Two new methods for power flow tracing using bus power balance equations
Abstract
Two new methods were presented for power flow tracing (PFT). These two methods were compared and the results were discussed in detail. Both methods use the active and reactive power balance equations at each bus in order to solve the tracing problem. The first method considers the proportional sharing assumption while the second one uses the circuit laws to find the relationship between power inflows and outflows through each line, generator and load connected to each bus of the network. Both methods are able to handle loop flow and loss issues in tracing problem. A formulation is also proposed to find the share of each unit in provision of each load. These methods are applied to find the producer and consumer’s shares on the cost of transmission for each line in different case studies. As the results of these studies show, both methods can effectively solve the PFT problem.
Key words
load contribution power flow tracing proportional/non-proportional sharing network Zbus transmission cost allocationPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- [1]BIALEK J. Topological generation and load distribution factors for supplement charge allocation in transmission open access [J]. IEEE Trans on Power Syst, 1997, 12(3): 1185–1193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [2]STRBAC G, KIRSCHEN D, AHMED S. Allocating transmission system usage on the basis of traceable contribution of generators and loads to flows [J]. IEEE Trans on Power Syst, 1998, 13(2): 527–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [3]KIRSCHEN D, ALLEN R, STRBAC G. Contributions individual generators to loads and flows [J]. IEEE Trans Power Syst, 1997, 12(1): 52–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [4]BIALEK J. Tracing the flow of electricity [J]. IEE Proc on Generation, Transmission and Distribution, 1996, 143(4): 313–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [5]XIE K, LI C, LIU Y. Tracing power flow from generators to loads and branches using incidence matrix multiplication [C]// Power & Energy Society General Meet. Calgary, AB: IEEE, 2009: 1–7.Google Scholar
- [6]BIALEK J. Allocation of transmission supplementary charge to real and reactive loads [J]. IEEE Trans on Power Syst, 1998, 13(3): 749–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [7]PANTO M, GUBINA F. Loss allocation by using improved topological generation and load distribution factors [C]// Power Eng Society General Meeting. San Francisco: IEEE, 2005: 12–16.Google Scholar
- [8]BIALEK J. Identification of source-sink connections in transmission networks [C]// Proc IEE 4th Conf Power System Control Management. London, UK: IET, 1996 (16/18): 200–204.Google Scholar
- [9]XIE K, ZHOU J, LI W. Analytical model and algorithm for tracing active power flow based on extended incidence matrix [J]. Elec Power Syst Res, 2009 (79): 399–405.Google Scholar
- [10]CONEJO A J, CONTRERAS J, LIMA D A, PADILHA-FELTRIN A. Zbus Transmission network cost allocation [J]. IEEE Transaction on Power System, 2007, 22(1): 342–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [11]EMADI A, EHSANI M, MILLER J. M. Vehicular Electric Power Systems [M]. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc., 2004: 133.Google Scholar
- [12]Reliability Test System Task Force. The IEEE reliability test system 1996 [J]. IEEE Trans Power Syst, 1999, 14(3): 1010–1020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [13]IEEE Committee Report. IEEE reliability test system [J]. IEEE Trans. on Power Apparatus and Syst., 1979, 98(6): 2047–2054.Google Scholar
- [14]WANG J, ENCINAS N, GALIANA F D. Demand-side reserve offers in joint energy/reserve electricity markets [J]. IEEE Trans Power Syst, 2003, 18(4): 1300–1306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar