Abstract
In this paper, we propose a predictor–corrector primal–dual approach for the doubly modified logarithmic barrier function (\(\hbox {M}^{2}\hbox {BF}\)) method in order to solve Optimal Reactive Power Flow (ORPF) problems. The \(\hbox {M}^{2}\hbox {BF}\) is a modification of the Polyak’s modified logarithmic barrier function (MBF) and is also a particular element of a recent family of nonquadratic penalty functions for augmented Lagrangian methods for handling convex problems only with inequality constraints. We also propose a global convergence strategy to be inserted in the proposed algorithm, which is developed over weak assumptions concerning the primal Hessian matrix. The resulting predictor–corrector primal–dual \(\hbox {M}^{2}\hbox {BF}\) approach is applied for solving ORPF problems involving power systems with 57, 89, 118, 200, 300, 1354, 2007 and 2869 buses. A comparison with two state-of-the-art methods is performed. Numerical results show that the proposed approach is competitive and capable of solving ORPF problems for small to large-scale power systems.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adibi MM, Polyak RA, Griva IA, Mili L, Ammari S (2003) Optimal transformer tap selection using modified barrier-augmented Lagrangian method. IEEE Trans Power Syst 18(1):251–257. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2002.807093
Barnes ER (1986) A variation on Karmarkar’s algorithm for solving linear programming problems. Math Program 36(2):174–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02592024
Basu M (2016) Multi-objective optimal reactive power dispatch using multi-objective differential evolution. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 82:213–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2016.03.024
Bazaraa MS, Sherali HD, Shetty CM (2006) Nonlinear programming: theory and algorithms, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken
Bertsekas DP (1999) Nonlinear programming, 2nd edn. Athena Scientific, Belmont
Birchfield AB, Xu T, Gegner KM, Shetye KS, Overbye TJ (2016) Grid structural characteristics as validation criteria for synthetic networks. IEEE Trans Power Syst 32(4):1. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2016.2616385
Bregman LM (1967) The relaxation method of finding the common point of convex sets and its application to the solution of problems in convex programming. USSR Comput Math Math Phys 7(3):200–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/0041-5553(67)90040-7
Capitanescu F, Glavic M, Ernst D, Wehenkel L (2007) Interior-point based algorithms for the solution of optimal power flow problems. Electr Power Syst Res 77(5–6):508–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2006.05.003
Capitanescu F, Ramos JLM, Panciatici P, Kirschen D, Marcolini AM, Platbrood L, Wehenkel L (2011) State-of-the-art, challenges, and future trends in security constrained optimal power flow. Electr Power Syst Res 81(8):1731–1741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2011.04.003
Capitanescu F, Wehenkel L (2013) Experiments with the interior-point method for solving large scale Optimal Power Flow problems. Electr Power Syst Res 95:276–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2012.10.001
Chiang N, Grothey A (2015) Solving security constrained optimal power flow problems by a structure exploiting interior point method. Optim Eng 16(1):49–71
Csiszár I (1967) Information-type measures of difference of probability distributions and indirect observations. Stud Sci Math Hung 2:299–318
de Sousa VA, Baptista EC, da Costa GRM (2009) Loss minimization by the predictor–corrector modified barrier approach. Electr Power Syst Res 79(5):803–808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2008.10.014
de Sousa VA, Baptista EC, da Costa GRM (2012) Optimal Reactive Power Flow via the modified barrier Lagrangian function approach. Electr Power Syst Res 84(1):159–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2011.11.001
Dikin II (1967) Iterative solution of problems of linear and quadratic programming. Sov Math Dokl 8:674–675
Dommel H, Tinney W (1968) Optimal Power Flow solutions. IEEE Trans Power Appar Syst PAS–87(10):1866–1876. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAS.1968.292150
FMINCON (2017) Find minimum of constrained nonlinear multivariable function. https://www.mathworks.com/help/optim/ug/fmincon.html. Accessed 25 Mar 2017
Frank S, Steponavice I, Rebennack S (2012) Optimal power flow: a bibliographic survey I. Energy Syst 3(3):221–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12667-012-0056-y
Frank S, Steponavice I, Rebennack S (2012) Optimal power flow: a bibliographic survey II. Energy Syst 3(3):259–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12667-012-0057-x
Granville S (1994) Optimal reactive dispatch through interior point methods. IEEE Trans Power Syst 9(1):136–146. https://doi.org/10.1109/59.317548
Griva I, Polyak RA (2006) Primal-dual nonlinear rescaling method with dynamic scaling parameter update. Math Program 106(2):237–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10107-005-0603-6
Hauswirth A, Bolognani S, Hug G, Dörfler F (2018) Generic existence of unique Lagrange multipliers in AC optimal power flow. IEEE Control Syst Lett 2(4):791–796
Itakura F, Saito S (1968) Analysis synthesis telephony based on the maximum likelihood method. In: Proceedings of 6th international congress on acoustics, pp c17–c20. Tokyo, Japan
Josz C, Fliscounakis S, Maeght J, Panciatici P (2016) AC power flow data in MATPOWER and QCQP format: iTesla, RTE snapshots, and PEGASE. arXiv:1603.01533 [math]
Kullback S, Leibler RA (1951) On information and sufficiency. Ann Math Stat 22(1):79–86
Lavaei J, Low SH (2012) Zero duality gap in Optimal Power Flow problem. IEEE Trans Power Syst 27(1):92–107. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2011.2160974
Li Y, Wang Y, Li B (2013) A hybrid artificial bee colony assisted differential evolution algorithm for Optimal Reactive Power Flow. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 52:25–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2013.03.016
Lin J, Li VOK, Leung KC, Lam AYS (2017) Optimal Power Flow with power flow routers. IEEE Trans Power Syst 32(1):531–543. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2016.2542678
Madani R, Ashraphijuo M, Lavaei J (2016) Promises of conic relaxation for contingency-constrained Optimal Power Flow problem. IEEE Trans Power Syst 31(2):1297–1307. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2015.2411391
Matioli LC, Gonzaga CC (2008) A new family of penalties for augmented Lagrangian methods. Numer Linear Algebra Appl 15(10):925–944. https://doi.org/10.1002/nla.596
Mazzini AP, Asada EN, Lage GG (2018) Minimisation of active power losses and number of control adjustments in the optimal reactive dispatch problem. IET Gener Transm Distrib 12(12):2897–2904
Mehdinejad M, Mohammadi-Ivatloo B, Dadashzadeh-Bonab R, Zare K (2016) Solution of optimal reactive power dispatch of power systems using hybrid particle swarm optimization and imperialist competitive algorithms. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 83:104–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2016.03.039
Molzahn DK (2017) Computing the feasible spaces of optimal power flow problems. IEEE Trans Power Syst 32(6):4752–4763
Molzahn DK, Lesieutre BC, DeMarco CL (2014) A sufficient condition for global optimality of solutions to the optimal power flow problem. IEEE Trans Power Syst 29(2):978–979
Momoh JA, Adapa R, El-Hawary ME (1999) A review of selected optimal power flow literature to 1993. I. Nonlinear and quadratic programming approaches. IEEE Trans Power Syst 14(1):96–104. https://doi.org/10.1109/59.744492
Momoh JA, El-Hawary ME, Adapa R (1999) A review of selected optimal power flow literature to 1993. II. Newton, linear programming and interior point methods. IEEE Trans Power Syst 14(1):105–111. https://doi.org/10.1109/59.744495
Monticelli A (2012) State estimation in electric power systems: a generalized approach. Springer, New York
Nie Y, Du Z, Wang Z, Feng H (2015) Pcpdipm based optimal reactive power flow model with discrete variables. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 69:116–122
Nie Y, Du Z, Wang Z, Feng H (2015) PCPDIPM based optimal reactive power flow model with discrete variables. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 69:116–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2014.12.085
Pinheiro RBN, Balbo AR, Baptista EC, Nepomuceno L (2015) Interior–exterior point method with global convergence strategy for solving the reactive optimal power flow problem. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 66:235–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2014.10.003
Platbrood L, Capitanescu F, Merckx C, Crisciu H, Wehenkel L (2014) A generic approach for solving nonlinear-discrete security-constrained optimal power flow problems in large-scale systems. IEEE Trans Power Syst 29(3):1194–1203. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2013.2289990
Polyak R (1992) Modified barrier functions (theory and methods). Math Program 54(1–3):177–222. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01586050
Polyak R (2014) Lagrangian transformation and interior ellipsoid methods in convex optimization. J Optim Theory Appl 164(3):966–992. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10957-014-0527-5
Polyak R, Teboulle M (1997) Nonlinear rescaling and proximal-like methods in convex optimization. Math Program 76(2):265–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02614440
Probst RW, Oliveira ARL (2015) A new predictor–corrector method for optimal power flow. Optim Eng 16(2):335–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11081-014-9265-7
Rosehart W, Roman C, Schellenberg A (2005) Optimal power flow with complementarity constraints. IEEE Trans Power Syst 20(2):813–822. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2005.846171
Shafarevich IR, Remizov A (2012) Linear algebra and geometry, 2013th edn. Springer, Berlin
Soler EM, de Sousa VA, da Costa GR (2012) A modified primal–dual logarithmic-barrier method for solving the optimal power flow problem with discrete and continuous control variables. Eur J Oper Res 222(3):616–622
Teboulle M (1992) Entropic proximal mappings with applications to nonlinear programming. Math Oper Res 17(3):670–690. https://doi.org/10.1287/moor.17.3.670
Test Case Archive PS (1999) https://www.ee.washington.edu/research/pstca/. Accessed 25 Mar 2017
Torres G, Quintana V (1999) Optimal power flow by a nonlinear complementarity method. In: Power industry computer applications, 1999. PICA ’99. Proceedings of the 21st 1999 IEEE international conference, pp 211–216. https://doi.org/10.1109/PICA.1999.779405
Wu YC, Debs AS, Marsten RE (1994) A direct nonlinear predictor–corrector primal–dual interior point algorithm for optimal power flows. IEEE Trans Power Syst 9(2):876–883. https://doi.org/10.1109/59.317660
Zhao J, Ju L, Dai Z, Chen G (2015) Voltage stability constrained dynamic optimal reactive power flow based on branch-bound and primal–dual interior point method. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 73:601–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2015.05.038
Zimmerman R, Murillo-Sánchez C, Thomas R (2011) MATPOWER: steady-state operations, planning, and analysis tools for power systems research and education. IEEE Trans Power Syst 26(1):12–19. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2010.2051168
Acknowledgements
Dr. R. B. N. M. Pinheiro would like to acknowledge the support provided by CAPES—Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education within the Ministry of Education of Brazil grant 202/47/01/2019.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pinheiro, R.B.N.M., Nepomuceno, L. & Balbo, A.R. Solving large-scale reactive optimal power flow problems by a primal–dual \(\hbox {M}^{2}\hbox {BF}\) approach. Optim Eng 21, 485–515 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11081-019-09451-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11081-019-09451-4