This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal.

Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS 1

Optimal Topology Control With Physical Power Flow

Constraints and N-1 Contingency Criterion
Gokturk Poyrazoglu, Student Member, IEEE, and HyungSeon Oh, Member, IEEE

AbstractIn this paper, a novel solution method is proposed for Magnitude of apparent power flow from
the optimal topology control problem in AC framework with N-1 Bus to Bus .
reliability. The resultant new topology of the proposed method Parameters
is guaranteed to yield a better objective function value than the
global solution of the problem with the original topology. In order Number of buses.
to prove our statement, semi-definite programming relaxation Number of branches.
is formulated to find a lower bound to the objective function
value of the problem. The proposed method is favorable for Number of generators.
parallelization to increase the computational efficiency, and the Admittance matrix, defined as
parallel computing flowchart is presented. Computational time of .
the algorithm for IEEE test cases is reported. An in-house power
market simulator is developed to simulate a market environment th element of .
complete with optimal topology control mechanism. Simulations Max apparent power flow capacity of the
held by participating human subjects are analyzed under the sub- transmission line connecting Bus to Bus
titles of the total operating cost, real power losses, and locational .
marginal price (LMP) variance. A simple example is illustrated
Half shunt capacitance of the transmission
to show that the resultant network topology may increase the real
power losses while still providing a lower operating system cost line connecting Bus to Bus .
than that of the original topology. Real power demand at Bus .
Index TermsAC optimal power flow, locational marginal Reactive power demand at Bus .
pricing, optimal topology control, semi-definite programming, Max and min voltage magnitude at Bus .
transmission switching.
Max and min real power capacity of the
generator at Bus .
NOMENCLATURE Max and min reactive power capacity of
the generator at Bus .
Operators
Positive semi-definite.
Indices
Transpose.
Bus indices.
Trace of a matrix.
Branch (transmission line) index with
terminal buses . Sets
Variables Set of all buses, has a cardinality of .
Real power supply from the generator at Set of all buses linked to a generator,
Bus . , has a cardinality of .
Reactive power supply from the generator Set of all transmission line indices, has a
at Bus . cardinality of .
Real part of voltage at Bus . Set of connected bus pairs, has a cardinality
Imaginary part of voltage at Bus . of . If th element in has terminal
Voltage magnitude at Bus , defined as buses , then th element of is
and th element of is
.

I. INTRODUCTION
Manuscript received March 08, 2014; revised June 27, 2014 and October 02,

2014; accepted November 24, 2014. This work was supported in part by US
DoE (under the CERTS initiative). Paper no. TPWRS-00339-2014.
The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, University at
Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260 USA (e-mail: gokturkp@buffalo.edu; hso1@buf-
falo.edu).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRS.2014.2379112
R
ECENT studies have shown that reconfiguration of the
existing energy grid, without any physical technological
improvement, arises the opportunity to provide a significant
increase in the overall operational efficiency of the system.
One actively studied area is the optimization of transmis-
sion topologyoften termed, transmission switching. The

0885-8950 2015 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
2 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS
motivation lying beneath this idea is to reconfigure a power
transmission network by switching off transmission lines in
order to result in a new topology, functioning at an econom-
ically efficient operational point in terms of total system cost.
New operation point still needs to meet all constraints in place
by the original system. The idea of purposefully switching
lines off is not new, as it has been utilized extensively within
the power industry as a corrective mechanism in response to
network contingencies [1], [2]. However, it had been a common
belief within industry that the reconfiguration of a transmission
network would induce increased power loss during operation
when the real power generations are fixed [3]. Contrary to
general belief, Bacher [4]proposed switching as a means to
minimize system losses by temporarily opening a transmission
line (temporarily taking the line out of operation).
In order to realize the most benefit from transmission
topology control, Fisher [5]merged optimal topology control
(OTC) with DC OPF (OPF including linear approximations).
Linearized DC approximations of the problem were formu-
lated as a mixed integer linear programming (MIP) and 25%
reduction on the operating system cost was observed for IEEE
118-bus test case. Promising results were also reported using
a similar approach by Hedman in [6]. However, even with
the computational benefits provided by DC OPF formulation,
the efficiency of transmission switching algorithms is still
insufficient for practical use. Subsequently, several heuristics
for transmission switching were proposed in the following
literature.
Barrows [7]analyzed the results of optimal transmission
switching on an RTS-96 network in order to reduce computa-
tional complexity. Ruiz [8]proposed an algorithm to identify
a promising candidate component for switching, and in some
cases was able to achieve a computational time up to four
orders of magnitude less than previous algorithms. Ruiz also
proposed tractable transmission topology control policies to se-
lect candidate lines and captured 96% potential cost savings in
[9]. Fuller [10], however, proposed another heuristic relying on
a line-ranking parameter based on the optimal solution of DC
OPF. Cong [11]developed a pre-screening method to identify a
candidate list for switchable lines hoping to reduce the number
of integer variables in OTC problem. Moreover, transmission
switching was also combined with planning problems in the
following literature.
Villumsen [12]used transmission switching in capacity ex-
pansion planning by merging a decomposition technique with a
stochastic integer-programming problem. Khodaei [13]decom-
posed the capacity expansion planning problem into a master
and two sub-problems while considering transmission topology
as a variable. IEEE 73- and 118-bus test cases were used in the
research and their performances indicated that a total cost re-
duction between 0.04% and 0.07% was achieved from the sim-
ulations.
Additionally, N-1 reliability imposed by FERC [14]was
studied with optimal topology control under pre-contingency
and post contingency situations. A detailed definition of N-1
contingency criterion is given in Section V. Hedman [15]ana-
lyzed N-1 reliable optimal DC OPF solutions with transmission
switching, where the problem was formulated as linear pro-
gramming with binary variables on both IEEE 118-bus and
RTS-96 system test cases. As of now, all the literature men-
tioned in this paper employed a linearized DC OPF model,
which does not guarantee a feasible AC dispatch. However,
Barrows [16]subsequently presented a method to correct DC
model solutions to ensure a feasible but not necessarily op-
timal AC power flow solutions. He also verified that DC OPF
may underestimate savings from OTC. Additionally, Polturi
[17]presented the AC OPF formulation for OTC, and took a
brute force approach to solve each problem individually. His
simulations indicate up to 9% savings is possible by topology
control. Lastly, the AC OPF formulation was considered in
[18]by Khanabadi to utilize transmission switching as a con-
gestion management tool with respect to voltage security and
N-1 contingency analysis.
In order to provide a detailed modeling of the power system,
we formulated OTC problem within AC framework with an
additional N-1 contingency criterion constraint. Moreover, we
have extended our research by developing in-house electric
power market simulation software [19]. Our software allows
human subjects to act as market participants in power market
environment. We are interested in optimal topology control
mechanism and its possible implementation to a market envi-
ronment. Our main intention is to simulate how people behave
in the market with such technological advancement.
For the completeness of our study, we bound the objective
function value of OTC problem by adopting the relaxation of
OPF in the form of semi-definite programming (SDP). Low and
Lavaei provided a derivation of SDP relaxation from AC OPF
problem in [20]. They reported that SDP relaxation of OPF re-
turns the global optimal solution for several IEEE test cases.
However, Lesieutre examined the limits of SDP in [21]and by
providing an example, he showed that the zero duality gap is
not always the issue in power system. Lavaei, later, presented
the necessary conditions of zero duality gap in radial networks
in [22]. In our study, SDP always yields a better or equally
acceptable solution as that of the original OPF. Therefore, in
this study, the objective function value of SDP relaxation will
be considered only as a lower bound. Using SDP solution as
a lower bound for AC OPF problem was also considered by
Raghunathan [23]while seeking the global optimal solution of
OPF.
This research represents the first attempt in related literature
using SDP relaxation as a lower bound in an OTC problem. By
providing a lower bound, we are able to select a limited number
of candidate lines to be switched off. Moreover, we proved that
the resulting topology will lead a globally better solution than
the original topology.
Secondly, to the authors' best knowledge, enabling human
subjects to directly interact within a simulated power market en-
vironment complete with optimal topology control mechanism
that satisfies N-1 contingency criterion is also another first at-
tempt in related literature.
II. MOTIVATION
A simple 3-bus system example is illustrated in Fig. 1(a).
The transmission line connecting Bus 1 and Bus 3 has a max-
imum flow limit of 100 MVA and the other lines are infinite
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
POYRAZOGLU AND OH: OPTIMAL TOPOLOGY CONTROL WITH PHYSICAL POWER FLOW CONSTRAINTS
Fig. 1. (a) 3-bus original network. (b) 3-bus network after switching operation.
in capacity. Suppose generators are located at Bus 1 and Bus
2 and their generation costs are $10/MWh and $20/MWh, re-
spectively. Furthermore, there are 200 MW, 100 MVar real and
reactive power demands at Bus 3. Lastly, all three lines are iden-
tical and their resistance and reactance are 0.007 and 0.04
, respectively. If we solve AC OPF while all 3-transmis-
sion lines are available, the solution of the problem will be real
power generation of 74.7 MW at Generator 1 and 127.1 MW at
Generator 2 with the objective function value of $3289.08. Max-
imum power flow limit on the line connecting Bus 1 and Bus 3
prevents a cheaper generator (Gen1) serving all the loads. How-
ever, if transmission switching takes place, the decision will be
made on switching the congested line off. This decision allows
all demand to be met by the cheapest generator as illustrated
in Fig. 1(b). The solution of OPF problem will be real power
generation of 206.55 MW at Generator 1 and 0 MW at Gener-
ator 2 with the objective function value of $2065.47. An impor-
tant analysis can then be made on LMP. LMPs at Buses 1, 2,
and 3 in the former case with a congested line are $10/MWh,
$20/MWh, and $31.15/MWh, respectively. The main reason of
LMP variance in this system is defined in [24]as the congestion
on a transmission line systematically splits LMP at each end
of the line. However, LMPs at Buses 1, 2, and 3 in the latter
case after switching operation are $10/MWh, $10.29/MW, and
$10.62/MWh, respectively. This small LMP difference in the
latter case is caused by the power loss associated with the line
resistance.
III. AC OPTIMAL POWER FLOW WITH
N-1 CONTINGENCY CRITERION
The objective function of an AC OPF problem is to mini-
mize the operating cost of the system, subject to real and reac-
tive power balance equalities, and some inequalities including
real and reactive power generation, apparent power flow, and
voltage reliability limits. AC OPF problem generally be mod-
eled in the form of (1), where the control variable consists
of by1 vectors of real part of voltage and imaginary
part of voltage and the by1 vectors of real and
reactive power injections, then is the set of non-
linear equations represent the real and reactive power balance,
and is the set of equations represent the power flow limits
as nonlinear functions and the variable limits. Lastly, and are
given vectors as parameters.
Mathematical programming in the form of (1) is a nonlinear
programming with a non-convex feasible region; hence the so-
lution methods of the problem are beyond the scope of this
3
paper. Instead, we have restricted our attention in the first place
to a local optimal solution provided by MATPOWER:
(1)
The interior-point method solver within MATPOWER [25]is
employed to solve (1). If there exists a feasible solution, the
resulting local optimal solution is guaranteed to be a feasible
solution; however, it should be noted that the global optimal so-
lution (which is not solved for in MATPOWER) may be dif-
ferent than the local optimal. In this study, we're interested to
provide an upper and a lower bound for the problem (1) not to
find the exact global solution but to find a range for it. Hence,
MATPOWER solution will be treated as an upper bound for (1)
and relaxed AC OPF problem in the form of SDP is adopted
to provide a lower bound for (1). This approach limits the ex-
istence of the global solution between upper and lower bound
(refer to Section VI for details).
Reliability and resiliency of the power system are the two
main goals in today's power industry. Such reliability is ex-
pected to be maintained even in a single component failure con-
dition. In power system operation, typically, all available trans-
mission components are utilized. Within industry, component
failure scenarios are typically referred to contingencies. Con-
sider a transmission network with N transmission lines. If such
a system is able to withstand (continue to operate) after the loss
of a single transmission line, the system would be said to have
met the N-1 contingency criterion. More specifically, N-1 con-
tingency criterion is a common term used to predict a system's
operational status after single component within the system fails
to operate [14].
N-1 contingency criterion when applied to AC OPF refers
to the ability of rescheduling generators immediately after the
single contingency occurs with no violation of physical con-
straints, so that the system can move from one stable operation
state to another. In general, a single contingency would be con-
sidered as the loss of a transmission line or a generator; how-
ever, the problem of interest in this study is to see the effect of
topology control on reliability. Therefore, hereinafter only the
loss of transmission line will be considered as a contingency. In
this sense, each contingency changes the topology of the system.
Complete problem formulation of AC OPF with N-1 reliability
is called super
..
.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

4 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS

Each problem in the set can be solved individually with no

shared information. This structure makes our proposed method
a great candidate for parallel computation.
(2)
Immediately after solving N+1 OPFs, we are able to identify
system [25]and it can be modeled in the form of (2) where the set of N-1 contingency condition for the original
is the vector of control variables associated with the given topology. Let define as the feasible region of , then
topology, for all is the vector of control variables we can define as a set of line indices when :
associated with the topology when th transmission line is off,
and are the given vectors of ramp down and ramp up
limits of control variables.
The constraint set given in (2) may tighten the feasible region includes the line indices, which are required-to-be-al-
of (1), however, it guarantees that the system is able to adjust ways-on, because there is no feasible state of operation when
its state and maintain stable operation even with a loss of any the associated line is out of service. As an additional benefit
transmission line. More specifically, the change on each element while identifying , the objective function values of all
of after a single contingency has to be in the allowable limit N+1 problems also provide us the candidate list of our optimal
range. It should be noted that the objective function value of (2) topology control problem. The members of the candidate list are
can be higher than that of (1). Moreover, the complexity of the the topologies leading to an operating cost lower than the cost
problem and the required computational solution time increase with the original topology. Let as the objective function
significantly with the number of contingencies of interest. of and define the set of candidate list accordingly:
In this study, we will provide here an alternative solution.
Instead of solving the super system in the form of (2), we will
solve separate sub problems formulated in the form of (1). Next,
number of OPF's have to be solved in order to determine and represents the best candidate line index with the lowest
the contingency condition of the original topology. The operating cost.
resulting set will be denoted as for the original topology
in the same fashion as was suggested in [15].
In OTC problem, we would like to find an optimal topology,
yet we do not want the system to be vulnerable after switching At this point, it is necessary to determine if the resulting net-
operation. Although the new topology may reduce the operating work after switching line off will still satisfy the N-1 contin-
cost of the system, we still want the system to show N-1 relia- gency condition of the original topology. Our purpose here is to
bility same as the original topology. Upon completion of the be sure that decision of transmission switching does not make
OTC algorithm we compare the original condition with the system more vulnerable than the original state. Hence, once
the one from new topology . the best candidate is obtained, N-1 OPFs with different topolo-
Our research represents the first attempt in literature to gies will be created by switching off one transmission line at a
consider such a strong constraint for N-1 contingency in OTC time.
problem. Next, we let be a set of secondary problems, where
is the AC OPF problem in the form of (1) while both th and
IV. PARALLEL COMPUTATION OF OTC 1st transmission lines are open and the others can be derived
We will provide here a parallel computing algorithm for accordingly:
one line switching with N-1 contingency criterion; however, it
can be easily updated for topology control involving multiple
switching actions. By adopting the proposed solution method These problems are created to compute the N-1 contingency
for OTC, we can create sub-problems in the form of nonlinear condition for the best candidate. Let define as
programming. Since each sub-problem of interest has different the feasible region of , then we can define as a set
topology, the problem parameters are independent of one of line indices when :
another. This independence makes the parallel computation
possible for OTC problem. For a given transmission system
with the assumption that N transmission components are in
operation, hereinafter called the original topology, we can
create N different topologies by switching a single transmission
line off at a time. Each topology comes with a different set of If two condition sets are identical or is better than
constraints because of different admittance matrix. Let be a , our proposed OTC algorithm stops and
set of created AC OPF problems in the form of (1), where returns the solution of OPF problem . Otherwise, we delete
is the problem created with the original topology and is the the best candidate from the candidate list and choose a new
problem created with the topology while th transmission line and keep comparing the retrieved with .
is open: The algorithm will be only terminated and return the solution
of if it also satisfies the N-1 contingency criterion. Other-
wise, we select another candidate topology from the list. But if
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

POYRAZOGLU AND OH: OPTIMAL TOPOLOGY CONTROL WITH PHYSICAL POWER FLOW CONSTRAINTS 5

TABLE I
COMPUTATIONAL TIME FOR PARALLEL ALGORITHM

Fig. 2. Computational time versus total number of branch.

the set of is empty after deleting the latest candidate from

the set, then there is no topology guaranteed to have less or equal
objective function value than the original topology. In this case,
the proposed algorithm returns the solution of original problem
.
A detailed flow chart of the parallel computation of optimal
topology control problem with N-1 contingency criterion is
given in Fig. 3. MATLAB Parallel Computing Toolbox was
used in this research to solve such a computationally intensive
problem using multicore processors. Two quad-core proces-
sors (2.5 GHz) and a 24-core single server were used in this
research. IEEE 30-, 57-, 118-, and 300-bus test cases were
tested. Those test cases have 41, 80, 186, and 411 branches,
respectively. Computational time is given in Table I and results
are summarized in Fig. 2.

V. SDP RELAXATION OF AC OPF

SDP OPF is a convex relaxation of classical AC OPF for-
mulated in rectangular form by ignoring con-
straint, where . Bai [26]first presented an SDP tech-
nique to solve AC OPF with no consideration of transmission
line flow limits. Lavaei and Low [20]expanded the formulation
of AC OPF with transmission line flow limits and proved that if
the solution of SDP satisfies the rank-1 condition of W, it can be
surmised that the solution is the global optimizer for a nonlinear
AC OPF problem [22], [23], [27]. In order to formulate SDP, a Fig. 3. Parallel computation flow chart for optimal topology control.
number of matrices must be defined earlier, where
is the unitary vector in which only the th element is 1 and all
others are 0: (3c)
(3a)
(3d)
(3b)
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

6 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS

(3e)

(3f)

(3g)

(3h)

The matrices given in (3a)(3g) are well-defined parameters

for any given problem with an admittance matrix . The vari-
able vector in (3h) is the optimal operation point of the system
under a specified objective function. The matrix , which is Fig. 4. One line switching results, upper and lower bounds.
constructed by vector , will be used as a control variable in the
SDP. Finally, SDP relaxation of AC OPF problem be formu-
lated in (4) (the interested reader is referred to [20]and [27]for The problem given in (4) was formulated in MATLAB and
derivation of SDP OPF). Our SDP formulation differs from that solved with the use of YALMIP toolbox [28]and SeDuMi 1.3
of [20]as follows: solver. Our developed software package for (4) is available via
1) Our updated SDP is capable of handling piecewise linear [19]. For the sake of clarity, an example is given to illustrate the
cost functions (4c). This is necessary when simulating the range of the global solution, and to determine the set of candi-
block-offer market structure used in our experiment with date list in Fig. 4.
human subjects. now represents the cost of generation Modified IEEE 30-bus test case [25]has 41 transmission
at Bus , represents the line segments, and repre- lines; hence the shown 41 solutions in Fig. 4 represent the
sent the power generation and cost coordinate for th line total operating costs of the system after one line has been
segment of generator at Bus respectively. Lastly, de- switched off. If there exists no feasible solution after a single
notes the slope of th line segment of generator at Bus . line switching, no cost will be shown in the figure. Blue stars
2) Equation (4f) is an additional constraint to set the angle of
the reference bus to zero degree. We are able force the di-
agonal element of associated with the imaginary com- (4)
ponent of the reference bus to be zero due to the property
of a positive semidefinite matrix given below ( repre-
sents the bus ID of reference bus).
Fact: If , then each , and if , then
for all . Similarly, if , then each , (4a)
and the statement still holds.
SDP OPF has a convex feasible region if the rank-1 condi-
tion of is ignored. However, the solution may not be phys- (4b)
ically meaningful for AC OPF. If the solution of SDP satisfies
the rank-1 condition of , the solution is the global optimizer (4c)
of problem (1). However, in general, the rank-1 condition will
(4d)
not be satisfied and SDP solution leads to an infeasible solution
to (1). Therefore, in this study, the solution of SDP OPF will (4e)
only be considered as a lower bound for (1). This follows the (4f)
principles of Lemma 1 as stated below.
Lemma 1: If the total operating cost of the system with the re-
configured topology found by interior point method is less than
the total operating cost of the system with the original topology
(4g)
found by SDP, then the reconfigured topology is guaranteed to
be a better one than the original topology.
represent for all . The stars below the upper
Proof: The solution of SDP is a lower bound for AC OPF.
bound (red dash line) actually shows the line indices in the set of
The approach we took is that SDP solution with the original
candidate list because decision of switching them off lead
topology is always better than or equal to the local solution with
to lower cost than the original topology. Lemma 1; however,
original topology. If a local solution with a different topology
states that only the solutions under the lower bound (green dash
is better than the SDP solution, it is guaranteed that the new
line) are guaranteed to be a globally better solution than that of
topology is globally better than the original one. Let
the original topology. Therefore, we select the best candidate as
as the objective function of in the form of SDP:
. Here, we need to check N-1 contingency condition
of the best candidate. However, the best candidate doesn't sat-
isfy the requirement of two condition sets as .
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

POYRAZOGLU AND OH: OPTIMAL TOPOLOGY CONTROL WITH PHYSICAL POWER FLOW CONSTRAINTS 7

Hence we select the second best candidate as our new candi-

date, . Indeed, switching 29th line off has the same N-1
contingency condition as the original topology.

VI. OBSERVATIONS AND DISCUSSION

A. Simulation Tool
An electric power market simulator can be used as an excel-
lent teaching tool to give students the opportunity to learn the
fundamentals of power economics while participating in several
market simulation experiments. Developed simulators in other
studies may be found in [29][33]. Here, we are interested in op-
timal topology control mechanism and its possible implemen- Fig. 5. Operating costs for 25 trading periods.
tation to a market environment. Our main intention is to sim-
ulate how people behave in the market with the technological
advancement. An electric power market simulation software,
complete with an OTC mechanism was developed and human
subjects, students of graduate and undergraduate level, took the
role of a person responsible of trading in a generator company.
Interested readers are referred to [34]for more detail; however,
for the completeness of this study, we will describe the simula-
tion tool briefly.
Participated students are informed in advance that the sim-
ulated power market is advanced with optimal topology con-
trol mechanism. In order to provide a realistic market environ-
ment to be competitive and confidential, participants can only
see their own dispatch amount and economic data. Human sub-
Fig. 6. Real power losses for 25 trading periods of an experiment.
jects should decide their offers for a trading period based on a
forecasted load and their own cost data. Their main objective is
to achieve high profit in each trading period. costly than the original network but also satisfies the N-1 con-
The following discussions on the total operating cost of tingency constraint. Proposed OTC algorithm found a topology
the system, real power losses, and locational marginal prices that leads 5% cost reduction within 22nd trading period, and
(LMPs) are based on an experiment held by human subjects for 10% within the 16th trading period.
25 trading periods.
C. Real Power Losses
B. Total Operating Cost
Fig. 6 shows the real power losses in MW with respect to
The objective of an OTC problem is to minimize the total 25 trading periods. In general, proposed OTC algorithm returns
operating cost of the system by considering the transmission a solution with lower power losses than the original topology
network as a variable in optimization problem. Although this solution. However, one interesting instance deserving careful
approach may decrease the operating cost of the system by attention is the 5th trading period in Fig. 6. During this period
switching operation, the resulted topology may not satisfy the the operating cost of the system after OTC with N-1 contingency
same N-1 contingency criterion as the original topology. is less than the cost of the original topology, yet higher power
Real and reactive power load parameters and cost functions of loss was observed as opposed to our expectation. Hence, our
generators are different in each trading period given in Fig. 5 and observation is that even though the operating cost of the system
they may be found online via [19]. For each trading period, the is reduced after transmission switching operation, real power
total operating cost of the system is given in Fig. 5. In order losses do not necessarily decrease.
to better illustrate our N-1 contingency criterion, we also in-
cluded the case when not considering N-1 contingency condi- D. Locational Marginal Price Variance
tion in Fig. 5 labeled as w/o N-1. Due to the similarity of The price of electricity at a particular bus is determined by
the solutions gathered with and without N-1 contingency crite- what is known as the LMP. LMP is well defined for ACOPF
rion, we believe it to be unnecessary to plot the results of no N-1 problem modeled in the form of (1). It is defined by the dual vari-
contingency condition throughout the remainder of the paper. able pertaining to the real power balance constraint. However,
The 5th trading period, as magnified in Fig. 5, illustrates how OTC problem is indeed a mixed integer nonlinear programming
the results differ with and without N-1 contingency condition. (MINLP) so that the dual variables are not well defined. Here,
Although there exists a topology with a better solution, due to we would like to note that, our intention in this section is not to
no satisfaction of N-1 contingency constraint, our proposed al- compare the dual variables of two problems. Instead, we simply
gorithm finds another topology that is still guaranteed to be less want to compare well-defined LMP in two different topologies.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.

8 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS

transmission line switching mechanism. Proposed OTC algo-

rithm in this study is designed to provide strict adherence to N-1
contingency condition as defined by U.S. Federal Energy Reg-
ulation Commission.
This is the first attempt within electric power market simu-
lation literature to successfully simulate optimal topology con-
trol problem with no linearization on constraints with partici-
pation of human subjects. All data presented in this paper was
collected from direct human interaction. A parallel computation
algorithm was utilized to increase computational efficiency of
such computationally expensive problem solving.
Analyses of the results gathered from the experiments were
discussed under the subtitles of total operating cost of the
Fig. 7. Locational marginal price at bus 20 for 25 trading periods.
system, real power loss, and LMP variance. We observed
that the total operating cost of the system may decrease after
transmission switching. We also observed that although optimal
topology control provides the lowest system cost, the real power
losses of the system may increase. We didn't observe a direct
relation of the power losses with the operating cost. Lastly,
the LMP data at several buses shows that a significant change
on LMP is possible before and after transmission switching
operation. Hence, our further research aimed at advancing our
knowledge of LMP in optimal topology control problem.

Fig. 8. Locational marginal price at Bus 6 for 25 trading periods.
Fig. 7 shows the LMP at Bus 20 in IEEE 30-bus system for 25
trading periods. LMP within the 16th trading period under the
original network is $555.93/MWh. After the application of the
proposed algorithm, the LMP at Bus 20 becomes $64.38/MWh.
This bus is chosen on purpose to highlight the maximum change
of LMP observed within our experiments at 88.42%.
Change on LMP to an opposite direction was also observed
after transmission switching operation. Fig. 8 shows LMP at
Bus 6 in IEEE 30-bus system and it is higher after the decision
of switching made in several trading periods when compared to
the LMP with the original network.
Analysis of our experimental results on LMP variance
showed that optimal topology control could not guarantee an
increase or a decrease on LMP at any bus.
VII. CONCLUSION
Our studies on optimal topology control problem with phys-
ical power flow constraints and N-1 reliability have exposed in-
teresting results. Such a method has proved to be theoretically,
quite beneficial by resulting in increased operational efficiency
of the electric power grid. Taking control of the transmission
topology is a promising option to reduce the total operating cost
of the system. The potential usefulness of such a methodology
motivated us to develop an electric power market simulation
software package that allows human subjects to take on the role
of a utility generation facility and to participate in experiments
with a power market simulator. The underlying structure of the
market is an economic dispatch model completed with a single
REFERENCES
[1] H. Glavitsch, State of the art review switching as means of control in
the power system, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst., vol. 7, no. 2, pp.
92100, Apr. 1985.
[2] J. G. Rolim and L. J. B. Machado, A study of the use of corrective
switching in transmission systems, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 14,
no. 1, pp. 336341, Feb. 1999.
[3] K. Hedman, Flexible transmission in the smart grid, Ph.D. disserta-
tion, Univ. California, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2010.
[4] R. Bacher and H. Glavitsch, Loss reduction by network switching,
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 447454, May 1988.
[5] E. B. Fisher, R. P. O'Neill, and M. C. Ferris, Optimal transmission
switching, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 13461355,
Aug. 2008.
[6] K. Hedman, R. P. O'Neill, E. B. Fisher, and S. S. Oren, Co-opti-
mization of generation unit commitment and transmission switching
with N-1 reliability, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 25, no. 2, pp.
10521063, May 2010.
[7] C. Barrows and S. Blumsack, Transmission switching in the RTS-96
test system, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 11341135,
May 2011.
[8] P. A. Ruiz, J. M. Foster, A. Rudkevich, and M. C. Caramanis, On fast
transmission topology control heuristics, in Proc. 2011 IEEE Power
and Energy Soc. General Meeting, San Diego, CA, USA, Jul. 2011.
[9] P. A. Ruiz, J. M. Foster, A. Rudkevich, and M. C. Caramanis,
Tractable transmission topology control using sensitivity analysis,
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 15501559, Aug. 2012.
[10] J. D. Fuller, R. Ramasra, and A. Cha, Fast heuristics for transmis-
sion-line switching, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 27, no. 3, pp.
13771386, Aug. 2012.
[11] L. Cong, W. Jianhui, and J. Ostrowski, Heuristic prescreening switch-
able branches in optimal transmission switching, IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 22892290, Nov. 2012.
[12] J. C. Villumsen and A. B. Philpott, Investment in electricity networks
with transmission switching, Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 222, no. 2, pp.
377385, Oct. 2012.
[13] A. Khodaei, M. Shahidehpour, and S. Kamalinia, Transmission
switching in expansion planning, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 25,
no. 3, pp. 17221733, Aug. 2010.
[14] U. S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Mandatory Reliability
Standards for the Bulk-Power System, Order no. 693, 72 FR 16416,
Apr. 4, 2007.
[15] K. Hedman, R. O'Neill, E. Fisher, and S. Oren, Optimal transmission
switching with contingency analysis, in Proc. 2010 IEEE Power and
Energy Soc. General Meeting, Minneapolis, MN, USA, July 2010.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
POYRAZOGLU AND OH: OPTIMAL TOPOLOGY CONTROL WITH PHYSICAL POWER FLOW CONSTRAINTS
[16] C. Barrows, S. Blumsack, and P. Hines, Correcting optimal transmis-
sion switching for AC power flows, in Proc. 2014 47th Hawaii Int.
Conf. System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI, USA, 2014, pp. 23742379.
[17] T. Polturi and K. W. Hedman, Impacts of topology control on the
AC OPF, in Proc. IEEE PES General Meeting, San Diego, CA, USA,
2012.
[18] M. Khanabadi, H. Ghasemi, and M. Doostizadeh, Optimal transmis-
sion switching considering voltage security and N-1 contingency anal-
ysis, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 542550, Feb. 2012.
[19] BEST Group at University at Buffalo Electrical Engineering Depart-
ment Website [Online]. Available: http://www.eng.buffalo.edu/Re-
search/BEST
[20] J. Lavaei and S. H. Low, Zero duality gap in optimal power flow
problem, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 92107, Feb.
2011.
[21] B. C. Lesieutre, D. K. Molzahn, A. R. Borden, and C. L. DeMarco, Ex-
amining the limits of the application of semidefinite programming to
power flow problems, in Proc. 2011 49th Annu. Allerton Conf. Com-
munication, Control, and Computing, 2011, pp. 14921499.
[22] J. Lavaei, D. Tse, and B. Zhang, Geometry of power flows on trees,
in Proc. 2012 IEEE PES General Meeting, San Diego, CA, USA, Jul.
2012.
[23] A. Gopalakrishnan, A. U. Raghunathan, D. Nikovski, and L. T. Biegler,
Global optimization of optimal power flow using a branch & bound
algorithm, in Proc. 2012 50th Annu. Allerton Conf. Communication,
Control, and Computing, 2012, pp. 609616.
[24] H. Oh, Aggregation of buses for a network reduction, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 705712, May 2012.
[25] R. D. Zimmerman, C. E. Murillo-Snchez, and R. J. Thomas, MAT-
POWER's extensible optimal power flow architecture, in Proc. 2009
IEEE Power and Energy Soc. General Meeting, Jul. 2630, 2009, pp.
17.
[26] X. Bai, H. Wei, K. Fujisawa, and Y. Wang, Semidefinite programming
for optimal power flow problems, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst.,
vol. 30, no. 67, pp. 383392, 2008, Elsevier.
[27] D. K. Molzahn, J. T. Holzer, B. C. Lesieutre, and C. L. DeMarco,
Implementation of a large-scale optimal power flow solver based on
semidefinite programming, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 28, no. 4,
pp. 39873998, Nov. 2013.
[28] J. Lfberg, YALMIP: A toolbox for modeling and optimization in
MATLAB, in Proc. CACSD Conf., Taipei, Taiwan, 2004.
[29] R. D. Zimmerman, R. J. Thomas, D. Gan, and C. Murillo-Snchez, An
internet-based platform for testing generation scheduling auctions, in
Proc. Hawaii Int. Conf. System Sciences, Kona, HI, USA, Jan. 69,
1998.
9
[30] R. Ethier, R. D. Zimmerman, T. Mount, W. Schulze, and R. J. Thomas,
Auction design for competitive electricity markets, in Proc. Hawaii
Int. Conf. System Sciences, Maui, HI, USA, Jan. 710, 1997.
[31] J. Bernard, R. Ethier, T. Mount, W. Schulze, R. D. Zimmerman, D.
Gan, C. Murillo-Snchez, R. J. Thomas, and R. Schuler, Markets for
electric power: Experimental results for alternative auction institu-
tions, in Proc. Hawaii Int. Conf. System Sciences, Kona, HI, USA,
Jan. 69, 1998.
[32] J. Bushnell and S. Borenstein, Energy economics and policy: Courses
and training, in Proc. PSERC Future Grid InitiativeAnnu. Meeting,
May 2013.
[33] Q. C. Trinh, M. Saguan, and L. Meeus, Experience with electricity
market test suite: Students versus computational agents, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 112120, Feb. 2012.
[34] G. Poyrazoglu and H. Oh, Electric power market experiments with
optimal topology control, in Proc. 2015 48th Hawaii Int. Conf. System
Sciences, Kauai, HI, USA, Jan. 58, 2015.
Gokturk Poyrazoglu (S14) received the M.S. de-
gree in electrical engineering (energy systems) from
the State University of New York at Buffalo (UB),
Buffalo, NY, USA, in 2013. He is currently pursuing
the Ph.D. degree at UB.
His interests include network reconfiguration
algorithms and large scale optimization in applica-
tions to power systems. Currently, he is working on
developing an efficient semi-definite programming
solver for power systems problems. Before graduate
school, he worked in St. Petersburg, Russia and
Istanbul, Turkey as a design engineer on power distribution system for 3 years.
HyungSeon Oh (M07) received the Ph.D. degree
in electrical and computer engineering from Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY, USA, in 2005.
He is an Assistant Professor at the State University
of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA. Before
the appointment, he was a staff engineer at the Na-
tional Renewable Energy Laboratory. His research
interests include: energy systems economics, power
system planning, smart grid, storage, computer sim-
ulation, and nonlinear dynamics.