Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
COMPUTATION
Jinquan Zhao,
Hohai University
Nanjing, P.R. China
jqzhao2@tom.com
Ping Ju
Hohai University
Nanjing, P. R.China
Page 1
fore, an acceleration factor ( 0 < 1) could be introduced to damp the numerical oscillation.
Vi ,new = Vi ,old + (Vi , set Vi ,old )
(2)
3 SUPPLEMENTARY SWITCHING LOGICS
There are two kinds of divergences with power flow
computation. One is the numerical divergence, in
which the power mismatches increase rapidly with
iterations. Another is the identification divergence, in
which the power mismatches maintain around a specific
value but the bus type identification of the voltage regulated buses meet difficulty. The former usually has less
iteration times than the latter one.
Those buses, which types are switched frequently in
the computation process, are called the hard identification buses in this paper. To handle this identification
difficulty, one seemingly reasonable idea is to stop the
oscillation. The following supplementary logic is usually used.
Supplementary logic 1: If the number of type
switching from PV to PQ for some buses is bigger than
N (say N = 3 ) in the solution process, then these
buses are fixed at PQ type in latter iterative computation
and the switching criterion above is never checked
again.
Generally, one solution can be obtained by using the
above supplementary logic. Furthermore, we hope that
the number of those buses, which are handled by this
supplementary logic, is as small as possible. Therefore,
the following supplementary logic could be an improved one:
Supplementary logic 2: When the supplementary
logic 1 is used, only one of the hard identification buses
is fixed in each iteration while let the others alone. In
general the most limit violated bus is selected to be
fixed.
Another advantage of the supplementary logic 2 is
that the numerical zigzag phenomena in the power flow
computation can be avoided. Its disadvantage is that the
total iteration times would increase.
Since both the bus type identification and the numerical solution are executed alternately in the power
flow computation, it is hard to know if the numerical
convergence process has a bad impact on the correct
identification of bus type. The following supplementary
logic is used based on this idea in which these two tasks
are separated.
Supplementary logic 3: First keep the type of all
voltage regulated buses, run purely numerical iteration
until a converged solution is got, then check if the type
of some buses need to be switched. If there are this kind
of buses, then switch them according to the original
logic described in section II and continue the numerical
solution process. If there is no such kind of bus, then
stop the computation.
Page 2
Voltagep.u.
4 NUMERICAL RESULTS
4.1 A practical power system
The numerical tests on power flow convergence of a
practical 640 bus power system are shown here. Using
the original bus type switching logic (OL) and the supplementary logics (SL) above we run the power flow
computation for base case, the case of 500KV tie line
#5031 outage and the case of #5001 outage respectively. The numerical results with respect to convergence are shown in table 1.
Logic
Base case
5001 outage 5031 outage
OL Convergence Divergence Convergence
SL1 Convergence Convergence Convergence
SL2 Convergence Convergence Convergence
SL3 Convergence Divergence Convergence
0.97
0.96
0.95
0.94
0.93
0.92
0.91
0.9
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
branch parameter
For base case system and the case of tie line 5031
outage, the converged solutions were obtained by using
the original logic and three supplementary logics. Actually the hard identification buses didnt arise in the
solution process. For the case of tie line 5001 outage,
the power flow diverges by using the original logic,
which is a type identification divergence. One convergent solution was obtained by using supplementary
logic 1, but this solution is an abnormal solution, since
five of all voltage regulated buses are fixed as PQ type
while their reactive powers are fixed at their upper limits but their voltage magnitudes are higher than their set
point values. One abnormal solution was also obtained
by using the supplementary logic 2, since the voltage
regulated bus 111 is fixed as PQ type while its reactive
power is fixed at its upper limit but its voltage magnitude is higher than its set point. By using supplementary
logic 3, the power flow computation is still diverged.
Tie line
5001 outage
SL1
SL2
Bus ID(fixed at PQ
by SL1 or SL2)
Abnormal bus
27, 43, 91, 93, 111 27, 43, 91, 93, 111
111
111
One question is whether there is a steady stable solution with the case of tie line 5001 outage. In other
words, whether this post contingency load flow is solvable or not? The reference [9] presented a branch parameterized continuation power flow tool to investigate
the nonlinear effect of branch outages. It is used to
verify the above analysis and the nose curve obtained is
shown in Fig. 1.
The branch parameter value max corresponding
to the nose point of the V Curve is smaller than 1
( max 0.921) as shown in Fig. 1, which indicates that
Logic
OL
SL1
SL2
SL3
Base case
Convergence
Convergence
Convergence
Convergence
Case 1
Divergence
Divergence
Convergence
Divergence
Case 2
Divergence
Convergence
Convergence
Divergence
Page 3
5 THEORETICAL ANALYSIS
First of all, we give the mathematical expression
which is equivalent with the heuristic PV-PQ switching
logic in power flow computation. They are a set of
complementarity constraints between the terminal voltage magnitude and the reactive power of each generator.
(Qi Qi min )(Vi Vi,set )(Qi max Qi ) = 0 (i = 1,2,", ng ) (3)
where ng is the number of generator buses. There are
two variables at each bus in load flow problem. They
are bus voltage magnitude and angle. If the reactive
powers of all generators are considered as variables
either, then there are totally 2n + ng variables. Therefore
1.2
Voltagep.t.
form as:
0.8
f ( , V , Qg ) = 0
0.6
(4)
0.4
0.2
0
0
200
400
600
800
LoadMW
Qi min Qi Qi max
(i = 1, 2,", ng )
(5)
Q
Qmax
Stable
branch
Unstable
branch
Vset
Qmin
Unstable
branch
Stable branch
Page 4
(7)
Page 5
f ( x, ) = 0
Q g min Q g ( x , ) Q g max
(9)
Voltage(p.u.)
1.25
1.2
1.15
1.1
1.05
1
0.95
0
Lamda
10
15
Voltage
PV Curve(bus 50)
1.06
1.04
1.02
1
0.98
0.96
0.94
0
10
20
30
40
LoadMW
Page 6
Page 7