ELSEVIER
ELEO*rRIO
POWER
8WSTEm8
R|$|nROI,I
a Department o f Electronic and Electrical Engineering, UniversiO, of Strathclyde, Royal College Building, 204 George Street,
Glasgow GI IXW, UK
b The National Grid Company plc, Coventry, UK
Abstract
A complete extended Ward equivalent approach is proposed for on-line security assessment of a power system. This new
approach combines the off-line topological modelling of the extended Ward equivalent with on-line updating of the parameters
of the equivalent model for representing real time topology changes of the external system. Test results indicate that the new
equivalent model has an excellent response from the external system to the contingencies of the internal system. ,~ 1997 Elsevier
Science S.A.
Keywords: Power system model; External system equivalent; Network reduction: Contingency analysis; Static security assessment
I. Introduction
182
External
System
I
Boundary
I
study~tem
I YEE
YEB
0 ]
Ym
YII
The Ward-type equivalent method represents the external system by a set of equivalent lines and power
injections attached at boundary buses. The basic Ward
equivalent disregards all of the external buses. The
Ward-PV equivalent has a basic Ward equivalent of
external PQ buses and retained PV buses. The extended
Ward equivalent combines the simplicity of the basic
Ward equivalent with the reactive power response of
the Ward-PV equivalent; the approach is summarised in
the following four steps:
9 1. Step 1: Obtaining a Ward equivalent vEq
o f tlle
XBB
external network
~.
[Y]=
0
0
'''
Y~3~+Y~
".....
Ym
YB,
external system
then eliminated,
attached at the
Y then becomes:
(2)
YII ]
Internal
System
buses of an interconnected power system can be partitioned into external (subscript E), boundary (subscript
B) and internal (subscript I) buses. For an original
unreduced system, the corresponding bus admittance
matrix Y is shown as follows:
system to be equivalenced
[yBEq] = [ Y,3.
EB + YBBI
BB -- [ Y,~z][YEE] '[ YEB]
(3)
Under steady state conditions the effect of the external on the internal system is reflected by the active and
reactive power flow from the external system into the
boundary buses. From the state estimator, it becomes
feasible to obtain the present state of the internal
system, i.e. bus voltage magnitudes V and phase angles
0 . Hence, it is easy to calculate the equivalent injections at boundary buses. For each boundary bus i:
V
--i V, j ,(g 8 *COS 0 . + b,j * sin O'e})]
(4)
183
Internal
System
Equivalent l i n e ~"::2.
tie-line
B
.leVi
-o u , c s 0 - gu * sin0)]
+ V~o l//(b
(5)
YQQ YQV
YVQ
Yvv
YOB
YVB
YIB
0 "]
0
YH
(6)
P~oo
m
Internal
System
Equivalentlines
I
Fig. 3. Study system with extended Ward equivalent.
184
Y~'B
AOi=Vt[B;iAVi- E
Y~,'v
YBV
Y 13B q- YBB
YBI
Ym
Y,
rEq
BI
- ~ B;;,,AV,,,]
BB[]FZ~VB]
BIB
= [AQ
(14)
m e [/q
B;mA[Tm- B;tiAVi
,,. E [h]
(7)
B,/' V B ~
,.ALAV, A LAQ,/,~, j
A0,=
(15)
m ~ [b]
(16)
m~-[h]
(9)
8;:,= -
8"i..,
(17)
me[6]
9;=-
Y 8;k
(18)
k~[v]
0
.
,..
v ' E BB
q +
.
B[
YB~
.
Ym
YBI
YH ]
then,
(lO)
AQi= - Vi(k;qB'tk~t,
)AVi=\ /
(19)
BB--~BB
B,B
qp, vq
B.ALAV, A
(11)
L AQI/V, J
Then, the reactive power response of the Ward equivalent can be expressed as:
[A Q B] = [ VB][B"~q][A VB]
(12)
Vit~iAV~=V'I~i(V;-- Vi)
(13)
Internal System
Boundary
External System
:z:: :::: ::,
iiiiiii~BufferZone
~i::i:ili.i!!i,
!I:~:I:~Z:I:!:I,
I
B
I
l, Study Syslem
:::::::::::::::,
ii:iiiiiiiiiiii:Distant Network
:. :=: :=:,
...::..:.:.:.,
!::~:::::::.::,
<.::.:.:.:.,
:;!iiiililili:!
v.
System to be equivalent
The extended Ward equivalent gives reasonable accuracy for both active and reactive power flows. In online applications, the operating conditions of the
external system vary with time. The extended Ward
equivalent model can reflect the load condition changes
of the external system by matching the boundary equivalent power injections, but fail to simulate significant
configuration changes since it is very difficult to obtain
all the on-line topology information from the external
system. Furthermore, even if the information is known,
it will require heavy computation to perform the equivalencing frequently. The extended Ward equivalent
method is therefore not suitable for on-line modelling
of significant configuration changes of the external system.
In order to monitor effectively the internal system
and keep the external system model up to date and
realistic, the fictitious branch/~ must be updated as the
topology of the external system changes. Clearly the
values of/~ depend on the topology and parameters of
the external system and these can be stored in advance.
In theory, the line status of the external system can be
obtained from the external system. But since the external system is usually very large, it is impossible to know
all topology information from the external system in
on-line applications. IEEE Task Force on Data Exchange for Security Assessment suggested that a small
portion of the external system should be monitored by
means of real time data exchange. The small portion of
the external system is referred to as the buffer zone; the
remainder is referred to as the distant network. The
interconnected network will be divided into four subsystems as shown in Fig. 4. In general, the distant
network is far from the internal system and has little
impact on it; the buffer zone is electrically close to the
boundary buses and has a significant impact on the
internal system.
The definition of the extent of the buffer zone can be
established by off-line studies using a full ac load flow
program. If the variation of a single equivalent parameter/~i exceeds a given difference tolerance (for example
5%) when an external line trips, the line will be allocated into the buffer zone. Otherwise, if the variation of
185
186
Table 2
Equivalent lines between boundary buses
4. Test results
Full
Internal
Boundary
Buffer
Distant
Busbar
Line
PV bus
706
1380
119
65
145
12
6
18
0
15
19
1
620
1198
106
From
To
R (in pu)
X (in pu)
MELKA1
M ELKA 1
M ELKA 1
M ELKA 1
MELKAI
DUNGA1
DUNGA1
DUNGAI
DUNGAI
DIDCA 1
DIDCAI
DIDCAI
BRLEA 1
BRLEA1
MELKB1
DUNGAl
D1DCA1
BRLEA 1
M ELKB 1
MELKB2
DIDCA1
BRLEA1
MELKBI
MELKB2
BRLEA 1
MELKBI
MELKB2
M ELKB 1
MELKB2
MELKB2
0.01498
0.00109
0.00093
0.00049
0.00054
0.00293
0.00416
2.13322
2.13096
0.00023
0.06521
0.06512
2.32951
2.32561
0.01127
0.13430
0.01380
0.00749
0.01324
0.01386
0.03343
0.04678
11.07212
11.09619
0.00335
0.37392
0.37473
14.47325
14.50444
0.03412
To
R (in pu)
X (in pu)
MELKA I
DUNGAI
DIDCA1
BRLEA 1
MELKBI
MELKB2
EXTRA 1
EXTRA2
EXTRA3
EXTRA4
EXTRA5
EXTRA6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.01192
606.815
0.00950
0.02257
0.10248
0.10268
u~
BUSBAR
P (MW)
Q (Mvar)
MELKA1
DUNGA1
DI DCA I
BRLEA1
MELKBI
M ELKB2
889.57959
1619.4813
- 258.6386
- 789.9861
16.91010
16.49737
114.091 l
-3.72315
-- 267.5182
340.4394
3.67155
4.96073
2 ~
/~
o[
,,,,,t,,,,,
187
~
....
, ,,
E= ~.~
P(MVV)
Q(Mvar)
,,,r
'~l
{I
-6
Number of Sample
Fig. 6. Maximum difference of line flow (CI).
AP%--~/
g'
-0
in%R a t i n ~
/)R.LF
A V,.% =
p,.~?
100%
(20)
The m a x i m u m errors in percentage o f the voltage magnitude for each case is illustrated in Fig. 5, where V~%
= pRLF
--~/
AQi,/=
~-0R L F
-pFLF
-d
(21)
~ /F L F
'~'/
__ ()FLF
~,i
Ratin,,
Lln%
=
100%
....
0.04
5. Conclusions
v%(c2)
".' 0.03
II,I
0.02
0.01
III
(24)
~V%(C1)
0.05
.~
(23)
(22)
AQ%-
* 100%
I Ifl
I It
10
I1[11
13
16
P III
]g
I I [111
22
25
III
7, ~ -4
28
Number of Sample
Fig. 5. Maximum errors (%) of voltage magnitudes.
Number of Sample
Fig. 7. Maxinmm difference of line flow (C2).
188
[4]
-1
[5]
~E
-2
....
Q%(Cl)
-3
[6]
Number of Sample
P%(C2)
1
....
0.5
o
=..
U.I
E -0.5
E
'~(g
:S
[7]
[8]
Q%(C2)
a~
"7 "'~
] ~1
[9]
-1
-v
./X_..,.--
[10]
-1.5
Number of Sample
[11]
Acknowledgements
[13]
T h e a u t h o r s w o u l d like t o t h a n k t h e N a t i o n a l G r i d
Company plc for the financial support and many technical discussions on this project.
[14]
References
[15]
[16]
[17]