EUROPEAN TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRICAL POWER Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.

com) DOI: 10.1002/etep.357

Power quality state estimation

Neville R. Watson*,y,z
Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand

SUMMARY Due to the size and complexity of modern electrical power networks and the cost of monitoring and telecommunication equipment, it is unfeasible to fully monitor the system state. For this reason state estimation techniques are used. With strategically placed measurements, estimation techniques can determine the parameters at unmonitored locations. Fundamental frequency state estimation is now a standard tool in modern power systems. The emission and immunity levels of modern electrical equipment are different to that of the past, and this has resulted in power quality issues have become important. Knowledge of the source and location of the disturbances is desirable so that remedial action can be taken promptly. Recent contributions have extended the concept to: harmonic state estimation (HSE) and identication of harmonic sources, transient state estimation (TSE) and voltage sag state estimation (VSSE), which are all types of power quality state estimation (PQSE). This paper provides an overview of the state-of-the-art techniques currently available for PQSE in a large electrical power system. Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. key words: power quality; state estimation; harmonics

1. INTRODUCTION The size and complexity of modern electrical power networks makes it unfeasible to fully monitor the system state and some form of estimation is required. State estimation has been used since the late 1960s in conjunction with fundamental frequency power-ow studies, which assume that all current and voltage waveforms are pure sinusoidal with constant frequency and magnitude [1,2]. Power quality (more accurately voltage quality) is a measure of the deviation of the voltage waveform from the ideal sinusoidal waveform (at rated voltage and frequency) and encompasses such phenomena as:      steady-state voltage magnitude (under- or over-voltage), variations in the peak or RMS voltage (sag and swells), harmonics (and inter-harmonics), voltage uctuations (light icker) and transients (spikes, impulses or surges).

The exact way in which power quality is assessed and quantied depends on the particular issue and the potential problems [3], and this necessitates a different type of power quality state estimation (PQSE) for each phenomena. Fundamental frequency state estimation can be considered as a type of PQSE as it deals with possible under- or over-voltages. With the growing use of nonlinear devices, and also the infrequent but undesirable system faults, there is a need to extend the state estimation techniques to power quality issues such as harmonics and transient events with the aim of identifying the source location and magnitude of power quality issues. The cost of PQ meters capable of measuring these PQ issues prohibits fully monitoring the system, hence there is a need for estimation. The aim of PQSE is, therefore, to economically determine the location and magnitude
*Correspondence to: Neville R. Watson, Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand. y E-mail: n.watson@elec.canterbury.ac.nz z Associate Professor.

Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

20

N. R. WATSON

of the source of the power quality issues and the power quality indices at unmonitored busbars. As mentioned, many diverse types of events come under the power quality label and each needs to be considered separately. This paper gives an overview of the state-ofthe-art in PQSE by rst introducing harmonic state estimation (HSE) [47], then extending this to transient state estimation (TSE) [8] and nally voltage sag state estimation (VSSE) will be introduced [9]. Ultimately for estimation a measurement equation must be derived, e.g. hx z (1)

where z is the vector of measurements and x is the state variables to be determined. h (.) is the measurement function relating the measurements to the state variables. For fundamental frequency state estimation the power measurements are utilized (due to the abundance of revenue meters) and the state variables are the phasor voltages, which results in a nonlinear measurement equation. With the appropriate choice of state variables and types of measurements a linear equation can be derived, as will be shown for HSE and TSE. 1.1. Solution of the measurement equation Regardless of how the measurement equation is derived there are two main ways of solving for the states. The rst is using the normal equation approach. This is the technique used for fundamental frequency state estimation applications. This approach can only be used if the system is fully observable and hence an inverse exists. To test for this, the condition number on this matrix is determined to ensure it is not too high. The second, and more robust approach, is to use singular value decomposition (SVD) to develop a pseudo-inverse and use this to solve. The computational requirements of SVD is high and is generally not used where speed is important (such as in real-time fundamental frequency state estimation). Inspection of the singular values and component matrices also gives important information on observability. SVD is able to give reliable answers for some state variables even when the system is partially observable [10]. In this case there is an innite number of solutions (x) that satises the measurement equation. SVD gives one particular solution and the null-space vector(s) xnsi , that when added to particular solution xp gives another valid solution. All possible solutions can be expressed as: x xp
N X i1

ki xnsi

where the number of null-space vectors (N) is equal to the number of zero singular values (n-rank(H)), and ki is an arbitrary constant. By inspecting the position of the zeros entries in the null-space vectors the observability can be determined. If all the ith element of all the null-space vectors are zero then adding the null-space vectors to the particular solution will not change the ith element of the particular solution, therefore it is observable. 2. HARMONIC STATE ESTIMATION The steady increase in the use of electrical equipment that are nonlinear, and thereby generate harmonics, has heightened the interest in harmonics. The impact of harmonics owing in electrical utility networks are diverse and often subtle. Destruction of powerfactor capacitors and the malfunction of equipment, such as crawling of motors, and telephone interference are readily apparent. However, reduction of equipment lifetime is not obvious for many years and the increased losses are difcult to assess. The task of HSE is to generate the best estimate of the harmonic levels from limited measured harmonic data, corrupted with measurement noise. The three issues involved are the choice of state variables, the criteria and the selection of measurement points and quantities to be measured. State variables are those variables that, when known, completely specify the system. The harmonic voltage phasors at all the busbars are usually chosen as state variables, as they allow the branch harmonic currents, shunt harmonic currents and harmonic currents injected into the busbar to be determined. For HSE harmonic voltages and harmonic currents are measured quantities as this is what power quality meters readily give, and the accuracy of harmonic power measurements is poor. With harmonic voltages and harmonic currents measurements and harmonic voltages at the busbars the state variables results in a linear measurement equation, i.e. Hx z where [H] is the measurement matrix, z is the vector of measurements and x is the state variables to be determined.
Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 DOI: 10.1002/etep

(2)

POWER QUALITY STATE ESTIMATION

21

Early HSE also used the normal equation approach [6,7] and a separate observability analysis procedure to determine solvability of the measurement equation [11]. However, unlike the fundamental frequency state estimation problem, the measurement equation for HSE is more likely to be under-determined, which precludes the use of the normal equation approach. The use of SVD allows a particular solution to be determined and inspection of the null-space vectors gives the observability information [1215]. The measurement equation is a complex-valued problem therefore early versions converted the measurement equation to a real valued problem. This is achieved by expanding Equation (2) to give:      ! <x <" <x <H =H =x =" =x =H <H where < and = represent the real and imaginary part, respectively. This conversion to a real valued problem is no longer needed due to the readily available complex-valued solvers (i.e. complex valued SVD routines). Another feature of some early HSE formulations was to start with the primitive admittance matrices for each component and use the node-branch connection matrices to form the system nodal admittance matrix. Now the system nodal admittance matrix is built up directly. The component parameters are read in, and knowledge of the component type and connections allow the appropriate elements in the system admittance matrix to be adjusted. Figure 1 shows the HSE framework. This is the reverse of harmonic penetration in that the harmonic sources are unknown and the harmonic levels throughout the system is determined from a limited number of harmonic measurements. It uses a three-phase system model to describe asymmetrical conditions such as circuit mutual couplings, impedance and current injection unbalance. A system-wide or partially observable HSE both require synchronized measurement of phasor voltage and current harmonics made at the different measurement points. Based on the network topology, a harmonic state estimator is formulated from the system admittance matrix at harmonic frequencies and the placement of measurements [12]. Measurements of voltage and current harmonics at selected busbars and lines are sent to a central workstation for the estimation of busbar injection current, busbar voltage and line current spectra at all or selected positions in the network. The placement of measurement points is normally assumed symmetrical (e.g. either three-phases or no phases at a possible measurement location). However, this requirement restricts the search for optimal placement of measurement points in three-phase asymmetrical power systems. Moreover, the implementation of existing algorithms will in practice be limited by poor synchronization of conventional instrumentation schemes. Two issues in HSE are the maximum observable subsystem for a given measurement placement, and the minimum number of measurement channels needed for the observability of a given system. The HSE can be implemented continuously in real-time if the measurement is continuous and the processing speed is fast enough. Potentially, the harmonic monitoring instrument and estimator can then be integrated into an existing supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system. 2.1. Virtual and pseudo-measurements Observability can be improved by different types of extra information: pseudo-measurements and virtual measurements. Pseudomeasurements are estimated based on historical data, but considering the lack of harmonic data it is not normally viable for HSE.

Figure 1. Framework for harmonic state estimation.

Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 DOI: 10.1002/etep

22

N. R. WATSON

virtual measurements is a type of information that does not need metering. For example, zero injection at a switching substation as there is no load connected directly. Early HSE partitioned the busbars into suspicious (those that possibly have nonlinear loads connected) and non-suspicious busbars and those busbars known not to have nonlinear loads connected (e.g. between generator and transformer or at switching substations). This is achieved by partitioning the equation, i.e.   !  h11 h12 V1 I1 (3) h21 h22 V2 0 where V1 is a vector of suspicious busbar voltages, V2 is a vector of non-suspicious busbar voltages, I1 is a vector of nodal harmonic current injection or line currents at suspicious busbars. Hence from Equation (3) the following expression for V2 is obtained: V 2 h1 Y21 V 1 22 (4)

To reduce the number of unknowns, Equation (4) is used in Equation (3) to eliminate the busbar voltages at non-suspicious busbars, i.e. h11 h12 h1 Y21 V 1 I 1 22 (5)

Although this greatly reduced the number of unknowns, it has the disadvantage of removing the possibility of using harmonic voltage measurements at non-suspicious busbars. Mathematically equivalent and now the preferred option is not to partition the busbars but to add a measurement to the measurement equation, termed virtual measurement (for each of these non-suspicious busbars). Not only are harmonics an issue, but also inter- and sub-harmonics, which are produced by loads such as cyclo-converters and arcfurnaces. Estimation techniques can be applied to inter- and sub-harmonics in the same manner as in HSE [16]. 2.2. Optimal measurement placement Optimal measurement placement involves nding the optimal number of measurements and the best positions to place them, in order to identify the locations and magnitudes of harmonic sources and is an active research area at present. One approach proposed to solve this problem has been using the minimum condition number of the measurement matrix as the criteria in conjunction with sequential elimination [17]. 2.3. Bad data analysis Bad data can be caused by erroneous measurement values, incorrect system parameters or incorrect network topology. Erroneous measurement has been the main focus of bad data analysis and can be categorized into three groups: extreme errors, gross errors and normal measurement noise. The presence of bad data degrades the accuracy of the HSE results and the problem is overcome by the detection, identication and removal of the bad data. A great deal of work has been done on bad data analysis for fundamental frequency, by detecting its presence, identifying which measurements are bad and eliminating the inuence of the bad data. This usually requires the system to be over-determined and is therefore of limited applicability to HSE. However, even in under-determined systems the presence of gross or extreme errors can be detected from the residual ri Zi H^ and the identied measurement removed. x The effect of random measurement noise has been assessed using Monte Carlo simulations and inspecting the generated cumulative probability density functions. This has shown that random measurement noise is less signicant in comparison to gross errors, which causes system wide estimation errors [18]. 2.4. Time-varying harmonics Throughout the day the composition of loading is varying and the output from the generators also changes to meet the demand. This results in a varying harmonic level with time, therefore the harmonic state estimation technique has been extended to track these variations with time using a Kalman lter approach [19,20]. The Kalman lter uses the least squares method in a dynamic sense to track the variation with time.
Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 DOI: 10.1002/etep

POWER QUALITY STATE ESTIMATION

23

For the specic linear HSE formulation the dynamic version of Equation (2) can be expressed as: xk1 k xk wk zk Hk xk vk (6) (7)

where wk and vk are process noise and measurement noise vectors, respectively. Solution by the basic recursive Kalman lter consists of a Time update and Measurement update. Time update consists of (for simplicity the square brackets signifying a matrix are not shown): (i) Project the state ahead ^ k ^k xk1 x (ii) Project the error covariance ahead P k P k T Q k k1 k (9) (8

where ^ is the initial estimate of ^k1 and P the initial estimate of the error covariance Pk+ 1. Q is the error covariance matrix xk1 x k1 for w. The Measurement update is then: (i) Update Kalman gain 1 T T Gk P Hk Hk P Hk Rk k k where R is the error covariance matrix for the measurement noise (v) (ii) Update estimate of state ^k ^ Gk zk Hk ^ x xk xk (iii) Update the error covariance Pk I Gk Hk P k (12) (10

(11

Another approach that has been researched is the use of Articial Neural Networks (ANN). With the massive parallel connectivity this method holds the promise of very high speed calculations. The main disadvantage is the difculty of training the ANN, and verifying the success of the training. This requires large data sets, which are generally not available. Moreover, the lack of experience with ANN applications in solving real world problems also hinders its application for HSE [3]. 2.5. Load identication A load can be considered to be Norton circuit, with an admittance in parallel to a current source representing the nonlinearity. Even if a load is passive (no harmonic current source) the HSE will show harmonic current injection due to the current in the linear component (admittance). Figure 2 is a general representation of a load. The task of load identication is to determine how much of the loads harmonic current (ILoad(h)) is due to the voltage distortion at the loads terminals (hence owing in the Norton admittance) and the magnitude of active harmonic current injection (Norton current source IN(h)). Further than this, by looking at the result across a number or harmonic frequencies, the types of nonlinear load(s) connected at a node can be estimated [7]. At present, load identication normally ignores complexity of the cross-coupling between harmonic frequencies. 2.6. Illustration The Lower South Island of New Zealand Test System, shown in Figure 3, will be used to demonstrate HSE. This is a three-phase system with detailed modelling of the transmission line including asymmetries due to the lack of transpositions. Figure 4 illustrates a comparison between the estimate and actual state variables (harmonic voltages) for this test system. The state variables are used to calculate the position and magnitude of harmonic current injections as shown in Figure 5.
Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 DOI: 10.1002/etep

24

N. R. WATSON

Figure 2. Norton Representation of three-phase load.

2.7. Field tests A paper published in 2005 [21] showed eld-test results of the use of HSE on an actual electrical power system. This was the transmission system in the Hokuriku region in Japan. To obtain more accurate transmission line parameters both the sending and receiving end voltages and currents at fundamental frequency were measured and the series impedance and shunt admittance were estimated. This was then scaled using hyperbolic function for harmonic frequencies. The parameters of the transformers were obtained by tests. There was enough harmonic measurements for the system to be over-determined, which allowed bad data detection and removal using the residuals.

3. TRANSIENT STATE ESTIMATION In the past electromagnetic transient studies (using EMTDC, EMTP, ATP or similar program) have been performed and various scenarios modelled, and then the results were compared with whatever measurements were available to identify the likely cause. However, such an approach is time consuming and sometimes inconclusive. On the other hand fault locators are used to determine the position of a fault along major transmission lines. These are based on voltages and currents measurements made at both ends and time-stamping this information with GPS timing information. Rather than looking at each line individually, this monitoring approach (time-stamping using GPS timing) coupled with more measurements can be extended to an estimator that provides system wide estimation. Voltage dips are the most frequently occurring disturbance disrupting electricity consumers therefore extending the estimation techniques from steady-state to transient phenomena is desirable. With this in view recent work has resulted in the extension of HSE to TSE. The formulation (Equation (2)) for HSE uses phasor quantities. This is because during steady-state operation the continuous electromechanical and electromagnetic distribution of energy among the system components are not modelled explicitly and the system behaviour can be represented by voltage and current phasors in the frequency domain. However, switching events and faults result in transient variations which are not accounted for in a traditional phasor approach, therefore instantaneous values are required. Extending the estimation technique to TSE allows the transient behaviour at unmonitored busbars to be determined and provides an alternative method to determine the location of system disturbances from partial measurements. To develop the measurement equation required by TSE a dynamic model of the system is required.
Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 DOI: 10.1002/etep

POWER QUALITY STATE ESTIMATION

25

Figure 3. The lower South Island of New Zealand test system.

Figure 4. Voltage estimate.

Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 DOI: 10.1002/etep

26

N. R. WATSON

Figure 5. Harmonic current injection.

3.1. State variable formulation Initially a state variable formulation was used as it is most intuitive (it can also easily accommodate nonlinearities), i.e. _ x Ax Bu y Cx Du (13) (14)

_ where x is the vector of state variable derivatives, y the vector of output variables and u the vector of inputs. Two earlier contributions [8,22] introduced the concept of TSE and discussed the component modelling and demonstrated the use of TSE for determining the location of load switching using a state variable formulation. The second contribution proposed a diakoptic formulation to allow a realistic power system to be modelled, and showed how to build the measurement equation. It then demonstrated its ability to identify the location of the fault. To supply extra information to the measurement system, the derivative of voltage and current measurements are also utilized. These can be estimated using present and previous values. The measurements in relation to the state variables are State variable measurement data: xmeasured 1x Derivative of measured state variables: _ xmeasured Ax Bu (16) (15)

Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 DOI: 10.1002/etep

POWER QUALITY STATE ESTIMATION

27

Dependent variable measurement data: ymeasured Cx Du Derivative of measured dependent variable: _ _ ymeasured C_ Du x _ CAx CBu Du (18) (17)

Rows of measurement equations corresponding to the selected measurement points are used to build up the measurement equation by selecting from Equations (15)(18) the row appropriate for the selected measurement. The measurement equation is then solved, i.e. 1 x HT H HT z or x H1 z [H]1 is the inverse or pseudo-inverse. Once the state variables are known, dependent variables such as branch currents can be calculated, and the complete knowledge of the system can be determined. 3.2. Numerical integrator substitution The use of companion circuit (or difference equations resulting from Numerical Integrator Substitution (NIS)) that results from using Dommels method could equally be used as the dynamic model rather than state variable formulation, and more recently a new TSE has been developed using this. The well-known matrix equation is: Gvt is t I History For an inductor: ikm t Dt vk t vm t I History t Dt 2L Dt vk t Dt vm t Dt 2L (19)

I History t Dt ikm t Dt For a capacitor: ikm t I History t Dt

2C vk t vm t I History t Dt Dt

2C vk t Dt vm t Dt ikm t Dt Dt

As in the previous case, each measurement results in one equation that is added to form a measurement equation of the form given in Equation (2). The difference is that state variables are the instantaneous node voltages. Instantaneous voltage measurement: Hek 1:0 Measurement vector entry: ze vmeas t where e is the number of the equation and k is the node voltage measured.
Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 DOI: 10.1002/etep

28 Instantaneous voltage across R, L or C element:

N. R. WATSON

Hek 1 Hem 1 Measurement vector entry: ze vk meas t vm meas t where e is the number of the equation, k is the sending end node and m is the receiving end node. Current measurement through R, L or C element: hek 1=Geff hem 1=Geff where Geff Measurement vector entry ze imeas t IHistory t Dt where I History t Dt 8 < 0; Resistor Dt ikm t Dt 2L vk t Dt vm t Dt; Inductor : 2C Dt vk t Dt vm t Dt ikm t Dt; Capacitor 8 < 1=R; Resistor Dt=2L; Inductor : 2C=Dt; Capacitor

3.3. Illustration of TSE Figure 6 shows a simple test system to demonstrate this technique. The component values for this circuit are: R1 1 V, R2 2 V, R3 100 V, R4 1 V, R5 100 V, L1 1 mH, L2 10 mH, L3 10 mH, C1 150 mF, C2 5 mF. Time-step (Dt) is 50 mS. Fault inception occurs at 0.020 S and fault removal at 0.025 S. With four measurements iL2 ; v2 ; iC1 ; iR2 the system is fully observable, and both normal equations and SVD give practically identical results. Figures 7 and 8 display the comparison between actual and estimated voltages for nodes 1 and 4 as well as the estimation error.

Figure 6. Simple test system to illustrate TSE.

Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 DOI: 10.1002/etep

POWER QUALITY STATE ESTIMATION

29

Figure 7. Comparison of Node 1 voltage for fully observable case (no measurement noise)

Figure 8. Comparison of Node 4 voltage for fully observable case (no measurement noise)
Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 DOI: 10.1002/etep

30

N. R. WATSON

Figure 9. Comparison of Node 1 voltage for fully observable case and 5% measurement noise

Measurement noise was added to one measurement iR2 and the comparison for Node 1 voltage is shown in Figure 9. The accuracy of the other estimates was not affected by this measurement noise. Removing one measurement iR2 makes the system only partially observable. Node 1 voltage is now unobservable and the SVD chooses a particular solution that minimizes the norm of the solution vector, resulting in the plot shown in Figure 10. This minimizing the norm is desirable because rather than giving wrong results that may be believed it returns a zero value, making it clear the node voltage is unobservable. Figure 11 clearly shows the measurement error, while Figure 12 shows the estimate of the voltage at the unmonitored Node (Node 4) is still accurate.

4. VOLTAGE SAG (DIP) STATE ESTIMATION State estimation of other power quality issues, such as voltage dips (sags), has also begun. VSSE estimates the voltage sags occurring at unmonitored busbars from the voltage sag recorded at a limited number of monitored busbars. Early work estimated the voltage proles of a feeder based on a limited number of metering points by making use of the radial connection characteristic of a distribution feeder [23]. Another contribution estimated the voltage sag at a low voltage grid connection points using the information about sag characteristics at other low voltage grid points at which sag meters are installed [24]. Paving the way for this is the work of Olguin and Bollen [25] who looked at propagation of voltage dips and counting of voltage dips and then developed an optimal placement method for voltage dip monitors. The magnitude of the RMS voltage depression seen at a remote busbar caused by a fault (or machine inrush) is dependent on the topology and network parameters. The reach area of the monitoring system is the area that if a fault occurs the monitoring system will detect with the given voltage threshold. Building upon this work a VSSE has been demonstrated [9].
Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 DOI: 10.1002/etep

POWER QUALITY STATE ESTIMATION

31

Figure 10. Comparison of Node 1 voltage for partially observable case and 5% measurement noise

Figure 11. Comparison of Node 2 voltage for partially observable case and 5% measurement noise
Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 DOI: 10.1002/etep

32

N. R. WATSON

Figure 12. Comparison of Node 4 voltage for partially observable case and 5% measurement noise

5. CONCLUSION At present the identication of the root cause of PQ disturbances is often a difcult and time consuming exercise, and even more so if the problem is intermittent. PQSE is of great benet to Utilities as it gives the PQ levels that are on their network, thus allowing Utilities to manage PQ levels and ensure they meet regulatory requirements. Trends in PQ levels over time can be observed and action can be taken before problems are experienced. Benchmarking against similar Utilities can also highlight techniques and practices that enhance PQ. The quick identication of the location and magnitude of the source of a PQ issue allows it to be addressed quickly, thereby minimizing its impact. With PQSE installed even the difcult intermittent events will be captured and the location of the disturbance identied quickly. The characteristics of loads has changed with more loads being nonlinear in nature due to the use of semiconductor devices. With more nonlinear devices being deployed at HV, MV and LV levels in the electrical network, power quality issues are becoming more prevalent, and this has heightened the awareness of it. The greater PQ awareness has caused greater interest in determining what PQ levels already exist. This, coupled with the reduction in cost of PQ monitors, is resulting in more electrical utilities deploying monitors on their networks. One obvious question is how best to make use of the enormous volume of PQ data being gathered by the monitoring equipment. The ultimate goal must be to have a system wide view of the PQ levels and identify the location and magnitude of the sources of PQ issues. This requires synchronized measurements to be fed to a central location (e.g. by the SCADA system), then run a PQSE algorithm to give the location and magnitude of sources of PQ disturbances and PQ indices at unmonitored locations. Although there is a wide range of power quality monitors available today, variation in their capability and data format limits the value of the data obtained. Also variable time delay in communication system can be a problem, which is overcome by using GPS time-stamping. However, at present some of the monitoring equipment being deploy lacks the synchronization via time-stamp which limits the datas usefulness. The improvement in PQ monitors and data communication in the foreseeable future means that there will be a wealth of high quality data. PQSE is in its infancy and there is scope to develop new PQSE for other power quality
Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 DOI: 10.1002/etep

POWER QUALITY STATE ESTIMATION

33

issues as well as further development of those than have been proposed. Although obtaining adequate synchronized measurements is the main barrier at present to the adoption of these algorithms, with the reduction in price and deployment of more PQ monitors, PQSE will be a reality in the future.

REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. Monticelli A. State Estimation in Electric Power Systems: A Generalized Approach; Kluwer Academic Publishers: USA, 1999. Abur A, Exposito AG. Power System State Estimation: Theory and Implementation; Marcel-Dekker: New York, USA, 2004. Heydt GT. Electric Power Quality; 2nd edn, Stars in a Circle Publications: West LaFayette, Indiana, USA 1991. Heydt GT. Identication of harmonic sources by a state estimation technique. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 1989; 4(1):569576. Meliopoulos APS, Zhang F, Zelingher S. Power system harmonic state estimation. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 1994; 9(3):17011709. Du ZP, Arrillaga J, Watson NR. Continuous harmonic state estimation of power systems. IEE Proceedings Generation, Transmission and Distribution 1996; 143(4):329336. Du ZP, Arrillaga J, Watson NR, Chen S. Identication of harmonic sources of power systems using state estimation. IEE Proceedings Part-C, Generation, Transmission and Distribution 1999; 146(1):712. Yu KCC, Watson NR. An Approximate method for transient state estimation. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 2007; 22(3):16801687. Espinosa-Juarez E, Hernandez A. A method for voltage sag state estimation in power systems. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 2007; 22(4):25172526. Press WH, Flannery BP, Teulolsky SA, Vetterling WT. Numerical recipes. In FORTRAN: The Art of Scientic Computing; 2nd edn, Cambridge University: England, 1992. Watson NR, Arrillaga J, Du ZP. Modied symbolic observability for harmonic state estimation. IEE Proceedings Part-C, Generation, Transmission and Distribution 2000; 147(2):105111. Arrillaga J, Watson NR, Chen S. Power System Quality Assessment; John Wiley & Sons: Chichester, England 2000. Yu KCC, Watson NR, Arrillaga J. Three phase harmonic state estimation using svd for partially observable systems. Proceedings of PowerCon 2004, Singapore, November, 2004. Matair SS, Watson NR, Wong K-P, Pham VL, Arrillaga J. Harmonic state estimation: a method for remote harmonic assessment in a deregulated utility network, electric utility deregulation and restructuring and power technologies. Proceedings. DRPT, 2000; 4146. Madtharad C, Premrudeepreechacharn S, Watson NR. Power system state estimation using singular value decomposition. Electric Power System Research 2003; 67:99107. Pham VL, Wong K-P, Watson NR, Arrillaga J. Sub-harmonic state estimation in power systems. Proceedings of Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting, Vol. 2, 2327 January, 2000; 11681173. Madtharad C, Premrudeepreechacharn S, Watson NR, Saeng-Udom R. An Optimal measurement placement method for power system harmonic state estimation. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 2005; 20(2):15141521. Yu KKC, Watson NR, Arrillaga J. Error Analysis in static harmonic state estimation: a statistical approach. Transactions on Power Delivery 2005; 20(2):1045 1050. Beides HM, Heydt GT. Dynamic state estimation of power system harmonics using Kalman lter methodology. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 1991; 6(4):16631670. Yu KKC, Watson NR, Arrillaga J. An Adaptive Kalman lter for dynamic harmonic state estimation and harmonic injection tracking. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 2005; 20(2):15771584. Kanao N, Yamashita M, Yanagida H, Mizukami M, Hayashi Y, Matsuki J. Power system harmonic analysis using state-estimation method for Japanese eld data. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery 2005; 20(2):970977. Yu KKC, Watson NR. Identication of Fault Locations using Transient State Estimation. Proceedings of the International Power System Transient Conference (IPST 2005), Montreal (Canada), 2005. Wang B, Xu W, Pan Z. Voltage sag state estimation for power distribution systems. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2005; 20(2):806812. Didden M, Belmans R, Dhaeseleer W. Geographic generalization of limited voltage sag monitoring data. Proceedings of CIGRE/IEEE PES International Symposium, Quality and Security of Electric Power Delivery Systems, Montreal, Canada 810 October, 2003; 4247. Olguin G, Vuinovich F, Bollen MHJ. An optimal monitoring program for obtaining Voltage sag system indexes. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2006; 21(1):378384.

Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euro. Trans. Electr. Power 2010; 20:1933 DOI: 10.1002/etep