. The step by step procedure followed in the present study are as follows : 1. For a given generation and load pattern, ac load flow analysis in the IEEE 30 bus system under study has been carried out using Newton-Raphson load flow method and overloaded lines have been selected using the proposed Line Loading index method described in Section II. 2. Six most congested lines were identified based upon their loading indices presented in Table II. It is obvious that tripping of one of these lines would lead to worst possible scenario in respect of congestion. 3. A multiobjective congestion constrained cost optimization algorithm has been developed using particle swarm optimization. 4.For outage of each of the six congested lines , according to the ranking table ac load flow has been carried out to determine the degree of congestion. 5. The constraints are set in PSO based OPF , each for maximum line flows ,line losses and minimum bus voltage amplitudes. 6. The results of PSO are evaluated to determine constraint violation. The penalties are applied for violation of maximum line flow limits , minimum value of p.u. bus voltage and on actual value of the line losses. 7. PSO search algorithm now looks for the optimal generation pattern which minimizes the overall operational cost including cost of generation , power loss charges , penalty charges for congestion and poor voltage profiles. 8.The search procedure repeats the following steps for a given number of iterations. The parameter setting of PSO based search is given in the appendix. i) velocity of the particles with inertia weight have been found according to equation[12]

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4438

Sandip Chanda et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

ii) The velocity is added with the previous iteration solution to obtain the new set of population following the equation [13] iii) Ac power flow has been carried out and the fitness function is calculated as stated in step5. iv) Compare fitness values and find the best possible solution. B. The detailed flow chart of the proposed algorithm is given in fig.2

Fig 2. Flowchart of the Proposed methodology

C. Identification of most vulnerable lines in terms of congestion by Line Loading Index : For proper identification and assessment of the congestion zone in the system, at the outset, the study concentrates on the determination of most congested lines using the proposed line loading index developed in section II. The ranking table (Table II) represents 38 lines with their respective line loading indices. With the help of this table, congested lines of the system can be identified and proper congestion relief can be implemented.

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4439

Sandip Chanda et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

TABLE II: SELECTION OF VULNERABLE LINES BY LINE LOADING INDEX

line no

power(MW)

1-2 1-3 2-4 2-5 2-6 3-4 4-6 4-12 6-7 6-8 6-9 6-10 7-5 9-10 10-20 10-17 10-21 10-22 11-9 12-14 12-15 12-16 13-12 14-15 15-18 15-23 16-17 18-19 20-19 21-22 22-24 23-24 25-26 27-25 27-29 27-30 28-27 29-30

117.7962 59.44315 34.07481 63.01612 45.4126 55.59228 50.85563 30.17419 34.65778 10.09864 24.83771 12.25928 11.53319 18.50686 10.04907 6.59687 17.84925 8.9778 12.176 7.60297 17.39429 5.97692 12 1.33518 5.02098 5.31357 2.44593 1.79543 7.73483 0.2059 9.10916 2.08428 3.54677 1.32728 6.20025 7.10515 14.63268 3.70687

Line Loading index 0.818029 0.4128 0.236631 0.437612 0.315365 0.386058 0.353164 0.209543 0.240679 0.070129 0.172484 0.085134 0.080092 0.12852 0.069785 0.045812 0.123953 0.062346 0.084556 0.052798 0.120794 0.041506 0.083333 0.009272 0.034868 0.0369 0.016986 0.012468 0.053714 0.00143 0.063258 0.014474 0.02463 0.009217 0.043057 0.049341 0.101616 0.025742

D. Determination of line flow limit: It is evident from the ranking Table II, 6 lines namely 1-2,2-5, 1-3, 3-4, 4-6 and 2-6 are most congested and it is quite apparent that their exclusion form the system would represent worst possible single line contingencies. It may be noted that with the increase of congestion, the security level of the lines decreases and at the same time the penalty cost associated with congestion level goes up. On the contrary relieving congestion in the lines will demand rescheduling of generation and increased generation cost, commonly termed as congestion relief cost. Thus the particular level of congestion relief to be adopted is an important area of study. Table III presents the cost of congestion relief (increased generation cost due to rescheduling) against various allowable levels of line congestion. In standard IEEE 30 bus system most of the line flows remain below 50% of their SIL limits (below the congestion threshold point). However in contingent condition, the line flows exceed this congestion threshold, and some relief measures have to be adopted. The example case presented in Table III, thus corresponds to one such contingency condition, with line 1-2 tripped. It is evident that the line

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4440

Sandip Chanda et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

flow limit can be restricted to any arbitrary value but only at the cost of rescheduling .The maximum line flow limit, in practice should be chosen at such a value that it can cater possible new transactions and increase in load demand in future without exceeding SIL as well . Henceforth the line limit has been set at 50% of SIL.
TABLEIII: VARIATION OF CONGESTION RELIEF COST (RESCHEDULLING COST) FOR DIFFERENT ALLOWABLE LEVELS OF CONGESTION WITH 1-2 LINE TRIP

Line flow as a percentage of SIL 40% 50% 70% 100% 110%

Rescheduling cost $/hr 1171.108 59.85 16.12 5.8 0.28

E. Relieving congestion by imposing Penalty : A practical approach for relieving congestion in the power lines would be to impose penalty for line flows exceeding the preset threshold limit for congestion. (50% of respective line SIL limits). Under this proposed congestion penalty regime, the system operator will be forced to reschedule the generation and transmission of power to avoid paying high penalty charges for routing power through already congested lines. The rescheduling of generation would generally mean an increase in generation cost above the optimum generation cost based upon cost co-efficients of generators alone . The objective should now be to optimize the overall operational cost of the power generating system including the cost of generation as well as the penalty cost due to congestion. The line losses under rescheduled power flow condition must be taken into consideration in the optimization problem. Further the voltage profile of the buses have to be maintained within the stipulated limits(5%) of the nominal values . This can be ensured by imposing additional penalty for any deviation of load bus voltages beyond these stipulated limits. Thus the present problem reduces to a multi objective optimization problem described in section. The case study on IEEE 30 bus system under various contingent conditions demonstrate that the proposed multi-objective optimization will lead to minimization of overall operational cost of the system ( cost of generation plus various penalty charges ) at the same time relieving congestion on power lines and thereby enhancing the security The present case study deals with n-1 contingency(1 from n elements to be contingent) of the system . Every time, the proposed algorithm reschedules the generators to achieve a feasible solution maintaining the voltage , power loss and congestion constraints. The table VI depicts the results of the case study where a comparison of line flows between the conventional method and the proposed method. In deregulated environment, the ISO can use this algorithm to re-schedule the GENCOS for required level of congestion management during contingency..
TABLE IV: COMPARISON OF LINE FLOW WITH CONVENTIONAL, AND PROPOSED PENALTY BASED OPTIMISATIONS

Tripp ed lines

Conventional Optimization without any Penalty Gener Line min Max aloss volta line tion (M ge flow cost W) (pu) (MW ($/hr) ) 8490 8490 8470 8460 8460 8460 16.2 9 18.3 2 12.3 2 12.1 4 10.3 5 10.2 6 0.991 7 0.990 4 0.992 8 0.993 0.991 3 0.992 151.3 0 103.4 9 169.4 7 167.2 9 129.2 6 104.4 3

Optimization with voltage and power loss Penalty Gener Line Max aMin loss line tion volta (M flow cost ge W) (MW ($/hr) (PU) ) 8600 9250 8520 8520 8490 8490 8.43 6.58 5.99 5.99 5.99 5.99 0.994 7 0.993 2 0.992 6 0.992 6 0.992 5 0.992 5 101.0 5 41.44 98.01 98.01 84.34 69.68

Optimization with voltage ,power loss and congestion Penalty Generati on cost($) Line loss (M W) Min volta ge (PU) 0.994 4 0.993 4 0.992 4 0.992 6 0.992 1 0.992 4 Max line flow (M W) 71.9 9 50.5 9 71.9 8 71.9 9 71.9 4 69.6 6

1-2 2-5 1-3 3-4 4-6 2-6

8560 8910 8560 8550 8510 8490

5.73 6.81 5.18 5.26 5.98 5.99

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4441

Sandip Chanda et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

It is observed that the proposed multi-objective OPF algorithm can effectively reduce line flows only by rescheduling of generation and without any load curtailment or installation of FACTS devices. As expected, the generation cost increases due to the change in individual contribution of the generators but overall savings in operational cost shall be achieved due to reduction in the penalty charges on congestion, voltage and power loss. The comparison of overall operating cost has been depicted in table V.
TABLE V: COMPARISON OF OPERATING COSTS

OPF without penalties Cos t of gen erati on ($/h r) 849 0 849 0 847 0 846 0 846 0 846 0 Penalty For Pow er loss ($/hr ) 316. 29 344. 86 213. 31 205. 55 130. 31 127. 30

OPF with voltage constraint and power loss charges Cost of gener ation ($/Hr ) 8600 9250 8520 8520 8490 8490 Penal ty cost for cong es tion ($/hr ) 116.2 3 36.61 104.1 1 104.0 6 49.58 0.07 Penalty For Pow er Loss ($,hr ) 81.9 7 7.36 24.5 7 22.1 7 0.40 0.05

OPF with voltage constraint, power loss charges and congestion penalty Cost of gener ation ($/hr ) 8560 8910 8560 8550 8510 8490 Penal ty cost for cong estion ($/hr) NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL Penal ty For Powe r Loss ($/hr ) NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL

Tripped lines

Penalty cost for congestion ($/hr)

Total opera t ing cost ($/hr)

Total Oper ating cost ($/hr)

Total operati ng cost ($/hr)

1-2 2-5 1-3 3-4 4-6 2-6

317.23 211.58 389.95 381.16 229.23 139.06

9120 9040 9070 9050 8820 8720

8800 9200 8650 8650 8540 8490

8560 8910 8560 8550 8510 8490

The net saving in operational cost can now be defined as the difference between un-constrained operation (simply based on optimal generation schedules) and constrained based optimal operation (including various penalty charges). Table VI demonstrates the net savings achieved by i) voltage and power loss constrained OPF ii) congestion, voltage and power loss constrained OPF.
TABLE VI: SAVING WITH RE-SCHEDULLING

Tripped lines

net savings for OPF with voltage constraint and power loss charges ($/hr) 560 130 510 500 310 230

1-2 2-5 1-3 3-4 4-6 2-6

net savings for OPF with voltage constraint, power loss charges and congestion penalty ($/hr) 239 292 891 966 334 92

Congestion Management Cost : The congestion management cost can be defined as the difference between the generation cost of the conventional method and generation as in the multi-objective multi-constraint OPF obtained from the proposed algorithm. The power loss management cost and voltage profile management cost are defined in similar manner and the same has been calculated .Table VII shows the variation of congestion management cost as well as voltage and power loss management cost in the proposed OPF under various contingent operation of the system. The ISO may recover this excess charge from the market participants.

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4442

Sandip Chanda et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

Table VII: VARIATION OF CONGESTION MANAGEMENT COST WITH CONTINGENCIES

Tripped lines

1-2 2-5 1-3 3-4 4-6 2-6

Voltage and power loss management cost for OPF with voltage constraint and power loss charges ($/hr) 110 760 55.2 56 36.1 35

congestion management charge for OPF with voltage constraint, power loss charges and congestion penalty ($/hr) 71.3 42.7 92.3 87.7 49.1` 34.9

OPERATIONAL ISSUES :
A. Generation Shift: As mentioned earlier , the multi-objective OPF algorithm leads to wide generation shift from the conventional generation cost coefficient based optimal generation scheduling .Further this generation will be variable depending upon the operating conditions and contingencies making it even more difficult for the GENCOs to pre-plan their generation schedule. In real time operation, the ISO has to negotiate with the GENCOs to realize this in practice. Sometimes the GENCOs may charge this additional amount for this generation shift which may further be incorporated in congestion management cost. [5] Fig. 3 depicts the shift in generation under voltage and line loss constrained OPF and under congestion voltage and power loss constrained OPF from the base case (unconstrained optimal generation schedule) for normal operating condition of the system.

Fig3. Comparison of generation Shift

B. Improvement in Voltage Profile :

Another important feature of the proposed algorithms is the improvement in voltage profiles .Fig. 4 shows the comparison of voltage profiles between the two algorithms and the conventional cost optimization . The voltage profile with penalty algorithms is better than the conventional cost optimization method. Hence it can be inferred that the congestion management cost not only relieves congestion but also improve the voltage profile. Improvement in voltage profile suggests an improvement in power transfer capability of the line.

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4443

Sandip Chanda et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

Fig.4 Comparison of voltage profile

C. Reduction in Power Loss:

Improvement of performance of a power system network depends on line loss minimization. Along with congestion management, the proposed algorithm can cause a considerable reduction in total line loss . Fig 5 shows the comparison of total line losses of the network with the conventional and proposed algorithms. During the consideration of the generation shift, the cost of power losses and the corresponding saving need also to be calculated.

Fig 5. Comparison of total line losses

Conclusion: A PSO based methodology has been proposed in this paper for congestion management in a contingent system at a minimum cost of management but without any load curtailment. On violation of a stipulated line flow , an additional penalty has been added to the objective function to direct the PSO based search process to the most feasible optimal solution considering the constraints . In doing so , line congestion has been limited to a specified value by generation re-scheduling. It has been also been observed that the bus voltage profile of the system has improved and total system loss has decreased appreciably with the application of the proposed algorithm. The net increase in cost in the proposed method is contributed due to generation rescheduling to maintain limited congestion and net decrease in cost is due to voltage improvement and reduced loss. It has also been shown that in the present deregulated power market scenario, the proposed methodology can offer a net saving of congestion cost to the market participants and can thus contribute to social welfare without affecting the sustainability of power supply. For proper assessment of congestion and security an index being referred as line loading index has also been proposed in this paper to assist proper selection of contingency. The IEEE30 bus system is analyzed to establish the technique. The results show that the proposed algorithm develops a cost effective congestion management technique in a restructured contingent power system which can be used by effectively used by ISO.

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4444

Sandip Chanda et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

References:
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] Ye Peng , Yao Bing , Song Jiahua, Comparison study of Spot Price under Transmission Congestion with Different Control Mechanism, IEEE/PES Transmission and Distribution Conference & Exhibition : Asia and Pacific Dalian, China K. Selvi, T.Meena , Dr.N.Ramaraj ,A generation Rescheduling Method to Alleviate Line Overloads using PSO, IE(I) Journal-EL,2005 Yu Xiaodan, Jia Hongjie, Zhao Jing, Wei Wei, Li Yan , Zeng Yuan, Interface Control Based on Power Flow Tracing and Generator Re-redispatching, Automation of Electric Power Systems IEEE,2008 G.Baskar, M.R. Mohan, Contingency constrained economic load dispatch using improved particle swarm optimization for security enhancement, Electric Power System Research Elsevier ,2008 E.Muneender, M.D. Vinod Kumar,Optimal Rescheduling of real and reactive powers of generators for zonal Congestion Management Based on FDR PSO, IEEE T&D Asia, 2009 Sujatha Balaraman, K.Kamaraj , Congestion management in Deregulated power system using real coded genetic algorithm, International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology , Vol2(11),2010,6681-6690 Sujatha Balaraman , K. Kamaraj, Application of Diffrential Evolution for Congeation management in power system, Modern Applied Science ,Vol 4, No 8, August 2010 Zhao Jinli, Jia Hongjie, Yu Xiaodan, Voltage Stability Control Based on real power flow tracing ,Proceedings of CSEE, IEEE,2009 Xiaosong Zou, Xianjue Luo, Zhiwei Peng ,Congestion Management Ensuing Voltage Stability under Multicontingency with preventive and Corrective Controls, IEEE,2009 Hwa-Sik Choi, Seung II Moon ,A new Operation of series compensating device under Line Flow Congestion using the Linear zed Line Flow sensitivity, Power Engineering Society winter meeting IEEE,2001 E.M. Yap, M.Al-Dabbagh, P.C. Thum ,UPFC Controller in Mitigating Line Congestion for Cost-Efficient Power Delivery, Power Engineering Conference IPEC, IEEE,2006 Xiao-Ping Zhang , Liangzhong Yao, A Vision of Electricity network Congestion Management with FACTS and HVDC,DRPT2008, 6-9 April, 2008 Nanjing China Garng.M.Huang, Nirmal Kumar , C Nair ,An OPF based Algorithm to Evaluate Load Curtailment Incorporating Voltage Stability Margin Criteria, Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting ,IEEE, 2002 Fei HE, Yihong WANG, Ka Wing CHAN, Yutong ZHANG, Shengwei MEI ,Optimal Load Shedding Stategy Based on Particle Swarm Optimisation, 8th international conference on Advances in Power System Control operation and Management .APSCOM 2009 Igor Kopcak , Luiz C.P. da Silva , Vivaldo F. Da Costa, Jim S. Naturesa,Transmission Systems Congestion Management By Using Modal Participation Factors, IEEE Bologna Power Tech Conference , June 23-24, Bologna ,Italy,2003 J.Ma, Y.H.Song,Q.Lu, S.Mei , Framework for dynamic congestion Management in open power markets, IEE Proc.Gener.Transm. Distrib. Vol.149,No.2 March 2002 R.N.Nayak, Y.K. Sehgal, Subir Sen ,EHV Transmission Line Capacity Enhancement through Increase in Surge Impedance Loading Level, Power India Conference ,2006 K.P. Basu , Power transfer Capability of Transmission Line Limited by voltage Stability : Simple Analytical Expressions, IEEE Power Engineering Review, September 2000 Kennedy, J, and Eberhart.R , Particle Swarm Optimisation,. Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Neural Netw. 1995, Vol 4, pp. 1942-1948 Kennedy, J, and Eberhart.R , A New Optimiser using particle swarm theory,. Proc6th Int Symp on Micro Machine and Human science , Nagoya, IEEE Service Center, October 1995, pp. 39-43

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4445

Sandip Chanda et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

Appendix

BUSDATA OF IEEE30 BUS SYSTEM

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4446

Sandip Chanda et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

LINE DATA OF IEEE30 BUS SYSTEM | From | To | R | X | | pu B/2 | X'mer | | pu | TAP (a) | 0.0264 0.0204 0.0184 0.0042 0.0209 0.0187 0.0045 0.0102 0.0085 0.0045 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.978 0.969 1 1 0.932 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

| Bus | Bus | pu 1 1 2 3 2 2 4 5 6 6 6 6 9 9 4 12 12 12 12 14 16 15 18 19 10 10 10 10 21 15 22 2 3 4 4 5 6 6 7 7 8 9 10 11 10 12 13 14 15 16 15 17 18 19 20 20 17 21 22 23 23 24

0.0192 0.0575 0.0452 0.1652 0.0570 0.1737 0.0132 0.0379 0.0472 0.1983 0.0581 0.1763 0.0119 0.0414 0.0460 0.1160 0.0267 0.0820 0.0120 0.0420 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2080 0.5560 0.2080 0.1100 0.2560 0.1400

0.1231 0.2559 0.0662 0.1304 0.0945 0.1987 0.2210 0.1997 0.0824 0.1923 0.1073 0.2185 0.0639 0.1292 0.0340 0.0680 0.0936 0.2090 0.0324 0.0845 0.0348 0.0749 0.0727 0.1499 0.0116 0.0236 0.1000 0.2020 0.1150 0.1790

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4447

Sandip Chanda et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

23 24 25 25 28 27 27 29 8 6

24 25 26 27 27 29 30 30 28 28

0.1320 0.2700 0.1885 0.3292 0.2544 0.3800 0.1093 0.2087 0.0 0.3960

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0214 0.065

1 1 1 1 0.968 1 1 1 1 1 ];

0.2198 0.4153 0.3202 0.6027 0.2399 0.4533 0.0636 0.2000 0.0169 0.0599

PARAMETER SETTING OF PSO

Name of the parameter Epochs iterations (epochs) to train acceleration const 1 (local best influence) acceleration const 2 (global best influence) Initial inertia weight Final inertia weight Epoch when inertial weight at final value epochs before error gradient criterion terminates run type flag PSO seed Value 20 100 2 2 0.9 0.4 1500 1e-6 0 0

Conventional OPF

Voltage and line loss Constrained OPF COMPARISON OF CONVERGENCE

Voltage, line loss and congestion Constrained OPF

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

4448