Power Flow Solution

Power flow equations
Net power entering the network at bus ‘I’
n
Pi   Yki Vi Vk cos( i   k   ik )
k 1

n
Qi   Y3 i V3 Vi sin( i   k   ik )
k 1
Calculated from V, Ѳ, Y
 Nonlinear Systems May Have 
Multiple Solutions or No Solution
•Example 1:x2 ‐ 2 = 0 has solutions x = 1.414…
•Example 2:  x2 + 2 = 0 has no real solution

f(x) = x2 ‐ 2   f(x) = x2 + 2  

two solutions where f(x) = 0 no solution f(x) = 0
 Multiple Solution Example 3
• The dc system shown below has two solutions:

where the 18 watt
load is a resistive
load
The equation we're solving is
2
 9 volts 
I RLoad  
2
 RLoad  18 watts
 1 +R Load 
One solution is R Load  2
Other solution is R Load  0.5
 Gauss Iteration
There are a number of different iterative methods
we can use. We'll consider two: Gauss and Newton.

With the Gauss method we need to rewrite our

equation in an implicit form: x = h(x)

To iterate we first make an initial guess of x, x (0) ,

and then iteratively solve x (v +1)  h( x ( v ) ) until we
ˆ such that xˆ  h(x).
find a "fixed point", x, ˆ
 Gauss Iteration Example
Example: Solve x - x  1  0
x (v 1)  1  x ( v )
Let k = 0 and arbitrarily guess x (0)  1 and solve
(v ) (v)
k x k x
0 1 5 2.61185
1 2 6 2.61612
2 2.41421 7 2.61744
3 2.55538 8 2.61785
4 2.59805 9 2.61798
 Stopping Criteria
A key problem to address is when to stop the
iteration. With the Guass iteration we stop when
x ( v )   with x ( v ) x ( v 1)  x ( v )
If x is a scalar this is clear, but if x is a vector we
need to generalize the absolute value by using a norm
x ( v ) 
j
Two common norms are the Euclidean & infinity
n
x 2   i
x 2
x   max i x i
i 1
 Gauss Power Flow
We first need to put the equation in the correct form
*
 n  n
Si  Vi I i*  Vi   YikVk   Vi  Yik*Vk*
 k 1  k 1
n n
*
Si  *
Vi I i  Vi *
 YikVk  Vi *
 YikVk
k 1 k 1

S*i n n

Vi*
  YikVk  YiiVi   YikVk
k 1 k 1,k i

1  S*i n 
Vi   *   YikVk 
Yii  V k 1,k i


i
Gauss Two Bus Power Flow Example
•A 100 MW, 50 Mvar load is connected to a generator  through a line 
with z = 0.02 + j0.06 p.u. and line charging of 5 Mvar on each end 
(100 MVA base).  Also, there is a 25 Mvar capacitor at bus 2.  If the 
generator voltage is 1.0 p.u., what is V2?  

SLoad = 1.0 + j0.5 p.u.

Gauss Two Bus Example, cont’d
The unknown is the complex load voltage, V2 .
To determine V2 we need to know the Ybus .
1
 5  j15
0.02  j 0.06
5  j14.95 5  j15 
Hence Ybus   
  5  j15 5  j14.70 
( Note B22  - j15  j 0.05  j 0.25)
 Gauss Two Bus Example, cont’d
1  S*2 n 
V2   *   YikVk 
Y22  V2 k 1,k i 
1  -1  j 0.5 
V2    (5  j15)(1.00) 
5  j14.70  V2 *

Guess V2(0)  1.00 (this is known as a flat start)
(v) (v)
v V2 v V2
0 1.000  j 0.000 3 0.9622  j 0.0556
1 0.9671  j 0.0568 4 0.9622  j 0.0556
2 0.9624  j 0.0553
Gauss Two Bus Example, cont’d
V2  0.9622  j 0.0556  0.9638  3.3
Once the voltages are known all other values can
be determined, such as the generator powers and the
line flows
S1*  V1* (Y11V1  Y12V2 )  1.023  j 0.239
In actual units P1  102.3 MW, Q1  23.9 Mvar
2
The capacitor is supplying V2 25  23.2 Mvar
 Slack Bus
 In previous example we specified S2 and V1 and 
then solved for S1 and V2.  
 We can not arbitrarily specify S at all buses 
because total generation must equal total load + 
total losses
 We also need an angle reference bus.
 To solve these problems we define one bus as the 
"slack" bus.  This bus has a fixed voltage 
magnitude and angle, and a varying real/reactive 
power injection.  
 Gauss with Many Bus Systems
With multiple bus systems we could calculate
new Vi ' s as follows:

1  S*i n 
Vi( v 1)   ( v )*   YikVk( v ) 
Yii  V   
 i k 1, k i 
 hi (V1( v ) ,V2( v ) ,...,Vn(v ) )
But after we've determined Vi(v 1) we have a better
estimate of its voltage , so it makes sense to use this
new value. This approach is known as the
Gauss-Seidel iteration.
 Gauss‐Seidel Iteration
Immediately use the new voltage estimates:
V2( v 1)  h2 (V1 ,V2( v ) ,V3( v ) ,,Vn( v ) )
V3( v 1)  h2 (V1 ,V2( v 1) ,V3( v ) ,,Vn(v ) )
V4( v 1)  h2 (V1 ,V2( v 1) ,V3( v 1) ,V4( v ) ,Vn( v ) )

Vn( v 1)  h2 (V1 ,V2( v 1) ,V3( v 1) ,V4( v 1) ,Vn( v ) )
The Gauss-Seidel works better than the Gauss, and
is actually easier to implement. It is used instead
of Gauss.
Gauss Two Bus Example, cont’d
V2  0.9622  j 0.0556  0.9638  3.3
Once the voltages are known all other values can
be determined, such as the generator powers and the
line flows
S1*  V1* (Y11V1  Y12V2 )  1.023  j 0.239
In actual units P1  102.3 MW, Q1  23.9 Mvar
2
The capacitor is supplying V2 25  23.2 Mvar
 Slack Bus
 In previous example we specified S2 and V1 and 
then solved for S1 and V2.  
 We can not arbitrarily specify S at all buses 
because total generation must equal total load + 
total losses
 We also need an angle reference bus.
 To solve these problems we define one bus as the 
"slack" bus.  This bus has a fixed voltage 
magnitude and angle, and a varying real/reactive 
power injection.  
 Gauss with Many Bus Systems
With multiple bus systems we could calculate
new Vi ' s as follows:

1  S*i n 
Vi( v 1)   ( v )*   YikVk( v ) 
Yii  V   
 i k 1, k i 
 hi (V1( v ) ,V2( v ) ,...,Vn(v ) )
But after we've determined Vi(v 1) we have a better
estimate of its voltage , so it makes sense to use this
new value. This approach is known as the
Gauss-Seidel iteration.
 Gauss‐Seidel Iteration
Immediately use the new voltage estimates:
V2( v 1)  h2 (V1 ,V2( v ) ,V3( v ) ,,Vn( v ) )
V3( v 1)  h2 (V1 ,V2( v 1) ,V3( v ) ,,Vn(v ) )
V4( v 1)  h2 (V1 ,V2( v 1) ,V3( v 1) ,V4( v ) ,Vn( v ) )

Vn( v 1)  h2 (V1 ,V2( v 1) ,V3( v 1) ,V4( v 1) ,Vn( v ) )
The Gauss-Seidel works better than the Gauss, and
is actually easier to implement. It is used instead
of Gauss.
 Three Types of Power Flow Buses
There are three main types of power flow 
buses
– Load (PQ) at which P/Q are fixed; iteration solves 
for voltage magnitude and angle.  
– Slack at which the voltage magnitude and angle 
are fixed; iteration solves for P/Q injections
– Generator (PV) at which P and |V| are fixed; 
iteration solves for voltage angle and Q injection
special coding is needed to include PV buses in the 
Gauss‐Seidel iteration
 Inclusion of PV Buses in G‐S 
To solve for Vi at a PV bus we must first make a
guess of Qi :
n
Si*  Vi*  YikVk  Pi  jQi
k 1

 ( v )* n (v) 
Hence Qi( v )   Im Vi  YikV 
 k 1
k

In the iteration we use Si( v )  Pi  jQi( v )
 Inclusion of PV Buses, cont'd
Tentatively solve for Vi( v 1)

1  Si( v )* n 
Vi( v 1)   (v )*   YikVk( v ) 
Yii  V   
 i k 1, k i 
But since Vi is specified, replace Vi( v 1) by Vi
 Two Bus PV Example
Consider the same two bus system from the previous
example, except the load is replaced by a generator 
z = 0.02 + j 0.06

Bus 1 Bus 2
V1 = 1.0 V2 = 1.05
(slack bus)
P2 = 0 MW
 Two Bus PV Example, cont'd
1  S2* 
V2   *  Y21V1 
Y22  V2 
Q2   Im[Y21V1V2*  Y22V2V2* ]
Guess V2  1.050
v S2( v ) V2( v 1) V2( v 1)
0 0  j 0.457 1.045  0.83 1.050  0.83
1 0  j 0.535 1.049  0.93 1.050  0.93
2 0  j 0.545 1.050  0.96 1.050  0.96
Generator Reactive Power Limits
 The reactive power output of generators varies 
to maintain the terminal voltage; on a real 
generator this is done by the exciter
 To maintain higher voltages requires more 
reactive power
 Generators have reactive power limits, which 
are dependent upon the generator's MW 
output
 These limits must be considered during the 
power flow solution.  
 Generator Reactive Limits, cont'd
 During power flow once a solution is obtained 
check to make generator reactive power output is 
within its limits
 If the reactive power is outside of the limits, fix Q 
at the max or min value, and resolve treating the 
generator as a PQ bus
– this is know as "type‐switching"
– also need to check if a PQ generator can again 
regulate
 Rule of thumb: to raise system voltage we need 
to supply more vars
 Accelerated G‐S Convergence

Previously in the Gauss-Seidel method we were

calculating each value x as
x ( v 1)  h( x ( v ) )
To accelerate convergence we can rewrite this as
x ( v 1)  x ( v )  h( x ( v ) )  x ( v )
Now introduce acceleration parameter 
x ( v 1)  x ( v )   (h( x ( v ) )  x ( v ) )
With  = 1 this is identical to standard gauss-seidel.
Larger values of  may result in faster convergence.
Accelerated Convergence, cont’d
Consider the previous example: x - x  1  0
x ( v 1)  x ( v )   (1  x (v )  x ( v ) )
Comparison of results with different values of 
k  1   1.2   1.5   2
0 1 1 1 1
1 2 2.20 2.5 3
2 2.4142 2.5399 2.6217 2.464
3 2.5554 2.6045 2.6179 2.675
4 2.5981 2.6157 2.6180 2.596
5 2.6118 2.6176 2.6180 2.626
 Gauss‐Seidel Advantages
Each iteration is relatively fast (computational 
order is proportional to number of branches + 
number of buses in the system
Relatively easy to program
 Gauss‐Seidel Disadvantages
Tends to converge relatively slowly, although 
this can be improved with acceleration
Has tendency to miss solutions, particularly on 
large systems
Tends to diverge on cases with negative 
branch reactances (common with 
compensated lines)
Need to program using complex numbers
 Newton‐Raphson Algorithm
The second major power flow solution 
method is the Newton‐Raphson algorithm
Key idea behind Newton‐Raphson is to use 
sequential linearization
General form of problem: Find an x such that
f ( xˆ )  0
Newton‐Raphson Method (scalar)
1. For each guess of xˆ , x ( v ) , define
x  xˆ - x
(v ) (v )

2. Represent f ( xˆ ) by a Taylor series about f ( x)

(v )
df ( x ) (v)
f ( xˆ )  f ( x ) 
(v)
x 
dx
d 2 f ( x(v ) )
 
2
 x (v )
 higher order terms
dx 2
Newton‐Raphson Method, cont’d
3. Approximate f ( xˆ ) by neglecting all terms
except the first two
(v)
df ( x ) (v)
f ( xˆ )  0  f ( x ) 
(v)
x
dx
4. Use this linear approximation to solve for x ( v )
1
 df ( x )  (v )
x  
(v ) (v)
 f (x )
 dx 
5. Solve for a new estimate of x̂
( v 1)
x  x (v )
 x (v)
 Newton‐Raphson Example
Use Newton-Raphson to solve f ( x)  x 2 - 2  0
The equation we must iteratively solve is
1
 df ( x ) 
(v )
x (v )
   f ( x (v )
)
 dx 
x (v )  1  (v ) 2
   (v )  (( x ) - 2)
2x 
( v 1)
x  x (v)
 x (v )

x ( v 1)
 x (v)  1  (v) 2
  ( v )  (( x ) - 2)
2x 
Newton‐Raphson Example, cont’d
x ( v 1)
 x (v )  1  (v) 2
  ( v )  (( x ) - 2)
2x 
Guess x (0)  1. Iteratively solving we get
v x(v ) f ( x(v) ) x ( v )
0 1 1 0.5
1 1.5 0.25 0.08333
2 1.41667 6.953  103 2.454  103
3 1.41422 6.024  106
Sequential Linear Approximations

At each
iteration the
N-R method
uses a linear
approximation
to determine
Function is f(x) = x2 - 2 = 0. the next value
Solutions are points where for x
f(x) intersects f(x) = 0 axis
 Newton‐Raphson Comments
When close to the solution the error 
decreases quite quickly ‐‐ method has 
quadratic convergence
f(x(v)) is known as the mismatch, which we 
would like to drive to zero
Stopping criteria is when f(x(v))  < 
Results are dependent upon the initial guess.  
What if we had guessed x(0) = 0, or x (0) = ‐1?
A solution’s region of attraction (ROA) is the 
set of initial guesses that converge to the 
Multi‐Variable Newton‐Raphson
Next we generalize to the case where x is an n-
dimension vector, and f (x) is an n-dimension function
 x1   f1 (x) 
x   f ( x) 
x   2
f ( x)   2 
   
x   f ( x) 
 n  n 
Again define the solution xˆ so f ( xˆ )  0 and
x  xˆ  x
 Multi‐Variable Case, cont’d
The Taylor series expansion is written for each f i ( x)
f1 (x) f1 (x)
f1 (xˆ )  f1 (x)  x1  x2  
x1 x2
f1 (x)
xn  higher order terms
xn

f n (x) f n (x)
f n (xˆ )  f n (x)  x1  x2  
x1 x2
f n (x)
xn  higher order terms
xn
 Multi‐Variable Case, cont’d
This can be written more compactly in matrix form
 f1 (x)
f1 (x)

f1 (x) 
 xx2 xn 
 1 
f ( x )  1
  x1 
 f (x)   f 2 (x)
f 2 (x)

f 2 (x)  
 x 
f (xˆ )   2    x1x2 xn   2 
      
 f ( x)       
 
 n   f (x) f n ( x)   n 
x
f n (x)
 n  
 x1
x2 xn 
 higher order terms
 Jacobian Matrix
The n by n matrix of partial derivatives is known
as the Jacobian matrix, J (x)
 f1 (x) f1 (x)

f1 (x) 
 x x2 xn 
 1

 f 2 (x) f 2 (x)

f 2 (x) 
J (x)   x1 x2 xn 
 
     
 f (x) f n (x) f n (x) 
 n  
 x1 x2 xn 
 Multi‐Variable N‐R Procedure
Derivation of N-R method is similar to the scalar case
f (xˆ )  f (x)  J (x)x  higher order terms
f (xˆ )  0  f (x)  J (x)x
1
x   J ( x) f ( x)
x( v 1)  x( v )  x( v )
x( v 1)  x( v )  J (x( v ) ) 1 f (x( v ) )
Iterate until f (x( v ) )  
 Multi‐Variable Example
 x1 
Solve for x =   such that f (x)  0 where
x2 
f1 (x)  2 x12  x22  8  0
f 2 (x)  x12  x22  x1 x2  4  0
First symbolically determine the Jacobian
 f1 (x) f1 (x) 
 x x2 
J (x) =  
1

 f 2 (x) f 2 (x) 
 x1 x2 
 Multi‐variable Example, cont’d
 4 x1 2 x2 
J (x) = 
 2 x1  x2 x1  2 x2 
Then
1
 x1   4 x1 2 x2   f1 (x) 
 x     2 x  x x1  2 x2   f 2 (x) 
 2  1 2
1
Arbitrarily guess x (0)
 
1
1
1  4 2   5  2.1
x (1)
        
1  3 1  3 1.3 
Multi‐variable Example, cont’d
1
 2.1 8.40 2.60   2.51 1.8284 
x (2)
        
  
1.3 5.50  0.50   1.45  1.2122 
Each iteration we check f (x) to see if it is below our
specified tolerance 
0.1556 
f (x )  
(2)

 0.0900 
If  = 0.2 then we would be done. Otherwise we'd
continue iterating.
NR Application to Power Flow
We first need to rewrite complex power equations
as equations with real coefficients
*
 n n
Si   Vi   YikVk   Vi  YikVk
*
Vi I i * *

 k 1  k 1
These can be derived by defining
Yik Gik  jBik
Vi Vi e ji  Vi  i
 ik i   k
Recall e j  cos  j sin 
 Real Power Balance Equations
n n
Si  Pi  jQi  Vi  Yik*Vk*   Vi Vk e jik (Gik  jBik )
k 1 k 1
n
  Vi Vk (cos ik  j sin  ik )(Gik  jBik )
k 1
Resolving into the real and imaginary parts
n
Pi   Vi Vk (Gik cos ik  Bik sin ik )  PGi  PDi
k 1
n
Qi   Vi Vk (Gik sin ik  Bik cos ik )  QGi  QDi
k 1
Newton‐Raphson Power Flow
In the Newton-Raphson power flow we use Newton's
method to determine the voltage magnitude and angle
at each bus in the power system.
We need to solve the power balance equations
n
Pi   Vi Vk (Gik cos ik  Bik sin  ik )  PGi  PDi
k 1
n
Qi   Vi Vk (Gik sin  ik  Bik cos ik )  QGi  QDi
k 1
 Power Flow Variables
Assume the slack bus is the first bus (with a fixed
voltage angle/magnitude). We then need to determine
the voltage angle/magnitude at the other buses.
 2   P2 (x)  PG 2  PD 2 
     
   
 n   Pn (x)  PGn  PDn 
x   f ( x)  
V2 Q (x)  QG 2  QD 2 
   2 
     
   
 n 
V  Qn (x)  QGn  QDn 
 N‐R Power Flow Solution 
The power flow is solved using the same procedure
discussed last time:
Set v  0; make an initial guess of x, x( v )
While f (x( v ) )   Do
( v 1) ( v ) 1
x  x  J (x ) f (x
(v ) (v)
)
v  v 1
End While
 Power Flow Jacobian Matrix
The most difficult part of the algorithm is determining
and inverting the n by n Jacobian matrix, J (x)
 f1 (x) f1 (x)

f1 (x) 
 x x2 xn 
 1

 f 2 (x) f 2 (x)

f 2 (x) 
J (x)   x1 x2 xn 
 
     
 f (x) f n (x) f n (x) 
 n  
 x1 x2 xn 
Power Flow Jacobian Matrix, cont’d
Jacobian elements are calculated by differentiating
each function, fi (x), with respect to each variable.
For example, if fi (x) is the bus i real power equation
n
fi ( x)   Vi Vk (Gik cos ik  Bik sin  ik )  PGi  PDi
k 1

fi ( x) n

 i
  Vi Vk (Gik sin  ik  Bik cos ik )
k 1
k i

fi ( x)
 Vi V j (Gik sin  ik  Bik cos ik ) ( j  i )
 j
Two Bus Newton‐Raphson Example
For the two bus power system shown below, use th
Newton-Raphson power flow to determine the
voltage magnitude and angle at bus two. Assume
that bus one is the slack and SBase = 100 MVA.
Line Z = 0.1j

One 1.000 pu Two 1.000 pu

0 MW 200 MW
0 MVR 100 MVR

2    j10 j10 

x    Ybus   
 V2   j10  j10 
 Two Bus Example, cont’d
General power balance equations
n
Pi   Vi Vk (Gik cos ik  Bik sin  ik )  PGi  PDi
k 1
n
Qi   Vi Vk (Gik sin  ik  Bik cos ik )  QGi  QDi
k 1
Bus two power balance equations
P2  V2 V1 (10sin  2 )  2.0  0
Q2  V2 V1 (10 cos 2 )  V2 (10)  1.0  0
2
 Two Bus Example, cont’d
P2 (x)  V2 (10sin  2 )  2.0  0
Q2 (x)  V2 (10 cos 2 )  V2 (10)  1.0  0
2

Now calculate the power flow Jacobian

 P2 (x) P2 (x) 
  V 2 
J ( x)   2

 Q 2 (x) Q 2 (x) 
   V 2 
 2

10 V2 cos 2 10sin  2 

 
10 V2 sin  2 10 cos 2  20 V2 
Two Bus Example, First Iteration
0 
Set v  0, guess x (0)
 
1 
Calculate
 V2 (10sin  2 )  2.0   2.0 
f(x )  
(0)
  1.0 
 V2 (10 cos 2 )  V2 (10)  1.0 
2
 
10 V2 cos 2 10sin  2  10 0 
J (x )  
(0)
   0 10 
10 V2 sin  2 10 cos 2  20 V2   
1
0  10 0   2.0   0.2 
Solve x (1)
   1.0    
  
1 0 10     0.9 
Two Bus Example, Next Iterations
 0.9 (10sin(0.2))  2.0  0.212 
f(x )  
(1)
 
0.9(10 cos(0.2))  0.9  10  1.0  
2 0.279 
 8.82 1.986 
J (x )  
(1)

 1.788 8.199 
1
 0.2   8.82 1.986  0.212   0.233
x 
(2)
       
 0.9   1.788 8.199   0.279   0.8586 
 0.0145   0.236 
f(x )  
(2)
 x (3)
  
 0.0190   0.8554 
0.0000906 
f(x )  
(3)
 Done! V2  0.8554  13.52
 0.0001175
 Two Bus Solved Values
Once the voltage angle and magnitude at bus 2 are
known we can calculate all the other system values
such as the line flows and the generator reactive
power output
200.0 MW -200.0 MW
168.3 MVR Line Z = 0.1j -100.0 MVR

One 1.000 pu Two 0.855 pu -13.522 Deg

200.0 MW 200 MW
168.3 MVR 100 MVR
 Two Bus Case Low Voltage Solution
This case actually has two solutions! The second
"low voltage" is found by using a low initial guess.
 0 
Set v  0, guess x (0)
 
 0.25 
Calculate
 V2 (10sin  2 )  2.0   2 
f(x )  
(0)
   0.875
 V2 (10 cos 2 )  V2 (10)  1.0 
2
 
10 V2 cos 2 10sin  2   2.5 0 
J (x )  
(0)
   0 5
10 V2 sin  2 10 cos 2  20 V2   
 Low Voltage Solution, cont'd
1
 0   2.5 0   2   0.8 
Solve x  
(1)
       
 0.25   0  5   0.875   0.075 
1.462  (2)  1.42   0.921
f (x )  
(2)
 x   x 
(3)

 0.534   0.2336   0.220 
Low voltage solution
200.0 MW -200.0 MW
831.7 MVR Line Z = 0.1j -100.0 MVR

One 1.000 pu Two 0.261 pu -49.914 Deg

200.0 MW 200 MW
831.7 MVR 100 MVR
 PV Buses
Since the voltage magnitude at PV buses is 
fixed there is no need to explicitly include 
these voltages in x or write the reactive 
power balance equations
– the reactive power output of the generator 
varies to maintain the fixed terminal voltage 
(within limits)
– optionally these variations/equations can be 
included by just writing the explicit voltage 
constraint for the generator bus 

|V | V 0
 Three Bus PV Case Example
For this three bus case we have
 2   P2 (x)  PG 2  PD 2 
x   3  f (x)   P3 (x)  PG 3  PD 3   0
   
 V2   Q2 (x)  QD 2 
Line Z = 0.1j

0.941 pu
One 1.000 pu Two -7.469 Deg

170.0 MW 200 MW
68.2 MVR 100 MVR
Line Z = 0.1j Line Z = 0.1j

Three 1.000 pu

30 MW
63 MVR
Modeling Voltage Dependent Load
So far we've assumed that the load is independent of
the bus voltage (i.e., constant power). However, the
power flow can be easily extended to include voltage
depedence with both the real and reactive load. This
is done by making PDi and Q Di a function of Vi :
n
 Vi Vk (Gik cos ik  Bik sin  ik )  PGi  PDi ( Vi )  0
k 1
n
 Vi Vk (Gik sin  ik  Bik cos ik )  QGi  QDi ( Vi )  0
k 1
Voltage Dependent Load Example
In previous two bus example now assume the load is
constant impedance, so
P2 (x)  V2 (10sin  2 )  2.0 V2
2
 0
Q2 (x)  V2 (10 cos 2 )  V2 (10)  1.0 V2  0
2 2

Now calculate the power flow Jacobian

10 V2 cos 2 10sin  2  4.0 V2 
J ( x)  
10 V2 sin  2 10 cos  2  20 V2  2.0 V2 
Voltage Dependent Load, cont'd
0 
Again set v  0, guess x (0)
 
1 
Calculate
 V (10sin  )  2.0 V
2   2.0 
f(x )     
(0) 2 2 2

 V2 (10 cos 2 )  V2 (10)  1.0 V2 

2 2
1.0 
10 4 
J (x )  
(0)

 0 12 
1
0  10 4   2.0   0.1667 
Solve x (1)
   1.0    
  
1 0 12     0.9167 
Voltage Dependent Load, cont'd
With constant impedance load the MW/Mvar load at
bus 2 varies with the square of the bus 2 voltage
magnitude. This if the voltage level is less than 1.0,
the load is lower than 200/100 MW/Mvar
160.0 MW -160.0 MW
120.0 MVR Line Z = 0.1j -80.0 MVR

0.894 pu
One 1.000 pu Two -10.304 Deg

160.0 MW 160 MW
120.0 MVR 80 MVR
 Solving Large Power Systems
The most difficult computational task is 
inverting the Jacobian matrix
– inverting a full matrix is an order n3 operation, 
meaning the amount of computation increases 
with the cube of the size size
– this amount of computation can be decreased 
substantially by recognizing that since the Ybus is a 
sparse matrix, the Jacobian is also a sparse matrix
– using sparse matrix methods results in a 
computational order of about n1.5. 
– this is a substantial savings when solving systems 
ith t f th d fb
 Newton‐Raphson Power Flow
Advantages
– fast convergence as long as initial guess is close to 
solution
– large region of convergence
Disadvantages
– each iteration takes much longer than a Gauss‐
Seidel iteration
– more complicated to code, particularly when 
implementing sparse matrix algorithms
Newton‐Raphson algorithm is very common in 
power flow analysis