Professional Documents
Culture Documents
net/publication/265865959
Article
CITATIONS READS
2 9
3 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Distribution System Pricing with Renewable Energy Integration in Competitive Electricity Markets View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Ashwani Kumar on 26 February 2016.
Abstract— In this paper, a scheme based on generators and in transmission pricing and congestion management was
loads real and reactive power flow contribution factors has discussed.
been presented for congestion management in pool based In this paper, both the real and reactive power flow
electricity markets. The system operator (SO) can identify contribution factors for generators as well as loads has
the generators and loads based on these contribution factors
for rescheduling their real and reactive power generation
been proposed to identify the most appropriate generators
and loads to manage congestion. The real and reactive and loads to participate in congestion management. Real
power bid curves for both generators and loads have been and reactive quadratic bid curves of the generators and
incorporated in the optimization model to determine loads have been incorporated in an OPF formulation. The
congestion cost. The impact of Thyristor Controlled Phase proposed method has been demonstrated on IEEE 57 bus
Angle Regulator has also been determined on the congestion test system.
cost. The study has been carried out on IEEE 57 bus test
system. II. MATHEMATICAL MODELING
Index Terms— Transmission congestion management, Real The algorithm for calculating the contribution factors
and reactive contribution factors, and Power flow sensitivity of each generator to the real power line flows has been
proposed in [16]. In this paper work, the generators
I. INTRODUCTION contribution to reactive power flows as well as loads
The system operator ensures open and non- contributions to real and reactive line flows has been
discriminatory access to transmission system and proposed for determining the most appropriate generators
manages the transactions to remove transmission line as well as loads for congestion management.
congestion and maintain the security of the system. These
A. Loads Contribution Factors
transactions are negotiated ahead of time and may violate
the one or more physical operating limits causing The approach has been extended for contribution factors
congestion in the network [1-2]. A comprehensive of each generator and loads to both real and reactive
bibliographical survey on various congestion power flows. These can be determined as given below:
management schemes has been presented in [3]. Various (a) Perform the base case Newton-Raphson power flow.
congestion management schemes based on price based, (b) Compute the sensitivity Sijk of the real and reactive
re-dispatch based, and sensitivity based methods have power flow Pij and Qij of a line connected between
been presented in [4-10]. bus-i and bus-j to real and reactive power output PDk
Flexible AC Transmission System (FACTS) controllers and QDk of generator-k. The fast-forward/fast-
play an important role in increasing loadability and backward substitution method allows an efficient
mitigating congestion in the network. The basic model computation of the sensitivity for real and reactive
for congestion management described in [11] is used in power flows:
[12] incorporating the FACTS controllers for minimum dPij ∂Pij ∂Pij ⎛ ∂g ⎞ −1 ∂g
curtailment of contracts. Reactive power management has
k
Sijp = k= k − ⎜ ⎟ (1)
dPD ∂PD ∂θ ⎝ ∂θ ⎠ ∂PDk
been identified as one of the important ancillary services
and its proper management can help to manage dQij ∂Qij ∂Qij ⎛ ∂g ⎞ −1 ∂g
k
Sijq = = − ⎜ ⎟ (2)
congestion [13]. In corrective action based congestion dQDk ∂QDk ∂θ ⎝ ∂θ ⎠ ∂QDk
management methods, it is essential to accurately
determine the contribution of each generator to each line k
Sijp = N ijp [J ]−1 M k (3)
flows. The generators whose contribution is considerable
to the congested line may help to mitigate congestion
k
Sijq = N ijq [J ]−1 M k (4)
more effectively than the other generators in the system. where Nijp and Nijq are the sparse block vector with sub-
A number of power flow tracing based methods have vector [ -bij Vi Vj, 0…0] and [ bij Vi Vj, 0…0] and [ -gij Vi
appeared in the literature [14-16]. In [16] generators real Vj, 0…0] and [ gij Vi Vj, 0…0] in the ith and jth position,
power contribution factors were determined and its role respectively. Mk is the sparse block vector with sub-
vector [1, 0] in the kth position. [J] is the Jacobian power
Ashwani Kumar, Saurabh Chanana are with Dept. of Electrical flow matrix. g is the power flow equation vector and θ is
Engg. at NIT Kurukshetra. Email: ashwa_ks@yahoo.co.in. the voltage angle vector.
13
(c) The contribution factor of load at slack bus to real QG − Qi 0 − ∆Qi + + ∆Qi − − Q(v, δ ) = 0 (15)
P(v,θ ), Q(v,θ ) are the load flow equations given as:
power flow of line i-j is:
⎛ ⎞
( )⎤
NG
⎜ ( Pij −
∑ k
Sijp PDk ) PD1 ⎟ Nb
⎡Gij cos δ i − δ j
⎜
CFijp = ⎜ k =2
NG
⎟
⎟ (5)
Pi = Pgi + PDGi − Pdi = ∑j =1
ViV j ⎢
(
⎢⎣+ Bij sin δ i − δ j )⎥⎥⎦ (16)
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ∑ PD k
⎟ ∀ i = 1,2, K N b
⎝ ⎠
k = 1
Nb
(
⎡Gij sin δ i − δ j )⎤
In a similar manner, the contribution factors of slack bus
load to reactive power flow of line i-j can be written as:
Qi = Qgi + QDGi − Qdi = ∑V V ⎢⎢⎣− B
j =1
i j
( ⎥
ij cos δ i − δ j ⎥ )
⎦ (17)
⎛ NG ⎞
⎜ (Qij −
⎜ ∑
k =2
k
Sijq QDk )Q1D ⎟
⎟
∀ i = 1,2, K N b
where
CFijq = ⎜ ⎟ (6)
⎜
NG
⎟ Pi real power injection at bus-i; Qi reactive power
⎜
⎝
∑ k =1
QD k
⎟
⎠
injection at bus-i; Pgi, Qgi real and reactive power
generation at bus-i; Pdi, Qdireal and reactive power
(d) The contribution factor of the mth load (except slack demand at bus-i; Vivoltage magnitude at bus-i; δiload
bus load) to the real and reactive power flow of line angle at bus-i; Yij = Gij + Bij i-jth element of Y-bus
i-j is
matrix; Nb Number of buses.
⎛ NG NG ⎞
∑ ∑
⎜ Pij − Inequality constraints:
k
Sijp PDk + Sijpm
PDk ⎟ PDm
⎜ ⎟ Incremental generation real and reactive power limit
m
CFijp =⎝ k =2
NG
k =1 ⎠ (7) 0 ≤ ∆Pi+ ≤ Pimax − Pi0 , 0 ≤ ∆Pi − ≤ Pi 0 − Pi min (18)
∑P
k =1
k
D 0 ≤ ∆Qi + ≤ Qi max − Qi 0 , 0 ≤ ∆Qi − ≤ Qi 0 − Qi min (19)
Line flow limit, Voltage limit, and angle limit
⎛ NG NG ⎞
⎜ Qij −
⎜ ∑ k
Sijq QDk + Sijq
m
∑
QDk ⎟QDm
⎟
Si min ≤ Sij ≤ Si max , Vi min ≤ Vi ≤ Vi max (20)
=⎝ ⎠
k =2 k =1
θ i min ≤ θ i ≤ θ imax
m
CFijq NG
(8) (21)
∑ QDk Objective function: (Case 2)
n ⎡
k =1 Cpd + (∆PD i + ) + Cpd − (∆PD i − ) ⎤
These contribution factors will help the SO to identify the Min ⎢∑ + + − −
⎥ (22)
generators as well as loads to participate in congestion ⎣+ Cqd (∆QD i ) + Cqd (∆QD i )⎥⎦
i =1 ⎢
management. The quadratic bids for real and reactive Cpd + (∆PDi + ) = a2 + b2 * ∆PDi + + c2 * (∆PDi + )2 (23)
power of generators have been taken in OPF simulation.
Cpd − (∆PDi − ) = a2 + b2 * ∆PDi − + c2 * (∆PDi − ) 2 (24)
B. General OPF Formulation
The congestion management has been formulated as a Cqd + (∆QDi + ) = (Cpd (∆PDi + ) 2 + (∆QDi + ) 2
(25)
non-linear programming problem solved using the − Cpd + (∆PDi + )
GAMS/CONOPT solver [17].
Objective function: (Case 1) Cqd − (∆QDi − ) = (Cpd (∆PDi − ) 2 + (∆QDi − ) 2
n ⎡ (26)
Cpg + (∆PG i + ) + Cpg − (∆PG i − ) ⎤
Min ⎢∑
i =1 ⎢
+ + − −
⎥ (9) − Cpd − (∆PDi − )
⎣+ Cqg (∆QG i ) + Cqg (∆QG i )⎥⎦ The all equality and inequality constraints are same as
The incremental and decremental bids for generator real for the scheme with generation rescheduling. The power
and reactive power has been represented by quadratic flow equations can be modified in the presence of
cost curves with cost coefficients as: TACPR [17].
Cpg + (∆PGi + ) = a1 + b1* ∆PGi + + c1* (∆PGi + ) 2 (10) III.SYSTEM STUDIES
− − − − 2
Cpg (∆PGi ) = a1 + b1* ∆PGi + c1* (∆PGi ) (11) The congestion has been simulated by increasing the
+ + + 2 + 2 load in steps and finding the line with a flow near to its
Cqg (∆QG i ) = (Cpg (∆PG i ) + (∆QG i )
(12) line rating. For the test system; line 1 has been found to
− Cpg + (∆PG i + ) be congested. The results have been obtained for two
cases:
Cqg − (∆QG i − ) = (Cpg (∆PG i − ) 2 + (∆QG i − ) 2 Case 1: Congestion management with Generation
(13)
− Cpg − (∆PG i − ) Rescheduling
Case 2: Congestion Management with Load Curtailment
Equality constraints: Real and reactive power flow
(A) Results for IEEE 57 Bus test System for both cases
equations with base load, inc/dec loads as:
Based on the contribution factors, generators G2 and
PG − Pi0 − ∆Pi+ + ∆Pi− − P(v,δ ) = 0 (14) G9 for case 1 have been selected to reschedule their real
14
power. The generation for base case, change in the congestion cost found in case of generation rescheduling
generation, new generation schedule, and minimum and without and with TCPAR as loads are subjected to higher
maximum limits has been shown in the Fig. 1. It is values of rescheduling than the generators.
observed form the figure that the generator G2 and G9
reschedule their generation by increasing and decreasing
their generation level within the specified limits.
For case2, based on the contribution factors of loads on
the congested line, real loads L12 and L32 and reactive
loads 2 and L27 have been selected for congestion
management. The real and reactive load curtailment is
shown in the Fig.2. As observed from Fig. 2, L12
decrement its load and L32 increase its load.
curtailment based methods. [9] Chien-Ning Yu., and M. Ilic, “Congestion clusters-based
The contribution factors based approach is simple as markets for transmission management”, in Proc. of IEEE
these factors can be calculated well in advance with only Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting, New York,
NY, pp. 1-11, January 1999.
single load flow solution and most appropriate generators [10] A. Kumar, S. C. Srivastava and S. N. Singh, “A Zonal
and loads can be selected based on their contributions to Congestion Management Using Transmission Congestion
the congested lines for congestion management. Distribution Factors,” IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, Vol.
19, No. 1, pp. 554-562, February 2004.
REFERENCES [11] S. C. Srivastava, and Perveen Kumar, “Optimal power
dispatch in deregulated market considering congestion
[1] Mohammed Shahidepour, H. Yamin, and Z. Li, Market management”, Int. Conf. on Electric Utility Deregulation
Operations in electric power systems, New York, Wiley and Restructuring and Power Technologies, DRPT, City
2002. University London, pp. 53-59, 4-7 April 2000.
[2] K. Bhattacharya, Math H. J. Bollen, and Jaap E. Daalder, [12] V. Z. Farahani, A. Kazemi, and A. B. Mazd, “Congestion
Operation of Restructured Power Systems, Kluwer management in bilateral based market by FACTS devices
Academic Publishers, 2001. and load curtailments”, in Proc. IEEE PES PIC, 2006,
[3] A. Kumar, S. C. Srivastava, and S.N. Singh, “Congestion New Delhi.
management in competitive power market: A [13] J. Zhong and K. Bhattacharya, “Towards a Competitive
bibliographical survey”, Electric Power System Research, Market for Reactive Power,” IEEE Transactions on Power
July 2005. Systems, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp 1206-1215, Nov. 2002.
[4] R.D. Christie, B.F. Wollenberg and I. Wangstien, [14] D. Kirschen, , R. Allan, and G. Strbac, ‘Contribution of
“Transmission management in the deregulated individual generators to loads and flows’, IEEE Trans.
environment,” in Proc. IEEE, vol. 88, No. 2, Feb. 2000, Power Syst., 1997, vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 52-60.
pp. 170-195. [15] J. W. Bialek, ‘Tracing the flow of electricity,’ IEE Proc.
[5] E. Bompard, P. Correia, G. Gross, and M. Amelin, Gener., Transm. Distrib., 1996, vol. 143, No. 4, pp. 313-
“Congestion-management schemes: A comparative 320.
analysis under a unified framework,” IEEE Trans. on [16] J.G. Vlachogiannis, “Accurate model for contribution of
Power Systems, vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 346-352, Feb. 2003. generation to transmission system effect on charges and
[6] R.S. Fang and A.K. David, “Transmission congestion congestion management,” IEE Proc., on Generation,
management in an electricity market,” IEEE Trans. on Transmission, and Distribution, vol. 147, No. 6, pp. 342-
Power Systems, vol. 14, No.2, pp. 877-883, Aug. 1999. 348, Nov. 2000.
[7] H. Singh, S. Hao, and A. Papalexopoulos, “Transmission [17] GAMS Release 2.50, A user’s guide, GAMS Development
congestion management in competitive electricity Corporation, 1999.
markets”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol.13,
[18] Ge Shaoyun, “Optimal Power System Operation and
No.2, pp. 672-680, May 1998.
[8] F. Galiana and M. Ilic, “A mathematical framework for Control Incorporating FACTS Devices,” PhD.
analysis and management of the power transactions under Thesis, The Hong Kong University, Aug. 1998.
open access”, IEEE Trans. on Power systems, vol. 13, no.
3, pp. 681-688, May 1998.
16