VSC-HVDC Model-Based Power System Optimal

Power Flow Algorithm and Analysis

Sang-Seung Lee, MIEEE Yong Tae Yoon, Seung-Il Moon, MIEEE
Power System Research Div. Jong-Keun Park, SMIEEE
(PSRD), KESRI, Bldg. 130 Dept. of Electrical and Computer Eng.
Seoul National Univ., Seoul, Korea Bldg. 301, Seoul National Univ.
(e-mail: ssLee6@snu.ac.kr) Seoul, Korea

Abstract—This paper presents a power system operation
optimization algorithm including VSC-HVDC (Voltage Source
Converter - High-Voltage Direct Current) lines using PD-IP
(primal-dual interior point) Newton-type OPF (optimal power
flow). The VSC-HVDC links have the ability to exert
instantaneous power control in neighboring AC systems.
Moreover, the VSC-HVDC technology is fit for meeting the
growing needs of the DER (distributed energy resource)
connection, such as with wind power generation in power
systems. The output results for the voltage and the angle are
shown by the simulation for the insertion of VSC-HVDC line in
the IEEE 30-bus power system. Simulations are executed by the
MATPOWER (MATLAB power system simulation) tool for the
optimal power flow.
Index Terms--PD-IP (primal-dual interior point) Newton-type
OPF, VSC-HVDC, PTP, BTB, OPF, MATPOWER, IEEE 30 bus
system
I. INTRODUCTION
The entire power system reliability must be addressed in
order to consider the effects on the broad sides after
interconnection or disconnection for a power system, such as
land-to-land power system interconnection or DG (distributed
generation). Recently, offshore grids based on DC technology
and DC super grids have been suggested to connect the
growing share of DG. In these situations, high-voltage direct
current (HVDC) transmission constitutes a key application in
power electronics technology to electrical power networks.
The current HVDC transmission schemes can be divided into
three types. The point-to-point HVDC transmission uses
overhead lines or submarine cables to connect converter
stations. Generally, the ground is used as a return path for the
current. The highest voltage used today in DC transmission is
600 kV, and 450 kV for submarine transmission. Back to back
stations are two converters located in the same station and
used to connect two asynchronous AC systems. A multi-
terminal system consists of more than two converter stations
[1]-[5].
VSC-HVDC (voltage source converter - high-voltage
direct current) links have the ability to exert instantaneous
power control in neighboring AC systems. In this case, the
VSC-HVDC technology will fit to meet the growing needs of
the DER (distributed energy resource) connection, such as
with wind power generation in power systems. VSC-HVDC
offers significant advantages over traditional AC grid
reinforcements to facilitate the integration of renewable
energy sources in the future [6]-[11].
The HVDC interconnection technique for the over-sea
interconnection is fit for the point-to-point (PTP) method.
Alternatively, the HVDC land-to-land power system
interconnection is suitable for the back-to-back (BTB)
technique without DC transmission lines. The land-to-land
power system interconnection will be used as the BTB
technique without DC transmission lines, whereas PTP
interconnection technique will be used for over-sea
interconnection [1]-[11].
In South Korea, for example, the power interconnection
point is now connected by submarine high-voltage direct-
current (HVDC) cables between the mainland transmission
system and Jeju Island. Jeju Island is a small island in South
Korea, and has environmental and geographical limitations. In
addition, the generation cost of the Jeju system is much more
expensive than that of the mainland system. The Jeju HVDC
system was constructed to provide power from main-land
power systems in 1998. The system consists of a two-pole
current-sourced converter (CSC) HVDC system, and has a
capacity of 300 MW (150×2pole) with a voltage of ±180kV.
The interconnection transmission line is 96km long and
connected between the Haenam substation bus in the mainland
system and the Nam-chang substation bus on Jeju Island [25].
The optimal power flow (OPF) problem has been well
known since the 1960s. Nowadays, modern methods to solve
OPF must be adjusted in order to satisfy the new challenges of
the power industry coming from market and technological
transformations. The development of competitive electricity
markets has had an important impact on classical analysis
tools [12]-[24].
MATPOWER is an open-source package of MATLAB
tools for electric power system simulation that attempts to
address this need by providing an extensible architecture for
optimal power flow problems, allowing users to easily modify

This work has been supported by KETEP (2011T100100144(H), 2011T100100152(S),

) and ETEP (I-2012-010-
2011T100100212(W), 2010T100100415(G), 2011T100100241(LF), 2009T100100534(N)
T5), which is funded by MKE (Ministry of Knowledge Economy).

978-1-4799-1303-9/13/$31.00 ©2013 IEEE

 2

and augment problem formulation with additional variables, The PD-IPM can be represented by the following
constraints, and costs. Since this customization is done via mathematical formulation [12]:
optional input parameters, it is still possible to take advantage min f ( X ) (1)
X
of the performance benefits of pre-compiled solvers [12]-[15].
This paper presents a power system operation optimization G(X ) = 0 (2)
algorithm including VSC-HVDC lines using PD-IP (primal- H (X ) ≤ 0 (3)
dual interior point) Newton-type OPF (optimal power flow).
⎡ ni
⎤
min ⎢ f ( X ) − γ ∑ ln ( Z m ) ⎥ (4)
II. POWER SYSTEM MODEL AND OPTIMIZATION X
⎣ m =1 ⎦
A. IEEE 30bus Power System Model and VSC-HVDC H (X )+Z = 0 (5)
Line Model [12]-[24] Z >0 (6)
Fig. 1 is the VSC-HVDC line model and equivalent The constrained optimization problem is converted to an
dummy generator to connect power systems. unconstrained optimization problem by constructing a
Lagrangian function corresponding to (4). The Lagrangian for
the equality constrained problem is given as:
Lγ ( X , Z , λ , µ ) = f ( X ) + λ T G ( X ) + µ T ( H ( X ) + Z ) (7)

( X , Z , λ , µ ) = f X + GX λ + H X µ
γ T T
LX (8)
Lλ ( X , Z , λ , µ ) = G T ( X )
γ
(9)
LZ ( X , Z , λ , µ ) = µ T − γ eT [ Z ]
γ −1
Fig. 1. The DC line model and equivalent generator [12]. (10)
Lµ ( X , Z , λ , µ ) = H T ( X ) + Z T
γ
(11)
The above equivalent model is represented by the
following equation. LγXX ( X , Z , λ , µ ) = f XX + GXX ( λ ) + H XX ( µ ) (12)
pt = p f − ploss = p f − ( l0 + l1 p f ) = (1 − l1 ) p f − l0 (1)
For the above problems, the first-order optimality KKT
Fig. 2 represents the IEEE 30-bus power system model (Karush-Kuhn-Tucker) conditions are satisfied when the
including HVDC lines. The simulation system is modified partial derivatives of the Lagrangian are all set to zero.
from the IEEE 30-bus system, in which four HVDC lines are F ( X , Z , λ, µ ) = 0 (13)
installed (6-10, 4-12, 15-23, 22-24). A case is considered in Z >0 (14)
which the connected HVDC lines are private. µ >0 (15)
⎡ LγX T ⎤ ⎡ f XT + λ T GX + µ T H X ⎤
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
F ( X , Z , λ , µ ) = ⎢⎢
[µ ] Z − γ e ⎥ = ⎢ [µ ] Z − γ e ⎥ (16)
G(X ) ⎥ ⎢ G(X ) ⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
⎢⎣ H ( X ) + Z ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ H (X )+Z ⎥⎦
These first-order optimality conditions are solved by using
a Newton update step.
Fµ ⎤⎦ [ ∆X ∆µ ] = − F ( X , Z , λ , µ )
T
⎡⎣ FX FZ Fλ ∆Z ∆λ
(17)
⎡ LXX
γ
0 GX
T
H X ⎤ ⎡ ∆X ⎤
T
⎡ LγX T ⎤
⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
⎢ 0 [µ ] 0 [ Z ] ⎥ ⎢ ∆Z ⎥ = − ⎢ [ µ ] Z − γ e ⎥ (18)
⎢G 0 0 0 ⎥ ⎢ ∆λ ⎥ ⎢ G(X ) ⎥
⎢ X ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
⎢⎣ H X I 0 0 ⎥⎦ ⎣⎢ ∆µ ⎦⎥ ⎢⎣ H ( X ) + Z ⎥⎦
[ µ ] ∆Z + [ Z ] ∆µ = − [ µ ] Z + γ e (19)
[ Z ] ∆µ = − [ Z ] µ + γ e − [ µ ] ∆ Z (20)
∆µ = − µ + [ Z ] ( γ e − [ µ ] ∆Z )
Fig. 2. IEEE 30 bus power system model including HVDC lines [12]-[24]. −1
(21)

B. Primal-Dual Interior Point Optimal Power Flow H X ∆X + ∆Z = − H ( X ) − Z (22)

Algorithm [12]-[24] ∆Z = − H ( X ) − Z − H X ∆ X (23)
The PD-IPM (primal-dual interior point method) consists T
LγXX ∆X + GX ∆λ + H X ∆µ = − LγX
T T
of minimizing the active power generation cost in the power (24)
system by adjusting suitable controllable parameters. LγXX ∆X + GX ∆λ + H X
T T
( −µ + [ Z ]−1
( γ e − [ µ ] ) ∆Z ) = − L
γ T
X (25)
 3

LγXX ∆X + GX ∆λ + H X
T T
⎛ ⎛ µm ⎞ ⎞
(26) α d = min ⎜⎜ ξ min ⎜ − ⎟ ,1⎟⎟ (35)
( −µ + [ Z ] (γ e − [ µ ] ( − H ( X ) − Z − H
−1
X ))
∆X ) = − LX γ T
⎝
∆µ m < 0
⎝ ∆µm ⎠ ⎠
The perturbation parameter γ must converge to zero in
[Z ] γ e
−1
LγXX ∆X + GX ∆λ − H X µ + H X
T T T
order to satisfy the first-order optimality conditions of the
+H X [Z ] [µ ] H ( X ) + H X [Z ] [Z ] µ original problem during the Newton-type iterations. It uses the
T −1 T −1
(27)
following rule to update γ at each iteration after updating Z
+ H X [ Z ] [ µ ] H X ∆X = − LγX
T −1 T
and µ .
( LγXX + H X T [ Z ]−1 µ + H X ) ∆X + GX T ∆λ (28)
X ← X + α p ∆X (36)
Z ← Z + α p ∆Z (37)
[ Z ] (γ e + [ µ ] H ( X ) ) = − LγX
T −1 T
+H X
λ ← λ + α d ∆λ (38)
where
µ ← µ + α d ∆µ (39)
[Z ] [µ ] H X
−1
M ≡ LγXX + H X
T
(29)
Z µ T

N ≡ LX + H X [ Z ] ( γ e + [ µ ] H ( X ) )
γ T T −1
(30) γ ←σ (40)
ni
f X + λ T GX + µ T H X + H X [ Z ] ( γ e + [ µ ] H ( X ) ) where σ is a scalar constant between 0 and 1.
T T −1
= (31)
Refer to the reference [12] for detailed nomenclatures in
M ∆X + GX ∆λ = − N
T
(32) (1)-(40). MATPOWER is an open-source MATLAB power
⎛ Zm ⎞ ⎞ ⎛ system simulation package. MATPOWER consists of a set of
α p = min ⎜⎜ ξ min ⎜ − ⎟ ,1⎟⎟ (33) MATLAB M-files designed to give the best performance
⎝ ⎝ ∆Z m ⎠ ⎠
∆Z m < 0
possible, while keeping the code simple to understand and
⎡M G X ⎤ ⎡ ∆X ⎤ ⎡ − N ⎤
T
customize [12]-[15].
⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ = ⎢ ⎥ (34)
⎣GX 0 ⎦ ⎣ ∆λ ⎦ ⎣ −G ( X ) ⎦ Fig. 3 represents the power system operation optimization
algorithm using PD-IP Newton-type OPF including VSC-
HVDC lines.

Fig. 3. The PD-IPM Newton-type OPF under VSC-HVDC.

 4

In tables I and II, the voltage at bus 13 is higher than that

of subsequent buses, and the angle at bus 19 is greater than
that of subsequent buses.

TABLE I
VOLTAGE PROFILE
Bus OPF OPF_HVDC6-10 OPF_HVDC4-12 OPF_HVDC15-23 OPF_HVDC22-24
1 0.98237 0.97918 0.98578 1.00089 1.00067
2 0.97872 0.97546 0.98186 0.99708 0.99675
3 0.97692 0.97418 0.97269 0.99056 0.98919
4 0.97644 0.97381 0.97058 0.98903 0.9874
5 0.97127 0.96713 0.97128 0.98667 0.98533
6 0.97233 0.96735 0.96919 0.98444 0.98206
7 0.9623 0.95761 0.96041 0.97588 0.97389
8 0.96112 0.95615 0.95798 0.97322 0.97084
9 0.99032 1.00024 0.98883 0.99568 0.98994
10 0.99984 1.01766 0.99922 1.00165 0.99425
11 0.99032 1.00024 0.98883 0.99568 0.98994
12 1.01744 1.03299 1.02 1.02112 1.01651
13 1.06447 1.08815 1.04197 1.06085 1.05792
14 1.00665 1.02229 1.0089 1.01079 1.00585
15 1.00921 1.02457 1.01133 1.01162 1.00913
16 1.00284 1.01942 1.00408 1.00587 0.99976
Fig. 4. Voltage profile. 17 0.99549 1.01301 0.99543 0.99772 0.99056
18 0.99326 1.00964 0.99444 0.99574 0.99099
19 0.98735 1.00432 0.98797 0.98965 0.98396
20 0.98957 1.00677 0.98987 0.99169 0.98564
21 1.00927 1.02443 1.00871 1.00888 0.99892
22 1.01598 1.03033 1.01544 1.01504 1.00424
23 1.02559 1.03952 1.02756 1.04573 1.02906
24 1.01672 1.02869 1.01712 1.02421 1.03279
25 1.0438 1.04841 1.04396 1.04672 1.05
26 1.02674 1.03142 1.0269 1.02971 1.03304
27 1.06895 1.06895 1.06895 1.06895 1.06891
28 0.98202 0.97747 0.97915 0.99311 0.99092
29 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.04995
30 1.03911 1.03911 1.03911 1.03911 1.03907

TABLE II
ANGLE PROFILE
Bus OPF OPF_HVDC6-10 OPF_HVDC4-12 OPF_HVDC15-23 OPF_HVDC22-24
1 0 0 0 0 0
2 -0.76301 -0.77331 -0.7611 -0.74467 -0.75399
3 -2.3897 -2.45447 -2.23613 -2.31951 -2.25713
4 -2.83859 -2.91637 -2.65777 -2.75852 -2.68362
5 -2.48635 -2.51293 -2.43849 -2.38496 -2.4097
6 -3.22866 -3.25878 -3.11212 -3.04971 -3.0818
7 -3.49098 -3.52442 -3.40165 -3.32565 -3.35628
Fig. 5. Angle profile. 8 -3.68188 -3.72195 -3.57161 -3.4788 -3.51558
9 -4.13711 -4.54734 -4.07145 -3.89595 -4.31987
10 -4.59985 -5.1889 -4.55884 -4.33159 -4.96039
A case study is performed on an IEEE standard 30-bus 11 -4.13711 -4.54734 -4.07145 -3.89595 -4.31987
12 -4.49791 -4.75132 -4.64086 -5.13469 -4.24048
system to assess the relative impact of each HVDC line on 13 -3.29796 -3.56432 -3.32286 -3.87197 -2.99306
voltage profile and the angle profile. 14
15
-5.03967
-4.81401
-5.30255
-5.10716
-5.15421
-4.8969
-5.97394
-6.05184
-4.70384
-4.40473
In Fig. 4, the shows the voltage output of an OPF 16 -4.83925 -5.22646 -4.90217 -5.09025 -4.84259
17 -4.88727 -5.4102 -4.87606 -4.7701 -5.14386
without including HVDC lines. The represents the 18 -5.48431 -5.85866 -5.52079 -6.19075 -5.34438
voltage output of an OPF that includes an HVDC line 19 -5.68819 -6.11555 -5.69898 -6.0796 -5.71139
20 -5.47185 -5.93793 -5.4698 -5.69673 -5.58095
between bus 6 and bus 10. The represents the 21 -4.62082 -5.13213 -4.57929 -4.09527 -5.11968
voltage output of an OPF that includes an HVDC line 22
23
-4.50305
-3.75571
-4.99299
-4.08335
-4.46128
-3.77435
-3.90081
-1.14742
-5.03457
-2.82469
between bus 4 and bus 12. The represents the 24 -3.88522 -4.27038 -3.87658 -2.59248 -2.49927
25 -2.0724 -2.35901 -2.07384 -1.16709 -1.21262
voltage output of an OPF that includes an HVDC line 26 -2.47604 -2.75905 -2.47736 -1.56845 -1.61143
between bus 15 and bus 23. The represents the 27 -0.71471 -0.94053 -0.72207 -0.03943 -0.16908
28 -3.21525 -3.27823 -3.11946 -2.95513 -3.00299
voltage output of an OPF that includes an HVDC line 29 -1.84939 -2.07522 -1.85675 -1.17412 -1.30387
between bus 22 and bus 24. 30 -2.64289 -2.86871 -2.65025 -1.96761 -2.09743

In the case of Fig. 5, the shows the angle output of an

OPF without including HVDC lines, and the
represents the angle output of an OPF that includes an HVDC
line between bus 6 and bus 10. The represents the
angle output of an OPF that includes an HVDC line between
bus 4 and bus 12. The represents the angle output
of an OPF that includes an HVDC line between bus 15 and
bus 23. The represents the angle output of an OPF
that includes an HVDC line between bus 22 and bus 24.
III. CONCLUSION
An examination of the power system operation
optimization algorithm including VSC-HVDC lines was
connected using PD-IP (primal-dual interior point) Newton-
type OPF to solve present problems by the following:
z The power system operation optimization algorithm
including VSC-HVDC lines using PD-IP Newton-type
OPF was presented.

z The interconnection technique for the over-sea
interconnection is fit for the point-to-point (PTP)
method. The land-to-land power system interconnection
is suitable for the back-to-back (BTB) technique without
DC transmission lines.
z BTB was proposed for land-to-land power system
interconnection in countries, and PTP was used for over-
sea interconnection sites.
z This paper introduces a power system operation
optimization algorithm using PD-IP Newton-type OPF
including VSC-HVDC lines.
z The output results for the voltage and the angle were
shown by simulation for the insertion of VSC-HVDC
lines in the IEEE 30-bus power system.
z MATLAB’s MATPOWER tool was used for the optimal
power flow simulation of the lines.
IV. REFERENCES
[HVDC, VSC-HVDC]
[1] D. Jovcic, N. Pahalawaththa, and M. Zavahir, “Analytical modeling of
HVDC-HVAC systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 14, no. 2, pp.
506-511, Apr. 1999.
[2] C. Osauskas and A. Wood, “Small-signal dynamic modeling of
HVDC systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 220-225,
Jan. 2003.
[3] C. Angeles-Camacho, O. L. Tortelli, E. Acha, and C. R. Fuerte-
Esquivel, “Inclusion of a high voltage DC-voltage source converter
model in a Newton-Raphson power flow algorithm,” IEE Proc.-Gener.
Transm. Distrib, vol. 150, no. 6, pp. 691-696, Nov. 2003.
[4] S. S. Lee, et al., Power System Optimization Operation Algorithm
under HVDC Operational Environment, Ministry of Knowledge and
Economy, First Year Report, June, 2012.
[5] S. S. Lee, Y. S. Jang, S. H. Ahn, G. P. Park, J. K. Park, and Y. T.
Yoon, “Northeast Asia Interconnection-Based Integration of DG, DR,
HVDC, and Nuclear Load-following under Smart Grid in the South
Korean Power System,” IEEE Power & Energy Society 2012 General
Meeting, San Diego, CA, U.S.A, July 22-26, 2012.
[6] X. P. Zhang, “Multiterminal voltage-sourced converter-based HVDC
models for power flow analysis,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 19, no.
4, pp. 1877-1884, Nov. 2004.
[7] A. Pizano-Martinez, C. R. Fuerte-Esquivel, H. Ambriz-Pérez, and E.
Acha, “Modeling of VSC-Based HVDC Systems for a Newton-
Raphson OPF Algorithm,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 22, no. 4, pp.
1794-1803, Nov. 2007.
[8] C. Du, E. Agneholm, and G. Olsson, “Comparison of different
frequency controllers for a VSC-HVDC supplied system,” IEEE Trans.
Power Del., vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 2224-2232, Oct. 2008.
[9] C. Karawita and U. D. Annakkage, “Multi-infeed HVDC interaction
studies using small-signal stability assessment,” IEEE Trans. Power
Del., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 910-918, Apr. 2009.
[10] L. Zhang, L. Harnefors, and H. P. Nee, “Modeling and Control of
VSC-HVDC Links Connected to Island Systems,” IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 809-820, May 2010.
[11] J. Beerten, S. Cole, and R. Belmans, “Generalized Steady-State VSC
MTDC Model for Sequential AC/DC Power Flow Algorithms,” IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 821-829, May. 2012.
[MATPOWER, OPF]
[12] R. D. Zimmerman and C. E. Murillo-Sánchez, MATPOWER User’'s
Manual. [Online]. Available: http://www.pserc.cornell. edu/matpower/.
[13] H. Wang, C. E. Murillo-Sánchez, R. D. Zimmerman, and R. J. Thomas,
“On computational issues of market-based optimal power flow,” IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 1185-1193, Aug. 2007.
[14] R. D. Zimmerman, C. E. Murillo-Sánchez, and R. J. Thomas,
“MATPOWER’'s extensible optimal power flow architecture,” in Proc.
IEEE Power and Energy Soc. General Meeting, pp. 1-7, Jul. 26-30,
2009.
5
[15] R. D. Zimmerman, C. E. Murillo-Sánchez, and R. J. Thomas,
“MATPOWER: Steady-State Operations, Planning, and Analysis
Tools for Power Systems Research and Education,” IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 12-19, Feb. 2011.
[OPF]
[16] D. I. Sun, B. Ashley, B. Brewer, A. Hughes, and W. F. Tinney,
“Optimal power flow by Newton approach,” IEEE Trans. Power App.
Syst., vol. PAS-103, no. 10, pp. 2864-2880, Oct. 1984.
[17] G. A. Maria and J. A. Findlay, “A Newton optimal power flow
program for Ontario Hydro EMS,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 2, no.
3, pp. 576-584, Aug. 1987.
[18] D. I. Sun, T. I. Hu, G. S. Lin, C. J. Lin, and C. M. Chen, “Experiences
with implementing optimal power flow for reactive scheduling in the
taiwan power system,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 3, no. 3, pp.
1193-1200, Aug. 1988.
[19] M. Huneault and F. D. Galiana, “A survey of the optimal power flow
literature,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 762-770, May
1991.
[20] Y. Y. Hong, “Enhanced Newton optimal power flow approach
experiences in Taiwan power system,” IEE Proc.-Gener. Transm.
Distrib., vol. 139, no. 3, pp. 205-210, May 1992.
[21] A. Monticelli and Wen-Hsiung E. Liu, “Adaptive movement penalty
method for the newton optimal power flow,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 334-342, Feb. 1992.
[22] O. Crisan and M. Mohtadi, “Efficient identification of binding
inequality constraints in optimal power flow Newton approach,” IEE
Proc.-Gener. Transm. Distrib, vol. 139, no. 5, pp. 365-370, Sep. 1992.
[23] S. A. Soman, K. Parthasarathy, and D. Thukaram, “Curtailed number
and reduced controller movement optimization algorithms for real
time voltage/reactive power control,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 9,
no. 4, pp. 2035-2041, Nov. 1994.
[24] J. A. Momoh, R. J. Koessler, M. S. Bond, B. Stott, D. Sun, A.
Papalexopoulos, and P. Ristanovic, “Challenges to optimal power
flow,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 444-455, Feb. 1997.
[25] http://www.kepco.co.kr and http://www.kpx.or.kr.
V. BIOGRAPHIES
Sang-Seung Lee was born in Goseong, Gyeongnam, Korea on April 2, 1960.
He received M.S.E.E. and Ph.D. degrees in Electrical Engineering at the
Seoul National University. Currently, he is with Power System Research
Division (PSRD) of KESRI, Bldg. 130, Seoul National University, 1
Gwanangno, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 151-742, Korea. His interest areas are
power system interconnection algorithm, power distribution operation
algorithm, nonlinear/adaptive/sliding mode algorithm, power system
stabilization algorithm, and reliability algorithm.
Yong Tae Yoon was born in Korea on April 20, 1971. He received his B.S.
degree, M. Eng. and Ph.D. degrees from M.I.T., USA in 1995, 1997, and
2001, respectively. Currently, he is an Assistant Professor in the Department
of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Seoul National University, Korea.
His special field of interest includes electric power network economics,
power system reliability, and the incentive regulation of independent
transmission companies.
Seung-Il Moon was born in Korea, on February 1, 1961. He received his B.S.
degree from Seoul National University, Korea in 1985 and his M.S.E.E. and
Ph.D. degrees from Ohio State University in 1989 and 1993, respectively.
Currently, he is a Professor at the Department of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, Seoul National University. His special fields of interest include
power quality, flexible ac transmission systems, renewable energy, and
distributed generation.
Jong-Keun Park was born in Youseong, Chungcheongnam-Do, Republic of
Korea, on October 21, 1952. He received his B.S. degree in Electrical
Engineering from Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea in 1973 and his
M.S.E.E. and Ph.D. degrees in Electrical Engineering from the University of
Tokyo, Japan in 1979 and 1982, respectively. He is currently a Professor at
the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Seoul National
University. He is a Fellow of the IEE and a Senior Member of the IEEE.