A

Practical File
On

Computer Based Power System Lab

Submitted in partial fulfillment for the award of the degree of

Bachelor of Technology

IN
ELECTRICAL ENGIN EERING

2018

Submitted to : Submitted By:

Mr. L.Senthil Nimisha Goyal
Assistant Professor EE,4th year (8th sem)
JECRC,EE Deptt. Roll No.-(14EJCEE082)
 EXPERIMENT NO. 1

Aim: Fault analysis (for 3 to 6 bus) and verify the results using MATLAB or any available
Software for the cases: (i) LG Fault (ii) LL Fault (iii) LLG Fault and (iv) 3-Phase Fault.

Software Requires: MATLAB

Theory:
Simulation: Simulation is the virtual realization of some real thing, state of affairs, or process.
Simulation generally entails representing certain key characteristics or behavior of a selected
physical or abstract system.

Simulation is used in many contexts, including the modeling of natural systems or human
systems in order to gain insight into their functioning. Other contexts include simulation of
technology for performance optimization, safety engineering, testing, training and education.

Simulink: It is the library browser which contains all the block sets. It models, simulates, and
analyzes dynamic systems. It enables you to pose a question about a system, model the system,
and see what happens.

Simulink supports linear and nonlinear systems, modeled in continuous time, sampled time, or a
hybrid of the two. Systems can also be multirate — having different parts that are sampled or
updated at different rates. Sim Power Systems and Sim Mechanics of the Physical Modeling
product family work together with Simulink to model electrical, mechanical, and control systems
etc.

Simulation model for faults: The circuit shown below is designed for the simulation of various
types of faults in the transmission lines in MATLAB Simulink model file. The respective blocks
are copied in the model file from the Simulink Library browser.
Simulation Graphs:

The graphs obtained after the simulation of the various faults are shown for the following faults:

1. Three phase to ground fault

2. Single line to ground fault

3. Double line to ground fault

4. Line to line fault

The graphs are shown respectively as follows:
Description of various blocks

1. Synchronous Machine

The Synchronous Machine block models both the electrical and mechanical characteristics of a
simple synchronous machine. The electrical system for each phase consists of a voltage source in
series with an RL impedance, which implements the internal impedance of the machine. The
value of R can be zero but the value of L must be positive.

2. Three-Phase Series RLC Load

The Three-Phase Series RLC Load block implements a three-phase balanced load as a series
combination of RLC elements. At the specified frequency, the load exhibits a constant impedance.
The active and reactive powers absorbed by the load are proportional to the square of the applied
voltage.

3. Three-Phase Transformer (Two Windings)

The three-Phase Transformer (2 Windings) block implements a 3-phase Transformer using 3

single-phase transformers. You can simulate the saturable core or not simply by setting the
appropriate check box in the parameter menu of the block.

4. Three-Phase Breaker

It implements a three-phase circuit breaker where the opening and closing times can be
controlled externally or internally.

5. Distributed Parameter Line

The Distributed Parameter Line block implements an N-phase distributed parameter line model
with lumped losses. The model is based on the Bergeron's traveling wave method used by the
Electromagnetic Transient Program (EMTP) . In this model, the lossless distributed LC line is
characterized by two values (for a single-phase line): the surge impedance Zc = (L/C) and the
phase velocity v= 1/√(LC).

The model uses the fact that the quantity e+Zi (where e is line voltage and i is line current) entering
one end of the line must arrive unchanged at the other end after a transport delay of τ= d/v.

6. Three-Phase V-I Measurement

The Three-Phase V-I Measurement block is used to measure three-phase voltages and currents in
a circuit. When connected in series with three-phase elements, it returns the three phase-to-
ground or phase-to-phase voltages and the three line currents. The block can output the voltages
and currents in per unit (p.u.) values or in volts and amperes.

7. Three-Phase Sequence Analyzer

The Three-Phase Sequence Analyzer block outputs the magnitude and phase of the positive-
(denoted by the index 1), negative- (index 2), and zero-sequence (index 0) components of a set of
three balanced or unbalanced signals. The signals can contain harmonics or not.

8. Scope

The Scope block displays its input with respect to simulation time. The Scope block can have
multiple axes (one per port); all axes have a common time range with independent y-axes. The
Scope allows. The Scope provides toolbar buttons that enables to zoom in on displayed data,
display all the data input to the Scope, preserve axis settings from one simulation to the next,
limit data displayed, and save data to the workspace.

9. Three-Phase Fault

The Three-Phase Fault block implements a three-phase circuit breaker where the opening and
closing times can be controlled either from an external Simulink signal (external control mode),
or from an internal control timer (internal control mode). The Three-Phase Fault block uses three
Breaker blocks that can be individually switched on and off to program phase-to-phase faults,
phase-to-ground faults, or a combination of phase-to-phase and ground faults.

Result: Fault analysis and verification of L-G, L-L, 2L-G using MATLAB is completed.
 Experiment No. 2

Aim: Load flow analysis for a given system (for 3 to 6 bus) using (i) Gauss Seidal (ii) Newton
Raphson (iii) Fast Decoupled Method and verify results using MATLAB or any available software.

Software Tool: MATLAB

Theory:

5. Gauss Siedel

Using the Gauss-Sedel method determine the phasor values of the voltage at the load
buses 2 and 3 (P-Q) accurate to four decimal places.
Find the slack bus real and reactive power.
Determine the line flow and line losses. Construct a power flow diagram showing the
direction of line flow.

Code:

y12=10-j*20;

y13=10-j*30;

y23=16-j*32;

V1=1.05+j*0;

iter =0;

S2=-2.566-j*1.102;
S3=-1.386-j*.452;

V2=1+j*0;

V3=1+j*0;

for I=1:10;

iter=iter+1;

V2 = (conj(S2)/conj(V2)+y12*V1+y23*V3)/(y12+y23);

V3 = (conj(S3)/conj(V3)+y13*V1+y23*V2)/(y13+y23);

disp([iter, V2, V3])

end

V2= .98-j*.06;

V3= 1-j*.05;

I12=y12*(V1-V2); I21=-I12;

I13=y13*(V1-V3); I31=-I13;

I23=y23*(V2-V3); I32=-I23;

S12=V1*conj(I12); S21=V2*conj(I21);

S13=V1*conj(I13); S31=V3*conj(I31);

S23=V2*conj(I23); S32=V3*conj(I32);

I1221=[I12,I21]

I1331=[I13,I31]

I2332=[I23,I32]

S1221=[S12, S21 (S12+S13) S12+S21]

S1331=[S13, S31 (S31+S32) S13+S31]

S2332=[S23, S32 (S23+S21) S23+S32]

Output:

1.0000 0.9825 - 0.0310i 1.0011 - 0.0353i

2.0000 0.9816 - 0.0520i 1.0008 - 0.0459i

3.0000 0.9808 - 0.0578i 1.0004 - 0.0488i

4.0000 0.9803 - 0.0594i 1.0002 - 0.0497i

5.0000 0.9801 - 0.0598i 1.0001 - 0.0499i

6.0000 0.9801 - 0.0599i 1.0000 - 0.0500i

7.0000 0.9800 - 0.0600i 1.0000 - 0.0500i

8.0000 0.9800 - 0.0600i 1.0000 - 0.0500i

9.0000 0.9800 - 0.0600i 1.0000 - 0.0500i

10.0000 0.9800 - 0.0600i 1.0000 - 0.0500i

I1221 =

1.9000 - 0.8000i -1.9000 + 0.8000i

I1331 =

2.0000 - 1.0000i -2.0000 + 1.0000i

I2332 =

-0.6400 + 0.4800i 0.6400 - 0.4800i

S1221 =

Columns 1 through 3

1.9950 + 0.8400i -1.9100 - 0.6700i 4.0950 + 1.8900i

Column 4

0.0850 + 0.1700i

S1331 =
Columns 1 through 3

2.1000 + 1.0500i -2.0500 - 0.9000i -1.3860 - 0.4520i

Column 4

0.0500 + 0.1500i

S2332 =

Columns 1 through 3

-0.6560 - 0.4320i 0.6640 + 0.4480i -2.5660 - 1.1020i

Column 4

0.0080 + 0.0160i

2. Newton-Raphson Method

Figure shows the one line diagram of a simple three bus system with generators at buses 1 and 3.
The magnitude of voltage at bus 1 is adjusted to 1.05 pu. Voltage magnitude at bus 3 is fixed at
1.04 pu with a real power generation of 200 MW. A load consisting of 400MW and 250 Mvar is
taken from bus 2. Line impedance are marked in per unit on a base of 100 MVA and the line
charging suspectance are neglected. Obtain the power flow solution by the NW methods.

Code:

iter=0;

pwracur = 0.00025; % Power accuracy

DC = 10; % Set the maximum power residual to a high value

while max(abs(DC)) > pwracur

iter = iter +1

P=[V(2)*V(1)*Y(2,1)*cos(t(2,1)-d(2)+d(1))+V(2)^2*Y(2,2)*cos(t(2,2))+ ...

V(2)*V(3)*Y(2,3)*cos(t(2,3)-d(2)+d(3));

V(3)*V(1)*Y(3,1)*cos(t(3,1)-d(3)+d(1))+V(3)^2*Y(3,3)*cos(t(3,3))+ ...

V(3)*V(2)*Y(3,2)*cos(t(3,2)-d(3)+d(2))];

Q= -V(2)*V(1)*Y(2,1)*sin(t(2,1)-d(2)+d(1))-V(2)^2*Y(2,2)*sin(t(2,2))- ...

V(2)*V(3)*Y(2,3)*sin(t(2,3)-d(2)+d(3));

J(1,1)=V(2)*V(1)*Y(2,1)*sin(t(2,1)-d(2)+d(1))+...

V(2)*V(3)*Y(2,3)*sin(t(2,3)-d(2)+d(3));

J(1,2)=-V(2)*V(3)*Y(2,3)*sin(t(2,3)-d(2)+d(3));

J(1,3)=V(1)*Y(2,1)*cos(t(2,1)-d(2)+d(1))+2*V(2)*Y(2,2)*cos(t(2,2))+...

V(3)*Y(2,3)*cos(t(2,3)-d(2)+d(3));

J(2,1)=-V(3)*V(2)*Y(3,2)*sin(t(3,2)-d(3)+d(2));

J(2,2)=V(3)*V(1)*Y(3,1)*sin(t(3,1)-d(3)+d(1))+...

V(3)*V(2)*Y(3,2)*sin(t(3,2)-d(3)+d(2));

J(2,3)=V(3)*Y(2,3)*cos(t(3,2)-d(3)+d(2));

J(3,1)=V(2)*V(1)*Y(2,1)*cos(t(2,1)-d(2)+d(1))+...

V(2)*V(3)*Y(2,3)*cos(t(2,3)-d(2)+d(3));

J(3,2)=-V(2)*V(3)*Y(2,3)*cos(t(2,3)-d(2)+d(3));

J(3,3)=-V(1)*Y(2,1)*sin(t(2,1)-d(2)+d(1))-2*V(2)*Y(2,2)*sin(t(2,2))-...
 V(3)*Y(2,3)*sin(t(2,3)-d(2)+d(3));

DP = Ps - P;

DQ = Qs - Q;

DC = [DP; DQ]

DX = J\DC

d(2) =d(2)+DX(1);

d(3)=d(3) +DX(2);

V(2)= V(2)+DX(3);

V, d, delta =180/pi*d;

end

P1= V(1)^2*Y(1,1)*cos(t(1,1))+V(1)*V(2)*Y(1,2)*cos(t(1,2)-d(1)+d(2))+...

V(1)*V(3)*Y(1,3)*cos(t(1,3)-d(1)+d(3))

Q1=-V(1)^2*Y(1,1)*sin(t(1,1))-V(1)*V(2)*Y(1,2)*sin(t(1,2)-d(1)+d(2))-...

V(1)*V(3)*Y(1,3)*sin(t(1,3)-d(1)+d(3))

Q3=-V(3)*V(1)*Y(3,1)*sin(t(3,1)-d(3)+d(1))-V(3)*V(2)*Y(3,2)*...

sin(t(3,2)-d(3)+d(2))-V(3)^2*Y(3,3)*sin(t(3,3))

ter =

DC =

-2.8600

1.4384
 -0.2200

J=

54.2800 -33.2800 24.8600

-33.2800 66.0400 -16.6400

-27.1400 16.6400 49.7200

DX =

-0.0453

-0.0077

-0.0265

b =
1.0500

0.9735

1.0400

d=

-0.0453

-0.0077

iter=
2

DC =

-0.0992

0.0217

-0.0509
J=

51.7247 -31.7656 21.3026

-32.9816 65.6564 -15.3791

-28.5386 17.4028 48.1036

DX =

-0.0018

-0.0010

-0.0018

V=
1.0500

0.9717

1.0400

d=

-0.0471

-0.0087

iter =

DC =

1.0e-003 *

-0.2166

0.0382

-0.1430
J=

51.5967 -31.6939 21.1474

-32.9339 65.5976 -15.3516

-28.5482 17.3969 47.9549

DX =

1.0e-005 *

-0.3856

-0.2386

-0.4412

V=
1.0500

0.9717

1.0400

d=

-0.0471

-0.0087

P1 =

2.1842

Q1 =

1.4085

Q3 =

1.4618
iter = 1

DC =

-2.8600

1.4384

-0.2200

J=

54.2800 -33.2800 24.8600

-33.2800 66.0400 -16.6400

-27.1400 16.6400 49.7200

DX =

-0.0453

-0.0077

-0.0265

V=
1.0500

0.9735

1.0400

d=

-0.0453

-0.0077

iter =

2
DC =

-0.0992

0.0217

-0.0509

J=

51.7247 -31.7656 21.3026

-32.9816 65.6564 -15.3791

-28.5386 17.4028 48.1036

DX =

-0.0018

-0.0010

-0.0018

V=
1.0500

0.9717

1.0400

d=

-0.0471

-0.0087

iter =

DC =
 1.0e-003 *

-0.2166

0.0382

-0.1430

J=

51.5967 -31.6939 21.1474

-2.9339 65.5976 -15.3516

-28.5482 17.3969 47.9549

DX =

1.0e-005 *

-0.3856

-0.2386

-0.4412

V=
1.0500

0.9717

1.0400

d=

-0.0471

-0.0087

P1 =

2.1842
Q1 =

1.4085

Q3 =

1.4618

3. Fast Decoupled Method

Figure shows the one line diagram of a simple three bus system with generators at buses 1 and 3.
The magnitude of voltage at bus 1 is adjusted to 1.05 pu. Voltage magnitude at bus 3 is fixed at
1.04 pu with a real power generation of 200 MW. A load consisting of 400MW and 250 Mvar is
taken from bus 2. Line impedance are marked in per unit on a base of 100 MVA and the line
charging suspectance are neglected. Obtain the power flow solution by the NW methods.

Code:

V1= 1.05; V2 = 1.0; V3 = 1.04;

d1 = 0; d2 = 0; d3=0;
Ps2=-4; Ps3 =2.0;
Qs2= -2.5;

YB = [ 20-j*50 -10+j*20 -10+j*30

-10+j*20 26-j*52 -16+j*32

-10+j*30 -16+j*32 26-j*62];

Y = abs(YB); t=angle(YB);

B =[-52 32; 32 62]

Binv = inv(B)
iter=0;
pwracur = 0.0003; % Power accuracy

DC = 10; % Set the max of power mismatch to a high value while

max(abs(DC)) > pwracur

iter = iter +1;

P2= V2*V1*Y(2,1)*cos(t(2,1)-
d2+d1)+V2^2*Y(2,2)*cos(t(2,2))+ ...

V2*V3*Y(2,3)*cos(t(2,3)-d2+d3);

P3= V3*V1*Y(3,1)*cos(t(3,1)-d3+d1)+V3^2*Y(3,3)*cos(t(3,3))+ ...

V3*V2*Y(3,2)*cos(t(3,2)-d3+d2); Q2=-
V2*V1*Y(2,1)*sin(t(2,1)-d2+d1)-V2^2*Y(2,2)*sin(t(2,2))- ...

V2*V3*Y(2,3)*sin(t(2,3)-
d2+d3); DP2 = Ps2 - P2; DP2V =
DP2/V2; DP3 = Ps3 - P3; DP3V =
DP3/V3; DQ2 = Qs2 - Q2; DQ2V =
DQ2/V2; DC =[DP2; DP3; DQ2];

Dd = -Binv*[DP2V;DP3V]; DV =
-1/B(1,1)*DQ2V;

d2 =d2+Dd(1);

d3 =d3+Dd(2);

V2= V2+DV;

angle2 =180/pi*d2;

angle3 =180/pi*d3;
R = [iter d2 d3 V2 DP2 DP3 DQ2];

disp(R)

end

Q3=-V3*V1*Y(3,1)*sin(t(3,1)-d3+d1)-V3^2*Y(3,3)*sin(t(3,3))- ...

V3*V2*Y(3,2)*sin(t(3,2)-d3+d2);

P1= V1^2*Y(1,1)*cos(t(1,1))+V1*V2*Y(1,2)*cos(t(1,2)-d1+d2)+ ...

V1*V3*Y(1,3)*cos(t(1,3)-d1+d3);

Q1=-V1^2*Y(1,1)*sin(t(1,1))-V1*V2*Y(1,2)*sin(t(1,2)-d1+d2)- ...

V1*V3*Y(1,3)*sin(t(1,3)-d1+d3);

S1=P1+j*Q1

Q3

B=

-52 32

32 -62
Binv =

-0.0282 -0.0145 -
0.0145 -0.0236

Columns 1 through 6

1.0000 -0.0605 -0.0089 0.9958 -2.8600 1.4384

Column 7

-0.2200

Columns 1 through 6

2.0000 -0.0565 -0.0080 0.9653 0.1759 -0.0710

 Column 7

-1.5790

Columns 1 through 6

3.0000 -0.0442 -0.0087 0.9657 0.6403 -0.4570

Column 7

0.0219

Columns 1 through 6

4.0000 -0.0448 -0.0090 0.9730 -0.0214 0.0012

Column 7

0.3652

Columns 1 through 6

5.0000 -0.0477 -0.0087 0.9731 -0.1534 0.1129

Column 7

0.0067

Columns 1 through 6

6.0000 -0.0476 -0.0086 0.9714 0.0005 0.0026 Column

7

-0.0861

Columns 1 through 6

7.0000 -0.0469 -0.0087 0.9713 0.0360 -0.0262

Column 7

-0.0041

Columns 1 through 6
 8.0000 -0.0469 -0.0087 0.9717 0.0009 -0.0014
Column 7

0.0201

Columns 1 through 6

9.0000 -0.0471 -0.0087 0.9718 -0.0084 0.0061

Column 7

0.0016

Columns 1 through 6

10.0000 -0.0471 -0.0087 0.9717 -0.0005 0.0005

Column 7

-0.0047

Columns 1 through 6

11.0000 -0.0471 -0.0087 0.9717 0.0020 -0.0014

Column 7

-0.0005

Columns 1 through 6

12.0000 -0.0471 -0.0087 0.9717 0.0002 -0.0002

Column 7

0.0011

Columns 1 through 6

13.0000 -0.0471 -0.0087 0.9717 -0.0005 0.0003

Column 7

0.0002

Columns 1 through 6
 14.0000 -0.0471 -0.0087 0.9717 -0.0001 0.0000

Column 7

-0.0003

S1 =

2.1843 + 1.4085i

Q3 =

1.4617

Result: We have successfully analyzed and study of Load Flow analysis for a 3 to 6 bus system
in MATLAB using the following methods:

1. Gauss Siedal Method

2. Newton Raphson Method
3. Fast Decoupled Method
 Experiment No. 3

Aim: Study of voltage security in power system Real-Time Voltage Security Assessment
(RTVSA).

Theory: Voltage stability is the ability of a power system to maintain acceptable voltages at all
buses in the system under normal operating conditions and after being subjected to a disturbance.
A system enters a state of voltage instability when a disturbance, increase in load demand, or
change in system condition cause a progressive and uncontrollable decline in voltage. The main
factor causing voltage instability is the inability of the power system to meet the demand for
reactive power. Voltage collapse is the process or sequence of events accompanying voltage
instability which leads to a low unacceptable voltage profile in a significant part of the system.

For maintaining voltage security within the system, the following need to be monitored from
time to time:

6. Available voltage security margin.

7. The most dangerous stresses in the system leading to voltage collapse.
8. Worst-case contingencies resulting in voltage collapse and/or contingencies with
insufficient voltage stability margin.
9. Contingency ranking according to a severity index for voltage stability related system
problems.
10. Weakest elements within the grid and the regions most affected by potential voltage
problems.
11. Controls to increase the available stability margin and avoid instability.
12. Information about voltage problems at the look-ahead operating conditions and for the
worst-case contingencies (contingencies with large severity ranks) that may appear in the
future.
13. A real-time dispatcher‘s situational awareness-type wide area graphic and geographic
displays.

It is known that voltage magnitudes alone are poor indicators of voltage stability or security.
Voltages can be near normal with generators, synchronous condensers, and Static VAR
compensators (SVCs) near current limiting levels, thus resulting in a possible voltage collapse.
However, as a security problem distinct from voltage collapse, it is also desirable that the system
voltage magnitudes remain within limits, and some of the control actions to maintain voltage
magnitudes may also be of benefit in avoiding voltage instability. Sufficient reactive power
reserves at generators and SVCs contribute strongly to maintaining voltage stability, but do not
measure the ability of the transmission system to transmit reactive power. Both voltage
magnitudes and reactive load margins are useful indicators; however, the voltage stability margin
is the more accurate and complete metric for the proximity to voltage collapse.

MODES OF OPERATION

1. Real-Time Modes - Real-time operations mode

-Real-time look-ahead mode

Under the ‗Real Time Operations Mode‘, a real time assessment of the most current state
estimation is done.

On the other hand, in the ‗Real Time Look-Ahead Mode‘we perform a 2-hour ―look-ahead‖
predictive assessment by applying planned outage information available and load forecast over
the next 2 hours.

This is done by means of simulation software.

c Study Mode - Study mode offers off-line analysis capabilities on either the real-time data
or on modified version of real-time solved cases.

Such study cases are:

W Real time RTVSA solved cases archived overtime within the Flat Files Storage (under
Central Server)
X Modified versions of the above mentioned real-time solved cases to study hypothetical
scenarios. For instance, a study mode user may extract a previously archived RTVSA
solved case from the Flat Files Storage, remove one or more transmission lines, manually
specify stressing directions, resolve using the RTVSA simulation capabilities and
perform a complete voltage security assessment, and export this as a new ―study case to
the central server if so desired.
RTVSA CAPABILITIES

The RTVSA application shall offer the following categories of functional capabilities:

W Contingency screening and ranking with respect to voltage limit violations or loading
margins associated with known stressing direction – The application should perform such
contingency analysis under all N-1 conditions and some user defined N-2 conditions
within each 5 minute real time cycle. A directional stressing, representative of the actual
system loading conditions based on the real time dispatch schedule and load forecast, will
be used for this analysis and the most binding contingency shall be identified.
X Wide area monitoring capabilities offering real time situational awareness to the
operators on key indicators that are closely associated with voltage security – These
include voltage profiles at select buses, real or reactive reserves at key generators both
under base case and the most binding contingency within geographic visualization. It also
includes animated power flow visuals at the higher voltage levels (e.g. 500 kV, 230 kV,
and 138 kV). The application will also have the capability of sending real time alarms to
the end-users on voltage violations and insufficient real or reactive loading margins.
Y Real time voltage stability analysis with known stressing direction – The application shall
present the loading margins (real or reactive) to the point of collapse under the base case
and the most binding contingency, allowing for an additional 2.5% and 5% (user
configurable) safety margins for N-1 and N-2 contingencies, respectively.
Z Quantify the efficacy of reactive power support at the most effective buses in terms of
their sensitivities (These sensitivities translate to a linear constraint and is representative
of the voltage stability limit associated with the unidirectional stressing which can be
incorporated into Security Constrained Unit Commitment (SCUC) and Security
Constrained Economic Dispatch (SCED) applications in the future).
AA Rank available corrective controls based on their effectiveness – These actions may
include enhancement controls that optimally increase the loading margin with respect to
the stressing direction, or remedial controls in the situation that a contingency may lead
the system state into an insecure region.
BB Identify the weak elements within the system associated with the one-dimensional stressing
– These are buses/regions with the grid that experience severe degradation in their voltage
 profile at the voltage collapse caused by the additional stressing. The proportions by
which the voltage magnitudes will fall at these buses shall be presented. Comprehensive
Voltage Security Assessment under Multi-Directional Stressing This is generalization of
the above mentioned capabilities to a multi-directional stressing situation presenting the
interaction and tradeoffs between different stressing directions, and the associated
interpretation of the safe-operating region as a 2-D or 3-D (or higher dimensional)
monogram. The application shall:
W Develop and update voltage security regions offline on demand based on a set of
predefined stressing directions – The boundaries of these regions shall be expressed as
piece-wise linear approximations (i.e., hyper planes) in coordinates of key descriptive
parameters (such as MW transfers, total MW generation, total MW loading, etc.)
associated with the stressing directions. As with the unidirectional stressing case, these
security region boundaries too shall be representative of the most binding contingency in
the various stressing directions. (These hyper planes are representative of the voltage
stability limits associated with various stressing scenarios which can ultimately be
embedded into SCUC and SCED applications).
X Real time voltage security assessment with respect to the multidirectional stressing – The
voltage stability margins between the most current base case operating condition and the
security region boundaries shall be evaluated within each 5 minute real time cycle.
Y Suggest appropriate controls to enhance margin to the boundary – While the current
operating point is within the security region, the application should also suggest
appropriate control actions to optimally steer away from the closest boundary.

DATA DESCRIPTION

The following are details on the required list of data:

W Detailed Network Model: Contains information in a volume sufficient for detailed

power flow simulations, under the CA ISO standards, i.e., branch information
(connectivity data, line impedance), breaker status, etc.
X System Component Status Information: Includes current status of generators,
transmission circuits, transformers, switching devices, and other components.
Y Available Power System Controls and their priorities : These include information of -
 W Tap Changers
X Static VAR Compensator (SVC)
Y Fixed and Controllable Shunt
Z Generator Re-dispatch, etc.
33 Limits (Voltage, Thermal, MVar, Others) : Consists of operational limits of system
facilities/components that are to be specified in appropriate units, e.g. transformer limits
in MVA, line limits in Amps, etc.

34 Generator Model : Required information for generator modeling, such as:

4. MVA ratings
5. Qmax, Qmin values
6. Leading and lagging power factor

6. Distributed Slack Bus Information : Required for governor power flow simulations
7. Low Voltage Load Models: These models (static characteristics) should cover the
low voltage load behavior and voltage collapse situations.
8. HVDC Models & Control Schemes
9. Contingency List : Consists of -
(a) All (N-1) and some (N-2) contingencies, or
(b) User specified contingency list
(c) Any Remedial Action Schemes (RASs) associated with these contingencies

10. Stressing Directions & Descriptor Variables : Contains –

(a) Generator dispatch sequence & pattern
(b) Load stress pattern

(Should feature the capability to assign participation factors to loads on an individual, area or
zonal basis) Descriptor variables are parameters that influence the voltage stability margin in
certain parts of the system (voltage stability problem areas). Examples of descriptor variables
are: total area load, power flows in certain transmission paths, total area generation, and so on.
The operating engineers ‘should be able to define/modify these variables for the known voltage
problem areas in the course of offline studies.
SPECIAL PROTECTION SCHEMES/REMEDIAL ACTION SCHEMES

During the system stressing process and contingency analysis, it is required for the RTVSA tool
to automatically trigger Remedial Action Schemes (RAS) or Special Protection Schemes (SPS)
to provide realistic voltage stability margins.

Modelling Details

Accurate modeling of voltage stability conditions and parameters that influence them is a must
for the RTVSA application. This includes the following requirements:

1. Voltage stability conditions simulated using full power flow Jacobian singularity
conditions.
2 The algorithms used must converge accurately to the power system equilibrium in all
cases in which that equilibrium exists, including cases at and nearly at voltage collapse.
3 Low voltage/voltage stability load models including the models reflecting the OLTC
action (e.g., constant active and reactive power for the OLTC regulation range), static
characteristics representing load behavior outside the regulation range of the OLTC, and
static characteristics approximately reflecting load behavior at the low voltage conditions.
4 Special Protection Schemes (SPS), Under-Voltage Protection schemes, and Remedial
actions schemes (including remote RAS).
5 Consistent treatment of the discrete event sequences, for example, the switching sequence
of capacitors (non-uniqueness of these sequences for a given stressing path is not
acceptable).
6 Distributed slack bus/post-transient power flow (governor) model.
7 Generation dispatch options reflecting California ISO models and practices (e.g.
generators maximum and minimum active power output, reliability must-run units,
emission-induced constraints, etc).
8 Multi-area power flow
9 Adequate modeling of the reduced (equivalent) parts of the system, especially, voltage
and governor responses of the reduced part of the system.
The minimum requirement for the data that is required to correctly describe the system
equipment’s have been briefly mentioned here.

1. Bus data
 Consisting of all bus types: swing/slack, PQ, PV, HVDC

 Representation with breaker information and status
2. Transmission line data
 Consisting of: out-of-service, in-service, bypassed, and HVDC lines

 Representation with loss model
3. Transformers and tap control data
 Model types: 2 & 3 winding transformers

 Control types: Fixed impedance with no control, voltage, MW, and MVAR control
4. Generator data
 Generator remote regulation

 Reactive power limits as Qmin/Qmax
5. Load data
 Static model as described under Modeling Details (3) above
6. Fixed Shunt data
7. Controllable shunt and static VAR devices (SVD) data
 SVD control types: locked, stepwise control, continuous control, stepwise control with
dead band, on/off control with dead band

 Models any controllable capacitive/inductive devices, such as:

 Static VAR compensators (SVC)
8. Mechanically Switched Capacitors (MSC)
9. Synchronous Condensers

VOLTAGE SECURITY ASSESSMENT

The display capabilities under this category demonstrate results of the Voltage Security
Assessment tool under the look-ahead scenario with respect to key stressing direction(s).
Such scenarios may be based on current operating conditions or under the worst case contingency.
These illustrate voltage security conditions and metrics that help users study voltage stability and
take decisions to prevent adverse situations. These capabilities include, but are not limited to:

  Real and reactive loading margins


 Margin at base case to point of collapse (POC)

 Margin under worst case contingency base case to POC
 Contingency ranking based on severity index (voltage margin, loading margin, etc.)

 Operating monograms i.e. the chart representing numerical relationships.

 Distance to instability

 Weak elements information

 Corrective actions (preventive control, enhancement control)

Result: - We have successfully Study of voltage security in power system Real-Time Voltage
Security Assessment (RTVSA).
 Experiment No. 4

Aim: Study of overload security analysis in power system.

THEORY:

The recent evolution of the electric power industry has brought about new needs in terms of
assessing the reliability of the transmission system. Perhaps the most important of these include
its accurate assessment and the need to integrate reliability into economic decision making.
These needs exist at the operational level. In this paper, we address them in terms of the one year
planning problem. There are today a number of commercial software packages that include the
influence of circuit overload in a reliability assessment scheme. All programs develop
probabilistic indices characterizing the power system reliability level, although some use
analytical approaches, sometimes called contingency enumeration, while others use Monte Carlo
simulation. Some of the most well known in North America include TRELSS [5], TPLAN,
PROCOSE [6], and CREAM. The approaches for assessing circuit overload for planning
purposes used in these and other programs have rested on two main assumptions.

14. The circuit overload reliability level is indicated by a measurement of the amount of load
shed necessary to avoid circuit overload; loss of load probability (LOLP) and expected
unserved energy (EUE) are two of the most common measurements used.
15. Measurements taken on one or a limited number of selected base cases are sufficient to
indicate the reliability of the system.

In this paper, we report on an approach that avoids these two assumptions. Our approach is
predicated on a desire to provide a measure of risk, a probabilistic expectation, as the product of
probability and monetary consequence of each outcome, summed over all possible outcomes. An
important attribute of using this measure is that it reflects event likelihood and consequence, the
two factors which, according to industry developed disturbance-performance criteria, determine
reliability level.

In measuring risk, it is essential that we distinguish between an outcome and a decision. One
important distinction is that an outcome is an unavoidable result of a decision. Based on this
distinction, we categorize transmission reinforcement, unit commitment, economic dispatch, and
load interruption as decisions.
In the context of overload assessment, the outcome of these decisions are the effects on the
circuits. These effects, which include equipment damage and equipment unavailability, are
random because they are heavily dependent on weather and on loadings, the randomness of the
latter caused mainly by uncertainties in demand and equipment outages. In contrast to the
commonly made assumption 1, our assessment is in terms of the probability and monetary
impact of these effects, given a decision, where the decision includes transmission reinforcement
and policies on unit commitment, dispatch and load interruption.

Calculation of the risk index has the distinct advantage of providing a uniform basis of
comparing various decisions.

1. SMV MODEL DESCRIPTION

The SMV model first uses the expected annual load curve, sampled hourly, 1 to arrange the
maintenance and unit commitment schedules, then employs time invariant variances to represent
normally distributed load uncertainties. The expected annual load curve can be obtained from
load forecasting, or it can be obtained from the load curve of the previous year, with an
appropriate scaling to account for load growth. There are various methods to identify the
maintenance, unit commitment schedule and load forecasting error.

For load forecasting error identification, we first employ time series analysis to identify the
structure and parameters of an ARIMA (autoregressive integrated moving average) model used
to represent the load series. This provides a load value for each hour. We assume that each
hourly load value used in our trajectory has associated with it some error.

Let‘s consider a single hour h , a single contingency states, and a single branch b, denoted by
and if we have a function which gives the expected monetary impact of each
flow Ib on branch b, the component risk, then we can compute the thermal overload (TOL) risk
for the particular contingency state, s, in hour h, as

The total risk for this branch in hour over all contingency states is then
From (2), we may sum over all branches to obtain total risk for a particular hour, or we may sum
over all hours to obtain the cumulative risk for a particular branch. These kinds of calculations
reflect the decomposition capability of this approach and attractive for identifying the reasons for
high risk. In addition, we may evaluate total cumulative risk as

These calculations, together with those required to obtain, are referred to as thermal overload risk
assessment. Its use, together with the trajectory development, are illustrated in Fig. 1. From this
figure

2. COMPONENT RISK
Equation (1) requires , which is the expected monetary impact on branch due to
overload given the flow on branch, b. If branch b is a transmission line, then, depending on the
weather conditions, conductor type, and flow duration, the flow Ib causes conductor heating
which can result in one or both of the following:

Loss of clearance due to sag: Here, the thermal expansion of the conductor results in sag. In the
worst case, the line can touch an underlying object, resulting in a permanent fault and subsequent
outage.
Loss of strength due to annealing: Annealing, the recrystallization of metal, is a gradual and
irreversible process when the grain matrix established by cold working is consumed causing loss
of tensile strength. In [12], we have shown how to use weather statistics to obtain f(θ ‫ ׀‬Ib), the
pdf for conductor temperature, θ. This can be used to obtain the desired risk expression as

Where ImL1(θ) and ImL2(θ) and express the monetary impact on the transmission line of sag and
annealing, respectively, as a function of conductor temperature, also described in [12]. Equation
can be evaluated for a range of flows, resulting in a component risk curve for branch b, as shown
in Fig. 2, where the pdfs for ambient temperature and wind speed are typically chosen. The same
pdf for ambient temperature is also used in transformer risk assessment.

We can then use an expression just like (4) to evaluate the thermal overload risk, except here, θ
represents the hottest spot temperature, and ImL1 and ImL2 represent the monetary impact on the
transformer of failure and loss of life, respectively, as described in [13] and [14]. With these
modifications, we can evaluate equation. (4) For a range of flows, resulting in a component curve
for branch b, as shown in Fig. 3. Here, 1.0 pu risk equals the cost to rebuild the transformer. It is
chosen to be $1 000 000 in [13] and [14].

3. PROBABILITY DENSITIES FOR CIRCUIT FLOWS

The pdfs of currents can be identified by probabilistic load flow methods. The probabilistic load flow
proposed in [15] uses DC power flow and convolution to deal with load uncertainties. The stochastic
load flow (also called AEP method) proposed in [16] linearizes the power system around the
expected point (which is obtained by iterations in order to account for the nonlinear nature of the
power flow equations), and then applies linear transformation of Gaussian distributions. Some
refinements for these two methods have also been proposed [17],[18]. In addition, efforts have been
made to perform risk assessment for power system planning in [19]. In this paper, we linearize the
system around the operating point at every hour, then use a convolution method to obtain pdfs.

d Assumptions: We assume all loads are normally distributed random variables at every hour.
Each hourly bus load is assigned a mean and variance equal to a fixed percentage of the total load
forecasted mean and variance. We also assume the covariance matrix of loads is available. In
practice, this covariance matrix can be estimated by statistical methods. Generator outages are also
considered. We assume that each bus is a single independent generating company.

B. Analytical Development
From the DC power flow formulation, we can obtain the following expressions for branch flows
corresponding to any outage states, and the normal state 1.

Where

  PG is the vector of real power generator levels at each bus.

  PD is the vector of real power load levels at each bus.
  Bps is the B-matrix for outage state .
 A(s) is the connection matrix of the network for outage states, having rows corresponding
 to buses (excluding the swing bus) and columns corresponding to branches.
 Pi(s) is the vector of branch power flows for outage state, s.

Subtracting (5) from (6) we get

Where .

Since Xi(s) are independent of generation and load level, we can calculate and store them
beforehand to save computation time. If we set PG and PD to be their expected values for the
hour, and use a full AC power flow solution to obtain Pl(1), then (7) provides the expected flows
for all branches at the hour. We will use this below in obtaining the distribution of flows due to
uncertainty in generation. Now we define ∆PG and ∆PD as the vectors of random variables
corresponding to generation and load levels, respectively.

We describe each component of ∆PG with a two state probability mass function. We describe each
element of ∆PD with a normal distribution having a mean equal to 0 and a standard deviation
derived from our load model assumption. The vector of random variables corresponding to
variations in branch flows at outage state are then given as

(8)
And the vector of random variables corresponding to the branch flows

(9)
Substitution of (8) into (9) yields

(10)
Here PLG is the vector of random variables corresponding to branch flows due to variation in
generation, given by

(11)
The mean of PLG(s) is Pl(s). Also, is the vector of random variables corresponding to branch
flows due to variations in loads, given by

(12)
The mean of PLD(s) is zero.

The covariance matrix for PLD(s) is obtained from

(13)

and the diagonal elements of (13) are the line flow variances.

The pdfs for the elements of PLG(s) can be obtained by a convolution algorithm. In order to
facilitate speed of this algorithm while maintaining reasonable accuracy, we have used segment
wise cluster-based convolution. The flowchart for thermal overload risk assessment is shown in
Fig. 4. For the first hour, we form the generation random variable ∆P G, i.e., we obtain their pdfs.
After the first hour, we use convolution (when some unit is started) and de-convolution (when
some unit is shut down) to update ∆PG. Then for each hour and each credible contingency, we
linearize the system, calculate the pdfs of line flows contributed by generation and by load by
using (11) and (12), respectively. Then we convolve the two pdfs to get the pdfs for active flows,
which is the term . This term can be transformed into based on the
assumption that the reactive flow remains constant.

Result: Study of overload security analysis in power system is completed.

 Experiment No. 5

Aim: - Study of economic load dispatch problem with different methods.

Software Tools: MATLAB

Theory:

Economic Distribution of Loads between the Units of a Plant

To determine the economic distribution of a load amongst the different units of a plant, the
variable operating costs of each unit must be expressed in terms of its power output. The fuel
cost is the main cost in a thermal or nuclear unit. Then the fuel cost must be expressed in terms
of the power output. Other costs, such as the operation and maintenance costs, can also be
expressed in terms of the power output. Fixed costs, such as the capital cost, depreciation etc.,
are not included in the fuel cost.

The fuel requirement of each generator is given in terms of the Rupees/hour. Let us define the
input cost of an unit- i ,fi in Rs./h and the power output of the unit as Pi. Then the input cost can

(1)

Rs./h

be expressed in terms of the power output as

The operating cost given by the above quadratic equation is obtained by approximating the
power in MW versus the cost in Rupees curve. The incremental operating cost of each unit is

(2)

Rs./MWh

Then computed as

Let us now assume that only two units having different incremental costs supply a load. There will be
a reduction in cost if some amount of load is transferred from the unit with higher incremental
cost to the unit with lower incremental cost. In this fashion, the load is transferred from the less
efficient unit to the more efficient unit thereby reducing the total operation cost. The load
transfer will continue till the incremental costs of both the units are same. This will be optimum
point of operation for both the units.

The above principle can be extended to plants with a total of N number of units. The total fuel
cost will then be the summation of the individual fuel cost fi,i = 1, ... , N of each unit, i.e.,

(3)

Let us denote that the total power that the plant is required to supply by PT, such that where P1,
..., PNare the power supplied by the N different units.

The objective is minimize fTfor a given PT. This can be achieved when the total difference

(5)

dfTbecomes zero, i.e.,

(6)

Now since the power supplied is assumed to be constant we have

(7)

Multiplying (6) by λ and subtracting from (5) we get

 (8)

The equality in (7) is satisfied when each individual term given in brackets is zero. This gives us

Also the partial derivative becomes a full derivative since only the term fiof fTvaries with Pi, i =
1, ...,N . We then have

(9)

Generating Limits

It is not always necessary that all the units of a plant are available to share a load. Some of the
units may be taken off due to scheduled maintenance. Also it is not necessary that the less
efficient units are switched off during off peak hours. There is a certain amount of shut down and
startup costs associated with shutting down a unit during the off peak hours and servicing it back
on-line during the peak hours. To complicate the problem further, it may take about eight hours
or more to restore the boiler of a unit and synchronizing the unit with the bus. To meet the
sudden change in the power demand, it may therefore be necessary to keep more units than it
necessary to meet the load demand during that time. This safety margin in generation is called
spinning reserve. The optimal load dispatch problem must then incorporate this startup and shut
down cost for without endangering the system security.

(10)

The power generation limit of each unit is then given by the inequality constraints The maximum
limit Pmaxis the upper limit of power generation capacity of each unit. On the other hand, the lower
limit Pminpertains to the thermal consideration of operating a boiler in a thermal or nuclear
generating station. An operational unit must produce a minimum amount of power such that the
boiler thermal components are stabilized at the minimum design operating temperature.

Economic Sharing of Loads between Different Plants

So far we have considered the economic operation of a single plant in which we have discussed
how a particular amount of load is shared between the different units of a plant. In this problem
we did not have to consider the transmission line losses and assumed that the losses were a part
of the load supplied. However if now consider how a load is distributed between the different
plants that are joined by transmission lines, then the line losses have to be explicitly included in
the economic dispatch problem. In this section we shall discuss this problem.

(11)

When the transmission losses are included in the economic dispatch problem, we can modify
where PLOSSis the total line loss. Since PTis assumed to be constant, we have

(12 )

In the above equation dPLOSSincludes the power loss due to every generator, i.e.

(13)

Also minimum generation cost implies dfT = 0 as given in (5). Multiplying both (12) and (13) by

(14)

and combining we get

Adding (14) with (5) we obtain

(16)

The above equation satisfies when

Again since

From (16) we get

(18)

Where Liis called the penalty factor of load- i and is given by

Consider an area with N number of units. The power generated are defined by the vector

(19)

Then the transmission losses are expressed in general as

Where B is a symmetric matrix given b

The elements Bijof the matrix B are called the loss coefficients. These coefficients are not
constant but vary with plant loading. However for the simplified calculation of the penalty factor
Lithese coefficients are often assumed to be constant.

When the incremental cost equations are linear, we can use analytical equations to find out the
economic settings. However in practice, the incremental costs are given by nonlinear equations
that may even contain nonlinearities. In that case iterative solutions are required to find the
optimal generator settings.

Code:

%Economical Load dispatch assuming 0 transmission losses

%input quantity is no of unit

%this code is limitation is that no of unit less then one

n=input('enter the no of unit');

kr=input('input total power')

%The form of IFC is

%ifc1=dC1/dP1=x1*p1+C1;

%ifc2=dC2/dP2=x2*p2+C2;

for t=1:n

disp('for unit=')

x(t)=input('enter the value of xi');

c(t)=input('enter the value of ci');

end

if n==2
a=[1 1 ;x(1) -x(2)]

p=inv(a)*[kr;c(1)-c(2)]

else if n==3

a=[1 1 1; x(1) -x(2) 0; 0 x(2) -x(3)]

p=inv(a)*[kr;c(1)-c(2);c(3)-c(2)]

else n==4

a=[1 1 1 1; x(1) -x(2) 0 0; 0 x(2) -x(3) 0; 0 0 x(3) -x(4)] p=inv(a)*[kr;c(1)-c(2);c(3)-c(2);c(4)-c(3)]

end

end

Output:

Enter the no of unit3

input total power1000

kr =

1000

for unit=

16. =

enter the value of xi.3

enter the value of ci.4

for unit=

t=2

enter the value of xi.2

enter the value of ci.3

for unit=

enter the value of xi.4 enter the value of ci.3 a =

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

0.3000 -0.2000 0

0.2000 -0.4000

p = 307.9231

461.3846

230.6923
 Experiment No. 6

Aim: Study of transient stability analysis using MATLAB/ETAP Software.

THEORY

Stability: Stability problem is concerned with the behavior of power system when it is subjected
to disturbance and is classified into small signal stability problem if the disturbances are small
and transient stability problem when the disturbances are large.

Transient stability: When a power system is under steady state, the load plus transmission loss
equals to the generation in the system. The generating units run at synchronous speed and system
frequency, voltage, current and power flows are steady. When a large disturbance such as three
phase fault, loss of load, loss of generation etc., occurs the power balance is upset and the
generating units rotors experience either acceleration or deceleration. The system may come
back to a steady state condition maintaining synchronism or it may break into subsystems or one
or more machines may pull out of synchronism.

Small signal stability: When a power system is under steady state, normal operating condition,
the system may be subjected to small disturbances such as variation in load and generation,
change in field voltage, change in mechanical toque etc., the nature of system response to small
disturbance depends on the operating conditions, the transmission system strength, types of
controllers etc.

Instability that may result from small disturbance may be of two forms

17. Steady increase in rotor angle due to lack of synchronizing torque.

18. Rotor oscillations of increasing magnitude due to lack of sufficient damping torque.

Formula

Reactive power Qe = sin(cos-1(p.f))

Reactive power

Stator Current
Voltage behind transient condition

Voltage of infinite bus

Where,

Angular separation between and

Pre fault operation:

Power

During fault condition:

Critical clearing angle:

Critical clearing time:

Secs
PROCEDURE

e Enter the command window of the MATLAB.

f Create a new M – file by selecting File - New – M – File.
g Type and save the program.
h Execute the program by pressing Tools – Run.
i View the results.

Exercise

DD Transient stability analysis of a 9-bus, 3-machine, 60 Hz power system with the

following system modeling requirements:
i.) Classical model for all synchronous machines, models for excitation and speed governing
systems not included.

CC Simulate a three-phase fault at the end of the line from bus 5 to bus 7 near bus 7 at time = 0.0 sec.
Assume that the fault is cleared successfully by opening the line 5-7 after 5 cycles ( 0.083 sec)
. Observe the system for 2.0 seconds.
DD Obtain the following time domain plots:
Z Relative angles of machines 2 and 3 with respect to machine 1.
AA Angular speed deviations of machines 1, 2 and 3 from synchronous speed.
BB Active power variation of machines 1, 2 and 3.
(c) Determine the critical clearing time by progressively increasing the fault clearing time.
PROGRAM

alpha = [500; 400; 200];

beta = [5.3; 5.5; 5.8]; gamma = [0.004; 0.006; 0.009];

PD = 800;

DelP = 10;

lamda = input('Enter estimated value of Lamda =

'); fprintf(' ')

disp(['Lamda P1 P2 P3 DP'...

Z grad
Delamda']) iter =
0;
while abs(DelP) >= 0.001

iter = iter + 1;

= (lamda - beta)./(2*gamma); DelP = PD - sum(P);

J = sum(ones(length(gamma),1)./(2*gamma));
Delamda = DelP/J;
disp([lamda,P(1),P(2),P(3),DelP,J,Delamda])
lamda = lamda + Delamda;

end

totalcost = sum(alpha + beta.*P + gamma.*P.^2)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pm = 0.8; E = 1.17; V = 1.0;

X1 = 0.65; X2 = inf; X3 = 0.65;

eacfault (Pm, E, V, X1, X2, X3)

For b)
Pm = 0.8; E = 1.17; V = 1.0;

X1 = 0.65; X2 = 1.8; X3 = 0.8;

eacfault (Pm, E, V, X1, X2, X3)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

function eacpower(P0, E, V, X)

if exist('P0')~=1

P0 = input('Generator initial power in p.u. P0 = '); else,

end if exist('E')~=1

E = input('Generator e.m.f. in p.u. E = '); else,

end if exist('V')~=1

V = input('Infinite bus-bar voltage in p.u. V = '); else,

end if exist('X')~=1

X = input('Reactance between internal emf and infinite bus in p.u. X = '); else, end

Pemax= E*V/X;

if P0 >= Pemax

fprintf('\nP0 must be less than the peak electrical power Pemax = %5.3f p.u. \n', Pemax)

fprintf('Try again. \n\n')

return, end

d0=asin(P0/Pemax);

delta = 0:.01:pi;

Pe = Pemax*sin(delta);

dmax=pi;

Ddmax=1;
while abs(Ddmax) > 0.00001

Df= cos(d0) - (sin(dmax)*(dmax-

d0)+cos(dmax)); J=cos(dmax)*(dmax-d0);

Ddmax=Df/J;

dmax=dmax+Ddmax;

end

dc=pi-dmax;

Pm2=Pemax*sin(dc);

Pmx =[0 pi-d0]*180/pi; Pmy=[P0 P0];

Pm2x=[0 dmax]*180/pi; Pm2y=[Pm2 Pm2];

x0=[d0 d0]*180/pi; y0=[0 Pm2]; xc=[dc dc]*180/pi; yc=[0

Pemax*sin(dc)]; xm=[dmax dmax]*180/pi; ym=[0 Pemax*sin(dmax)];

d0=d0*180/pi; dmax=dmax*180/pi;
dc=dc*180/pi; x=(d0:.1:dc);

y=Pemax*sin(x*pi/180);

%y1=Pe2max*sin(d0*pi/180);

%y2=Pe2max*sin(dc*pi/180);

x=[d0 x dc];

y=[Pm2 y Pm2];

xx=dc:.1:dmax;

h=Pemax*sin(xx*pi/180);

xx=[dc xx dmax];

hh=[Pm2 h Pm2];
delta=delta*180/pi;

%clc

fprintf('\nInitial power =%7.3f p.u.\n', P0)

fprintf('Initial power angle =%7.3f degrees \n', d0)

fprintf('Sudden additional power =%7.3f p.u.\n', Pm2-P0)

fprintf('Total power for critical stability =%7.3f p.u.\n', Pm2)

fprintf('Maximum angle swing =%7.3f degrees \n', dmax)

fprintf('New operating angle =%7.3f degrees \n\n\n', dc)

fill(x,y,'m')

hold;

fill(xx,hh,'c')

plot(delta, Pe,'-', Pmx, Pmy,'g', Pm2x,Pm2y,'g', x0,y0,'c', xc,yc, xm,ym,'r'),

grid Title('Equal-area criterion applied to the sudden change in power')
xlabel('Power angle, degree'), ylabel(' Power, per unit') axis([0 180 0
1.1*Pemax])

hold off;
Result: