ECE 476

POWER SYSTEM ANALYSIS

Lecture 14
Power Flow

Professor Tom Overbye

Department of Electrical and
Computer Engineering
Announcements

 Be reading Chapter 6, also Chapter 2.4 (Network Equations).

 HW 5 is 2.38, 6.9, 6.18, 6.30, 6.34, 6.38; do by October 6 but
does not need to be turned in.
 First exam is October 11 during class. Closed book, closed
notes, one note sheet and calculators allowed. Exam covers
thru the end of lecture 13 (today)
 An example previous exam (2008) is posted. Note this is exam
was given earlier in the semester in 2008 so it did not include
power flow, but the 2011 exam will (at least partially)

2
Modeling Voltage Dependent Load

So far we've assumed that the load is independent of

the bus voltage (i.e., constant power). However, the
power flow can be easily extended to include voltage
depedence with both the real and reactive load. This
is done by making PDi and Q Di a function of Vi :
n
 Vi Vk (Gik cos ik  Bik sin  ik )  PGi  PDi ( Vi )  0
k 1
n
 Vi Vk (Gik sin  ik  Bik cos ik )  QGi  QDi ( Vi )  0
k 1
3
Voltage Dependent Load Example

In previous two bus example now assume the load is

constant impedance, so
2
P2 (x)  V2 (10sin  2 )  2.0 V2  0
2 2
Q2 (x)  V2 (10 cos  2 )  V2 (10)  1.0 V2  0
Now calculate the power flow Jacobian
10 V2 cos 2 10sin  2  4.0 V2 
J ( x)  
10 V2 sin  2 10 cos 2  20 V2  2.0 V2 

4
Voltage Dependent Load, cont'd

(0) 0 
Again set v  0, guess x  
1 
Calculate
 V 2 (10sin  2 )  2.0 V2
2   2.0 
(0)
f(x )     
2 2
 V2 (10cos  2 )  V2 (10)  1.0 V2  1.0 

(0) 10 4 
J (x )   
 0 12 
1
(1) 0  10 4   2.0   0.1667 
Solve x    1.0    
1
   0 12     0.9167 
5
Voltage Dependent Load, cont'd

With constant impedance load the MW/Mvar load at

bus 2 varies with the square of the bus 2 voltage
magnitude. This if the voltage level is less than 1.0,
the load is lower than 200/100 MW/Mvar
160.0 MW -160.0 MW
120.0 MVR Line Z = 0.1j -80.0 MVR

0.894 pu
One 1.000 pu Two -10.304 Deg

160.0 MW 160 MW
120.0 MVR 80 MVR

6
Dishonest Newton-Raphson

 Since most of the time in the Newton-Raphson

iteration is spend calculating the inverse of the
Jacobian, one way to speed up the iterations is to
only calculate/inverse the Jacobian occasionally
– known as the “Dishonest” Newton-Raphson
– an extreme example is to only calculate the Jacobian for
the first iteration
Honest: x(v 1)  x( v ) - J (x( v ) )-1f ( x( v ) )
Dishonest: x(v 1)  x( v ) - J ( x(0) )-1 f ( x( v ) )
(v )
Both require f (x )   for a solution
7
Dishonest Newton-Raphson Example

Use the Dishonest Newton-Raphson to solve

f ( x)  x 2 - 2  0
1
(v)  df ( x ) 
(0)
(v)
x    f ( x )
 dx 
 1  (v) 2
x ( v )    (0)  (( x ) - 2)
2x 
(v)  1 
x ( v 1)  x   (0)  (( x ( v ) ) 2 - 2)
2x 

8
Dishonest N-R Example, cont’d

( v 1) (v)  1  (v) 2

x  x   (0)  (( x ) - 2)
2x 
Guess x (0)  1. Iteratively solving we get
v x ( v ) (honest) x ( v ) (dishonest)
0 1 1 We pay a price
1 1.5 1.5 in increased
2 1.41667 1.375 iterations, but
with decreased
3 1.41422 1.429
computation
4 1.41422 1.408 per iteration
9
Two Bus Dishonest ROC
Slide shows the region of convergence for different initial
guesses for the 2 bus case using the Dishonest N-R
Red region
converges
to the high
voltage
solution,
while the
yellow region
converges
to the low
voltage
solution
10
Honest N-R Region of Convergence

Maximum
of 15
iterations

11
Decoupled Power Flow

 The completely Dishonest Newton-Raphson is not

used for power flow analysis. However several
approximations of the Jacobian matrix are used.
 One common method is the decoupled power flow.
In this approach approximations are used to
decouple the real and reactive power equations.

12
Decoupled Power Flow Formulation

General form of the power flow problem

 P (v ) P (v ) 
  (v) 
 θ V  θ  P ( x (v ) 
) (v )
      f ( x )
 Q ( v ) Q (v )    V   Q(x ( v ) ) 
( v )
 
 θ  V 
where
 P2 (x(v ) )  PD 2  PG 2 
(v)  
P (x )    
 P ( x( v ) )  P  P 
 n Dn Gn 
13
 Decoupling Approximation
P ( v ) Q ( v )
Usually the off-diagonal matrices, and
V θ
are small. Therefore we approximate them as zero:
 P ( v ) 
 0 
θ  θ (v) 
  P ( x (v ) 
)
        f ( x (v )
)
 Q    V 
(v) ( v )

 Q ( x (v)
) 
 0 
  V 
Then the problem can be decoupled
 P ( v )  1  Q ( v )  1
(v) (v) (v) (v)
θ    P ( x ) V    Q ( x )
 θ   V  14
Off-diagonal Jacobian Terms

Justification for Jacobian approximations:

1. Usually r x, therefore Gij  Bij
2. Usually  ij is small so sin  ij  0
Therefore
Pi
 Vi  Gij cos ij  Bij sin  ij   0
 Vj
Qi
  Vi V j  Gij cos ij  Bij sin  ij   0
θ j

15
Decoupled N-R Region of Convergence

16
Fast Decoupled Power Flow

 By continuing with our Jacobian approximations we

can actually obtain a reasonable approximation that is
independent of the voltage magnitudes/angles.
 This means the Jacobian need only be built/inverted
once.
 This approach is known as the fast decoupled power
flow (FDPF)
 FDPF uses the same mismatch equations as standard
power flow so it should have same solution
 The FDPF is widely used, particularly when we only
need an approximate solution
17
FDPF Approximations

The FDPF makes the following approximations:

1. G ij  0
2. Vi  1
3. sin  ij  0 cos ij  1
Then
(v ) (v)
(v) 1  P ( x ) (v ) 1 Q ( x )
θ  B (v )
 V B (v )
V V
Where B is just the imaginary part of the Ybus  G  jB,
except the slack bus row/column are omitted
18
FDPF Three Bus Example

Use the FDPF to solve the following three bus system

Line Z = j0.07

One Two

200 MW
100 MVR
Line Z = j0.05 Line Z = j0.1

Three 1.000 pu

200 MW
100 MVR  34.3 14.3 20 
Ybus  j  14.3 24.3 10 
 
 20 10 30 
19
FDPF Three Bus Example, cont’d

 34.3 14.3 20 
   24.3 10 
Ybus  j 14.3 24.3 10 B  
   10 30 
 20 10 30 
 0.0477 0.0159 
B 1   
 0.0159 0.0389 
Iteratively solve, starting with an initial voltage guess
(0) (0)
 2  0  V 2  1
    V   1
 3 0   3 
(1)
 2  0   0.0477 0.0159   2   0.1272 
         
 3 0
   0.0159 0.0389 2
   0.1091
20
FDPF Three Bus Example, cont’d

(1)
V 2  1  0.0477 0.0159  1  0.9364 
V   1   0.0159 0.0389  1   0.9455
 3      
Pi (x ) n PDi  PGi
  Vk (Gik cos ik  Bik sin  ik ) 
Vi k 1 Vi
(2)
 2   0.1272   0.0477 0.0159   0.151  0.1361
         
 3  0.1091    0.0159  0.0389  0.107    0.1156 
(2)
V 2  0.924 
V    
 3 0.936 
 0.1384   0.9224 
Actual solution: θ    V 
 0.1171  0.9338 
21
FDPF Region of Convergence

22
“DC” Power Flow

 The “DC” power flow makes the most severe

approximations:
– completely ignore reactive power, assume all the voltages are
always 1.0 per unit, ignore line conductance
 This makes the power flow a linear set of equations,
which can be solved directly

θ  B 1 P

23
Power System Control

 A major problem with power system operation is the

limited capacity of the transmission system
– lines/transformers have limits (usually thermal)
– no direct way of controlling flow down a transmission line
(e.g., there are no valves to close to limit flow)
– open transmission system access associated with industry
restructuring is stressing the system in new ways
 We need to indirectly control transmission line flow by
changing the generator outputs

24
DC Power Flow Example

25
DC Power Flow Example

26
 DC Power Flow 5 Bus Example

One Five Four Three

A A

MVA MVA

360 MW A
520 MW
0 Mvar
MVA

0 Mvar
slack

1.000 pu 1.000 pu A A
1.000 pu 80 MW
0.000 Deg -4.125 Deg MVA MVA
-1.997 Deg 0 Mvar
1.000 pu
0.524 Deg

1.000 pu Two
-18.695 Deg

800 MW
0 Mvar

Notice with the dc power flow all of the voltage magnitudes are
1 per unit. 27
Indirect Transmission Line Control

What we would like to determine is how a change in

generation at bus k affects the power flow on a line
from bus i to bus j.
The assumption is
that the change
in generation is
absorbed by the
slack bus

28
Power Flow Simulation - Before

One way to determine the impact of a generator change is to compare a before/after

power flow.
For example below is a three bus case with an overload

131.9 MW

124%

One Two

200.0 MW 68.1 MW 200 MW

68.1 MW 100 MVR
71.0 MVR

Z for all lines = j0.1

Three 1.000 pu

0 MW
64 MVR

29
Power Flow Simulation - After
Increasing the generation at bus 3 by 95 MW (and hence
decreasing it at bus 1 by a corresponding amount), results
in a 31.3 drop in the MW flow on the line from bus 1 to 2.
101.6 MW

100%

One Two

105.0 MW 3.4 MW 200 MW

98.4 MW 100 MVR
64.3 MVR
92%
Z for all lines = j0.1
Limit for all lines = 150 MVA
1.000 pu
Three
95 MW
64 MVR

30
Analytic Calculation of Sensitivities

 Calculating control sensitivities by repeat power

flow solutions is tedious and would require many
power flow solutions. An alternative approach is to
analytically calculate these values
The power flow from bus i to bus j is
Vi V j i   j
Pij  sin( i   j ) 
X ij X ij
 i   j  ij
So Pij  We just need to get
X ij PGk
31
Analytic Sensitivities

From the fast decoupled power flow we know

θ  B 1P (x)
So to get the change in θ due to a change of
generation at bus k, just set P( x) equal to
all zeros except a minus one at position k.
0
 
 
P   1  Bus k
0
 
   32
Three Bus Sensitivity Example
For the previous three bus case with Zline  j 0.1
 20 10 10 
   20 10 
Ybus  j 10 20 10  B   
   10 20 
 10 10 20 
Hence for a change of generation at bus 3
1
  2   20 10   0   0.0333
        
 3  10  20 
   1 0.0667 
0.0667  0
Then P3 to 1   0.667 pu
0.1
P3 to 2  0.333 pu P 2 to 1  0.333 pu
33
Balancing Authority Areas

 An balancing authority area (use to be called operating areas)

has traditionally represented the portion of the interconnected
electric grid operated by a single utility
 Transmission lines that join two areas are known as tie-lines.
 The net power out of an area is the sum of the flow on its tie-
lines.
 The flow out of an area is equal to

total gen - total load - total losses = tie-flow

34
Area Control Error (ACE)

 The area control error (ace) is the difference between the

actual flow out of an area and the scheduled flow, plus a
frequency component

 Ideally
ace the ACE
Pint should
Psched always
 10 be
f zero.
 Because the load is constantly changing, each utility must
constantly change its generation to “chase” the ACE.

35
Automatic Generation Control

 Most utilities use automatic generation

control (AGC) to automatically change their
generation to keep their ACE close to zero.
 Usually the utility control center calculates
ACE based upon tie-line flows; then the
AGC module sends control signals out to the
generators every couple seconds.

36
Power Transactions

 Power transactions are contracts between

generators and loads to do power transactions.
 Contracts can be for any amount of time at
any price for any amount of power.
 Scheduled power transactions are
implemented by modifying the value of Psched
used in the ACE calculation

37
PTDFs

 Power transfer distribution factors (PTDFs) show

the linear impact of a transfer of power.
 PTDFs calculated using the fast decoupled power
flow B matrix
θ  B 1P (x)
Once we know θ we can derive the change in
the transmission line flows
Except now we modify several elements in P (x),
in portion to how the specified generators would
participate in the power transfer 38
Nine Bus PTDF Example

Figure shows initial flows for a nine bus power system

300.0 MW
400.0 MW 300.0 MW

A B 250.0 MW D

10% 71%
71.1 MW C
60% 57%
92% 0.00 deg 64%
55%
11%
G F E
150.0 MW

74% 250.0 MW 250.0 MW 44% 32%

24%
H I

200.0 MW
150.0 MW

39
Nine Bus PTDF Example, cont'd

Figure now shows percentage PTDF flows from A to I

300.0 MW
400.0 MW 300.0 MW

A B 250.0 MW D

43% 30%
71.1 MW C
57% 10%
13% 0.00 deg 20%
35%
2%
G F E
150.0 MW

34% 250.0 MW 250.0 MW 34% 32%

34%
H I

200.0 MW
150.0 MW

40
Nine Bus PTDF Example, cont'd

Figure now shows percentage PTDF flows from G to F

300.0 MW
400.0 MW 300.0 MW

A B 250.0 MW D

6% 18%
71.1 MW C
6% 6%
12% 0.00 deg 12%
61%
19%
G F E
150.0 MW

21% 250.0 MW 250.0 MW 20%

21%
H I

200.0 MW
150.0 MW

41
WE to TVA PTDFs

42
Line Outage Distribution Factors (LODFS)

 LODFs are used to approximate the change in the

flow on one line caused by the outage of a second
line
– typically they are only used to determine the change in
the MW flow
– LODFs are used extensively in real-time operations
– LODFs are state-independent but do dependent on the
assumed network topology

Pl  LODFl ,k Pk

43
Flowgates

 The real-time loading of the power grid is accessed via

“flowgates”
 A flowgate “flow” is the real power flow on one or more
transmission element for either base case conditions or a
single contingency
– contingent flows are determined using LODFs
 Flowgates are used as proxies for other types of limits, such
as voltage or stability limits
 Flowgates are calculated using a spreadsheet

44
NERC Regional Reliability Councils

NERC
is the
North
American
Electric
Reliability
Council

45
NERC Reliability Coordinators

Source: http://www.nerc.com/page.php?cid=5%7C67%7C206
46