Contingency Analysis in Power Systems

Q: What limitations of the concentric relaxation method does the bounding technique aim to address?

The bounding technique tackles limitations in concentric relaxation, particularly the need to manage distant impact scenarios in circuits. It introduces a flexible adjustment by defining zones (N1, N2, N3) and imposing constraints on phase angles to preclude unrealistic overload predictions. This adjustment ensures that the analysis remains tractable and accurate even when an outage's effects extend beyond immediate surroundings.

Q: Why is it important to screen for AC contingency effects using the techniques discussed?

Screening for AC contingency effects using techniques like concentric relaxation and bounding is crucial because these methods efficiently identify critical conditions that may disrupt system operations. They allow operators to preemptively address potential overloads and voltage variations, ensuring the network can sustain unforeseen outages without compromising service continuity or safety. This proactive approach is foundational to real-time security analysis and system resilience.

Q: What is the significance of boundary buses (N3) in the bounding analysis method?

Boundary buses (N3) serve as a critical demarcation in the bounding analysis, separating the problem-focused subsystem N1 from the less detailed N2. Calculations of phase angle spreads in N3 help establish constraints, ensuring that potential flow changes due to outages in N1 do not result in overloads in N2, thus helping determine the safety limits of power system operations.

Q: What improvement does the bounding method introduce to the concentric relaxation technique?

The bounding method improves the concentric relaxation technique by introducing an adjustable region around the outage to solve for overloads. It defines three subsystems: N1 (the region immediately surrounding the outage), N2 (the external subsystem not solved in detail), and N3 (the boundary buses). This method leverages phase angle assumptions and flow limits to determine the effects on circuits, thereby reducing the complexity and extending applicability from linear (DC) to AC network analyses.

Q: How is the maximum change in phase angle difference calculated in the bounding approach?

In the bounding approach, the maximum change in phase angle difference across a pair of buses, |∆𝜃ₚ-∆𝜃ₑ|, is determined by translating the maximum flow change on a transmission line (∆𝑓ₚ𝑞) into phase angle terms using the line's reactance (𝑥ₚ𝑞). The method ensures that this angular change does not exceed the limit given by the largest difference across any two buses in the boundary subsystem N3. If it does, the region around the outage must be expanded until you find a safe region meeting this constraint.

Q: What can be inferred about the dependency of power system security on accurate phase angle measurements in the bounding method?

Power system security heavily depends on accurate phase angle measurements in the bounding method because these measurements are pivotal for determining flow limits and assessing potential overloads. Any inaccuracy can lead to a misjudgment of risk levels in subsystems, affecting decisions on system adjustments or expansions needed to prevent overloads, therefore impacting overall system reliability and safety.

Q: What conclusions are drawn about the safety of circuits in subsystem N2 using the bounding technique?

Circuits in subsystem N2 are deemed safe if the value of |∆𝜃ᵢ-∆𝜃ⱼ| is less than the smallest ∆𝑓ₚ𝑞 𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑥ₚ𝑞 value across all circuit pairs pq. If this condition fails, indicating potential overloads, then the N1 region needs to be expanded, recalculating the maximum angular differences until a safe configuration is achieved, ensuring no overloads are possible in the N2 region.

Q: How does the concentric relaxation technique handle power outages in a power system?

The concentric relaxation technique addresses power outages by dividing the power system into affected and unaffected parts based on layers. The process begins with marking the buses at the end of the outaged line as layer zero, and subsequently, buses that are one transmission line or transformer away are labeled as the next layer. This layering continues until the entire network is included. The layers closer to the outage are solved for power flow, while higher-numbered layers are treated as reference buses. Through this approach, concentric relaxation identifies outage effects and determines overloads and voltage violations in the presence of an outage.

Q: How does the layer identification in concentric relaxation contribute to solving power flow problems?

Layer identification in concentric relaxation empowers the solving of power flow problems by segmenting the network into progressively affected zones around an outage. This hierarchical structuring allows analysts to focus computational efforts on the most impacted parts of the system while maintaining reference conditions in less affected areas, ensuring efficient resource allocation when assessing the impact of line outages.

Q: How can the enlargement of region N1 affect the bounding analysis in managing overload risks?

Enlargement of region N1 in bounding analysis reduces overload risks by incorporating more affected buses into the detailed analysis pool, thereby tightening constraints on allowable phase angle changes in boundary buses (N3). This diminishes the potential for undetected overloads in N2, since a more expansive N1 means a wider net of protective analysis, ultimately reassuring system stability and constraints adherence.

The concentric relaxation procedure divides a power system into layers surrounding an outage to model its geographical effects. However, it requires many layers for outages with wide-ranging influence. The bounding technique instead defines three subsystems - the area immediately around the outage (N1), the external area not solved in detail (N2), and the boundary buses separating them (N3). It calculates the maximum possible phase angle change across N3 to determine an upper limit on flow changes in N2 circuits. If this limit is below all N2 circuit overload thresholds, then only N1 needs detailed analysis to identify overloads. Otherwise, N1 must be expanded and reanalyzed until an N2 region is found where all circuits are below

Uploaded by

vitthal01

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

326 views4 pages

Contingency Analysis in Power Systems

Uploaded by

vitthal01

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Concentric relaxation

Another idea to enter the field of security analysis in power systems is that an outage only has a
limited geographical effect. The loss of a transmission line does not cause much effect a thousand miles
away; in fact, we might hope that it doesn't cause much trouble beyond 20 miles from the outage,
although if the line were a heavily loaded, high-voltage line, its loss will most likely be felt more than 20
miles away
To realize any benefit from the limited geographical effect of an outage, the power system must
be divided into two parts: the affected part and the part that is unaffected. To make this division, the
buses at the end of the outaged line are marked as layer zero. The buses that are one transmission line or
transformer from layer zero are then labeled layer one. This same process can be carried out, layer by
layer, until all the buses in the entire network are included. Some arbitrary number of layers is chosen and
all buses included in that layer and lower-numbered layers are solved as a power flow with the outage in
place. The buses in the higher-numbered layers are kept as constant voltage and phase angle (i.e., as
reference buses).
This procedure can be used in two ways: either the solution of the layers included becomes the
final solution of that case and all overloads and voltage violations are determined from this power flow,
or the solution simply is used to form a performance index for that outage. Figure 11.11 illustrates this
layering procedure.

Figure Layering of outage effects.

The concentric relaxation procedure was originally proposed by Zaborsky (see reference 13). The
trouble with the concentric relaxation technique is that it requires more layers for circuits whose influence
is felt further from the outage.

Bounding
A paper by Brandwajn (reference 11) solves at least one of the problems in using the concentric
relaxation method. Namely, it uses an adjustable region around the outage to solve for the outage case
overloads. In reference 11, this is applied only to the linear (DC) power flow; it has subsequently been
extended for AC network analysis.
To perform the analysis in the bounding technique we define three subsystems of the power
system as follows:
N1=the subsystem immediately surrounding the outaged line
N2=the external subsystem that we shall not solve in detail
N3=the set of boundary buses that separate N1 and N2
The subsystems appear as shown in Figure 11.12. The bounding method is based on the fact that
we can make certain assumptions about the phase angle spread across the lines in N2, given the injections
in N1 and the maximum phase angle appearing across any two buses in N3. In Appendix 11A of this
chapter we show how to calculate the APk and the AP,,, injections that will make the phase angles on
buses k and rn simulate the outage of line k-m.
If we are given maximum amount a transmission line in N2 with flow f:q, then there is a that the
flow on pq can shift. That is, it can increase from

Figure Layers used in bounding analysis.

ƒ0𝑝𝑞 to its upper limit or it can decrease to its lower limit. Then,
𝑚𝑎𝑥 + 0 0 −
∆𝑓𝑝𝑞 =smaller of [( 𝑓𝑝𝑞 − 𝑓𝑝𝑞 ), (𝑓𝑝𝑞 − 𝑓𝑝𝑞 )]
Further, we can translate this into a maximum change in phase angle difference as follows
𝑓𝑝𝑞 = 1/𝑥𝑝𝑞 (𝜃𝑝 − 𝜃𝑞 )
∆𝑓𝑝𝑞 = 1/𝑥𝑝𝑞 (∆𝜃𝑝 − ∆𝜃𝑞 )
(∆𝜃𝑝 − ∆𝜃𝑞 )𝑚𝑎𝑥 = ∆𝑓𝑝𝑞
𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑥𝑝𝑞
Thus, we can define the maximum change in the phase angle difference across pq. Reference 11
develops the theorem that:
|∆𝜃𝑝 − ∆𝜃𝑞 | < |∆𝜃𝑖 − ∆𝜃𝑗 |
where i and j are any pair of buses in N3, Adi is the largest A8 in N3, and Adj is the smallest A8 in N3
(see Appendix 11B)
Equation 11.14 is interpreted as follows: the right-hand side, IA8, - ABj(, provides an upper limit to the
maximum change in angular spread across any circuit in N2. Thus, it provides us with a limit as to how
far any of the N2 circuits can change their flow. By combining Eqs. 11.13 and 11.14 we obtain:
𝑚𝑎𝑥
∆𝑓𝑝𝑞 𝑥𝑝𝑞 < |∆𝜃𝑖 − ∆𝜃𝑗 |
Figure 11.13 shows a graphical interpretation of the bounding process. There are two cases
represented in Figure 11.13: a circuit on the top of the figure that

Fig. Interpretation of bounding.

cannot go over limit, while that on the bottom could. In each case, the horizontal line represents
the change in flow on circuit pq times its reactance, ∆𝑓𝑝𝑞 𝑥𝑝𝑞 the dotted line, labeled,
𝑚𝑎𝑥
∆𝑓𝑝𝑞 𝑥𝑝𝑞 represents the point where circuit pq will go into overload and is determined as explained
previously. Any value of ∆𝑓𝑝𝑞 𝑥𝑝𝑞 to the right of the dotted line represents an overload.
The solid line labeled |∆𝜃𝑖 − ∆𝜃𝑗 | represents the upper limit on ∆𝑓𝑝𝑞 𝑥𝑝𝑞 Thus, if the solid line is
below (to the left) of the dotted line, then the circuit theory upper limit predicts that the circuit cannot go
into overload; if on the other hand, the solid line is above (to the right of) the dotted line, the circuit may
be shifted in flow due to the outage so as to violate a limit.
A completely safe N2 region would be one in which the maximum |∆𝜃𝑖 − ∆𝜃𝑗 | upper limit is
𝑚𝑎𝑥
small enough to be less than all of the ∆𝑓𝑝𝑞 𝑥𝑝𝑞 limits. In fact, as the N1 region is enlarged, the value
|∆𝜃𝑖 − ∆𝜃𝑗 | will become smaller and smaller. Therefore, the test to determine whether the N1 region
encompasses all possible overloaded circuits should be as follows:
Note-All circuits in N2 are safe from overload if the value of |∆𝜃𝑖 − ∆𝜃𝑗 | is less than the smallest
𝑚𝑎𝑥
value of ∆𝑓𝑝𝑞 𝑥𝑝𝑞 over all pairs pq, where pq corresponds to the [Link] the ends of circuits in N2
If this condition fails, then we have to expand N1, calculate a new |∆𝜃𝑖 − ∆𝜃𝑗 | in N3, and rerun
the test over the newly defined N2 region circuits. When an N2 is found which passes the test, we are
done and only region N1 need be studied in detail. References 10 and 12 extend this concept to screening
for AC contingency effects. Such contingency selection/screening techniques form the foundation for
many real-time computer security analysis algorithms.

Common questions