Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 7

Electric Power Systems Research 76 (2006) 9961002

Fuzzy logic in real time voltage/reactive power control in FARS regional electric network
Akbar Rahideh a, , M. Gitizadeh b , Abbas Rahideh a
a

School of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Shiraz University of Technology, Shiraz, Iran b Fars Regional Electric Company, Shiraz, Iran

Received 8 August 2005; received in revised form 5 December 2005; accepted 5 December 2005 Available online 7 February 2006

Abstract In this paper, a new method based on fuzzy logic for voltage/reactive power control and simultaneously loss reduction in power systems is presented. The purpose is to provide a solution, which does both voltage improvement and loss reduction for every practical power systems. In this idea, the voltage violation level of buses and also controlling ability of controlling devices such as shunt capacitors/reactors and tap changing transformers are translated into fuzzy sets, but at rst the controlling ability of these devices are calculated using sensitivity coefcient. A feasible solution set, which causes voltage improvement, is attained using the maxmin operator of fuzzy sets and nally a solution for power loss reduction is taken into account. A standard IEEE 30-bus test system and Fars regional power system are used to validate the performance of the proposed method. The obtained results show that the method is efcient, practical and fast. 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Fuzzy logic; Voltage/reactive power control; Loss reduction; Controlling devices

1. Introduction In order to improve voltage security, power systems are equipped with a lot of voltage controlling devices such as: shunt capacitors and reactors, tap changing transformers, generators, synchronous condensers, static var compensators, etc. Either by variation of load or by changing power network conguration, a real time control on these controlling devices is necessary in order to alleviate the problems caused by the perturbations. On the other hand, the power systems in every condition must have the best voltage prole, and for this reason, after the determination of locations and amounts of the new compensators, the effective harmony between these new sources and other reactive power sources is necessary. So the reactive power scheduling is a complicated optimization problem [1]. In [2] optimal voltage/reactive power control with a fuzzy multiobjective approach was presented. Due to the limitation time for presenting the nal adjustment of reactive power controlling devices in power networks, some methods based on sensitivity

Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 711 7264101; fax: +98 711 7262102. E-mail address: Rahide@sutech.ac.ir (A. Rahideh).

analysis and fuzzy sets were proposed to prevent the voltage deviation from certain value [3,4]. In [5] a hybrid tool to assist the operator in reactive power/voltage control and optimization was presented that is a exible model for reactive power voltage control. The other methods based on fuzzy algorithm were used for reactive power voltage control [6,7]. For voltage security problems, linear programming utilized linearized models to obtain an objective function and constraint to formulate the problem [811]. The linear programming results for inherently nonlinear objective functions may not represent the optimal solution and also this method needs a great deal of computation. In other methods, rule based method [12] and expert systems [13,14] as well as hybrid systems methods [1517] proposed rigorous mathematical models and numerical approaches to solve the problems. Fuzzy set theory [18,19] was also utilized to solve the problem [2024], in this application, objectives and constraints were rst translated into fuzzy set notations then linear programming was employed to nd the optimal solution. In [25] an approximate reasoning based on a exible model which employed an expert system and fuzzy set to solve the var control problems was proposed. In [26] a new fuzzy control method which, repeatedly uses fuzzy operations to effectively improve voltage prole, was presented. In [27] fuzzy sets based method

0378-7796/$ see front matter 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.epsr.2005.12.017

A. Rahideh et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 76 (2006) 9961002

997

for voltage and reactive power control was utilized but the tap changing transformers that play a very important role for voltage control in power systems have been neglected. In this paper, at rst, the procedure of proposed method is described and then the results after implementing the proposed method on IEEE 30-bus test system and Fars power network (one of the main part of Iran power network) are presented. Results show that the proposed method is effective for voltage and reactive power control and simultaneously minimizes the power loss, and it is very useful for practical power networks. 2. The main procedure Assume an N-bus power system that buses 1 to L are load buses (PQ buses), buses L + 1 to N ns are voltage controlled buses (PV buses) and buses N ns + 1 to N are slack buses. Also assume that the number of tap changing transformers is T. In other words, the number of load buses is L and ns is the number of slack buses. It must be mentioned that the Fars regional electric network has 1 slack bus (7 units of the main power plant that

have the same voltage angle). Fig. 1 shows the ow chart of the computational procedures. Different stages of voltage/reactive power control model based on fuzzy logic for improving the voltage prole and simultaneously reducing the power loss, are as follow. 2.1. Base case load ow calculation After entering data and arranging them, a load ow program is needed. Due to the great number of buses in practical power system, the load ow program must be fast and accurate, and the convergence must also be guaranteed. All of the constraints such as maximum and minimum of active and reactive power at voltage controlled buses and also line thermal ratings are considered in the load ow program. 2.2. Voltage constraint violation checking In this stage, the voltages of load buses must be checked in order to obtain the voltage constraint violation. The formulas

Fig. 1. Flow chart of the computational procedures.

998

A. Rahideh et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 76 (2006) 9961002

Fig. 2. Membership function for voltage violations.

Fig. 3. Membership function of shunt capacitors and reactors controlling ability.

are as follow: Vi = Vi Vnorm for i = 1, 2, , L for i = 1, , L Stop Go to the next stage (1) (2)

determined as follow: Cij = Sij Mj (4)

if V min Vi V max otherwise

where Mj is the controlling margin of the controlling device at bus j and Sij is the sensitivity coefcient of bus j on bus i. 2.6. Maxmin operator on uCij s and u Rvar j = max min(u
i Vi , uCij ) Vi s

where Vi is the voltage of bus i in per unit, Vnorm the normal voltage that equal to 1 per unit, Vi the voltage violation of bus i and nally Vmin and Vmax represent the minimum and maximum of voltage limit, respectively. So if there is any voltage violation, the controlling devices are used to remove those voltage violations and also reduce power loss simultaneously. 2.3. Computation of sensitivity coefcients Here, the sensitivity coefcients means violation of load buses voltage with respect to all of the buses reactive power except slack buses. So this can be expressed as: |Vi | Sij = Qj i = 1, 2, , L, j = 1, 2, , N ns (3)

i {1, . . . , L} and j {1, . . . , (N ns )}

(5)

where Rvar j represents the membership value of controlling ability for shunt capacitor or reactor at controlling bus j on controlled bus i, and Rvar j is a 1 (N ns ) dimension matrix. 2.7. Tap changing transformers controlling ability calculation and fuzzifying them In this stage, the controlling ability of tap changing transformers are calculated. At rst the injected or absorbed reactive power in respect of lower and upper limit (aU and aL , respectively) of tap changer at the both side of transformer must be calculated. So from the Fig. 4 the Eqs. (6)(9) can be written. MjL = aL (aL 1)bjk v2 j MkL = (1 aL )bjk v2 k MjU = aU (aU 1)bjk v2 j MkU = (1 aU )bjk v2 k (6) (7) (8) (9)

where L is the number of load buses and ns is the number of slack buses. The Jacobian matrix is used to calculate the sensitivity coefcients [28]. 2.4. Fuzzifying the voltage violations In this stage, the load bus voltage violations must be fuzzied. The membership function for fuzzifying the load bus voltage violations is shown in Fig. 2. In this gure, u Vi represents the membership value of Vi . The maximum accepted voltage deviation for ith bus is determined by Vimax = Vimax V norm and the minimum accepted voltage deviation for ith bus is determined by Vimin = Vimin V norm . 2.5. Shunt capacitors and reactors controlling ability calculation and their fuzzifying Fig. 3 shows the membership function used for fuzzifying the controlling ability of shunt capacitors and reactors. In Fig. 3, Cij represents the controlling ability for controlling device of bus j on bus i, and uCij is the membership function of Cij . The controlling abilities of shunt reactors and capacitors are

Fig. 4. Equivalent circuit for tap changing transformer.

A. Rahideh et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 76 (2006) 9961002

999

In Fig. 5, Cijk(L) represents the controlling ability of tap changing transformer in lower limit state and uCijk(L) is its membership function. In Fig. 6, Cijk(U) represents the controlling ability of tap changing transformer in upper limit state and uCijk(U) is its membership function. 2.8. Maxmin operator on uCijk s and u Rjk = max min(u
Fig. 5. Membership function of Cijk(L) .
tap i tap Vi s

Vi , min(uCijk(L) , uCijk(U) ))

(12)

where bjk is the line susceptance between bus j and bus k. MjL represents the injected reactive power in the left hand side bus (bus j) and MkL represents the absorbed reactive power in the right hand side bus (bus k), with respect to aL < 1. MjU represents the absorbed reactive power in the left hand side bus (bus j) and MkU represents the injected reactive power in the right hand side bus (bus k), with respect to aU > 1. The effect of variation of tap changing transformers on the load bus voltages in respect of upper and lower limit tap changing can be calculated as follow: Cijk(L) = Sij Mj(L) + Sik Mk(L) Cijk(U) = Sij Mj(U) + Sik Mk(U) (10) (11)

where Rjk represents the membership value of controlling ability for tap changing transformer between bus j and bus k, and tap Rjk is a 1 T dimension matrix. So t subscription can be used instead of jk subscription for simplicity: Rt
tap

= Rjk

tap

t = 1, 2, . . . , T n1,T

Eq. (12) can be explained as follow: n11 n12 n 21 n22 min(u Vi , min(uC(L)i,t , uC(U)i,t )) = . . i . . . . nL,1 nL,2 where ni,t = min(u 1, 2, . . . , T.And nally Rt
tap Vi , uC(min)i,t ),

n2,T . .. . . . nL,T (13)

where Cijk(L) represents the effect of variation of tap changer between bus j and k in the lower limit state on the voltage of bus i and Cijk(U) represents the effect of variation of tap changer between bus j and k in the upper limit state on the voltage of bus i. Now the fuzzied Cijk(L) and Cijk(U) is needed. The membership function used for fuzzifying the tap changing transformers controlling ability are shown in Figs. 5 and 6.

i = 1, 2, . . . , L, t =

= [max(n11 , n21 , . . . , nL,1 ) max(n1,T , n2,T , . . ., nL,T )] (14)

2.9. Optimum R calculation In this stage, among (N ns ) + T calculated value of Rvar j and tap Rt in the previous stages, one of them that results the minimum power loss is chosen as the optimum R and shown by R* . R = min(PL1 , PL2 , . . . , PLj , . . . , PL(N ns ) , PL(N ns )+1 , . . . , PLt , . . . , PL(N ns )+T ) (15)

Fig. 6. Membership function of Cijk(U) . Table 1 The results of bus voltages before and after improvement of IEEE test system Bus no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Before improvement 0.963 0.932 0.972 0.97 0.969 1 0.989 0.995 After improvement 0.993 0.97 0.989 0.987 0.998 1.012 0.996 1.012 Bus no. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

where PLs are the power loss in response to the controlling devices, and R* is the value of optimum device. The power loss is a nonlinear function of bus voltages and phase angles [27].

Before improvement 0.995 0.983 0.943 0.984 0.939 0.974 0.97 0.978

After improvement 1.008 1.003 0.98 1.013 0.98 1.008 1 1.006

Bus no. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Before improvement 0.977 0.966 0.969 0.974 0.98 0.98 0.967 0.967

After improvement 1.002 0.995 0.996 1 1 1.001 0.997 0.995

1000

A. Rahideh et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 76 (2006) 9961002 Table 4 Power loss before and after improvement and percentage of power loss reduction of Fars network Power loss before improvement (MW) 118.8 Power loss after improvement (MW) 93.3 Power loss reduction (%) 21.46

Table 2 Power loss before and after improvement and percentage of power loss reduction of IEEE test system Power loss before improvement (MW) 29.865 Power loss after improvement (MW) 24.052 Power loss reduction (%) 24.17

2.10. Load ow In this stage, a new load ow regarding the previous results must be done and then return to stage 3. It must be mentioned that the program presents two choices for the user: rst choice is based on minimum voltage violations, and the second choice is based on minimum power loss. 3. Results 3.1. IEEE test system To verify the effectiveness of the proposed method, an IEEE 30-bus test system is tested, where the system parameters and initial buses data are extracted from [26]. In this system, there are reactive power sources at 9 buses which have minimum and maximum adjustable reactive power of 1 and 1 pu, respectively, and tap changing transformers at 15 lines which have minimum and maximum adjustable step of 0.9 and 1.1 pu, respectively. Assume buses 2, 11 and 13 are heavily loaded and a circuit breakdown at line 28 has occurred. This causes larger voltage violations at buses 2, 11 and 13. On the other hand, the lower and upper bus voltage are 0.97 and 1.03 pu, respectively. The results of bus voltages before and after improvement and also power loss reduction are listed in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. The computational results show that the proposed method has a satisfactory performance, and not only improves the voltage security but also effectively reduces the system power loss. 3.2. Fars regional electric network (FREN) To illustrate the capabilities of the proposed method in practical situation, Fars regional electric network is taken under test. It must be mentioned that the used data are related to the peak demand condition. In this system, there are 229 buses and 349

Fig. 7. The trend of power loss reduction in Fars regional electric network.

lines. The complete data of Fars regional electric network can be seen in [29]. After running the program, the controlling devices have been adjusted in such a way that the total power loss is reduced remarkably and the trend of power loss reduction is illustrated in Fig. 7. Controlling devices improves the bus voltage security. Some of these bus voltages, before and after improvement, are listed in Table 3. Fig. 8 shows the bus voltages in pu before and after improvement. The results show that the proposed method has a satisfactory performance, and all the voltage violations are reduced effectively and the power loss is also decreased remarkably. Table 4 shows the power loss of FREN before and after improvement.

Table 3 The results of some bus voltages before and after improvement of Fars system Bus name SHIRAZ6 AMIRKBR6 HEMAT6 SNAYE6 MALABAD6 FLSTIN6 UNIVER6 Before improvement 0.95929 0.94729 0.95651 0.9462 0.94446 0.94964 0.94899 After improvement 1.0354 1.0237 1.0327 1.0222 1.0202 1.0247 1.0232 Bus name GHORAN6 MARKAZI6 VLIASR6 AKBARAB6 GOLESTA6 AHMADY6 MIANROD6 Before improvement 0.95833 0.94728 0.98268 0.90995 0.8932 0.95658 0.9548 After improvement 1.014 1.0231 1.0059 1.0065 0.98843 1.0132 1.0167 Bus name SHOHADA6 MODARES6 FRODGAH6 DASHT6 SHAHROZ6 BRIDJES6 RADIO6 Before improvement 0.94869 0.98255 0.98198 0.97469 0.9747 0.97388 0.9689 After improvement 1.0138 1.0064 1.0065 1.0157 1.0339 1.0095 1.0296

A. Rahideh et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 76 (2006) 9961002 Table 5 Sample of data transfered to EXCEL environment Left bus name SHIRAZ2 SADI2 DEHNO2 Bus name SHIRAZ6 AMIRKBR6 HEMAT6 Right bus name SHIRAZ6 SADI6 DEHNO6 Bus no. 1 2 3 Left bust 601 604 602 Right bus 1 26 27 Qinj MVAR 5 9.6 2.4 Optimum tap setting value 0.97 1 0.94

1001

Optimum tap setting code 7 10 4 Banks =2 2.5 =2 4.8 =2 1.2

Fig. 8. Bus voltages in pu before and after improvement of Fars regional electric network.

The experimental results show that the proposed method has a satisfactory performance, and not only improves the voltage security but also effectively reduces the system power loss. To simplify the utilization of this program for users, graphic user interface is used, and the nal results, including controlling device adjustment, are sent to EXCEL in order to make the implementation much easier. Table 5 shows a sample of such data transfer to EXCEL environment. 4. Conclusion In this paper, the voltage prole improvement and power loss minimization are taken under consideration. In the presented method, at rst the voltage level and the controlling ability of controlling devices are translated into fuzzy variable and then the maxmin operator is used to nd the feasible solutions for voltage prole improvement. Finally, the min operator is used to minimize the power loss. The proposed approach is simple and efcient and has advantages of fast response and practical usage. The presented results from 30-bus IEEE test system and Fars regional electric network show that the proposed method is fast and accurate and improves voltage proles and reduces power loss simultaneously. References
[1] T.J.E. Miller, Reactive Power Control in Electric Systems, John Wiley Inc., US, 1982.

[2] X. Guiguang, W. Xing, Y. Erkeng, A fuzzy multi-objective approach to optimal voltage/reactive power control, IEEE Conf. Power Syst. (1998) 14431447. [3] P.Y. Ekel, L.D.B. Terra, M.F.D. Junges, F.J.A. de Olivrira, R. Kowaltschuk, T.Y. Taguti, Fuzzy logic in voltage and reactive power control in power systems, IEEE Int. Conf. Control Appl., USA (1999) 622627. [4] W.H. Edwin Liu, X. Guan, Fuzzy constraint enforcement and control action curtailment in an optimal power ow, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 11 (May (2)) (1996) 639645. [5] J.L. Martines Ramos, et al., A hybrid tool to assist the operator in reactive power voltage control and optimization, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 10 (May (2)) (1995) 760768. [6] S.M. S Shahidehpour, A Fuzzy Set Approach to Heuristic Power Generation Scheduling with Uncertain Data, Proceeding of 1991NSF/EEI Workshop, Norman, July, 1991, pp. 101105. [7] S.B. Dhar, Power system long range decision analysis under fuzzy environment, IEEE Trans. Power Apparatus Syst. PAS-98 (March (2)) (1979) 585596. [8] B. Stott, J.L. Marinho, Linear programming for power system network security application, IEEE Trans. PAS 98 (May/June (3)) (1979) 837848. [9] J. Qiu, S.M. Shahidehpour, A new approach for minimizing power losses and improving voltage prole, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2 (May (2)) (1987) 287295. [10] A. Venhataramana, J. Carr, R.S. Ramshan, Optimal reactive power allocation, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2 (1) (Feb. 1987) 138144. [11] O. Alsac, J. Bright, M. Prais, B. Stott, Further development in LP-based optimal power ow, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 5 (August (3)) (1990) 697711. [12] W.R. Wagner, A. Keyhani, S. Hao, T.C. Wong, A rule based approach to decentralized voltage control, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 5 (May (2)) (1990) 643651. [13] C.C. Liu, K. Tomsovic, An expert system assisting decision-making of reactive power/voltage control, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 1 (August (3)) (1986) 195210. [14] S.J. Cheng, O.P. Malik, G.S. Hope, An expert system for voltage and reactive power control of a power system, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 3 (November (4)) (1988) 14491455. [15] A.G. Exposito, J.L.M. Ramos, J.L.R. Macias, Y.C. Salinas, Sensitivitybased reactive power control for voltage prole improvement, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 8 (August (3)) (1993) 937945. [16] S.K. Chang, G.E. Marks, K. Kato, Optimal real time voltage control, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 5 (August (3)) (1990) 750758. [17] C.T. Su, C.T. Lin, Application of neural network and heuristic model for voltage-reactive power control, Electric Power Syst. Res. J. 34 (3) (1995) 143148. [18] H.J. Zimmermann, Fuzzy Set Theory and Its Applications, Kluwer, Boston, MA, 1985. [19] H.J. Zimmermann, Fuzzy Programming and Linear Programming with Several Objective Functions, TIMS/Studies in the Management Sciences, vol. 20, 1984, pp. 109121.

1002

A. Rahideh et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 76 (2006) 9961002 [25] R. Yokoyama, T. Niimura, Y. Nakanishi, A coordinated control of voltage and reactive power by heuristic modeling and approximate reasoning, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 8 (May (2)) (1993) 636645. [26] C.T. Su, C.T. Lin, A new fuzzy control approach to voltage prole enhancement for power systems, in: IEEE Power Engineering Society, 1996 Winter Power Meeting, 96 WM 299-8-PWRS, 1996. [27] C.T. Su, C.T. Lin, Fuzzy based voltage/reactive power scheduling for voltage security improvement and loss reduction, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 16 (April (2)) (2001) 319323. [28] I. Hano, Y. Tamura, S. Narita, K. Matsumoto, Real time control of system voltage and reactive power, IEEE Trans. PAS 88 (November/December (5)) (1969) 15441558. [29] A. Rahideh, Fuzzy Based Voltage/Reactive Power Control and Loss Reduction, Project Report, FARS Regional Electric Company, 2004.

[20] K. Tomsovic, A fuzzy linear programming approach to the reactive power/voltage control problem, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 7 (February (1)) (1992) 287293. [21] V. Miranda, J.T. Saraiva, Fuzzy modeling of power system optimal load ow, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 7 (May (2)) (1992) 843849. [22] K.H. Abdul-Rahman, S.M. Shahidehpour, A fuzzy-based optimal reactive power control, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 8 (May (2)) (1993) 662670. [23] K.H. Abdul-Rahman, S.M. Shahidehpour, Reactive power optimization using fuzzy load representation, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 9 (May (2)) (1994) 898905. [24] C.T. Su, C.T. Lin, Voltage-reactive power control via fuzzy linear programming approach, in: Proceedings of the 1995 LASTED International Conference on Modeling and Simulation, 1995, pp. 173176.

Вам также может понравиться