03 Ieat Powerflow

Power Flow Analysis
Dr. Federico Milano

E-mail: Federico.Milano@uclm.es
Department of Electrical Engineering
University of Castilla - La Mancha
Spain
Ciudad Real, Spring 2013
Introduction - 1
Contents
Power Flow Problem

Power Flow Solvers
Introduction - 2
Power Flow Problem
Power Flow Problem - 1
Background (I)
A classical problem of circuit theory is to find all branch currents and all node voltages
of an assigned circuit.
Typical input data are generator voltages as well as the impedances of all branches.
If all impedances are constant, the resulting set of equations that describe the circuit is
linear.
Example 1 (I)
Classical circuit problem.

i1
i2
jx12
jx13
jx23
+
3
v1
v2
+
v3
i3
z3
Example 1 (II)
Using the branch current method, one has:
v1 v2
v1 v3
+
i1
jx12
jx13
v2 v3
v2 v1
+
i2
jx12
jx23
v3 v1
v3 v2
+
i3
jx13
jx23
(1)
Example 1 (III)
In vector form:
i1
0
v1
i2 = Y + I 3 0 v2 = Y tot v
0
1/
z3
v3
(2)
Example 1 (IV)
where I 3 is a 3 3 identity matrix and Y is the so-called admittance matrix:
1/jx12 + 1/jx13
1/jx12
1/jx13
Y =
1/jx12
1/jx12 + 1/jx23
1/jx23
1/jx13
1/jx23
1/jx13 + 1/jx23
(3)
Background (II)
The power flow problem is conceptually the same problem as solving a steady-state ac
circuit.
The only, though substantial, difference is the set of input data.

Loads are expressed in terms of consumed active and reactive powers (PQ load) and
generators are defined in terms of constant voltage magnitude and active power
injection (PV generator ).
Hence, the power flow problem is nonlinear.
Example 2 (I)
Classical power flow problem.

s1
s2
jx
12
v1
v2
jx
23
jx
13
v3
3
s3
Example 2 (II)
The power flow problem is formulated in order to determine unknown voltage

magnitudes and angles.
0 =
0 =
0 =
v2 v1
sin(2 1 ) p2
x12
v3 v2
v3 v1
sin(3 1 ) +
sin(3 2 ) p3
x13
x23
v32
v32
v3 v1
v3 v2
+
cos(3 1 )
cos(3 2 ) q3
x13
x23
x13
x23
(4)
where the unknowns are v3 , 3 and 2 .
Rationales Behind Power Flow Problem Formulation
Loads at high voltage level are modelled as constant PQ due to under-load tap
changers.
Generators are modelled as PV due to turbine and voltage regulators.

Transmission lines and transformers are generally modelled as lumped -circuits with
constant parameters.
Observe that one bus has to be the phase angel reference. Typically, one generator is
used as slack bus.
The distributed slack bus model is more physical.
General Formulation of the Power Flow Problem (I)
The vector of currents injected at each node is:

i = Y v
(5)
which leads to write the power flow problem as the complex power injections at buses:
= V i = V Y v
s
where V
(6)
= diag(
v1 , v2 , . . . , vnb ) and nb is the number of network buses.
General Formulation of the Power Flow Problem (II)
Rewriting (6):

V Y v
0=s
(7)
0 = g(y)
(8)
Or, more in general:

where y and partameters per bus type are:
Bus type
Variables
Data
Slack generator
p, q
v,
PV generator
q,
p, v
PQ load
v,
p, q
Relevant Issues of the Power Flow Problem
The origins of the formulation of the power flow problem and the solution based on the
Newtons method date back to the late sixties.
Since then, a huge variety of studies have been presented about the solution of the
power flow problem, addressing:
Starting initial guess
Computational efficiency
Ill-conditioned cases
Robustness
Multiple solutions
Unsolvable cases
Taxonomy of the Power Flow Problem
It is relevant to classify the power flow problems into the following categories:
Well-conditioned case
Ill-conditioned case
Bifurcation point
Non-physical solution
Unsolvable case
Well-conditioned case
The power flow solution exists and is reachable using a flat initial guess (e.g., all load
voltage magnitudes equal to 1 and all bus voltage angles equal to 0) and a standard
Newtons method.
This case is the most common situation.
Ill-conditioned case
The solution of the power flow problem does exist, but standard solvers fail to get this
solution starting from a flat initial guess.
This situation is due to the fact that the region of attraction of the power flow solution is
narrow or far from the initial guess.
In this case, the failure of standard power flow procedure is due to the instability of the
numerical method, not of the power flow equations.
Robust power flow methods have proved to be efficacious for solving ill-conditioned
cases.
Bifurcation Point
The solution of the power flow exists but it is either a saddle-node bifurcation or a
limit-induced bifurcation.
Saddle-node bifurcations are associated with the maximum loading condition of a
system. The solution cannot be obtained using standard or robust power flow
methods, since the power flow Jacobian matrix is singular at the solution point.
Limited-induced bifurcations are associated with a physical limit of the system, such
as the shortage of generator reactive power. The solution point is typically a
well-conditioned case and does not show convergence issues.
Non-physical Solution
Solutions that cannot be accepted since some variable is out of its technical limits.
Typically these solution are characterized by very low voltage levels.
These solutions are also known as: extraneous, false, lower, or unstable.
Unsolvable Case
The solution of the power flow problem does not exist.

Typically, the issue is that the loading level of the network is too high.
As in the case of the bifurcation points, a continuation method or an optimal power flow
problem allows defining the maximum loading level that the system can supply.
Power Flow Solvers
Power Flow Solvers - 1
Solution Methods (I)
Methods that do not require the computation of the Jacobian matrix of g :

Jacobis method.
Gauss-Seidels method.
Methods that require the computation of the Jacobian matrix of g :

Newtons (or Newton-Raphsons) method.
Robust Newtons methods.
Solution Methods (II)
Methods that simplify the Jacobian matrix of g :

Inexact and dishonest Newtons methods.
Fast decoupled power flow.
Methods that simplify g :

DC power flow model.
Newton-Raphsons Method (I)
The i-th iteration of the classical Newtons method for (8) is as follows:
where g (i)
y (i)
1 (i)
]
g
[g (i)
y
y (i+1)
y (i) + y (i)
(9)
(i)
= g(y (i) ), g y = g y (y (i) ), and g y = Ty g is the Jacobian matrix of
the power flow equations.
Newton-Raphsons Method (II)
The geometrical interpretation of the Newtons method is well-known. For the actual
value y (i) , one computes the tangent of g (i) as:
(i)
(y) = g (i) + g (i)
y (y y )
(10)
Imposing (y) = 0 yields the value y (i+1) defined in (9).
Geometrical Interpretation of the Newton-Raphsons Method
g(y)
g(y)
gy
gy
gy
y
y
(b)
(a)
g(y)
g(y)
gy
gy
(c)
gy
gy
(d)
Robust Newtons Method (I)
There are idiosyncratic cases for which the Newtons technique fails to converge.
A variety of robust variations of the basic Newtons method have been proposed in the
literature for solving ill-conditioned cases.
The majority of these techniques mainly consist in modifying the first equation of (9) as
follows:
1 (i)
y (i) = [g (i)
g
y ]
(11)
where is a factor that improves the convergence properties of the iterative process.
Robust Newtons Method (II)
If is the result of an optimization process, is called optimal multiplier (e.g.,

Iwamotos method).
It is important not to confuse ill-conditioned cases with those that are unsolvable since
the solution does not exist.
Robust solvers are useful in case of ill-conditioned systems but do not generally work
well for unsolvable cases.
Unsolvable cases are better tackled using the continuation power flow technique.
Geometrical Interpretation of the Robust Newtons Method

g(y)
g(y)
gy
gy
gy
gy
(a)
y
(b)
Main Issue of the Newtons Method
One of the most relevant drawbacks of the Newtons method is the need of factorizing
the full Jacobian matrix at each iteration.
From the computational point of view, the factorization of a matrix is an order N 3

operation, i.e., the computational weight increases with the cube of the size N of the
matrix.
The computational effort can be reduced to N 1.5 if using sparse matrices techniques,
which allows saving a considerable time for large systems (e.g., thousands of buses).
However, the Jacobian matrix factorization remains the most critical issue of the
Newtons method (about 85% of the total CPU time for networks with thousands of
buses).
Inexact and Dishonest Newtons Method
Inexact methods aim to approximate the factorization of the Jacobian matrix.

A family of inexact methods are based on the Generalized Minimal Residual (GMRES)
method.
The GMRES is a particular case of Krylovs subspace. The main issue is to properly
pre-conditioning the Jacobian matrix.
Dishonest methods compute the Jacobian matrix factorization only the first one or two
iterations and then use the previous factorization for the remaining iterations.
Geometrical Interpretation of the Dishonest Newtons Method

g(y)
g(y)
gy
gy
y
y
(a)
(b)
Fast Decoupled Power Flow (FDPF)
The FDPF is a particular case of dishonest Newtons method.

The Jacobian matrix is approximated so that it becomes block diagonal and all
non-zero elements are constant. Hence only one factorization is needed.
The FDPF requires much more iterations than the NR method but proved to be more
robust.
Comparison of Power Flow Solution Methods (I)
Newton
Jacobi
Gauss-Seidel
Bus #
Iter. #
time [s]
Iter. #
time [s]
Iter. #
time [s]
14
0.0050
76
0.0217
56
0.0288
118
0.0287
580
0.505
388
2.738
1228
0.210
454
5.120
224
112.4
11856
3.15
340
399.0
173
9112
Comparison of Power Flow Solution Methods (II)
GMRES
Dishonest
FDPF
Bus #
Iter. #
time [s]
Iter. #
time [s]
Iter. #
time [s]
14
0.4339
0.0040
0.0053
118
53.53
15
0.0183
0.0117
1228
n.a.
n.a.
26
0.207
12
0.160
11856
n.a.
n.a.
10
3.820
5.174
Region of Attraction (I)
A key issue of any iterative technique is the initial guess.

The only way to know if a given initial guess is adequate for obtaining a solution y 0 of
the power flow problem is to determine the region of attraction of y 0 . At this regard,
the initial guess can be of three types:
The initial guess is inside the region of attraction of the solution y 0 and the
numerical method converges.
The initial guess is outside the region of attraction of the solution y 0 . Numerical
methods typically diverge if one starts with such initial guess.
Although the initial guess is within the region of attraction, the numerical method
diverges.
Example 3 (I)
Consider the following simple 2-bus system.
2
z = 0.01 + j0.1 pu
v1 = 1.0 + j0 pu
s2 = 0.9 + j0.6 pu
Example 3 (II)
Region of attraction of the Newtons method for a 2-bus system.
Region of Attraction (II)
Different methods have different region of attractions.

Unfortunately defining the region of attraction is extremely costly.
In practice it is virtually impossible to define the region of attraction for a real-world
system.
Robust methods are thus required.
How Many Power Flow Solution Do Exists? (I)
Since the power flow equations are basically quadratic equations, the number of real
solutions increases as the bus number increases.
For the two-bus system of Example 3, the solutions are two, both real.
For big networks, the number of real solutions is unkown a priori.
How Many Power Flow Solution Do Exists? (II)
A simple method to find all solutions is using the continuation power flow (CPF)
analysis.
However, to use the CPF, one solution has to be found before being able to apply such
method.
7
4
Transformer Equivalent
G
1
Compensators
Synchronous
Generators
Three Winding
G
12
Let consider the IEEE 14-bus system.
11
13
Example 4 (I)
10
14
Example 4 (II)
All real power flow solutions of the IEEE 14-bus system.
Bus
Sol. #1
Sol. #2
Sol. #3
Sol. #4
vh
vh
vh
vh
1.0600
0.0000
1.0600
0.0000
1.0600
0.0000
1.0600
0.0000
1.0450
-0.0869
1.0450
-0.2329
1.0450
-0.2291
1.0450
-0.1506
1.0100
-0.2220
1.0100
-0.5447
1.0100
-0.5578
1.0100
-0.3439
1.0186
-0.1802
0.6202
-0.4833
0.5588
-0.4720
0.9306
-0.3199
1.0203
-0.1533
0.5340
-0.3756
0.4903
-0.2834
0.9436
-0.2966
1.0700
-0.2482
1.0700
-2.8782
1.0700
-3.1994
1.0700
-0.6762
1.0620
-0.2333
0.6120
-1.0675
0.5756
-1.4094
0.8851
-0.4953
1.0900
-0.2333
1.0900
-1.0675
1.0900
-1.4094
1.0900
-0.4953
1.0564
-0.2609
0.4017
-1.5433
0.4500
-1.9780
0.7352
-0.6144
10
1.0513
-0.2636
0.4077
-2.0123
0.4620
-2.3752
0.7841
-0.6338
11
1.0571
-0.2582
0.6756
-2.6346
0.7043
-2.9451
0.9198
-0.6576
12
1.0552
-0.2631
0.9427
-2.9136
0.9860
-3.1992
0.9389
-0.7138
13
1.0504
-0.2646
0.8225
-2.8861
0.9224
-3.1533
0.8142
-0.6870
14
1.0358
-0.2799
-0.0628
-0.0597
0.5177
-2.7767
-0.0356
1.7273
Example 4 (III)
Solution of the full CPF analysis for the voltage at bus 14.

03 Ieat Powerflow

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

03 Ieat Powerflow

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Power Flow Analysis

Dr. Federico Milano

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 1

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 2

Classical circuit problem.

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 3

Using the branch current method, one has:

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 4

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 5

where I 3 is a 3 3 identity matrix and Y is the so-called admittance matrix:

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 6

The only, though substantial, difference is the set of input data.

Hence, the power flow problem is nonlinear.

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 7

Classical power flow problem.

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 8

The power flow problem is formulated in order to determine unknown voltage

where the unknowns are v3 , 3 and 2 .

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 9

Rationales Behind Power Flow Problem Formulation

Generators are modelled as PV due to turbine and voltage regulators.

The distributed slack bus model is more physical.

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 10

General Formulation of the Power Flow Problem (I)

The vector of currents injected at each node is:

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 11

General Formulation of the Power Flow Problem (II)

Or, more in general:

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 12

Relevant Issues of the Power Flow Problem

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 13

Taxonomy of the Power Flow Problem

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 14

This case is the most common situation.

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 15

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 16

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 17

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 18

The solution of the power flow problem does not exist.

Ciudad Real, Spring 2013

Power Flow Problem - 19