A Thesis

entitled

Study of Power and Renewable Systems Modeling and Simulation Tools

by

Yogesh Kumar

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

Master of Science Degree in Electrical Engineering

_________________________________________
Dr. Srinivasa Vemuru, Committee Chair

_________________________________________
Dr. Vijay Devabhaktuni, Committee Co-Chair

_________________________________________
Dr. Mansoor Alam, Committee Member

_________________________________________
Dr. Raghav Khanna, Committee Member

_________________________________________
Dr. Richard Molyet, Committee Member

_________________________________________
Dr. Patricia R. Komuniecki, Dean
College of Graduate Studies

The University of Toledo

December 2015
 Copyright 2015, Yogesh Kumar

This document is copyrighted material. Under copyright law, no parts of this document
may be reproduced without the expressed permission of the author
 An Abstract of

Study of Power and Renewable Systems Modeling and Simulation Tools

by

Yogesh Kumar

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
Master of Science Degree in Electrical Engineering

The University of Toledo

December 2015

The trends in the energy generation as well as consumptions are increasing steadily

all over the globe due to growing population and remarkable industrialization. Declining

traditional fossil fuel energy resources combined with carbon emissions restrictions and

environmental protection policies are compelling countries to reduce their fossil fuel

combustions. Therefore in the power system, the focus is shifting towards utilizing

renewable energy sources to accomplish increasing energy demands.

However, introduction of renewable energy sources into the existing power systems

is not easy; the integration of these resources brings up major technical, economic and

social challenges. These challenges have led researchers to identify best suitable solutions

for stable and economical operations of the grid. It is neither practical nor efficient for

power engineers and researchers to analyze physical systems on the field by collecting data

and examining the behaviour. Alternatively, modeling the physical systems using

computational tools and simulating them for various possible conditions provide greater

efficiency and economical senses.

iii
 This thesis evaluates the suitability of the computational tools available for power

system analysis from the point of view of their suitability and usage to user specific

requirements. The thesis puts more emphasis on the modules of these tools which support

renewable energy system modeling. Four software tools namely, NEPLAN, PowerWorld,

PSAT and MATPOWER have been chosen to perform static, fault and dynamic analyses

of IEEE power system test cases. In addition, the load flow results for wind energy systems

integrated with IEEE 9-bus and IEEE 14-bus systems are presented. The simulation results

of standard test systems as well as the renewable integrated systems show the compatibility

among the commercial and open source software studied in this study.

iv
“Dedicated to my late grandparents Shimra and Yadram Tulfi Singh, and Kaila and
Chunni Lall”.

The mind is everything. What you think you become.

--- Buddha

v
Acknowledgements

My highest gratitude goes to my advisors Dr. Srinivasa Vemuru and Dr. Vijay

Kumar Devabhaktuni who helped guide and supported me through the completion of this

work. I would also like to thank Dr. Mansoor Alam, Dr. Richard Molyet and Dr. Raghav

Khanna for agreeing to serve as members of my thesis committee.

My sincere thanks also goes to Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer

Science and Department of Engineering Technology at The University of Toledo for

financial support and assistantships. I would also like to express my deepest gratitude to

ET department chair Dr. Allen Duncan and Dr. William Ted Evans.

I would like to thank Dr. Jordan Ringenberg, Dr. Soma Shekara Depuru, Dr.

Yazdan Javaid Ahmad, Praveen Damacharla, Abhishek Sahu, colleagues and friends who

were always willing to help and gave their best suggestions.

Finally, I would like to thank my parents, sisters and younger brother for their love

and affection.

vi
Table of Content

Abstract ............................................................................................................................. iii

Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... vi

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................ vii

List of Tables ....................................................................................................................x

List of Figures .................................................................................................................. xii

List of Abbreviations .......................................................................................................xv

List of Symbols ............................................................................................................... xvi

1 Introduction…. .......................................................................................................1

1.1 Motivation and Objectives .................................................................................1

1.1.1 Overview of Modern Power Systems .................................................3

1.1.2 Research Publications and Contributions to the Study .......................6

1.2 Thesis Organization ...........................................................................................6

2 Computational Tools in Power System…. ...........................................................7

2.1 Evolution of Computational Tools in Power Systems .......................................8

2.2 Power System Modeling and Simulation Tools.................................................9

2.2.1 Proprietary Software Tools ...............................................................11

2.2.2 Free Open Source Tools....................................................................16

2.3 Software Tools for Development of Renewable Energy .................................22

2.4 Conclusion .......................................................................................................28

vii
3 Power System Analyses and Simulations ............................................................30

3.1 Load Flow ........................................................................................................30

3.1.1 Load Flow Equations ........................................................................31

3.1.2 IEEE 9-Bus System Study Case .......................................................35

3.1.3 IEEE 14-Bus System Study Case .....................................................38

3.1.4 IEEE New England 39-Bus System Study Case ..............................41

3.2 Fault Analysis ..................................................................................................46

3.2.1 Types of Fault ...................................................................................46

3.2.2 Ward-Hale 6-Node System Study Case ............................................47

3.2.3 IEEE 14-Bus System with Three Phase Faults .................................49

3.3 Power System Dynamics and Stability Analysis ............................................52

3.3.1 Analysis of Andersen-Farmer 9-Bus System ....................................54

3.3.2 Analysis of 14-Bus System with Different Contingencies ...............59

3.3.2.1 Analysis When Line 2-4 Gets Opened...............................59

3.3.2.2 Analysis of the System under Three Phase Fault...............64

3.4 Conclusion .......................................................................................................68

4 Distributed Energy Resources and Modeling ..................................................69

4.1 Need for Renewable Energy Sources ..............................................................69

4.1.1 Challenges to Renewables ................................................................71

4.2 Issues with Grid Integration .............................................................................72

4.2.1 Technical Issues ................................................................................74

4.2.2 Non-Technical Issues ........................................................................75

4.3 Energy Storage Technologies in RES ..............................................................76

viii
 4.4 Wind Power Output Equation ..........................................................................77

4.5 Wind Energy Systems Modeling .....................................................................78

4.5.1 IEEE 9-Bus system with wind RES ..................................................79

4.5.2 IEEE 14-Bus system with wind RES ................................................82

4.6 Dynamic Analysis of Modified IEEE 14-Bus system .....................................85

4.7 Conclusion .......................................................................................................88

5 Conclusions and Future Work ............................................................................89

5.1 Brief Summary and Conclusions .....................................................................89

5.2 Future Works ...................................................................................................91

References .........................................................................................................................92

A IEEE Test Systems Data ....................................................................................102

A.1 IEEE 9-Bus System Data ..................................................................102

A.2 IEEE 14-Bus System Data ................................................................103

A.3 New England 39-Bus System Data ...................................................105

A.4 Anderson-Farmer 9-Bus System Data ..............................................106

ix
List of Tables

1.1 Standard AC electrical power system voltage levels ...............................................4

1.2 Research publications and contributions to the study ..............................................6

2.1 List of available major power system analysis software tools ...............................11

2.2 List of available FOSS tools ..................................................................................18

2.3 Popular FOSS tools and their functional capabilities ............................................21

2.4 Resent major studies and researches of RES tools ................................................22

2.5 List of software tools for RES technologies ..........................................................24

2.6 Analysis capabilities of some of the popular RES tools ........................................26

2.7 Merit and limitations of discussed RES tools ........................................................27

3.1 Classification of buses in power system ................................................................32

3.2 Comparison of obtained bus voltage magnitudes for IEEE 9-bus system .............36

3.3 Comparison of obtained angles for IEEE 9-bus system ........................................36

3.4 Comparison of obtained bus voltage magnitudes for IEEE 14-bus system ...........39

3.5 Comparison of obtained angles for IEEE 14-bus system ......................................40

3.6 Comparison of obtained bus voltage magnitudes for IEEE 39-bus system ...........43

3.7 Comparison of obtained angles for IEEE 39-bus system ......................................44

3.8 Number of iterations and time taken to compute by each tool ..............................45

3.9 Type of faults and their likelihood in power system..............................................46

3.10 System bus voltage magnitudes and angles for three phase fault ..........................48

x
3.11 Three phase fault current magnitudes and angles for different simulation tool ....49

3.12 Fault current magnitudes and phase for three phase fault at different buses .........51

3.13 Bus voltages at each bus under three phase faults for PowerWorld ......................52

3.14 Generators ratings and the connected components ................................................55

3.15 Simulations time taken by each tool ......................................................................59

3.16 Simulation time taken by each tool for IEEE 14-bus system ................................64

4.1 Major technical issues and causes due to the RES grid integration .......................73

A.1 Line data for IEEE 9-bus system .........................................................................102

A.2 Exciter data for IEEE 14-bus system ...................................................................103

A.3 Synchronous machine data for IEEE 14-bus .......................................................103

A.4 Bus data of IEEE-14 Bus system .........................................................................104

A.5 Line data IEEE-14 Bus system ............................................................................104

A.6 Line data of IEEE 39-bus system.........................................................................105

A.7 Exciter (AVR) data for Anderson-Farmer model ................................................106

A.8 PSS data of Anderson-Farmer model ..................................................................106

A.9 Switched shunt data .............................................................................................106

A.10 Line data for Anderson-Farmer model ................................................................107

A.11 Generator data of Anderson-Farmer model .........................................................107

A.12 Power and voltage set points at Anderson-Farmer model ...................................107

xi
List of Figures

1-1 Structure of a basic electric power system ...............................................................4

1-2 Modern power grid intelligently deploying DERs and renewables .........................5

2-1 Evolution of power system computational tools......................................................9

2-2 Basic steps involve in the simulation process ..........................................................9

2-3 Classification of PSS tools ....................................................................................10

3-1 One-line diagram representation of a simple power system ..................................32

3-2 Widely used methods to solve load flow problems ...............................................33

3-3 Effect of iterative method on number of iterations and simulation time ...............34

3-4 IEEE 9-bus system .................................................................................................35

3-5 Bus voltage magnitudes for all four tools ..............................................................37

3-6 Bus voltage phase angles for all four tools ............................................................37

3-7 One-line diagram of IEEE 14-bus test system .......................................................38

3-8 Bus voltage magnitudes for IEEE 14-bus system ..................................................39

3-9 Bus voltage phase angles for IEEE 14-bus system ................................................40

3-10 One-line diagram of New England 39-bus system ................................................41

3-11 Bus voltage magnitudes for New England 39-bus system.....................................42

3-12 Bus voltage phase angles for New England 39-bus system ...................................47

3-13 Type of faults .........................................................................................................47

3-14 Ward-Hale 6-node system......................................................................................48

xii
3-15 IEEE 14-bus system with a three phase fault.........................................................50

3-16 Bus voltages at each bus under fault at different locations for PowerWorld .........51

3-17 Basic dynamic phenomena in power system and their time frames ......................53

3-18 Stabilities in electric power system........................................................................53

3-19 Andersen-Farmer 9-bus system model ..................................................................54

3-20 Rotor frequency in pu for Anderson-Farmer model ..............................................55

3-21 Active power at each machine for Anderson-Farmer model during fault .............56

3-22 Reactive power at each machine for Anderson-Farmer model during fault ..........57

3-23 Bus voltage magnitudes for Anderson-Farmer model ...........................................58

3-24 IEEE 14-bus system with CB opened at line 2-4 ...................................................60

3-25 Rotor speeds in pu for IEEE 14-bus system ..........................................................61

3-26 Rotor angles in radian for IEEE 14-bus system .....................................................62

3-27 Active and reactive power at machine-2 ................................................................62

3-28 Bus voltage magnitudes for IEEE 14-bus system ..................................................63

3-39 Rotor speeds of machines in IEEE 14-bus system under 3-phase fault .................65

3-30 Rotor angles of machines in IEEE 14-bus system under 3-phase fault .................66

3-31 Bus voltage magnitudes .........................................................................................67

4-1 Benefits of renewable energy.................................................................................70

4-2 Wind turbine accidents and human casualties .......................................................72

4-3 Different energy storage technologies for RES power systems .............................76

4-4 Wind flux on a surface area A ................................................................................77

4-5 Modified IEEE 9-bus system with wind turbine....................................................80

4-6 Bus voltage profile of IEEE 9-bus system with wind turbine ...............................80

xiii
4-7 Bus voltage phase with wind turbine connected ....................................................81

4-8 Active power flow in IEEE 9-bus system with wind turbine ................................81

4-9 Reactive power flow in IEEE 9-bus system with wind turbine .............................82

4-10 Modified IEEE 14-bus system with wind RES......................................................83

4-11 Bus voltage profile of IEEE 14-bus system with wind turbine .............................83

4-12 Bus voltage phase with wind turbine connected ....................................................84

4-13 Active power flow in IEEE 14-bus system with wind turbine ..............................84

4-14 Reactive power flow in IEEE 9-bus system with wind turbine .............................85

4-15 Modified IEEE 14-bus PSAT model .....................................................................86

4-16 Weibull distribution profile wind speed ................................................................86

4-17 Visualization of system voltages ...........................................................................87

4-18 Machines rotor speeds and rotor angles .................................................................88

xiv
List of Abbreviations

AC ..............................Alternative Current
AVR ...........................Automatic Voltage Regulator

CO2.............................Carbon Dioxide
CPF ............................Continuous Power Flow

DAPPER ....................Distribution Analysis for Power Planning and Evaluation and

Reporting
DER............................Distributed Energy Resources
DG ..............................Distributed Generation

ESS.............................Energy Storage System

FCT ............................Fault Clearance Time

GNU ...........................Graphical Network Editor

GUI ............................Graphical User Interface

OPEC .........................Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries

OPF ............................Optimal Power Flow
OSS ............................Open Source Software

PF ...............................Power Flow
PSAT ..........................Power System Analysis Toolbox
PSS .............................Power System Stabilizer

RAPS..........................Remote Area Power Supply

RE ..............................Renewable Energy
RESE ..........................Renewable Energy Sources of Electricity

SSA ............................Steady State Analysis

TDA ...........................Time Domain Analysis

TG ..............................Turbine Governor

UHV ...........................Ultra-High Voltage

xv
List of Symbols

A .................................Area of the surface

k..................................Kilo
m ................................Air volume
v..................................Wind speed
V.................................Voltage

ρ..................................Air density

xvi
 Chapter 1

Introduction

Constantly increasing demand of electricity due to growing population and

industrial development is putting power industry on great pressure of increasing the power

generation. Increasing demand potentially causes deterioration of environment due to

combustion of fossil fuels to meet the energy generation needs. Continuing adding new

generation capacity while keeping carbon dioxide (CO2) emission at minimum level

require extensive modifications to existing power systems. The environmental impact of

increased energy needs can be taken care by adding more renewable energy sources (RES)

for electricity generation [1].

This chapter discusses the motivations and objectives of this study followed by a

brief overview about rest of the thesis.

1.1 Motivation and Objectives

Modern power systems are very complex and larger in nature which contain

thousands of buses. Analyzing a system with so many nodes is beyond human capacity,

and therefore highly sophisticated computer programs are required to analyze, design and

1
operate modern power systems. The increased energy demand requires the integration of

renewable energy resources into these existing electric networks making them even more

complex. Moreover, the deployment of these unconventional energy resources such as

wind, solar, hydro, and geothermal and other renewables introduces technical challenges

of stable and reliable operations due to intermittent nature of the renewables as well as

distributed nature of energy generation.

It is essential to simulate the real world phenomena that impact the power systems

and analyze the potential problems in order to find optimum solutions for power systems

before its physical realization. Understanding and finding optimal solutions in the

presence of these obstacles require simulation of multiple scenarios that can occur, and

apply the solution that suits best for the specific situations. Currently, there are a wide

range of commercial as well as open source computational tools to choose from; however,

most of them have been developed for specific purposes. There is limited comparative

knowledge available about the effectiveness of such tools in different scenarios [2].

Motivated by these challenges, this thesis seeks to investigate some of the widely

utilized computational software, specifically addressing the features for renewable

resource analyses. The main goal of this thesis is to evaluate available commercial and

open-source power system tools from the perspective of user’s requirements. NEPLAN,

PowerWorld, PSAT and MATPOWER are selected for this study. NEPLAN and

PowerWorld are widely used commercially whereas PSAT and MATPOWER are popular

among researchers, educators and university students. All four tools are analyzed and

validated for various power system studies and results are compared with published

benchmark results. In order to analyze renewable energy modeling capabilities of the tools,

2
wind power generation resources are modeled using all four tools and compared.

Mathematical representations of various power system components are given as necessary.

Then underlined theoretical foundations are analyzed and validated through simulation

results. Finally, simulated and standard results are compared to each other and used to

judge the suitability of the selected tools for renewable as well as conventional power

systems.

1.1.1 Overview of Modern Power Systems

A typical power system comprises of three major components: generation,

transmission and distribution of electricity as can be seen below in Figure 1-1. The

generating stations, typically thermal, nuclear and hydro generators, have voltage levels

of 11kV-25kV and hence step-up transformers are required to increase voltage up to a

level suitable for long distance transmissions. At transmission level, the power system

connects with grid and also supplies power to very large consumers1 at sub transmission

level. The distribution network can be divided into primary and secondary levels with

step-down transformers used to lower the voltage levels. Primary distribution usually

supplies power to medium-large consumers2 whereas secondary distribution supplies

power to residential customers. The voltage levels at different sections of electric power

networks are listed in Table 1.1. Transmission voltage level varies in different regions but

it is typically in the range of 115 kV to 500 kV in most of the countries, whereas most of

distribution of power is done in the range of 4 kV to 35 kV.

1Typically in a power system, large consumers are big manufacturing facilities such as steel manufacturing plants, and
petroleum refineries, etc. and usually gets power at sub-transmission levels.
2 Medium-large consumers are commercial buildings, business complexes etc. whereas schools, offices, households etc

come under small consumers.

3
 Table 1.1: Standard AC electrical power system voltage levels [3].

Voltage Level System

13.5-24 kV Generation
115, 138, 230 kV High Voltage (HV) Transmission
345, 500, 765 kV Extra High Voltage (EHV) Transmission
˃765, 1000, 1100, 1500 kV Ultra High Voltage (UHV) Transmission
≥ 2250 kV Under R&D Transmission
34.5-115 kV Low Voltage (LV) Sub-transmission
4-34.5 kV Primary Distribution
240-120 V Secondary Distribution
Generation
Level

Power
Generation

Transmission Power Grid

Transmission

Network
Level

Sub-Transmission Large Consumer

Primary Medium-Large Consumer

Distribution

Distribution
Level

Secondary Small Consumer

Distribution

Figure 1-1: Structure of a basic electric power system, illustrating all the levels.

A large share of electricity is being currently generated by traditional fossil fuel

turbine generators which include coal, natural gas, and petroleum plants. However,

4
network of modern power systems incorporate RES as well as conventional sources of

electricity. This change requires more intelligent sensing and control with integration of

information technology and communication technology assets. These electric power

systems commonly known as smart grid (shown in Figure 1-2), focus on Distributed

Generation (DG)/ Distributed Energy Resources (DER) unlike the conventional centralized

generation. Main contributors of the distributed generations come from the five major

renewable resources namely wind, solar, small-hydro, biomass and geothermal energy. As

stated earlier, integration of these DGs adds significant technical complication to the grid

analysis that requires using more complex computational models and simulations.

Figure 1-2: Modern power grid intelligently deploying DERs and renewable.

5
 Therefore, as the future power systems are transforming towards more reliable,

controlled, efficient and flexible networks, the need of developing and validating more

sophisticated and robust computational tools used starting from planning, controlling and

utility levels have become inevitable.

1.1.2 Research Publications and Contribution to the Study

The following publications motivated by this thesis have already been published

and the contributions to the area of power system studies and renewable energy systems

are enlisted in Table 1.2.

Table 1.2: Research publications and contributions to the study

Publication Type Publication / Research Contribution Title

Journal Paper Wind Energy: Trends and Enabling Technologies

Conference Paper Comparison of Power System Simulation Tools with Load Flow
Study Cases

1.2 Thesis Organization

The rest of thesis is organized as follows. Chapter 2 discusses widely used

computational software tools including the tools selected for analysis and simulations,

namely NEPLAN, PowerWorld, MATPOWER and PSAT. Chapter 3 presents details

about different types of analyses, and simulation results based on case studies using

selected software. Chapter 4 focuses on renewable distributed energy resources and impact

of wind RES using load flow studies. Finally the conclusion and possible extensions to this

work are presented in Chapter 5.

6
Chapter 2

Computational Tools in Power System

This chapter discusses the need and challenges of modeling and simulation software

tools for power system. After being more or less unchanged for over six decades the power

grid, large and highly complex in nature, is undergoing vast physical and conceptual

changes. This transformation of the power grids has introduced many new challenges [4].

In typical systems, experimentation and direct measurements could possibly be used to

predict the system behavior. However, when it comes to the electric power systems, which

are inherently large in size, this approach is neither practical nor feasible. Therefore,

measurement data collected from physical power systems must be fused with

computational tools to simulate the potential behavior of the future or modified system.

Computer simulations are backbone for present day operation of electric grids and play a

critical role in all phases starting from initial planning to reliable operation. The advances

in modeling and simulation tools are facilitating power grid experts to predict occurrence

of abnormal conditions in the future expansion or modifications. During the planning

phase of the grid, computer simulations are used to identify all possible contingencies to

ensure power can be delivered efficiently and reliably with addressing factors such as

stability, controllability and economical operation. Development of simulation models of

7
power systems components that trade accuracy with computational cost is also a factor

that needs to be addressed.

A systematic comparison of the available tools is essential to facilitate the

prospective users in selecting appropriate one for their projects [5]. In this chapter a

comparative study of some of major software tools in the subject area is presented. First,

major commercial and open-source tools are discussed following by a review of tools

specifically used in advancement of renewable energy systems.

2.1 Evolution of Computational Tools in Power Systems

The roots of the usage of digital computers for modeling and simulating the power

systems can be traced back as early as 1950s. The computational methods for power

systems evolved with the progress of computer technology for the past six decades. Figure

2-1 illustrates the development of such tools over the past half-century [6]. Since the

development of first program, the field has flourished exponentially and modern day

computational tools for power system have attained whole new levels in terms of

computational capabilities, functionalities and speed. The first well known application in

the area was load flow analysis developed by J. B. Ward and H. W. Hale in the year 1956

[7]. However, scaled physical models and analog computers were in use for power systems.

For example, large AC network analyzers and static models were used for load flow study.

These network analyzers were extensively used to model and study AC power systems

between early 30s to late 60s in last century.

Figure 2-2 shows the steps involved in the development of computation tools. In

general, any power system simulation process starts with defining the system which

includes goals and objectives to solve the problems.

8
 Functionality, computational
Internet and
Transient Deregulation/ Cloud
Stability and Control/ computing

Capability, Speed
EMPT Renewable /Market/ Technologies
Demand Analysis
Voltage Stability/
Load Flow/
Power Quality/
Short Circuit
Harmonic
Analysis
Optimal Analysis
AC Power Power Flow
Network System State
Analyzer
Estimation

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1985 1995 2005 2010

Years

Figure 2-1: Evolution of power system computational tools.

The next important step is defining the system components that need to be modeled. Further

steps include model formulation, data collection, translation of model into a programing

language, and verification and validation of results [8].

Defining Model Data Model Verification

System Formulation Collection Translation & validation

Figure 2-2: Basic steps involve in the simulation process and development of a
computational tool.

Due to complexity of power systems, the additional components that need to be addressed

are data portability, data visualization, and user-friendly interfaces.

2.2 Power System Modeling and Simulation Tools

The progress in computer hardware as well as software technology over the past

few decades has allowed power system professionals to develop efficient computational

modeling and simulation tools. These tools serve two purposes: provide better control and

9
operation of the power systems, and bring realistic experience to power system engineering

researchers and students for power systems design.

Most of the available power system simulation (PSS) tools can broadly be divided

in three categories: proprietary tools, free tools, and open source software tools, as detailed

following.

i) Proprietary Tools: These are the tools that are typically developed by eminent power

system research institutions or by electric utility companies and industries. They are well

designed and highly efficient comprehensive packages that are well maintained and tested

by the providers. These tools require licenses before using them and do not allow for

changes to the source code. A detailed study of these tools is provided in section 2.2.1.

ii) Free PSS Software Tools: These tools are provided by developers at no cost and

available to use free by everyone without purchasing any license. Mostly developed by

researchers and educators at universities, they focus on flexibility rather than

computational capabilities and efficiency [9].

iii) Open Source Software (OSS): This is a subcategory of free software; OSS tools are

freely available and allow

Power System
changes and additions to the Software

source code, redistribution and Proprietary Free Open-Source

Software Software Software
Primary
modifications. These are best Users
Commercial Research/ Education
suitable for research and
Figure 2-3: Classification of tools available
educational purposes [10]. for power system.

10
 A combined term for ii) and iii) is given as Free Open Source Software (FOSS). A

pictorial representation classification of power system software tools is given in Figure 2-

3. Some details about available FOSS tools’ functionalities, capabilities and suitability are

given in Section 2.2.2. Besides, above discussed classifications of the tools, they can also

be categorized as off-line and online tools, based on the hardware and software

requirements [11].

2.2.1 Proprietary Software Tools

Table 2.1 shows a comprehensive list of proprietary software tools. A great

discussion of the subject matter has been presented in [12] and [13]. Some of the remarks

derived from this study are as follows.

 A majority of available tools are PC based, though most of commercial tool

providers are trying to develop internet and cloud based versions. Web based

simulations have numerous advantages over classical approaches [14].

Currently well-known web-based and cloud based tools are NEPLAN,

POYUYA and XENDEE [15] [16].

 PSCAD provides a free full functional version to the prospective users with the

only limitation on number of busses.

Table 2.1: List of available major power system analysis software tools.

Demo/Ed.
Tool Vendor/ Developer Web Address
Version
NEPLAN [17] NEPLAN AG/ BCP Inc.  http://www.neplan.ch
PowerWorld [18] PowerWorld Corp./  http://www.powerworld.com
University of Illinois
SKM [19] SKM Systems Analysis Inc.  http://www.skm.com
ETAP [12] [20] Operation Technology Inc.  http://etap.com

11
 CYME [12] [21] CYME International  http://www.cyme.com
PSCAD [13] [22] Minitoba HVDC Research – https://hvdc.ca/
Center
PSS/E [13] [23] Siemens  http://w3.siemens.com/smartgrid/g
lobal/en/

MiPower [24] PRDC Pvt. Ltd.  http://www.prdcinfotech.com/

PowerFactory [25] DIgSILENT  http://www.digsilent.de/
CAPE [13] [26] Electrocon International  http://www.electrocon.com/capein
Incorporated tro.php
ASPEN [27] Advanced Systems for  http://www.aspeninc.com/web/ind
Power Engineering Inc. ex.html

EasyPower [12] [28] EasyPower  www.easypower.com

EMTP[12] [29] POWERSYS  http://emtp.com/

SIMPOW [30] Solvina  http://www.solvina.se/
ERACS [30] Edif Group  http://www.eracs.co.uk/
EDSA [12] [13] Power Analytics  www.poweranalytics.com/
GE PSLF [30] General Electric  www.geenergyconsulting.com

DNV GL [30] DNV GL  www.dnvgl.com/

IPSA Power [30] IPSA Power Group  http://www.ipsa-power.com/
RTDS [31] RTDS Technologies  http://www.rtds.com
POUYA [32] INTELECTRICOM  http://www.intelectri.com/POUY
Aflash/index.html

WindMil [30] MILSOFT Utility Solutions  http://www.milsoft.com/

CDEGS[12] Safe Engineering Services  http://www.sestech.com/Products/

& Technologies Ltd. SoftPackages/CDEGS.htm

DSA Tools [13] Powertech Labs Inc. www.dsatools.com/index.php

DINIS [33] Fujitsu www.dinis.com/Index.htm
XENDEE [16][30] XENDEE https://www.xendee.com/

Among all the software listed in the table, we have selected NEPLAN, PowerWorld, SKM,

ETAP, CYME and PS CAD for detailed description.

12
a) NEPLAN: NEPLAN provides analysis, planning, optimization and simulation of

electric networks. We have worked with this software in this thesis, and from our

experience, it is a complete package for power system engineering. The GUI of the

software is very user-friendly and covers all three aspects of power systems, namely

generation, transmission and distribution. NEPLAN provides a vast model library for

thousands of network elements. It uses advance algorithms for dynamic simulations and

supports real time simulations of the models created in Matlab or Simulink directly.

Besides traditional networks, it also supports smart grid and renewable energy models.

Some of the features of NEPLAN are given below [17].

 It has vast model libraries which cover elements of motors, relays, turbines,

controllers, renewable energy and FACT devices etc.

 It allows simulation of models and components created using Matlab Simulink. In

other words, user can develop an element in Matlab/Simulink and can simulate it

using NEPLAN environment.

 NEPLAN has very effective import/export interface. The user can read, write, add

and delete NEPLAN data using programs written in C/C++ programming languages.

b) PowerWorld: PowerWorld was primarily developed for solving Power Flow (PF) and

Optimal Power Flow (OPF) problems by Prof. Thomas Overbye with a group of power

system researchers at the University of Illinois, and later PowerWorld Corporation. This

power system simulator has a variety of tools to model transmission planning, power

market, system operations, and power system training and education. PowerWorld

simulator is user-friendly and has highly interactive software package for high voltage

power system operation, and is capable of effectively solving load flow analysis of systems

13
up to 250,000 buses [18] [34]. A few of unique features of this software tool are given

below.

 This simulator has nice visual nature that allows users to understand and analyze the

power systems very easily. Even, a user with little knowledge of the subject area can

understand the results achieved from the tool.

 It is a complete package for power flow analysis.

 It allows simulations in snapshot mode plus over the period of time simulations [35].

c) SKM: SKM was originally developed as a primary power system tool known as

Distribution Analysis for Power Planning, Evaluation and Reporting (DAPPER). DAPPER

is a complete package of modules for three phase power system design and analysis. It has

a long list of calculation modules and can perform demand load analysis, voltage drop

calculations, motor starting, extensive fault analysis, demand load analysis and load

schedule documentations. Besides these major functions, it also allows transformer, feeder

and raceway sizing [19]. The main features include the following.

 It is good tool to design and analyze new power system before constructing it

physically

 It has a broad set of library models with thousands of unique models of protection

equipment.

 It has templates for components and parts of power system that can be used to save

time in creating a model, and users can define their own symbols and annotations in

order to personalize the one-line diagrams.

14
d) ETAP: Electrical Transient Analyzer Program (ETAP) is one of the fully-functional

software packages for the design, simulation, and analysis of generation, transmission,

distribution, and industrial power systems. ETAP has great simulation modules for power

system analysis, real-time simulations, monitoring, optimized control, intelligent load

shedding, energy management, cost analysis, and load management. The best features of

ETAP include the following as below [20].

 It has comprehensive renewable energy modeling modules that allow to studying

renewable energy penetration levels, grid interconnection, environmental

monitoring and wind turbine performance monitoring etc.

 ETAP has nice data exchange, interfaces and geographical information system

(GIS) facilities.

 It offers one of the best arc flash studies.

 ETAP provides designing, maintenance, and operation of electric power system in

fully graphical and virtual reality environment.

 ETAP Real-time has turned the classical data acquisition systems used for power

systems in to more intelligent and optimized power management.

e) CYME: CYMDIST is an effectual power system tool that has basic modules of analysis

as well as advanced features to simulate the performance of future modification in the

system. The network forecaster, advance project manager, energy profile manager,

reliability assessment, secondary grid networks analysis, geographic overlay and several

other add-ons modules have greatly enhanced the computational capabilities of this tool

[21].

15
2.2.2 Free Open Source Software Tools

As described above, FOSS is a term used to represent the free and open source

software tools. Although the commercial software tools for power system provide

comprehensive full-functional simulation packages they are complicated to use and do not

share source code. Source codes are necessary to understand the architecture and allow

researcher to make the tools more efficient and powerful. FOSS allow researchers to test

their own algorithms and programs [10].

Free/Libre tools in general provide a great deal of advantages to the related fields

[36]. While most of these tools get developed at research institutes and universities with

limited functionality initially, other researchers and developers from all over the globe

contribute to enhance the features over a period of time due to access of source code. For

example, MATPOWER’s functionality has been increased after the transient stability

analysis and time domain simulation tool called MatDyn has been added to it. MatDyn is

an extension to MATPOWER [37]. Similarly MatACDC has been integrated with

MATPOWER and can simulate interconnected AC systems and multi-terminal voltage

source converters (VSC) high voltage direct current (HVDC) power systems [38]. Some

of the major features and advantages of FOSS tools are described below

1) Continuous development: Researchers from all over the world contribute in the further

developments to any FOSS in order to make such programs more reliable and

functional. InterPSS power engineering software tool is the best example of that kind

of collective community development. FOSS projects can expand at rapid rate because

of collective contributions from multiple researchers [39] [40].

16
2) Flexibility: These tools are most flexible in every aspect. Users have choice to customize

it as per their choice and as per their needs, and have privileges to redistribute and

modify [41].

3) Simplicity: Typically the architecture of open source tools is simpler [42].

4) Provides virtual power engineering laboratory: The flexibility to use and redistribution

provide a virtual laboratory and work space for the power system engineering students

and researchers as these tools can be downloaded and installed anywhere, anytime for

no cost without any restrictions. On the other hand, proprietary tools allow the usage

on a particular server or system. Again, many of such tools have initiated to develop

cloud-based versions that would further enhance their accessibility.

4) Economical: They are available for no cost. Therefore, students and researchers get most

of its advantages [43] [44].

Most of FOSS are developed using scientific mathematical programing languages

such as MATLAB, Modelica, and Mathematica. The source code is usually simple to

understand because of inherited ease of use of these programming environments. Most of

these tools have a few modules intended for only specific kind of analyses and often do not

provide complete package unlike commercial software [45]. From the list given in Table

2.2, one can see that MATLAB programming language is used by most power system

engineering researchers. The fact can be bolstered by the available majority of MATLAB

based software tools such as Power System Toolbox (PST), Power System Analysis

Toolbox (PSAT), MATPOWER, MatDyn, MatACDC, Voltage Stability Toolbox (VST),

Power Analysis Tool (PAT), MatEMTP, SimPowerSystems (SPS) and Educational

Simulation Tool (EST), etc [10] [46].

17
 Table 2.2: List of available FOSS tools for power system engineering.

Tool Platform Developer Download link

PSAT [10] [47] MATLAB University College http://faraday1.ucd.ie/psat.html
Dublin, Ireland

MATPOWER [48] MATLAB Cornell University, http://www.pserc.cornell.edu//matp

Ithaca, USA ower/
UWFLOW [49] C University of Waterloo, https://ece.uwaterloo.ca/~ccanizar/s
Canada oftware/pflow.htm
DOME [50] Python University College http://faraday1.ucd.ie/dome.html
Dublin, Ireland

MatDyn [37] MATLAB Katholieke Universiteit http://www.esat.kuleuven.be/electa/

Leuven, Belgium teaching/matdyn
TEFTS [51] C University of Waterloo, https://ece.uwaterloo.ca/~ccanizar/s
Canada oftware/tefts.htm
OpenDSS [30] [51] Delphi/ Electric Power http://sourceforge.net/projects/electricd
Kylix, Research Institute, Inc. ss/

InterPSS [52] Java InterPSS Community of http://sourceforge.net/projects/interpss/

developers files/

VST [53] MATLAB Drexel University http://power.ece.drexel.edu/vst/

Philadelphia, USA

PST3 [54] MATLAB Rensselaer Polytechnic http://www.eps.ee.kth.se/personal/vanfr

Institute, USA etti/pst/Power_System_Toolbox_Webp
age/Downloads.html
PCFLO [55] University of Texas, http://users.ece.utexas.edu/~grady/
Austin

GridLAB-D [51] Pacific Northwest http://sourceforge.net/projects/gridlab-

National Laboratory d/files/

PAT [56] MATLAB West Virginia

University, USA

AMES [47] Java Iowa State University, http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/A

USA MESMarketHome.htm

PowerSystems [47] Modelica https://github.com/modelica/PowerSyst

ems

DCOPFJ [47] Java Iowa State University, http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/D

USA COPFJHome.htm

Minpower [30] Python University of https://pypi.python.org/pypi/minpower

[47] Washington, USA

18
 THYME [51] C++ Oak Ridge National http://web.ornl.gov/~1qn/thyme/docs/
Laboratory, USA

MatACDC [38] MATLAB Katholieke Universiteit http://www.esat.kuleuven.be/electa/teac

Leuven, Belgium hing/matacdc

OpenETran [51] Electric Power http://sourceforge.net/projects/epri-

Research Institute, Inc. openetran/

Among all of above listed FOSS tools, PSAT and MATPOWER are quite popular

among the researchers and educators. A more detailed review of these two tools along with

MatDyn and MatACDC is given below.

a) PSAT: Power System Analysis Toolbox, is a Matlab and GNU/Octave-based open

source power system analysis and simulation tool. The typical simulations that users can

perform using PSAT are PF, OPF, Continuous Power Flow (CPF), Small-signal Stability

Analysis (SSA) and time-domain (TD) simulations. For the optimum performance, PSAT

takes advantages of the efficient inherent features of Matlab programming language such

as vectorization and sparse matrix functions. Unlike other Matlab based tools, it

accommodates interfaces with UWPFLOW and GAMS tools. The easy interface with other

PSS tools makes PSAT widely used among all FOSS tools available for power systems.

PSAT has Simulink library for network design, and supports data conversions and user

defined models. It also supports wind turbine models for renewable energy systems,

synchronous machines and controls, regulating transformers, FACTS and fuel cells [10].

The main features of PSAT can be listed as below.

3 PST is a free tool however it does not share source code with users.

19
  PSAT has data conversion facility, Data Format Conversion (DFC) that can convert

data files from all widely used other PSS formats such as IEEE, EPRI, CYME,

MATPOWER, PSS/E, PSAP, PTI and PST to and from the PSAT data format.

 The MATLAB written functions and programs for components and simulations are

simple and can be easily understood by any user.

 PSAT allows modeling of wind energy systems, phase measurement units (PMU)

and FACT devices.

 It allows the simulation results to be obtained in the form of static report (text

output), plots and visualizations (graphical output).

b) MATPOWER: MATPOWER is an open source Matlab based power system simulation

package which solves power flow and OPF problems. It focuses to provide a simulation tool

by keeping code very simple, easy to understand and to modify. MATPOWER provides

data format as Matlab M-files and can incorporate users own codes and modules to add-up

to the computational capabilities [48]. As discussed earlier MatDyn and MatACDC share

same philosophy with MATPOWER and therefore, can be integrated with it successfully.

i) MatDyn: It is inspired by MATPOWER and focuses on transient stability analysis

and time-domain analyses rather than merely restrict to steady state simulations of

power systems [37].

ii) MatACDC: This program focuses on power flow simulations of HVDC power

systems and interconnected AC/DC networks. MatACDC is fully capable to

integrate with MATPOWER and is able to solve non-synchronized multiple AC

and multiple DC systems [38].

20
After integration of MatDyn and MatACDC, the functional capabilities of MATPOWER

have increased enormously. The leading features of this tool can be described below.

 MATPOWER does not have any GUI but has robust and efficient algorithms to

solve power flow and optimal power flow problems.

 This tool was designed with the intention to keep it as simple as possible and hence,

the script is extremely simple and can be modified with great ease.

 However, MATPOWER alone is limited to PF and OPF simulations.

From above discussions it is clear that a lot of tools are freely available that share

their source codes with users. None of the available tools provide complete package for

power system simulations except PSAT. Popular tools and their simulation capabilities are

listed in the Table 2.3 and from the table it is clear that most of the FOSS for power systems

do not have renewable energy (RE) modules.

Table 2.3: Popular FOSS tools and their functional capabilities [10] [53] [57] [58].

Tool GUI GNE PF OPF CPF VS FA TD SSA EMT RE

PSAT          
MATPOWER    
MatDyn   
MatACDC 
DOME           
PST     
VST      
InterPSS       
PCFLO   
UWPFLOW   

Another conclusion that can be drawn from the table is that the OFSS tools still lack fault

analysis capabilities. At the time, PSAT seems to be more or less a complete package that

21
has facility of modeling renewable energy with the available library for wind turbine

models.

2.3 Software Tools for Development of Renewable Energy

In recent years, renewable energy has become a crucial factor in combating

emerging global energy and environment related issues [59]. To efficiently realize the true

potential of these new energy technologies, a comprehensive analysis is required. Such

meaningful analyses require computational tools to model optimized systems [60]. Till

date, numerous studies have been published for comparative analysis of available tools.

Some of the major works and emphasis of their effort are listed in Table 2.4. This section

further investigates into the area and reviews some of popular available computational tools

for the development and integration of renewable energy systems in to utility grids.

Table 2.4: Recent major studies and researches conducted in the area of renewable
systems modeling and computational tools.

Author(s) Year Study domain/Emphasis Ref.

S. Sinha and S.S 2014 Study of current status of and capabilities of different [61]
Chandel software are with the limitations, availability and areas
of further research
Arribas et al. 2011 Survey of PV and renewable hybrid system tools based [62]
on license policies, availability, features, applications
and limitations including with guidelines and
recommendations
H. L. Lam et al. 2011 The study has briefly discussed popular integration, [60]
modeling and optimization tools for energy efficient
and pollution reduction technologies
D. Markovic et al. 2011 This work presented a survey of RES tools with an [63]
emphasis on economic and environmental aspects
while discussing input and output variables

22
H. Ibrahim et al. 2011 Study presented design and simulation models of the [64]
hybrid RES systems for remote and rural area
electrification
D. Connolly et al. 2010 In this study presented comprehensive review of 37 [65]
major RES integration tools to find out the best
suitable tool under multiple objectives. The research
concluded that there is lack of tools that can address all
issues.
W. Zhou et al. 2010 Review simulation and optimization technologies for [66]
hybrid solar–wind energy systems including with
listing merits and demerits of three popular RES
software tools
M. Faraji-Zonooz 2009 Detailed study of MARKAL energy tool for RES [67]
et al.
J. L. Bernal- 2009 Major researches in the area of simulation and [68]
Agustín optimization techniques for hybrid renewable systems
including with the comparison of existing tools are
presented
R. Segurado et al. 2009 Study of EMINENT energy tool including with [69]
comparison of five popular RES tools CO2DB,
MARKAL, IKARUS, E3database, and Synopsis has
been presented
H. Lund et al. 2007 Two RES software tools EnergyPLAN and H2RES are [70]
compared
F. Urban et al. 2007 A broad analysis of 12 RES software tools for energy- [71]
systems especially for developing countries including
MiniCAM, LEAP, RETScreen, MESSAGE,
MiniCAM, and MARKAL is presented. The study
concluded that at present time none of the tool
adequately address all the issues related to energy and
economies
S. Jebaraj et al. 2006 This study broadly compared a large variety of energy [72]
tools addressing supply–demand optimization,
forecasting, neural-network, and emissions models.
C. Cormio at al. 2003 Comprehensive review of energy flow optimization [73]
model (EFOM)
S. C. Morris et al. 2002 NEMS and MARKAL-MACOR are compared in [74]
detailed including with simulation results
D. Turcotte, M. 2001 Classification of popular tools for renewable energy [75]
Ross and F. into categories of pre-feasibility, simulation, sizing and
Sheriff open architecture

23
 Currently, there is a wide range of RES simulation and modeling tools available

that are RES technology specific as listed in Table 2.5. As concluded by D. Connolly, H.

Lund et al. in [65], despite large number tools, no energy tool addresses all issues related

to integrating renewable energy. Therefore, there is a need of universal tools that can be

used for all objectives of RES power systems.

Table 2.5: List of software tools for RES technologies.

Tool Platform Provider License

ARES [76] Windows University of Wales, UK Not available

DYMOLA [61] Windows/C++ Fraunhofer Institute for solar energy, Priced

German
Homer [77] Windows/C++ NREL,USA Free

HySim [78] SNL Not available

HybSim [78] SNL Priced

Hybrid2 [78] Windows/ University of Massachusetts and Free

Visual Basic NREL

Hybrid Designer [79] Windows EDRC, University of Cape Town Unknown

HYSYS [78] Wind Technology Group, Spain Free Trial/ Priced

HOGA [66] Windows/C++ University of Zaragoza, Spain Free Ed,

Trial/Priced
INSEL [80] Windows/Fortran German University of Oldenburg, Free Trial/Priced
C/C++
IPSYS [81] Windows/Linux Riso National Laboratory Unknown
C++
iGRHYSO [82] Windows University of Zaragoza, Spain Priced
C++
RAPSIM [83] Windows MUERI, Australia Not available

RETScreen [84] Windows/Excel Ministry of Natural Resources, Free

Canada
SOMES [78] Windows/Turbo Utrecht University, Netherlands ̅Unknown

24
SOLSIM [64] Windows Fachhochschule Konstanz, Germany Not available

SOLSTOR [78] Windows/Fortran SNL Not available

TRNSYS [85] Window/Fortran University of Wisconsin, University Priced

of Colorado
PVToolbox [86] Matlab/Simulink Natural Resources Canada Unknown

LEAP [87] Windows Stockholm Environment Institute Priced/ Free for

students from
Developing
countries
energyPRO [88] EMD International A/S Priced

BCHP Screening Tool Oak Ridge National Lab Free

[89]
EnergyPLAN [90] Windows Aalborg University Free
H2RES [91] Instituto Superior Técnico and the Internal use only
University of Zagreb

HYDROGEMS [92] Oak Ridge National Laboratory Free

EMCAS [93] Argonne National Laboratory Priced

AEOLIUS [94] Institute for Industrial Production, Priced

Universität Karlsruhe

COMPOSE [95] Excel Aalborg University Free

GTMax [96] Argonne National Laboratory Priced

ENPEP-BALANCE Windows Argonne National Laboratory Free trial/Priced

[97]
MAED [98] Windows/Linux IAEA Free for research
and public
MARKAL/TIMES Windows ETSAP Priced
[99]

This section has been included with an intention of facilitating prospective users

choose a software tool that can best serve their purpose. A comparative review of four

popular hybrid renewable systems tools HOMER, RETScreen, HOGA and HYBRIDS is

given below.

25
a) HOMER: Hybrid Optimization Model for Electric Renewables (HOMER) is frequently

used most popular software tool for hybrid energy systems. It was developed by National

Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). HOMER provides highly user-friendly

environment and is best suitable for optimization and sensitivity analyses. It is a windows-

based software and developed using visual C++. HOMER has functionality to show

simulation results in tabular as well as in the form of graphs which can facilitate users to

compare various RES system configurations and help them to estimate the economic and

technical aspects [77].

b) RETScreen: This program was developed by Canadian Ministry of Natural Resources. It is

based on Visual Basic and C languages as well as on Excel spreadsheets. RETScreen can be

used to estimate cost and environmental benefits of different renewable energy

technologies. It also provides dimensioning calculations for Photovoltaic-diesel hybrid stand-

alone systems [84]. It has a database of global solar irradiation and temperature database

for more than 6000 ground stations and can link to NASA climate data too [84].

Table 2.6: Analysis capabilities of some the popular RES tools.

Economica
PV Wind Diesel Storage Bio Hydro Thermal
Tools l/Technical
system system Generator Device energy System Systems
Analysis
HOMER        

RETScreen        

HOGA        

HYBRIDS        

26
c) HOGA: It is a hybrid renewable system optimization program. The optimization is

performed using genetic algorithms, and facilitates mono-objective as well as multi-

objective optimization of the variables. Hybrid systems of PV, batteries storage, wind

turbines, fuel cells, hydraulic turbine, AC generator, electrolyzers, H2 tank, rectifier, and

inverter can be optimized using HOGA. It allows AC, DC, and hydrogen loads and

simulates the systems with one hour of intervals. Genetic algorithm and sensitive analysis

optimize the systems at low computational time [66].

c) HYBRIDS: It is a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet-based tool to estimate technical

potentials of RES for a specific configuration determine and evaluate net present cost based

economic essence. Only one configuration at a time can be simulated and need average

daily load and environmental data. The tool is generally not designed to optimize the

systems [61].

Table 2.7: Merits and limitations of discussed RES tools.

Tools Merits Limitations

HOMER  Easy GUI  Inability to select appropriate
 Provides results in highly attractive graphical form system components
 Can handle hourly data  Inability to import daily average
time series data
RETScreen  Robust general as well as meteorological database  Few data input options
 Linked to NASA climate data  Limited visualization, search and
 Strong financial analysis capability data retrieval options
 Inherent easiness as it based on excel  Inability to import time series data

HOGA  Robust genetic algorithm and sensitive analysis  Limited analysis capability of free
 Can be mono as well multi objective optimization Version
 Available net metering system allow users to buy  Limited to Simulate up to average
and sell electricity daily load of 10 kWh
HYBRIDS  Comprehensive optimization variables  Only simulate one configuration at
 require higher level knowledge of system a time
configurations

27
 Analysis capabilities of all four above discussed tools are given in Table 2.6 and

their merits and major limitations are enlisted in Table 2.7. Careful observation proves

HOMER having more capabilities others.

2.4 Conclusion

In the chapter, popular power system engineering software tools available for

commercial use as well as free open-source software for research are presented and

discussed. Most of the currently available proprietary tools provide complete simulation

packages for every level of power system starting from planning to the operations. Despite

their completeness, these tools almost never have developed with the intention of the

usage in academic environment. Nonetheless, almost all of the commercial purpose PSS

tools provide demo/trial versions for no cost and educational versions for reduced prices.

On the other hand, the open-source free software packages for PSS are more often

incomplete but easily available to everyone. The flexibility and freedom of use of such

tools have made them more popular among power system engineering educators and

researchers. Among FOSS for power system engineering, the tools developed with

MATLAB programming environment are more popular. The reason behind it might be

the easiness of matrix-oriented programming, attractive graphical capabilities and the

integration with MATLAB Simulink. For a complete free open-source software concept,

the programming environment must also be open-source or free. For example, Matlab

based FOSS are free to download and allow modifications but to run these tools

MATLAB, a commercial product, need to be purchased. Therefore, open source

programming environments such as GNU/Octave can provide more innovations,

flexibility and capability to the FOSS development.

28
 In the field of power system simulations, there is still scope for improvements; the

major improvement need to achieve is the lack of a standard data format among the

available power system tools. In other words, the data transport between software needs

to improve. However, most of the tools providers are working towards providing the

common data format so that the model created in one tool can also work in other PSS

tools. Also many of commercial tools have very complicated user interfaces and require

lot of expertise to properly use them. Other improvements might be related to graphical

representation of results and plotting utilities.

Most of FOSS tools do not have fault analysis and renewable energy modeling

capabilities at this time. This leaves a huge void but at the same time gives great

opportunities for the power system researchers to fill this gap. The current trends in the

developments of PSS tools are the cloud-based technology. Many popular state-of-art

power system software tools have already started providing the internet and cloud-based

software versions that can be accessed from any corner of the world.

From the review of renewable tools, it is noticeable that a wide spectrum of

different hybrid RES tools is available which are diverse in terms of their geographical

usage, the technologies and the objectives. Despite a high availability of such tools, most

of them still lack the analysis capabilities and there is an urgency of a universal tool that

can addresses all the issues in the area.

29
 Chapter 3

Power System Analyses and Simulations

This chapter will discuss and analyze the steady state, fault and dynamic stability

operation of standard bus systems. Standard circuits provide a common data set to facilitate

researchers to verify the correctness of their computational methods and programs. The

purpose of this study is to compare different power simulation software tools and in

particular a mix of open-source tools against commercial tools. From the variety of tools

that are available, four tools NEPLAN, PowerWorld, PSAT and MATPOWER are selected

to carry out different analyses on test circuits. IEEE 9-bus, IEEE 14-bus and IEEE 39-bus

systems are used to compare for load flow analysis whereas the fault analysis is carried out

on Ward-Hale and IEEE 14-bus systems. Finally, dynamic simulations are performed on

Anderson-Farmer 9-bus and IEEE 14-bus systems. The results are compared with results

from earlier publications. Therefore, all the errors and conclusions are not from real

measured data.

3.1 Load Flow Analysis

In the first case, IEEE 9-bus test system is analyzed for load flow and the second

case study is based on a 14-bus system. Finally, load flow results of IEEE New England-

39 bus system are presented. The results obtained are compared against published standard

30
results for each case. Previously standard IEEE benchmark test cases have been studied for

load flow. Power system test cases archive of the University of Washington provides power

system data for standard test cases [100]. Similarly, the University of Illinois at Urbana-

Champaign provides IEEE test cases models for PowerWorld simulator [101]. Section

3.1.1 describes basic load flow equations. The simulation results of load flow study cases

are presented in section 3.1.2, section 3.1.3 and section 3.1.4.

3.1.1 Load Flow Equations

Load flow study, a most common and important analysis for power system,

calculates sinusoidal steady state of system voltage, generated and absorbed reactive and

active power and power losses. Load flow study usually uses one-line diagram and per unit

(pu) notation. The main objective of load flow is to find out voltage magnitude of each bus

and its angle when the power generators and loads are predefined. Buses are the nodes

where two or more lines connected. Buses can be classified into three types based on the

four quantities of interest namely active and reactive power, voltage magnitude and phase

angle associated with them. All three buses are described as below:

 Load bus (P-Q bus): In a P-Q bus active and reactive powers are known, and voltage

and phase are the unknown quantities. About 80% buses in any electrical power system

are load buses.

 Voltage Controlled bus/ generator bus (P-V bus): Active power and bus voltage are

known at these buses whereas reactive power and phase angle need to be calculated.

These buses have a generator connected to them. Reactive power, Q, and voltage phase

angle, δ, must be found out at these types of buses.

 Slack or Swing bus: The injected power at generator buses is taken as positive and as

31
 negative at load buses. The system losses are unknown prior to any load flow solution.

Therefore, a generator bus, usually called as reference or slack bus provides required

active and reactive powers to supply for these losses. The known and unknown quantities

for each bus are listed in Table 3.1.

Vi
Table 3.1: Classification of buses in
power system. yi1 V1

yi2 V2
Known Unknown G
Bus Type yi3 V3
Quantities Quantities
yin Vn
Slack bus |V|, δ P, Q
|V|, δ

yi0
Generator P, Q
busbus
Load P, |V| Q, δ

Figure 3-1: One-line representation of a

simple power system.

In a typical power system model, transmission lines are represented by equivalent

π-model and impedances are converted to per unit admittances for a particular MVA base

as shown in Figure 3-1. By applying Kirchhoff’s current law at any ith bus we have,

I i  yi 0Vi  yi1 Vi - V1   yi 2 Vi - V2    yin Vi - Vn 

  yi 0  yi1  yi 2  yin Vi - yi1V1 - yi 2V2  yinVn (3.1)

n n
I i  Vi  yij -  yijV j j i (3.2)
j 0 j 1

Now, apparent power at ith bus can be calculated as

Si  Pi  jQi  Vi I i* (3.3)

Pi - jQi
Ii  (3.4)
Vi*

From (3.2) and (3.4) we get

32
 n n
Pi - jQi
Ii   I i  Vi  ij  yijV j
y - j i (3.5)
Vi* j 0 j 1

Equation (3.5) represents a system of non-linear equations, hence cannot be solved

using simple analytical approaches. Solutions for these equations can be achieved by

iterative methods. A common solution scheme typically have four steps: 1) Determination

of bus admittance matrix YBUS; 2) Making an initial guess of voltage magnitudes as well as

angles at each bus; 3) Calculate the deviation by substituting the guessed values; 4) Update

estimated voltages by using iterative numerical methods; 5) Repeat the steps until the

solution converged with minimal error.

A variety of new and optimized methods and algorithms are available to solve load

flow problems. However, conventional iterative methods such as Newton-Raphson, Fast-

Decoupled and Gauss-Seidel are commonly used to solve load flow equations. Some of the

power flows solving methods are depicted in Figure 3-2. For iterative methods, a mismatch

Load Flow Solution Methods

Newton-Raphson Optimization Compensated Artificial Gauss-Seidel

based Based Back/Forward Intelligence Based
based based

Particle-Swarm Genetic Algorithms ANN based

Optimization
Algorithms

Figure 3-2: Widely used methods to solve load flow problems [102].

between known and unknown bus quantities, known as tolerance, is needed to stop

computation. That value is chosen as 0.001 in this study. For better performance of

computational tools, it is recommended to keep a minimal tolerance value. Each tool offers

33
a flexibility to choose a user defined tolerance value. From the study, we have observed

that varying the tolerance value has minimal effect on load flow results in all selected tools.

To examine how simulation results can get affected by the type of methods selected

for load flow studies, we have used IEEE 9-bus test case for different load flow methods

in PSAT. The time and number of iterations to converge at solution were different for

different methods as can be seen from Figure 3-3. In all of the methods, trapezoidal rule

integration method is used.

0.2

0.15
Time (s)

0.1

0.05

0
NR Method XB FD BX FD Runge-Kutta Iwamoto

25
Number of Iterations

20

15

10

0
NR Method XB FD BX FD Runge-Kutta Iwamoto
----------------------------------Itretive Methods----------------------------------

Figure 3-3: Number of iterations and time taken by different iterative methods to
converge at solution for IEEE 9-bus systems in PSAT.

Two of the fundamental characteristics of power flow algorithms are speed (time) and rate

of convergence. In this case, convergence time and number of iterations are the minimum

when NR method is used. Hence, we can say that NR method converges faster due to less

convergence time and iterations as compared with the other methods.

34
3.1.2 IEEE 9-Bus System Case Study

In this section a 9-bus test system is considered for load flow studies. This test

system is a simple approximation of Western System Coordination Council (WSCC) which

contains 3 generators, 9 buses, and 3 loads [101] as shown in Figure 3-4. The IEEE 9-bus

test system data is given appendix A.1.

Bus-8
Bus-7 Bus-3
G-2 G-3

Bus-2 Bus-9

Bus-5 Bus-6
Bus-4

Bus-1

G-1

Figure 3-4: One-line diagram of IEEE 9-bus system.

The results for the load flow are obtained with the selected tools along with the

standard results from [103]. The simulation results for bus voltages and angles are shown

in Figures 3-5 and Figure 3-6 as well as are listed in Table 3.2 and Table 3.3. The second

column of Table 3.2 presents the results from [103], while columns 3-6 present the bus

voltage magnitudes obtained from NEPLAN, PowerWorld, MATPOWER and PSAT,

respectively. Columns 7-10 present the percentage deviations of the results from the four

tools from standard results from [103]. For this system, 9th bus shows maximum percentage

error (7.170) for node voltage as obtained from MATPOWER.

35
 Table 3.2: Comparison of obtained bus voltage magnitudes for IEEE 9-bus system.

Bus No. Per Unit Bus Voltages % Differences

Std. NEP PW MAT PSAT %NEP %PW %MAT %PSAT
1 1.040 1.040 1.040 1.000 1.040 0.000 0.000 3.846 0.000
2 1.025 1.025 1.025 1.000 1.025 0.000 0.000 2.439 0.000
3 1.025 1.025 1.025 1.000 1.025 0.000 0.000 2.439 0.000
4 1.026 1.027 1.025 0.987 1.025 0.097 0.097 3.801 0.097
5 0.996 0.998 0.999 0.975 0.995 0.200 0.301 2.108 0.100
6 1.013 1.014 1.012 1.003 1.012 0.098 0.098 0.987 0.098
7 1.026 1.029 1.026 0.986 1.025 0.292 0.000 3.898 0.097
8 1.016 1.025 1.017 0.996 1.015 0.885 0.098 1.968 0.098
9 1.032 1.035 1.032 0.958 1.032 0.390 0.000 7.170 0.000
Average 1.022 1.024 1.022 0.989 1.021 0.218 0.066 3.184 0.054

The percentage error averaged over all nine buses is presented in the last row of

Table 3.2. For this particular study case MATPOWER has a maximum deviation of 3.184%

while PSAT has minimum deviation of 0.054% and converged to the solution in 0.076

second. Table 3.3 present similar results for phase angle for the 9-bus system. For the phase

angles of node voltages, PowerWorld exhibited maximum deviation from standard results

at 8th bus with an absolute difference of 0.64.

Table 3.3: Comparison of phase angles obtained from available software with reference
results for IEEE 9-bus system.

Bus No. Phase Angle (Degrees) Absolute Differences (Degrees)

Std. NEP PW MAT PSAT ∆ NEP ∆ PW ∆ MAT ∆ PSAT
1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 9.30 9.20 9.35 9.66 9.28 0.10 0.05 0.36 0.02
3 4.70 4.60 5.14 4.77 4.66 0.10 0.44 0.07 0.04
4 -2.20 -2.20 -2.22 -2.40 -2.21 0.00 0.02 0.20 0.01
5 -4.00 -4.00 -3.68 -4.01 -3.98 0.00 0.32 0.01 0.02
6 -3.70 -3.70 -3.57 -4.35 -3.68 0.00 0.13 0.65 0.02
7 3.70 3.70 3.80 3.79 3.71 0.00 0.10 0.09 0.01
8 0.70 0.70 1.34 0.62 0.72 0.00 0.64 0.08 0.02
9 2.00 1.90 2.44 1.92 1.96 0.10 0.44 0.08 0.04
Average 0.03 0.23 0.17 0.02

36
 1.04 Standard NEPLAN PowerWorld MATPOWER PSAT

Voltage magnitude (p.u) 1.03

1.02
1.01
1
0.99
0.98
0.97
0.96
0.95

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Bus

Figure 3-5: Bus voltage magnitudes for all four tools.

The average absolute error of all nine buses for phase angles was 0.23 for

PowerWorld and it was 0.17 for MATPOWER. However, MATPOWER simulation time

was the fastest with the simulation converging to the solution in 0.05 second with four

iterations. For the 9-bus system, PSAT followed by NEPLAN demonstrated most accurate

results for both voltage magnitudes as well as phase angles, although they took four and

six iterations respectively which can be seen in Table 3.8.

Standard NEPLAN PowerWorld MATPOWER PSAT

10
Voltage phase

-5
1 2 3 4 Bus 5 6 7 8 9

Figure 3-6: Bus voltage phase angles for all four tools.

37
3.1.3 IEEE 14-Bus System Case Study

This section presents the simulation results for load flow study of the IEEE 14-bus

system using all above mentioned power system simulation tools. The test system

represents a portion of American Electric Power System (in Midwestern US) as shown in

Figure 3-7 [100]. The system has two generators, three synchronous condensers, 14 buses

and 11 loads. The system data for this bus system is given in appendix A.2. All load flow

results for the test system obtained by the tools using Newton’s method are compared with

the standard results published in [104]. The load flow results for this case are shown in

Table 3.4 and Table 3.5 for bus voltage magnitudes and bus voltage phases respectively.

The percentage differences in the per-unit voltages of the all buses are given in the last four

columns of Table 3.4. Errors averaged over all fourteen buses are listed in last row of the

Bus-13
Bus-14
Bus-12
Bus-11
Bus-10

Bus-9
Bus-6
C
C

Bus-7 Bus-8
Bus-5
G-1 Bus-4
Bus-1

Bus-2

Bus-3
G-2
C

Figure 3-7: One-line diagram of IEEE 14-bus test system.

Table 3.4. With 0.007% of average error for voltage magnitudes, MATPOWER proved to

be more accurate and it took two iterations to converge on the solution. NEPLAN has an

average of 0.021% error and converged in five iterations.

38
 Table 3.4: Comparison of obtained bus voltage magnitudes for IEEE 14-bus system.

Bus No. Power System Tools Percentage Difference

Std. NEP PW MAT PSAT %NEP %PW %MAT % PSAT
1 1.060 1.060 1.060 1.060 1.060 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
2 1.045 1.045 1.045 1.045 1.045 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
3 1.010 1.010 1.010 1.010 1.010 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
4 1.019 1.018 1.012 1.018 1.021 0.098 0.687 0.098 0.196
5 1.020 1.019 1.016 1.020 1.024 0.098 0.392 0.000 0.392
6 1.070 1.070 1.070 1.070 1.070 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
7 1.062 1.062 1.047 1.062 1.059 0.000 1.412 0.000 0.282
8 1.090 1.090 1.087 1.090 1.090 0.000 0.275 0.000 0.000
9 1.056 1.056 1.032 1.056 1.048 0.000 2.273 0.000 0.758
10 1.051 1.051 1.031 1.051 1.050 0.000 1.903 0.000 0.095
11 1.057 1.057 1.047 1.057 1.058 0.000 0.946 0.000 0.095
12 1.055 1.055 1.053 1.055 1.066 0.000 0.190 0.000 1.043
13 1.050 1.050 1.047 1.050 1.061 0.000 0.286 0.000 1.048
14 1.036 1.035 1.020 1.036 1.048 0.097 1.544 0.000 1.158
Average 1.049 1.048 1.041 1.049 1.051 0.021 0.708 0.007 0.362

Pictorial representations of the data listed in the tables are also shown in Figures 3-8 and

Figure 3-9. It is clearly visible from the figures that PowerWorld deviated more for the

1
Standard
NEP LAN
0.99 P owerWorld
MAT POWER
Voltage magnitude (p.u)

P SAT

0.98

0.97

0.96

0.95
1 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Bus

Figure: 3-8: Bus voltage magnitudes for IEEE 14-bus system.

voltage magnitudes with maximum errors at buses 9 and 10, whereas PSAT deviated more

from the standard results for phase angles. Similarly, in the case of bus phase angles

39
 Standard
0 NEP LAN
P owerWorld
MAT POWER

Voltage phase (Degree)

P SAT
-5

-10

-15

-20
2 4 6 Bus 8 10 12 14

Figure: 3-9: Bus voltage phase angles for IEEE 14-bus system.

all tools gave accurate results. For IEEE 14-bus case PSAT has average absolute error of

1.735 degrees while having the maximum difference error of 5.61 degrees at 3nd bus. PSAT

took four iterations to converge to the solution within 0.071 seconds of simulation time.

Table 3.5: Comparison of phase angles obtained from available software with
reference results for IEEE 14-bus system.

Bus Power System Tools Absolute Difference

Std. NEP PW MAT PSAT ∆ NEP ∆ PW ∆ MAT ∆ PSAT
No.
1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
2 -4.98 -4.98 -5.00 -4.98 -6.04 0 0.02 0 1.06
3 -12.72 -12.73 -12.80 -12.73 -18.33 0.01 0.08 0.01 5.61
4 -10.33 -10.31 -10.20 -10.31 -10.83 0.02 0.13 0.02 0.5
5 -8.78 -8.77 -8.70 -8.77 -8.89 0.01 0.08 0.01 0.11
6 -14.22 -14.22 -14.40 -14.23 -11.80 0 0.18 0.01 2.42
7 -13.37 -13.36 -13.20 -13.36 -12.76 0.01 0.17 0.01 0.61
8 -13.36 -13.36 -13.20 -13.36 -12.76 0 0.16 0 0.6
9 -14.94 -14.94 -14.8 -14.93 -13.77 0 0.14 0.01 1.17
10 -15.10 -15.10 -15.00 -15.09 -13.47 0 0.1 0.01 1.63
11 -14.79 -14.79 -14.80 -14.79 -12.64 0 0.01 0 2.15
12 -15.07 -15.08 -15.30 -15.08 -12.12 0.01 0.23 0.01 2.95
13 -15.16 -15.16 -15.30 -15.16 -12.29 0 0.14 0 2.87
14 -16.04 -16.03 -16.10 -16.03 -13.42 0.01 0.06 0.01 2.62
Average 0.005 0.107 0.007 1.735

40
3.1.4 IEEE New England 39-Bus System Study Case

IEEE New England 39-bus system comprises of 39 buses and 10 generator

machines. Bus 30 is reference bus and provides active and reactive power to balance out

the initial power losses in the system. Figure 3-10 shows a one-line representation of the

power system as described in “Energy Function Analysis for Power System Stability” by

Anantha Pai [105]. The system data is given in appendix A.3.

Figure 3-10: IEEE New England 39-bus power system. This figure is representing the
one-line diagram of the system as modeled in PowerWorld simulator.

Load flow analysis was carried out on the system using all the four above-

mentioned power system software tools with the same convergence tolerance of 0.001, and

41
Newton-Raphson method was used in all of the tools for solving the load flow equations.

The results for bus voltage magnitudes and phase angles are listed in the Tables 3.6 and

Table 3.7. In both the tables, the first column represents the standard results as taken from

[106].

Load flow results for the bus voltage magnitudes, as listed in the given tables show

that buses 4−14 exhibit maximum deviations from the benchmark results for PowerWorld

and PSAT. PowerWorld has a maximum percentage error of 6.361% at 5th bus and PSAT

has a maximum error of 5.848% at bus 12. This behavior can be visualized from Figure 3-

11 for the voltage magnitudes. The percentage errors averaged over all 39 buses is the

maximum for PSAT with 2.801% followed by PowerWorld with 1.914%. NEPLAN has

smallest deviation and MATPOWER shows 0.096% of average deviation. The bus voltage

magnitudes at buses 29−39 have small deviation for all four tools.

1.14
Standard
1.12 NEPLAN
PowerWorld
1.1 MATPOWER
Voltage magnitude (p.u)

PSAT
1.08

1.06

1.04

1.02

0.98
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40
Bus

Figure: 3-11: Bus voltage magnitudes for IEEE New England 39-bus system.

42
Table 3.6: Comparison of obtained bus voltage magnitude of the IEEE New England
39-bus system.

Power System Tools Percentage Difference

Bus No.
Std. NEP PW MAT PSAT %NEP %PW %MAT % PSAT
1 1.047 1.047 1.052 1.039 1.059 0.000 0.437 0.808 1.097
2 1.049 1.049 1.060 1.048 1.079 0.000 1.054 0.067 2.802
3 1.030 1.030 1.057 1.031 1.070 0.000 2.494 0.078 3.685
4 1.004 1.004 1.059 1.004 1.053 0.000 5.220 0.010 4.661
5 1.005 1.005 1.074 1.006 1.057 0.000 6.361 0.070 4.858
6 1.008 1.008 1.074 1.008 1.060 0.000 6.198 0.030 4.947
7 0.997 0.997 1.061 0.998 1.047 0.000 6.045 0.100 4.750
8 0.996 0.996 1.059 0.998 1.044 0.000 5.912 0.200 4.604
9 1.028 1.028 1.054 1.038 1.048 0.000 2.450 0.944 1.893
10 1.017 1.017 1.061 1.018 1.073 0.000 4.134 0.079 5.174
11 1.013 1.013 1.064 1.013 1.067 0.000 4.847 0.030 5.116
12 1.000 1.000 1.049 1.001 1.062 0.000 4.683 0.080 5.848
13 1.014 1.014 1.059 1.015 1.069 0.000 4.194 0.069 5.089
14 1.012 1.012 1.056 1.012 1.063 0.000 4.208 0.030 4.818
15 1.015 1.015 1.041 1.016 1.062 0.000 2.449 0.059 4.428
16 1.032 1.032 1.049 1.033 1.076 0.000 1.596 0.116 4.121
17 1.034 1.034 1.052 1.034 1.076 0.000 1.725 0.039 3.897
18 1.031 1.031 1.052 1.032 1.072 0.000 2.036 0.107 3.839
19 1.050 1.050 1.056 1.050 1.112 0.000 0.577 0.010 5.546
20 0.991 0.991 0.994 0.991 0.994 0.000 0.304 0.020 0.304
21 1.032 1.032 1.044 1.032 1.069 0.000 1.126 0.019 3.491
22 1.050 1.050 1.056 1.050 1.079 0.000 0.597 0.019 2.688
23 1.045 1.045 1.051 1.045 1.070 0.000 0.620 0.019 2.349
24 1.037 1.037 1.053 1.038 1.079 0.000 1.452 0.067 3.856
25 1.058 1.058 1.066 1.058 1.088 0.000 0.771 0.038 2.770
26 1.052 1.052 1.062 1.053 1.087 0.000 0.959 0.085 3.240
27 1.038 1.038 1.052 1.038 1.076 0.000 1.334 0.029 3.601
28 1.050 1.050 1.055 1.050 1.082 0.000 0.503 0.010 2.956
29 1.050 1.050 1.054 1.050 1.080 0.000 0.348 0.010 2.811
30 1.048 1.048 1.048 1.050 1.048 0.000 0.000 0.238 0.000
31 0.982 0.982 0.982 0.982 0.982 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
32 0.983 0.983 0.983 0.984 0.983 0.000 0.000 0.091 0.000
33 0.997 0.997 0.997 0.997 0.997 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.000
34 1.012 1.012 1.012 1.012 1.012 0.000 0.000 0.030 0.000
35 1.049 1.049 1.049 1.049 1.049 0.000 0.000 0.029 0.000
36 1.064 1.064 1.064 1.064 1.064 0.000 0.000 0.047 0.000
37 1.028 1.028 1.028 1.028 1.028 0.000 0.000 0.019 0.000
38 1.027 1.027 1.027 1.027 1.027 0.000 0.000 0.049 0.000
39 1.030 1.030 1.030 1.030 1.030 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Average 1.026 1.026 1.046 1.026 1.056 0.000 1.914 0.096 2.801

43
Table 3.7: Comparison of obtained bus angles for load flow analysis of the IEEE
New England 39-bus system.

Power System Tools Absolute Difference

Bus
No.
Std. NEP PW MAT PSAT ∆ NEP ∆ PW ∆ MAT ∆ PSAT

1 -8.44 -8.40 -6.99 -13.54 -8.32 0.04 1.45 5.10 0.12

2 -5.75 -5.80 -4.54 -9.79 -5.87 0.05 1.21 4.04 0.12
3 -8.60 -8.60 -7.36 -12.28 -8.58 0.00 1.24 3.68 0.02
4 -9.61 -9.60 -8.19 -12.63 -9.55 0.01 1.42 3.02 0.06
5 -8.61 -8.60 -7.18 -11.19 -8.67 0.01 1.43 2.58 0.06
6 -7.95 -7.90 -6.56 -10.41 -8.08 0.05 1.39 2.46 0.13
7 -10.12 -10.10 -8.49 -12.76 -10.04 0.02 1.63 2.64 0.08
8 -10.62 -10.60 -8.93 -13.34 -10.48 0.02 1.69 2.72 0.14
9 -10.32 -10.30 -8.69 -14.18 -10.15 0.02 1.63 3.86 0.17
10 -5.43 -5.40 -4.28 -8.17 -5.81 0.03 1.15 2.74 0.38
11 -6.28 -6.30 -5.07 -8.94 -6.58 0.02 1.21 2.66 0.30
12 -6.24 -6.20 -5.05 -9.00 -6.55 0.04 1.19 2.76 0.31
13 -6.10 -6.10 -4.93 -8.93 -6.41 0.00 1.17 2.83 0.31
14 -7.66 -7.70 -6.45 -10.72 -7.79 0.04 1.21 3.06 0.13
15 -7.74 -7.70 -6.72 -11.35 -7.83 0.04 1.02 3.61 0.09
16 -6.19 -6.20 -5.32 -10.03 -6.39 0.01 0.87 3.84 0.20
17 -7.30 -7.30 -6.28 -11.12 -7.40 0.00 1.02 3.82 0.10
18 -8.22 -8.20 -7.11 -11.99 -8.25 0.02 1.11 3.77 0.03
19 -1.02 -1.00 -0.75 -5.41 -1.79 0.02 0.27 4.39 0.77
20 -2.01 -2.00 -2.14 -6.82 -2.80 0.01 0.13 4.81 0.79
21 -3.78 -3.80 -2.96 -7.63 -4.13 0.02 0.82 3.85 0.35
22 0.67 0.70 1.43 -3.18 0.08 0.03 0.76 3.85 0.59
23 0.47 0.50 1.23 -3.38 -0.09 0.03 0.76 3.85 0.56
24 -6.07 -6.10 -5.20 -9.91 -6.27 0.03 0.87 3.84 0.20
25 -4.36 -4.40 -3.11 -8.37 -4.57 0.04 1.25 4.01 0.21
26 -5.53 -5.50 -4.39 -9.44 -5.70 0.03 1.14 3.91 0.17
27 -7.50 -7.50 -6.38 -11.36 -7.56 0.00 1.12 3.86 0.06
28 -2.01 -2.00 -0.90 -5.93 -2.38 0.01 1.11 3.92 0.37
29 0.74 0.70 1.84 -3.17 0.23 0.04 1.10 3.91 0.51
30 -3.33 -3.30 -2.15 -7.37 -3.46 0.03 1.18 4.04 0.13
31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
32 2.57 2.60 3.38 -0.19 2.30 0.03 0.81 2.76 0.27
33 4.19 4.20 4.46 -0.19 3.45 0.01 0.27 4.38 0.74
34 3.17 3.20 3.05 -1.63 2.41 0.03 0.12 4.80 0.76
35 5.63 5.60 6.36 1.78 5.03 0.03 0.73 3.85 0.60
36 8.32 8.30 9.04 4.47 7.60 0.02 0.72 3.85 0.72
37 2.42 2.40 3.64 -1.58 2.20 0.02 1.22 4.00 0.22
38 7.81 7.80 8.89 3.89 7.27 0.01 1.08 3.92 0.54
39 -10.05 -10.10 -8.48 -14.54 -9.87 0.05 1.57 4.49 0.18
Average 0.02 1.03 3.58 0.29

44
 10
Standard
7.5
NEP LAN
5 P owerWorld
Voltage phase (Degree) MAT POWER
2.5 P SAT

0
-2.5
-5
-7.5
-10
-12.5
-15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Bus
Figure 3-12: Bus voltage phase angles for IEEE New England 39-bus system

Table 3.8: Number of iterations and time taken to compute by each tool.

IEEE New
WSCC 9-Bus IEEE 14-Bus
Tools Parameters England 39-Bus
System System
System
MATPOWER PowerWorld NEPLAN

No. of Iterations 6 5 6
Convergence
― ― ―
Time (s)
No. of Iterations 1 4 4

Convergence
0.04 0.058 0.062
Time (s)

No. of Iterations 4 2 5

Convergence
0.07 0.02 0.06
Time (s)

No. of Iterations 4 4 3
PSAT

Convergence
0.44 0.49 0.09
Time (s)

Analyzing the phase angles results for 39-bus system, listed in Table 3.7, it is

observed that the results obtained from NEPLAN, PSAT and PowerWorld are fairly close

to benchmark results. NEPLAN has the least absolute difference of 0.02 averaged over all

45
the buses followed by PSAT with 0.29. From Figure 3-12 it can also be noticed that the

maximum deviation for phase angles are for MATPOWER. From the Table 3.8, it can be

observed that despite having more deviation from the benchmark results, MATPOWER

converged quickly to the solution and took less time in all three cases. The reason behind

it might be its simplicity and having less nested loops used in the Matlab source code.

3.2 Fault Analysis

This section presents study of the power system operation during abnormal

conditions due to faults occurred within the system. Ward-Hale 6-bus and IEEE 14-bus

systems are considered for fault study. In a very broad term, a fault is characterized by the

flow of substantial current through a low resistive path created by the fault. These current

surges can cause massive equipment damage that ultimately leads to interruption in the

power supply for long durations. Moreover, these faults increase risk of serious human

casualties, deaths and fire hazards. Extreme weather conditions such as lighting strike, high

speed winds and heavy rains are major causes of such faults.

3.2.1 Types of Fault

Faults in a power transmission line can be categorized as balanced (symmetrical)

and unbalanced (unsymmetrical) faults. Table 3.9 shows the type of faults and their

percentage chances of occurrence.

Table 3.9: Type of faults and their likelihood in power system.

Fault Abbreviation Category Occurrence

Single line-to-ground L-G Unsymmetrical 70%
Line-to-line L-L Unsymmetrical 15%
Double line-to-ground L-L-G Unsymmetrical 10%
Three phase fault L-L-L Symmetrical 5%

46
 There are many commercial software tools for short circuits analysis to calculate

fault currents and voltages during abnormal power system conditions. The fault analysis is

necessary in order to determine current capacities of circuit-breaker and protective relays.

Further, the fault analysis is mandatory for some of other power system studies such as

transient stability and voltage sag analyses [107]. Figure 3-13 depicts all for above

mentioned faults. Here a, b and c are subscripts for all three phases.

a a
b b
c c

(a) (b)
a a
b b
c c

(c) (d)

Figure 3-13: Types of fault; a) L-G, b) L-L, c) L-L-G and d) 3-phase.

3.2.2 Ward-Hale 6-Node System Study Case

This section discusses the Ward and Hale system for fault analysis and calculates

system voltages and currents under faulty conditions. The results obtained from the

software tools are compared with the results published by P M Anderson in [104]. The

system considered for fault study is shown in Figure 3-14. NEPLAN, PowerWorld and

PSAT support fault analysis, however PSAT does not give fault current directly therefore

the results are not presented for PSAT. The study has presented simulation results for three

phase symmetrical fault (L-L-L) fault at bus-4. The results obtained with NEPLAN and

PowerWorld are listed in Table 3.10. Columns 2 and 3 of the table shows the standard

voltage magnitudes and angles when a three phase short circuit fault has occurred at 4th bus

47
whereas columns 4-5 and columns 6-7 show the same for NEPLAN and PowerWorld. The

last four columns of the table show percentage deviation of the voltage magnitudes and

absolute difference of the angles from the standard results obtained from [104].

Figure 3-14: Ward-Hale 6-node system. The one-line diagram shown in figure is
modeled in PowerWorld simulator.

By examining the last four columns of the result table, we can conclude that the

results obtained by NEPLAN as well as PowerWorld are close to standard results. The

maximum error for the voltage magnitude is 0.01% for NEPLAN whereas it is 0.13% for

PowerWorld.

Table 3.10: System bus voltage magnitudes and angles when a three phase fault occurred
at bus 4 as obtained with simulation tools.

Abs. Angle
Standard NEPLAN PowerWorld % Mag. Difference
Bus Difference
No. Mag Angle Mag Angle Mag Angle ∆ ∆
% NEP % PW
(p.u) (Deg) (p.u) (Deg) (p.u) (Deg) NEP PW
1 0.708 -2.30 0.708 -2.30 0.707 -2.31 0.01 0.13 0.00 0.01
2 ̅ ̅ 0.526 15.81 0.489 25.67 ̅ ̅ ̅ ̅
3 0.075 26.80 0.075 26.76 0.075 26.66 0.00 0.13 0.04 0.14
4 0.000 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 ̅ ̅ 0.264 23.82 0.264 21.17 ̅ ̅ ̅ ̅
6 0.403 -2.60 0.403 -2.61 0.403 -2.62 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02

48
 Similarly, the fault current magnitudes in per unit and angles in degree are listed in

Table 3.11. The percentage deviation of the current magnitude from the standard results is

the maximum at 2.827% at line 3-4 for NEPLAN.

Table 3.11: Three phase fault currents magnitudes and angles for different simulation tools.

% Mag Abs. Angle

Standard NEPLAN PowerWorld
Bus/Line Difference Diff.
No. Mag Angle Mag Angle Mag Angle %
%PW ∆ NEP ∆ PW
(p.u) (Deg) (p.u) (Deg) (p.u) (Deg) NEP
Bus-4 1.689 -77 1.679 -77.5 1.59 -76.24 0.592 5.861 0.5 0.76
Line 1-4 0.935 -80.1 0.932 -80.91 0.981 -82.27 0.321 4.920 0.81 2.17
Line 3-4 0.283 -63.2 0.275 -62.08 0.276 -64.95 2.827 2.473 1.12 1.75
Line 6-4 0.481 -79.2 0.486 -79.62 0.486 -79.32 1.040 1.040 0.42 0.12
Average 1.195 3.574 0.713 1.200

Similarly, the magnitude deviation for PowerWorld is 4.92% at line 1-4 for this

case. The average percentage differences in the magnitudes are 1.195% and 3.574% for

NEPLAN and PowerWorld, respectively. Overall, the results are close enough to the

standard results for both software tools.

3.2.3 IEEE 14-Bus System with Three Phase Faults

This section presents the analysis of IEEE 14-bus system under a three phase fault.

The test system is modeled in NEPLAN and PowerWorld. PSAT supports time domain

simulations under three phase balanced faults but it does not show fault current directly.

To obtain fault currents using PSAT, one needs to write a Matlab program using admittance

matrix created by initial load flow studies. On the other hand, MATPOWER does not

support fault analysis; therefore, the simulation results from MATPOWER are not included

in this section. In MATPOWER, under fault conditions the resulting low impedance draws

49
very low voltage. Hence, the iterative techniques used in MATPOWER to solve steady

state load flow problems would not converge.

Bus-13 Bus-14

Bus-12
Bus-11
Bus-10

Bus-9
Bus-6
C
C

Bus-7 Bus-8
Bus-5
G-1 Bus-4
Bus-1

Fault at
bus 2
G-2

Bus-2

Bus-3
C

Figure 3-15: IEEE 14-bus system with three phase faults at bus 2.

The simulations are carried out for three phase faults located at different buses to

see the variations in fault currents and angles. The obtained results are compared with the

results published in [108]. As discussed in section 3.1.3, this system has 2 generators and

three synchronous condensers. The system with three phase faults at each bus is analyzed,

as shown in above Figure 3-15. Note that all the faults are applied independently. The first

column of Table 3.12 shows the location of bus where the fault occurs. Columns two, three

and four give corresponding three phase fault currents. The last two columns of the table

show the percentage difference between the standard results published in [108] and

NEPLAN and PowerWorld, respectively.

50
 Table 3.12: Fault current magnitudes in per unit and phase in degree for three phase
faults occurred at different buses.

Fault Standard NEPLAN PowerWorld % Difference

at Bus Fault Fault Phase Fault Phase % %
1 Current
17.93 Current
18.15 -84.72 Current
17.52 -88.51 NEP
1.23 PW
2.30
2 20.27 21.06 -84.78 19.82 -82.32 3.90 2.20
3 11.21 11.53 -82.62 10.91 -82.32 2.88 2.61
4 13.31 13.70 -82.18 13.13 -80.12 2.96 1.37
5 13.20 13.21 -82.84 12.99 80.59 0.06 1.61
6 8.87 9.11 -85.06 8.62 -86.46 2.63 2.83
7 7.86 7.92 -85.30 7.60 -85.71 0.80 3.26
8 7.29 7.51 -86.93 7.21 -88.82 3.13 1.02
9 6.88 6.82 -83.02 6.80 -83.10 0.89 1.08
10 5.31 5.31 -78.08 5.25 -78.20 0.09 1.17
11 4.81 4.79 -74.47 4.83 -74.20 0.37 0.42
12 3.89 3.90 -68.02 3.81 -68.29 0.03 2.11
13 5.37 5.40 -73.79 5.32 -74.25 0.52 0.99
14 3.75 3.72 -71.66 3.73 -71.73 0.77 0.59
Average 1.45 1.68

1
Bus-1
Bus-2
0.9 Bus-3
Bus-4
Bus-5
0.8 Bus-6
Bus-7
Bus-8
0.7 Bus-9
Bus-10
Bus-11
Bus Voltage (p.u)

0.6 Bus-12
Bus-13
Bus-14
0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Faulted Bus Number

Figure 3-16: Bus voltages at each bus when faults occurred at different buses. The voltages
are obtained from PowerWorld for three phase faults occurred at from bus 1
to bus 14 independently. The values are for phase A, because of balanced
fault, the value of voltages is same for all three phases.

51
Table 3.13: Bus voltages in per unit for each bus under three phase faults as obtained
using PowerWorld.

Bus Faulted Bus Number

No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
1 0.00 0.64 0.89 0.82 0.79 0.93 0.93 0.96 0.94 0.96 0.96 0.97 0.96 0.97
2 0.66 0.00 0.71 0.60 0.60 0.87 0.85 0.92 0.87 0.91 0.92 0.95 0.92 0.94
3 0.69 0.46 0.00 0.52 0.61 0.86 0.82 0.91 0.85 0.89 0.92 0.95 0.92 0.93
4 0.72 0.38 0.60 0.00 0.24 0.73 0.65 0.82 0.70 0.78 0.83 0.89 0.84 0.86
5 0.71 0.39 0.68 0.25 0.00 0.70 0.71 0.85 0.75 0.81 0.84 0.88 0.82 0.87
6 0.68 0.69 0.83 0.59 0.53 0.00 0.71 0.85 0.67 0.70 0.63 0.64 0.50 0.76
7 0.35 0.59 0.74 0.36 0.49 0.66 0.00 0.48 0.36 0.56 0.72 0.86 0.77 0.75
8 0.62 0.78 0.86 0.66 0.73 0.82 0.47 0.00 0.66 0.77 0.85 0.92 0.88 0.86
9 0.48 0.59 0.74 0.37 0.46 0.53 0.24 0.61 0.00 0.32 0.57 0.80 0.67 0.61
10 0.43 0.61 0.76 0.41 0.48 0.44 0.32 0.65 0.12 0.00 0.40 0.78 0.64 0.64
11 0.72 0.65 0.79 0.50 0.50 0.22 0.51 0.75 0.39 0.34 0.00 0.71 0.58 0.70
12 0.66 0.69 0.82 0.57 0.53 0.04 0.68 0.83 0.62 0.67 0.62 0.00 0.26 0.68
13 0.82 0.68 0.82 0.56 0.52 0.08 0.64 0.81 0.57 0.64 0.62 0.48 0.00 0.59
14 0.65 0.63 0.77 0.45 0.49 0.33 0.42 0.70 0.25 0.46 0.59 0.66 0.38 0.00

From the table, it is evident that the results for both the tools are very close to

standard results with the average percentage error remains within 1.68. Figure 3-16 depicts

the voltages at each bus when the three phase fault applied to the all 14 buses

independently. Similar information is listed in Table 3.13.

3.3 Power System Dynamics and Stability Analysis

The stability of a power system is the capability of its synchronous machines to

maintain their synchronism after being subjected to an abnormal condition. The system

becomes unstable if it loses the synchronism. The time range for transients in power system

varies from microseconds to several hours. Electro-magnetic phenomena occur from

milliseconds to a second, and slower electro-mechanical dynamics remains between a

52
second to several seconds. Whereas, thermodynamic phenomenon can remains from

several hours to days as can be seen from Figure 3-17 [109].

Microseconds Milliseconds Seconds Hours Days

Thermodynamic
Phenomena
Electro-mechanical
Phenomena

Electro-magnetic Phenomena

Wave Phenomena

10−7 10−6 10−5 10−4 10−3 10−2 10−1 1 10 102 103 104 105

Figure 3-17: Basic dynamic phenomena in power system and time frames [109].

As the interconnected power systems have been expanded enormously, upholding

synchronism among the various machines within the system is not easy. The stability can

be divided as static, dynamic and transient stabilities. Stability studies are of extremely

importance for future power system planning. Figure 3-18 shows classification of the

different stabilities in power system.

Power System
Stability

Rotor angle Stability Volatge Stability Frequency Stability

Small-Disturbance Small-Disturbance Large-Disturbance

Transient Stability
Angle Stability Voltage Stability Voltage Stability
Short Term
Short Term Longe Term

Figure 3-18: Stabilities in electric power system and time scale [109].

53
Dynamic analysis of such large power systems require sophisticated computational

software tools, efficient enough to predict approximate behavior. In this section Anderson-

Farmer 9-bus and IEEE 14-bus systems are analyzed for dynamic simulations.

3.3.1 Analysis of Anderson-Farmer 9-Bus System

In this subsection, the 9-bus test system proposed by P. Andersen and Dick Farmer

[110] is analyzed for transient stability under a three phase fault condition. The system

comprises of three areas, four generators, and five loads and a switched shunt capacitor

connected at bus-7 as shown in Figure 3-19. Bus-4 acts as the swing bus for this system.

Individual MVA ratings of all four synchronous machines and the control components,

Power System Stabilizer (PSS), Automatic Voltage Regulators (AVR) and Turbine

Governor (TG) connected to them are listed in Table 3.14. Line and dynamic data of the

system, and the data for PSS, AVR, TG, and switched shunt capacitor are given in appendix

A.4 [111].

Area 2 Area 3
G-1 G-4
Area 1
Bus-5 Bus-9 Bus-4
Bus-1

Bus-2 Bus-6

G-2 G-3

3-ɸ Fault Bus-7 Bus-8 Bus-3

Figure 3-19: Andersen-Farmer 9-bus system model.

Table 3.14: Generators ratings and the connected components.

54
 Generator 1 2 3 4

Ratings (MVA) 60000 1300 4400 70000

TG, AVR TG, AVR, TG, AVR, TG, AVR

Components PSS PSS

The transient stability is analyzed when a three phase fault to ground is applied on

bus-6 at 0.1 second with solid ground for duration of 0.066 second. The simulations are

carried out with NEPLAN, PowerWorld and PSAT with 100 MVA system base, 20

dynamic iterations and for 10 seconds of time. Newton-Raphson method is used for load

flow calculations in order to initialize the dynamic system variables.

Figure 3-20: Rotor speeds of all four synchronous machines in per unit as obtained using
NEPLAN PowerWorld and PSAT.

55
 The tolerance used for the calculations is taken as 0.0001. The bus voltages, rotor

speed, and rotor angles are obtained during and after the occurrence of fault, to analyze the

stability. Figure 3-20 shows the simulation results of rotor speeds of all four generators in

terms of per unit frequency. The base of the rotor frequency is 60 Hz. From the results we

can observe that the rotor of machine-2 and machine-3 has more fluctuations around base

frequency due to its proximity to the fault location.

From the results of rotor speeds it can be observed that the rotors tend to become

stable after the removal of the fault. The rotor frequency plots obtained using all three tools

are close to each other. However, the results are more diverted at machine-1 and machine-

4 for PSAT.

Figure 3-21: Plots shows the active power at all four machines during fault as obtained
from NEPLAN, PSAT and PowerWorld.

56
 Similarly, the active and reactive powers at each machine are given in Figure 3-21

and Figure 3-22 respectively. Active power plots show that power dropped down to almost

zero at machine-2 during fault. The results for active powers are almost same with all tools

except that the PowerWorld shows more deviation for active power at machine-3 and

PSAT at machine-4. Nevertheless, the results are as expected in all three software tools.

Figure 3-22: Reactive power at all machines during fault.

The magnitudes of voltage at each bus were obtained during the fault and plotted

in Figure 3-23. By carefully analyzing the plots, the magnitudes at faulted bus-6 and the

nearby bus-7, dropped drastically during fault. The magnitude has fallen to almost zero at

57
 (a)

(b)

(c)
Figure 3-23: Drop in magnitudes of bus voltage due to fault as obtained form (a) NEPLAN,
(b) PowerWorld and (c) PSAT.

bus 6 whereas; it went down to 40% for bus-7. Once the fault cleared at 0.166 second, the

voltage magnitudes returned back to their normal values. The results from all three tools

were as expected. The simulation time taken by the each software is listed in Table 3.15.

58
 Table 3.15: Simulations time taken by each tool.

Tool NEPLAN PowerWorld PSAT

Time (s) 1.2170 1.0160 5.1786

3.3.2 Analysis of 14-Bus System for Different Contingencies

IEEE 14-bus system as given in [100] is analyzed for dynamic stability under

different contingencies using NEPLAN, PowerWorld and PSAT. As stated earlier,

MATPOWER does not have function to perform dynamic analysis. However, the

simulations can be carried out using the extension tool of MATPOWER known as MatDyn.

The integrated tool of MATPOWER and MatDyn can be used to perform dynamic analysis

in MATPOWER environment. The system data of PSS, turbine governor, automatic

voltage regulator, load and generator are given in Tables A.2-A5 in appendix A.2. In this

section, the test system is analyzed for two kinds of dynamic perturbations. The first case

occurs when line 2-4 gets opened due to the tripping circuit breaker at the near end of bus

2. In the second case the system is analyzed when a three phase fault occurred at line 2-4.

3.3.2.1 Analysis When Line 2-4 Gets Opened

The system behavior was analyzed when line 2-4 get opened at the end close to

bus-2 at 1.0 second. Similar to the case studied in previous section, data for rotor

frequencies and rotor angles of all generators and bus voltage magnitudes was obtained

using all three software tools.

The simulations were carried out for 5 seconds with 100 MVA system base and 60

Hz frequency. Figure 3-25 shows the rotor speeds as a function of time. By scrutinizing

59
the plots for rotor speeds precisely, it can be seen that the rotor of generator 2 starts to

accelerate instantly after disconnection of the line 2-4.

Bus-13

Bus-14

Bus-11
Bus-12

Bus-10

Bus-9
Bus-6
G-6
G-8

Bus-7 Bus-8
Bus-5
G-1
Bus-4
Bus-1

CB
Bus-2

Bus-3
G-2

G-3

Figure 3-24: IEEE 14-bus test system showing the open circuit breaker at line 2-4.

Because of the opening of the power line, the loads which were getting some

portion of power by synchronous machine-2 got disconnected. In other words, loads at

machine-2 decreased and hence, the rotor started rotating at faster speed. At the same time,

the system loads started getting more power from remaining generators, and therefore due

to increased load demands, all other machines’ rotors started rotate at slower speeds.

Turbine governors of all the generating machines sense the change in speed and initiated

to compensate for the changes.

60
 Figure 3-25: Generator rotor speeds
(frequencies) in per unit
as obtained from
NEPLAN, PSAT and
PowerWorld. The base
frequency is taken as 60
Hz.

That behavior can be noticed from the plots as the speed of generator 2 started

decrease and the rotor speeds of remaining generators 1, 3, 6 and 8 also started increase

after approximately 0.25 seconds after opening of the power line. The simulation results of

all three tools exhibit the expected dynamic behavior. Figure 3-26 shows the plots of load

angles. As a result of unbalanced load demands at each generator, the load angles started

to increase. From the plots, system seems to be unbalanced for rotor angles as they continue

to increase.

61
Figure 3-26: Rotor angle deviation of each
machine as achieved from
NEPLAN, PSAT and
PowerWorld.

Figure 3-27: Graph illustrated active and reactive power at machine-2 as obtained by
NEPLAN, PSAT and PowerWorld.

62
 (a)

(b)

(c)

Figure 3-28: Magnitudes of bus voltage at each bus after tripping the CB at line 2-4 as
achieved from (a) NEPLAN, (b) PowerWorld and (c) PSAT.

As the line got opened near bus-2, the active power generated by machine-2,

dropped down instantly at 1.0 s and then increasingly fluctuated as shown in Figure 3-27.

Ultimately it becomes constant with respect to time with slight fluctuations. On the other

63
hand, the reactive power fluctuated and decreased at this machine. From the plots one can

observed that the results are almost similar for all three tools.

Figure 3-28 illustrates the magnitude of each bus voltage during the dynamic

behavior. The magnitudes dipped down at all buses as can be observed from the given

plots. Results for NEPLAN and PSAT almost resemble each other, whereas the results

from obtained from PowerWorld have minor deviations when compared with other two.

However, the results from all three tools exhibited approximate dynamic characteristic of

the system.

Table 3.16: Simulation time taken by each tool for IEEE 14-bus system.

Tool NEPLAN PowerWorld PSAT

Time (s) 1.076 0.7601 4.218

The simulation times for each tool are listed in Table 3.16. The deviations in the simulation

results achieved by PowerWorld might be due to the quick convergence of load flow

solutions as it took lesser time than other two. Due to quick load flow solutions, the initial

conditions for dynamic simulations for PowerWorld might have been a bit different and

that explains the difference among the results of PowerWorld, NEPLAN and PSAT.

3.3.2.2 Analysis of the System under Three Phase Fault

In this case, a three phase fault is occurred on line 2-4 at 1.0 second. All parameters

of the system are same as used in previous section 3.3.1.1

64
 Figure 3-29: Plots illustrates rotor speed
deviations of all machines
when a three phase fault
occurred on line 2-4 as
obtained by NEPLAN,
PSAT and PowerWorld.

The simulation results attained using NEPLAN, PowerWorld and PSAT are

presented. A similar study has been presented in [112] using Dynamic Commutation for

Power System (DCPS). Figure 3-29 and 3-30 show the rotor speed in per unit and rotor

angle in radians for NEPLAN, PowerWorld and PSAT respectively. From the simulation

results it can be seen that the system tends to be unstable after the fault.

65
 Figure 3-30: Rotor angle deviations of
all machines under a three
phase fault on line 2-4, as
obtained from NEPLAN,
PSAT and PowerWorld.

The results from all software tools show similar characteristics during dynamic

behavior of the system. From Figure 3-29 we can conclude that the rotors of generator 1

and generator 2 start rotating at higher speed and continue to increase the speed, whereas

generators 3, 6 and 8 start rotating at lower speed due to unbalanced load sharing due to

the fault. The same pattern can be seen in voltage magnitudes shown in Figure 3-31. As

the voltage at bus-2 starts fluctuating with a pu value of zero, the magnitude of bus-1 starts

increasing due to bus-1 being a slack bus.

66
 (b)

(b)

(c)

Figure 3-31: Bus voltage magnitudes from a) NEPLAN, b) PowerWorld and c) PSAT.

67
3.4 Conclusion

The chapter presented the simulation results for power flow, fault analysis and

dynamic stability analysis using NEPLAN, PowerWorld, MATPOWER and PSAT

software tools. The results obtained with all tools in each case were compared with the

standard published results. The main objective of this chapter was to compare the

functionality of commercial software tools for PSS with free open sources software tools.

To serve the purpose, two tools from each category were selected. All of the selected tools

gave fairly accurate results for the study cases we have done. FOSS still needs to add

dynamic analysis modules. MATPOWER does not have source code to simulate any kind

of fault analysis at the time; however, it is possible to perform some of the dynamic analysis

with the integration of extended code (MatDyn).

However, these tests cases are not enough to draw any concrete conclusion. The

choice of considering a software tool for power system engineering studies is highly

objective specific. Nevertheless, for load flow analysis, MATPOWER have robust

algorithms, whereas PSAT can be a good fit for time domain analyses. NEPLAN is most

suitable for dynamic and renewable systems modeling and PowerWorld can be convenient

for fault and contingency analyses.

68
 Chapter 4

Distributed Energy Resources and Modeling

In this chapter, major technical challenges that occur during grid integration of RES

with the electric grid are discussed followed by the modeling of wind DER. A quick

description of energy storage system (ESS) for RES energy systems is also presented.

Finally, the load flow simulations of IEEE 9-bus and IEEE 14-bus systems with added

wind turbines are presented.

4.1 Need for Renewable Energy Sources

According to the International Energy Agency, in 2009, 1.3 billion people from

developing countries lived without electricity. The use of small off-grid wind turbines can

be very helpful for rural electrification [113]. Renewable energy-based long term

sustainable development can help reduce reliance on crude oil and coal and therefore can

enhance economic and social growth, political stability, and national security [114].

Realizing the importance of development of RESs, most of developing countries has started

adding capacity from renewable energy projects at nearly twice the rate of developed

countries. Growth of such resources in China, Brazil and South Africa combined has

increased 143 percent from 2008 to 2013 [115].

69
 The development and prosperity of any nation relies on energy security, better

economic growth and environment protection. When the quality of life improves, the

energy demand rises. As new economies such as China, India and Brazil are emerging,

they need more energy to compel their development [116]. Some of major benefits of

adopting more RES can be seen in Figure 4-1 and discussed as below,

 Independency of foreign fuel: Petroleum resources are limited to a few countries

and the group of petroleum rich countries known as Organization of the Petroleum

Exporting Countries (OPEC) influence the world economy as well as politics by

manipulating the crude oil prices. RES will not only provide energy to the countries

that lack in petroleum but also make them more independent from world politics

[117].

More energy
Independancy

National Political
Security

Less Crude Oil Increased

Import Environmental
value
Better Benefits of Renewable Green House
Economy Energy Gases Reduction
Economic Environmental
Employment
Rural
Public Health Electrification
Women and Children
Empowerment

Social

Figure 4-1: Benefits of renewable energy.

70
  Public health benefits: Adopting a large portion of RES for energy requirements

can reduce poisonous gases and can help in cleaning the environment. According

to World Health Organization (WHO), annually 7 million people die prematurely

due to air pollution related diseases. By improving quality of air, significant public

health benefits can be achieved [118].

 Employment: Thousands of jobs can be created by installing big RES power

systems. Large RES power projects can empower individuals of developing

economies by creating employments on a large scale. According to a recent study,

in the US, every 250 MW of additional wind power creates more than 1000 new

jobs [119].

4.1.1 Challenges to Renewables

Although renewables are clean and potential sources of power, they have some

economical, technical, social, and environmental challenges. Some of the major challenges

are described below.

i) Visual Impacts: The degree of visual disturbance caused by wind turbines varies from

person to person based on individual perception. However, adverse visual and wind turbine

syndrome impacts can be avoided by selecting turbine sites far from residential areas [120].

ii) Rehabilitation of people: Large hydro power plants require large tracts of land resulting

in deforestation and possible to rehabilitation of the surrounding communities to different

places.

iii) Disturbance to bio-diversity: Many fauna and flora might get disturbed during the

construction and operation of large hydro wind and geothermal power plants.

71
iv) High cost per MW installed capacity: Some of RES power systems have very high start-

up costs and usually need a large scale investment

30 Accident
Blade 150 Fatality
25 Fire
Injury
Structure
Accident causes
Ice
20

Recorded Cases
100
15

10
50
5

0
0
2000 2005 2010 2015 2000 2005 2010 2015
Year Year

Figure: 4-2: Graphs showing wind turbines accidents, major causes and human
causalities in UK4.

v) Accidents and human causalities: Human operators, workers during construction and

operation come across the accidents related to wind turbines, hydro and geothermal power.

Figure 4-2 is showing accidents4 occurred at wind parks in UK [119].

4.2 Issues with Grid Integration

Intermittent nature of major RES technologies, especially wind and solar, introduce

operational challenges to grid integration. For example, wind power output can be anything

between zero and its rated capacity, depending upon wind conditions. Similarly, power

output of solar power system is zero during the night and approaches its rated capacity

during periods of high sunlight.

4
The data of accidents were recorded only for cases that have been reported. However, according to a report published
in The Telegraph in 2011, indicates that there have been approximately 1500 accidents between 2006 and 2011. [Source:
Caithness Wind Farm Information Forum].
5
Major causes of wind turbine accidents are blades failures followed by fire caught up by the turbine. Other
causes of fire are lightning strikes, electrical equipment malfunctioning and hot surface ignition due to some
of highly flammable material (hydraulic oil and plastics).

72
 Table 4.1: Major technical issues and causes due integration [121] [122].

Issues Impacts Major Cause

Dimming of lights Change in wind speed and

Voltage fluctuation
Shut-down of fridges, motors etc. solar irradiance
Voltage flicker Reduced efficiency and performance of Switching operations, wind
household appliances turbine tower shadow etc.

Voltage imbalance Damage to power system equipment, Distributed RES

Temperature rise, noise and vibrations
in motor and power electronic devices

Frequency fluctuation Low performance of electro- Lack of output from RES

mechanical equipment and other house during peak demand
hold appliances

Power fluctuations Power cut-offs, decreased efficiency Intermittency of RES

Harmonics Overheating and decreased life time of Power electronic converters

electric equipment

Need of more reactive Requirement of more reactive power Induction generators and
power injection in to injector placements. power electronic devices
system

Different Protection Complexity of protection systems Bidirectional flow of fault

system current

Storage system Increased cost and maintenance of Intermittency of RES

over-all grid.

Power electronics Increased cost and complexity; Due to DC nature of solar

systems harmonics in the system, increased power
reactive power requirement

Need of optimal RE Need of more research and Intermittency of RES

power prediction developments
methods

High penetration levels of RES can put the grid under potential risks related to

power quality, system stability and voltage regulation if certain technical conditions are

not taken care. The issues arise during and after grid integration of RES power systems

can be explained under two broad categories: 1) technical challenges and 2) non-technical

challenges. A detailed discussion of wind and solar technologies from the stand point of

73
grid integration challenges is presented in following subsection. Some major technical

issues due to RES integrations are listed in Table 4.1.

4.2.1 Technical Issues

These are issues related to power quality and system reliability and must be taken

care under standard conditions to ensure that the field equipment and appliances of

electricity consumers can operate properly.

i) Voltage fluctuations: Voltage fluctuations are swings in supply voltage levels and must

not deviate from a specified standard range know as nominal voltage. These voltage

fluctuations may cause degraded performance of consumer appliances. The effects on

loads such as dimming of lights and inability to start induction motor loads are normally

observed when the voltage fluctuates by more than 10% the nominal voltage. The severity

of the effects depend upon the duration of the change.

ii) Frequency fluctuations: Due to large gap in demand and power supply, the system

frequency will vary. The intermittence nature of RES technologies enhances the frequency

fluctuations within the system.

iii) Power Fluctuations: Power output fluctuations occur more often in RES distributed

generation. These fluctuations can be for a few seconds or could be for longer periods.

Power fluctuations for a shorter time create power quality problems such as light flicker

and variations in motor speed etc.

iv) Harmonics: Currents or voltages having frequencies that are integer multiples of the

fundamental supply power frequency are known as harmonics. Large power electronic

74
devices and converters used in RES power systems are main cause of harmonics in an

integrated grid. Vibrations in motors, flickers of TV and computer monitors, interference

in transmission signals, overheating of equipment and flickers in compact fluorescent lamp

based lights are major problems arise due to harmonics in power supply.

These technical problems of voltage and frequency fluctuations and harmonics can

be taken care with some power system schemes. Voltage fluctuation, power fluctuations

and frequency fluctuations can be eliminated by incorporating energy storage system (ESS)

with RES power systems in the integrated grid. The details of ESS are presented in section

5.2. Problems related to harmonics can be solved by means of voltage source inverters and

active and passive filters [121] [122] [123].

4.2.2 Non-Technical Issues: Some of the major non-technical challenges in grid

integration of RES include:

 Need of larger transmission networks to connect with grid if the RESs are

available at remote locations. For example, off-shore wind power systems require

installation of transmission lines or underwater cables.

 Scarcity of investments to make installed RES power systems large enough to

integrate with utility power grids.

 Lack of available skilled operators and technical professionals in order for

efficient operations of integrated RES.

Most of the issues can be handled effectively with good planning, prudent government

policies, and standards combined with more research and development in RES

technologies.

75
4.3 Energy Storage technologies in RES

Due to intermittency in the output power of major RES they rarely can match the

sudden change in load conditions and result in either a surplus or a shortage of generated

power. Therefore, these systems do not contribute to the frequency stability [124]. To

overcome the frequency and/or voltage stabilities and for a reliable operation of integrated

RES power systems, adequate Energy Storage System (ESS) is required. ESS has ability

to provide power during peak demands, and hence maintains system stability. During times

of surplus power ESS gets charged.

Energy Storage Technologies

Electro-Chemical Electro-Magnetic Thermal Mechanical

BESS Flow BESS Hydrogen

Lead Acid NaNiCl VRB Fuel Cell Supercap AL-TES PHS

PSB SNG SNG CES CAES

NiCd Li-Ion

HI-TES FES
NiMh Metal Air ZnBr SMES

PbSb
NaS
Liquid

Figure 4-3: Different energy storage technologies for RES power systems [125] [126].

Advanced ESS technologies fused with power electronic technologies have

advanced the RES systems to harness their benefits. There are various ESS technologies

that exist based on the type of energy schemes. These schemes include mechanical, electro-

chemical, chemical, electromagnetic, and thermal form of energy storage [127] [125] as

shown in Figure 4-3.

76
4.4 Wind Power Output Equation

Wind power output depends on wind speed and air mass. If a wind with volume m,

speed v, and air density ρ is flowing through an area of interest A then kinetic energy of the

wind is given as,

Area = A
1 2
E

Wind
mv (4.1)
2

Now, power can be defined as the

v
kinetic energy per unit time or rate
Figure 4-4: Wind flux on a surface area A.
of change of energy as given below,

1 2
P mv (4.2)
2

dm
Where, m  . From fluid mechanics, the mass flow rate of wind can be defined as,
dt

dm
  Av (4.3)
dt

Therefore, from equation 4.2 and equation 4.3, the power can be expressed as,

1
P  Av 3 (4.4)
2

From the expression of wind power, it can be observed that the power generated by wind

turbine is proportional to cube of wind speed. In 1919, German physicist Albert Betz

16
concluded that none of wind turbines can convert more than or 59.3% of the kinetic
27

energy of the wind into mechanical energy. That limit in the power is known as the Betz

Limit or Betz' Law. Therefore, according to Betz’ limit, theoretical maximum power

77
efficiency of any design of wind turbine cannot exceed 0.59 (59%) and called as the power

coefficient and is defined as,

CP max  0.59 (4.5)

4.5 Wind Energy Systems Modeling

In this section, IEEE 14-bus and IEEE 9-bus test systems with added wind energy

resources are analyzed for load flow. The simulations are carried out using NEPLAN,

PowerWorld, MATPOWER and PSAT software tools. The results obtained from all four

software are compared against each other. The objective of the study is to compare different

PSS tools by analyzing power flows, bus voltages, and power losses in the systems. The

other motivation is to find the suitable bus to place wind turbine for maximum system

stability. The method to model a wind RES varies in different software tools. A short

description of wind resource modeling for each tool is presented following

a) Modelling in NEPLAN: This tool supports modeling of renewable energy systems. The

tool allows entering wind turbine models in three different ways: 1) by using predefined

standard dynamic models, 2) by using user defined models with function blocks, and 3) by

using DLL files. DLL files are user defined models written in form of equations and

modeled in MATLAB. The controllers in the dynamic models for wind systems can be

entered in same way. NEPLAN includes several renewable energy modeling examples

including wind, photovoltaic and battery storage which provide great help for the users

[128].

b) Modelling in PowerWorld: For the load flow study, wind turbine can be represented as

generators with fixed active and reactive powers. However, PowerWorld simulator

facilitates the wind turbine models for dynamic simulations also. In this study, the wind

78
turbine is modeled as generator supplying fixed active power and consuming fixed reactive

power [129].

c) Modelling in MATPOWER: MATPOWER does not support dynamic analysis at this time.

Since the objective of this study is the load flow analysis, the wind turbine is considered as

regular generator with fixed active and reactive powers and zero operating cost. To serve

the purpose, the wind park is modeled as P-Q bus in MATPOWER with the load connected

to the bus consuming negative active power and positive reactive power [130].

d) Modelling in PSAT: PSAT has a library that allows users to model wind RES very

easily. There are all four types of wind turbines models and wind is modeled with Weibull,

composite and Mexican hat distributions. Users can also use measured wind data as input

to the model.

4.5.1 IEEE 9-Bus System with Wind RES

The behavior of the nine bus system is tested with a wind turbine connected at bus

6. The wind turbine is best to be placed at the strong bus for better system stability. In the

system, a constant speed wind turbine with capacity of 25 MVA and 0.5 kV is considered.

10th bus in the system is representing a wind RES system connected to the test system with

a step-up power transformer as shown in Figure 4-5. The system is modeled in all four

software tools for load flow analysis. Total power delivered to the system from wind park

is 50 MW which falls below 20% of wind capacity penetration level. This level is more or

less considered as optimal and beyond this level a number technical issues arise. The

system base of 100 MVA and Newton-Raphson method are used for all the calculations.

Voltage profile for the given system is shown in Figure 4-6. Voltage magnitude is high at

79
generator buses 1, 2 and 3. The voltage is less at bus 10 where the wind turbine is

connected. This problem occurs mostly at the startup of the turbines as they draw large

reactive currents during starting. The starting current usually exceeds the machine rating

by 2-3 times and can remain for 10 seconds [131].

Bus-7 Bus-3
G-2 G-3

Bus-8 Bus-9
Bus-2

Bus-5 Bus-6
Bus-4

Bus-1
G-1
Wind Park
Bus-10
Figure 4-5: Modified IEEE 9-bus system with wind turbine connected at bus 6. Bus 10
in the system represents the wind park.

Results for bus voltages attained using NEPLAN, PowerWorld and PSAT are almost

similar and their average deviations from 1 pu magnitudes are 0.01969, 0.01963 and

0.03164 respectively.

Figure 4-6: Bus voltage profiles of the system with integration of wind turbine. The graph
is showing a voltage dip on the RES bus 10 whereas the voltages are high on
synchronous generators buses 1, 2 and 3.

80
Whereas, the results from MATPOWER are also fairly close with a slight lesser magnitude

at each bus. The total deviation from 1 pu is averaged 0.00906 for MATPOWER. Similarly

the voltage angles are depicted in Figure 4-7.

Figure 4-7: Bus voltage phase with wind turbine integrated with the base system.

From the graph of voltage angles, it can be seen that except for MATPOWER all tools gave

identical results. The maximum difference in the angles for the MATPOWER is observed

at bus 2 followed by buses 3 and 4.

Figure 4-8: Active power flow for IEEE 9-bus with wind turbine connected at 10th bus
as obtained by all four software tools.

81
 Figure 4-9: Reactive power flow for IEEE 9-bus with wind turbine connected at bus 10.

Real power flow (PG-PL) and reactive power flow (QG-QL) are shown in Figure 4-

8 and Figure 4-9 respectively. For both the powers, all four tools gave similar results. The

power is high at buses 2, 3, 5, 6 and 10. (QG-QL) are higher at buses 1, 2, 3 and 10.

4.5.2 IEEE 14-Bus System with Wind RES

A similar study has been carried out on a modified IEEE 14-bus system with wind

RES. The system is modified to add an extra bus-15 where the wind park is connected.

This extra bus is connected to bus-4 with a power transformer. Again, the wind park

consists of one constant speed wind turbine of 3.8 kV and 100 MVA rating. The wind park

is delivering 50 MW of power to the system. The modified system as shown in Figure 4-

10 is modeled in all four selected software tools for load flow studies. To run the load flow

simulations, Newton-Raphson method with 100 MVA system base is used. The wind

turbine must be connected to strong buses for better system stability. Therefore, the

renewable bus 15 is connected to rest of the system through bus 4.

82
 Bus-13

Bus-14

Bus-11
Bus-12

Bus-10

Bus-9
Bus-6
G-6
G-8

Bus-7 Bus-8
Bus-5
G-1
Bus-4
Bus-1

Bus-2

Bus-3
G-2
Wind Park
G-3 Bus-15

Figure 4-10: Modified IEEE 14-bus system with wind RES connected at bus 15.

Voltage magnitudes profile of the system is illustrated in Figure 4-11. In the base system,

buses 1, 2, 3, 6 and 8 have synchronous generators. The impact of the generator buses can

be noticed in form of voltage rises at these five buses. The impact of wind turbine at bus

15 and bus 4 is observed as a voltage dip at both buses.

Figure 4-11: Bus voltage magnitudes at each bus as obtained from all four software tools.

83
 The results are almost same for bus voltage magnitudes for all buses except bus 15

whereas PSAT results were slightly deviated from rest of the tools at buses 2-14. The

average deviations from reference 1 pu for NEPLAN, PowerWorld, MATPOWER and

PSAT are 0.031, 0.0219, 0.0472 and 0.0317 respectively. With a deviation of 0.1884 pu

at RES bus (bus-15) MATPOWER voltage magnitude has more deviation from reference

level of 1 pu.

Figure 4-12: Voltage phase at each bus as obtained from all four software tools.

Figure 4-13: Active power flow for modified IEEE 14-bus system with wind RES.

84
 Analyzing the voltage angles from Figure 4-12, it can be observed that for

NEPLAN the angles have more deviation from results from other tools. For the RES bus,

the angle value deviated more for MATPOWER. Angle values obtained from PowerWorld

and PSAT are close to each other for all 15 buses.

Figure 5-14: Reactive power flow for IEEE 14-bus system with wind RES.

Graphs for PG-PL and QG-QL are shown in Figure 4-13 and Figure 4-14. By

inspecting the graph of active power, we can note the maximum power are at buses 1, 3, 4,

9 and 15. For real power every tool gave similar results for all buses except bus 1 and bus

15. For reactive power, the results deviated for all tools at bus 2, 3 and 4. MATPOWER

exhibited more deviations in the reactive power with the maximum deviation from others

at 4th bus.

4.6 Dynamic Analysis of Modified IEEE 14-bus System

The dynamic analysis of the modified 14-bus system previously discussed in

Section 5.5.2 is carried out. The system model in PSAT (Figure 5-15) is used. Time domain

simulations were performed for 20 seconds. The dynamic analysis is completed only with

85
one tool just to demonstrate how it works, and other tools are not considered because

dynamic analysis on wind system is not in the scope of this study.

Figure 5-15: Modified IEEE 14-bus system modeled in PSAT.

17

16

15
Wind Speed [m/s]

14

13

12

11

10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Ttime [s]

Figure 5-16: Weibull distribution profile wind speed.

86
 A doubly fed induction generator (DFIG) type wind turbine with Weibull

distribution wind profile with an average wind speed of 15 meter/ second is connected at

RES wind bus 15. The RES bus is further integrated with the system at bus 4. Wind profile

can be seen in the above figure.

Figure 4-17: Visualization of system voltage.

From visualization of the system voltages in Figure 4-17, it is evident that the voltage

magnitudes peaked at bus 8. The reason is because of the RES bus connected at this bus.

Figure 4-18 depicts plots for synchronous generator rotor speeds and rotor angles. The

speeds of all generators started deviated between 0.998 and 1.0015 pu and finally settled

down around 1 pu (60 Hz.). Similarly, after some fluctuations all the rotor angles become

constant with time. Therefore from this dynamic behavior, we can conclude that the system

is in completely stable operation.

87
 1.002 1.2
Gen-1
Gen-1
Gen-2
Gen-2 1
1.0015 Gen-3
Gen-3
Gen-4
Gen-4
0.8 Gen-5
Gen-5
1.001

0.6
1.0005
Rotor Speed (pu.)

Rotor Angle (pu.)

0.4
1
0.2
0.9995
0

0.999
-0.2

0.9985
-0.4

0.998
-0.6

0.9975 -0.8
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
Time (s) Time (s)

Figure 4-18: Machine rotor speeds and rotor angles.

4.7 Conclusion

In this chapter the challenges in grid integration of renewable DER have discussed

followed by a short description of need of energy storage systems and classification of

different type of ESS. Later, impacts of wind RES systems on integration with IEEE 9-bus

and IEEE 14-bus system have been assessed using load flow studies. The effect on the

voltage profiles in both the cases with wind turbines are analyzed with the objective of

comparison of all four software tools. By scrutinizing all the results, the conclusion can be

drawn that all the tools gave similar results. The maximum deviations in the results were

for MATPOWER which can be justified as the tool does not have sophisticated modules

to model renewable energy systems at this time.

88
 Chapter 5

Conclusions and Future Work

This study is devoted to investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of available

power system engineering software tools based on case studies with an emphasis on

renewable energy systems. The thesis broadly divided in three sections. The first section

covers the study of available power system computational tools and the simulations of basic

analysis using selected four tools. The second section has presented a comprehensive

evaluation of importance of renewable energy and current status. Finally, the last section

has covered the modeling of wind energy systems.

5.1 Brief Summary and Conclusions

Based on the present research and results obtained, the thesis can be summarized

as following,

1) Computational tools and simulations in the field of power system engineering have

ample opportunities the improvement, especially in the section of user interface and

flexibility of data transportation among different PSS software tools. There is a

need for a standardized data format so that users have flexibility in usage of

different tools.

89
2) Majority of commercially available tools have very complicated GUI and it is very

hard to understand them for an average user without having an expertise in power

system. Therefore, GUI and even graphical representation and plotting utilities

have significant chances of enhancements.

3) A study and evaluation of free open source software tools available for PSS reveals

lack of their fault and dynamic simulation capabilities. Not only most of FOSS tools

do not support fault and dynamic analyses but also they lag behind when it comes

of renewable energy systems analysis and modeling.

4) To have a leading edge in world politically, the nations that lack petroleum sources

must embrace RES technologies.

5) Based on the case studies presented in chapter 3 we can say that FOSS PSS gave

reasonably accurate results when compared with standard results as well as results

obtained by commercially used software tools. Currently, most of the tools are

objective specific and the choice of a best fit tool depends upon what the users

intend to do with them.

6) Finally, from the results presented in chapter 4 it can be concluded that the power

system stability increases if the distributed renewable energy resources are placed

at strong buses. Also, other results show that the wind turbine spatially distributed

gave better voltage stability.

7) Storage devices technologies and better renewable energy forecasting tools are

required for highly reliable RES integrated power grids. These two technologies in

RES systems not only will help reducing the intermittency but also can reduce cost

of electricity by giving chances for better energy management.

90
5.2 Future Works

In view of the major findings of this study, a few areas of further development and

investigation are recommended, mainly:

 Further extension of the study cases: The study can further extended to the test

power systems with large number of buses in order to imitate them in more realistic

way as practical power systems are more complex in nature. Other analyses such

as harmonic, motor starting and power factor correction can also be completed and

compared against standard results. Again, dynamic studies can be performed using

other tools on the modified systems presented in Chapter 4.

 Development of fault analysis module for FOSS: Extension module capable of

doing fault studies in FOSS can be developed, especially for MATPOWER in a

similar way as MatDyn and MatACDC. After adding the module, results can be

established and validated against the results obtained by NEPLAN, PowerWorld,

PSAT or any other tool.

 Development of renewable energy modules: RES modeling and analysis modules

can be developed for MATPOWER and similar open source free software for

power system engineering to provide them completeness.

91
 References

[1] O. Hafez and B. Kankar, “Optimal planning and design of a renewable energy
based supply system for microgrids,” Renewable Energy, vol. 45, pp. 7–15, 2013.

[2] D. Povh, Retzmann D. and Rittiger J., “Benefits of simulation for operation of large
power system & system interconnection,” in 4th IERE General meeting & IERE
central & Eastern Europe Forum, pp. 1–12, Oct. 2004.

[3] Turan Gonen, “Electrical Power Transmission Engineering: Analysis and Design,”
CRC Press, 3rd Ed., USA: Taylor and Francis Group, p. 3, 2014.

[4] A. Ipakchi and F. Albuyeh, “Grid of the future,” IEEE Power and Energy
Magazine, vol.7, no.2, pp.52–62, Apr. 2009.

[5] G. Gediga, K. C. Hamborg and I. Duntsch, “Evaluation of Software Systems,”

Encyclopedia Comp. Sci. Technol., vol. 45, pp. 127–153, 2002.

[6] Soman, A., S., Khaparde, S., A., and Pandit, S., Computational Methods for Large
Sparse Power System Analysis, Springer Science and Business Media, New York,
2012.

[7] Ward, J.B.; Hale, H.W., “Digital Computer Solution of Power-Flow Problems,”
AIEE Trans. in Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. 75, no. 3, pp 96–102, 1956.

[8] University of Houston, “Introduction to Modeling and Simulation Systems,” 2014.

[9] M. Larsson, “ObjectStab-an educational tool for power system stability studies,”
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 56–63, Feb. 2004.

[10] F. Milano, “An Open Source Power System Toolbox,” in IEEE Transactions in
Power System, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 1199–1206, Aug. 2005.

[11] R. Agrawal, S. K. Bhardwaj, and D. P. Kothari, “An Educational and Simulation

Tools for Power System and FACT Controller: An Overview,” International
Journal of E.E. and Computer Engineering, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 91–96, Sep. 2003.

[12] E. S. Ibrahim, “A comparative study of PC based software packages for power

engineering education and research,” International Journal of Electrical Power &
Energy Systems, vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 799–805, Dec. 2002.

92
[13] L. Bam, and W. Jewell, “Review: Power System Analysis Software Tools,” in
Power Engineering Society Gen. Meeting, vol. 1, pp. 139–44, Jun. 2005.

[14] J. Byrne, C. Heavey, P. J. Byrne, “A review of Web-based simulation and

supporting tools,” Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, vol. 18, pp. 253–76,
2010.

[15] S. Agamah, L. Ekonomou, “A PHP Application Library for Web-Based Power

Systems Analysis”, IEEE European Modelling Symposium, pp. 353–58, 2005.

[16] “XENDEE” [Online]. Available: https://www.xendee.com/.

[17] “NEPLAN” [Online]. Available: http://www.neplan.ch/.

[18] Roche, R, “Introduction to PowerWorld Simulator”, Université de Technologie de

Belfort-Montbéliard, 2015.

[19] “PTW DAPPER” [Online]. Available: www.skm.com.

[20] “ETAP” [Online]. Available: www.etap.com.

[21] “CYME” [Online]. Available: www.cyme.com.

[22] O. Anaya-Lara and E. Acha, "Modeling and analysis of custom power systems by
PSCAD/EMTDC," IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol.17, no.1, pp.266–
72, Jan 2002.

[23] PSS/E Program Application Guide, Siemens Energy, Inc., June 2009.

[24] “MiPower,” PRDC Pvt. Ltd. [Online]. Available: http://www.prdcinfotech.com.

[25] “DIgSILENT GmbH,” PowerFactory, [Online]. Available: www.digsilent.de.

[26] “CAPE” [Online]. Available: http://www.electrocon.com/capeintro.php.

[27] “ASPEN” [Online]. Available: www.aspeninc.com.

[28] “EasyPower” [Online]. Available: http://www.easypower.com.

[29] W. Long, D. Cotcher, D. Ruiu, P. Adam, S. Lee and R. Adapa, “EMTP-a powerful
tool for analyzing power system transients,” IEEE Computer Applications in
Power, vol.3, no.3, pp.36–41, Jul 1990.

[30] Open Electrical, “Power Systems Analysis Software”, [Online]. Available:

http://www.openelectrical.org/wiki/index.php?title=Power_Systems_Analysis_So
ftware, 2015.

93
[31] R. Kuffel, J. Giesbrecht, T. Maguire, R. P. Wierckx, P. McLaren, “RTDS-a fully
digital power system simulator operating in real time,” in IEEE Pro. WESCANEX,
Comm., Power, and Computing Conf., vol.2, pp.300–05, May 1995.

[32] “POUYA” [Online]. Available: http://www.intelectri.com/.

[33] “DINIS” [Online]. Available: http://www.dinis.com/Index.htm.

[34] T. J. Overbye, P. W. Sauer, C. M. Marzinzik and G. Gross, “A user-friendly

simulation program for teaching power system operations,” IEEE Transactions
on Power Systems, vol.10, no.4, pp.1725–33, 1995.

[35] “PowerWorld” [Online]. Available: http://www.powerworld.com/.

[36] A. Boulanger, “Open-source versus proprietary software: Is one more reliable and
secure than the other?,” IBM Systems Journal , vol.44, no.2, pp.239–48, 2005.

[37] S. Cole and R. Belmans, “MatDyn, A New Matlab-Based Toolbox for Power
System Dynamic Simulation,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol.26, no.3,
pp.1129-36, 2011.

[38] J. Beerten and R. Belmans, “Development of an open source power flow software
for high voltage direct current grids and hybrid AC/DC systems: MATACDC,” IET
Gen., Trans. & Distribution, vol.9, no.10, pp.966–74, 2015.

[39] J. Bitzer, W. Schrettl, P. J. H. Schröder, “Intrinsic motivation in open source

software development,” Journal of Comparative Economics, vol.35, pp.160–69,
2007.

[40] C. Gacek and B. Arief, “The many meanings of open source,” IEEE Software,
vol.21, no.1, pp.34–40, 2004.

[41] M. W. Wu and Y. D. Lin, “Open source software development: an overview,”

in Computer, vol.34, no.6, pp.33–38, 2001.

[42] J. W. Paulson, G. Succi, A. Eberlein, “An empirical study of open-source and

closed-source software products,” in IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering,
vol.30, no.4, pp.246–56, 2004.

[43] K. Crowston, K. Wie, J. Howison and A. Wiggins, “Free/Libre open-source

software development: What we know and what we do not know,” ACM Computing
Surveys, vol.44, no.2, 2012.

[44] D. A. Wheeler, “Why Open Source Software/ Free Software (OSS/FS, FLOSS or
FOSS)? Look at the Numbers” [Online]. Available: http://www.dwheeler.com/.

94
[45] D. Bică, D. Bucur and A. Modrea, “Current trends and challenges in power
engineering education,” Scientific Bulletin of the Petru Maior University of Tirgu
Mures, vol.6, pp.1841–9267, 2009.

[46] F. Milano and L. Vanfretti, “State of the art and future of OSS for power systems,”
in IEEE PES Society General Meeting, pp.1–7, July 2009.

[47] L. Tesfatsion, “Open Source Software (OSS) for Electricity Market Research,
Teaching, and Training” [Online]. Available:
http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/ElectricOSS.htm.

[48] Zimmerman, R. D., Murillo-Sánchez, C. E., and Thomas, R. J. (2011)

“MATPOWER: Steady-State Operations, Planning, and Analysis Tools for Power
Systems Research and Education,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol.26,
no.1, pp.12–19.

[49] C. A. Cañizares and F. Alvarado, UWPFLOW: Continuation and Direct Methods

to Locate Fold Bifurcations in AC/DC/FACTS Power Systems, Apr. 2006.
ece.uwaterloo.ca/~ccanizar/software/uwpflow/readme.txt.

[50] F. Milano, “A python-based software tool for power system analysis,” in IEEE PES
Society General Meeting, pp.1–5, July 2013.

[51] PSACE, Task Force for Open Source Software for Power Systems, [Online].
Available: http://ewh.ieee.org/cmte/psace/CAMS_taskforce/software.htm.

[52] M. Zhou and S. Zhou, “Internet, Open-source and Power System Simulation,”
InterPSS org, 1–5.

[53] S. Ayasun, C. O. Nwankpa, H. G. Kwatny, “Voltage Stability Toolbox for Power

System Education and Research,” IEEE Transactions on Education, vol.49, no.4,
pp.432–442, Nov. 2006.

[54] J. H. Chow, K. W. Cheung, “A toolbox for power system dynamics and control
engineering education and research,” IEEE Transaction on Power Systems, vol.7,
no.4, pp.1559–64, Nov. 1992.

[55] W. M. Grady [Online]. Available: http://web.ecs.baylor.edu/faculty/grady/.

[56] K. Schoder, A. Hasanovic, A. Feliachi, and A. Hasanovic, “PAT: A power analysis

toolbox for Matlab/Simulink,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol.18, pp.42–47, Feb.
2003.

[57] M. Pochacker, A. Sobe, A and W. Elmenreich, “Simulating the smart grid,” in

PowerTech (POWERTECH) IEEE Conference, pp.1–6, 2013.

[58] PS Analytical Software Tools, PSS Laboratory, The University of Queensland,

[Online]. Available: http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/pssl.

95
[59] H. Lund and B. V. Mathiesen, “Energy system analysis of 100% renewable energy
systems–the case of Denmark in years 2030 and 2050,” Energy, vol. 34, no. 5, pp.
524–31, 2009.

[60] H. L. Lam, J. J. Klemes, Z. Kravanja, P. S. Varbanov, “Software tools overview:

process integration, modelling and optimisation for energy saving and pollution
reduction,” Asia Pac. J. Chem. Eng., vol.6, no.5, pp. 696–712, 2011.

[61] S. Sinha and S. S. Chandel, “Review of software tools for hybrid renewable energy
systems,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 32, pp.192–205, 2014.

[62] L. Arribas, G. Bopp, M. Vetter, A. Lippkau and K. Mauch, “World-wide overview

of design and simulation tools for hybrid pv systems,” IEA PVPS Task 11 Report,
Jan. 2011.

[63] D. Markovic, D. Cvetkovic and B. Masic, “Survey of software tools for energy
efficiency in a community,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 15,
pp. 4897–903, 2011.

[64] H. Ibrahim, J. Lefebvre, J. F. Methot and J.S. Deschenes, “Numerical modeling

wind–diesel hybrid system: overview of the requirements, models and software
tools,” in IEEE pro. EPE conf., Winnipeg, pp. 23–8, Oct. 2011.

[65] D. Connolly, H. Lund, B.V. Mathiesen and M. Leahy, “A review of computer tools
for analysing the integration of renewable energy into various energy systems,”
Applied Energy, vol. 87, pp. 1059–1082, 2010.

[66] W. Zhou, C. Lou, Z. Li, L. Lu and H. Yan, “Current status of research on optimum
sizing of stand-alone hybrid solar–wind power generation systems,” Applied
Energy, vol. 87, pp. 380–9, 2010.

[67] M. R. Faraji-Zonooz, Z. M. Nopiah, A. M. Yusof and K. Sopian, “A review of

MARKAL energy modeling,” Eur J Sci Res, vol.26, no.3, pp. 352–61, 2009.

[68] J. L. Bernal-Agustin and R. Dufo-López, “Simulation and optimization of stand-

alone hybrid renewable energy systems,” RSER, vol.13, pp.2111–18, 2009.

[69] R. Segurado, S. Pereira, A. Pipio, L. Alves, “Comparison between EMINENT and

other energy technology assessment tools,” J Cleaner Prod, vol. 17, no.10, pp. 907–
10, 2009.

[70] H. Lund, N. Duic, G. Krajacic, G. Md. Carvalho, “Two energy system analysis
models: a comparison of methodologies and results,” Energy, vol. 32, no. 6, pp.
948–54, 2007.

[71] F. Urban, R. M. L. Benders, H.C. Moll, “Modelling energy systems for developing
countries,” Energy Policy, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 3473–82, 2007.

96
[72] S. Jebaraj and S. Iniyan, “A review of energy models,” Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 281–311, 2006.

[73] C. Cormio, M. Dicorato, A. Minoia and M. Trovato, “A regional energy planning

methodology including renewable energy sources and environmental constraints,”
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 99–130, Apr. 2003.

[74] S. C. Morris, G. A. Goldstein, V. M. Fthenakis, “NEMS and MARKAL-MACRO

models for energy–environmental–economic analysis: a comparison of the
electricity and carbon reduction projections,” Environ Model Assess, vol. 7, no. 3,
pp. 207–16, 2002.

[75] D. Turcotte, M. Ross and F. Sheriff, “Photovoltaic hybrid system sizing and
simulation tools: status and needs,” in PV Horizon: workshop on photovoltaic
hybrid systems, Montreal, pp. 1–10, Sep. 2001.

[76] T. R. Morgan, R. H. Marshall, B. J. Brinkworth, “ARES: a refined simulation

program for the sizing an optimization of autonomous hybrid energy systems,”
Solar Energy, vol. 59, no. 4–6, pp. 205–15, 1997.

[77] HOMER Energy LLC. HOMER [Online]. Available:

http://www.homerenergy.com.

[78] G.T. Klise and J. S. Stein, “Models used to assess the performance of photovoltaic
systems,” Sandia National Laboratories, 2009.

[79] C. Schaffrin, I. Knoblich, G. C. Seeling-Hochmuth, E. V Kuik E, “Solsim and

hybrid designer: self-optimizing software tools for simulation of solar hybrid
applications,” EuroSun 98, pp.1–7, Sep. 1998.

[80] “INSEL” [Online] Available: http://www.insel.eu/.

[81] H. Bindner, O. Gehrke, P. Lundsager, J. C. Hansen, T. Cronin, “IPSYS - A

simulation tool for performance assessment and controller development of
integrated power system distributed renewable energy generated and storage,” in
Scientific proceedings, London, EWEA, pp. 128–130, 2004.

[82] “IGRHYSO” [Online]. Available: http://www.unizar.es/rdufo/grhyso.htm.

[83] M. S. Patel, and T. L. Pryor, “Monitored Performance Data from a Hybrid RAPS
System and the Determination of Control Set Points for Simulation Studies,” ISES
Solar World Congress, Adelaide, 2001.

[84] National Resources Canada, RETScreen Int. [Online]. Available:

http://www.retscreen.net/.

[85] University of Wisconsin-Madison, A TRaNsient SYtems Simulation program,

[Online]. Available: http://sel.me.wisc.edu/trnsys/.

97
[86] D. Thevenard, M. M. D. Ross, “Validation and Verification of Component Models
and System Models for the PV Toolbox,” Natural Resources Canada [Online].
Available:
http://www.rerinfo.ca/english/publications/pubReport2002PVToolboxValid.html.

[87] Stockholm Environment Institute, “Community for energy, environment and

development,” [Online]. Available: http://www.energycommunity.org/.

[88] EMD International A/S [Online]. Available: http://www.emd.dk/energypro/.

[89] Oak Ridge National Laboratory, “Whole-Building and Community Integration

Program,” [Online]. Available: http://www.coolingheatingpower.org/.

[90] Aalborg University, “EnergyPLAN: advanced energy system analysis computer

model,” [Online]. Available: http://www.energyplan.eu/.

[91] G. Krajačić, D. Neven and M. da G. Carvalho, “H 2 RES, Energy planning tool for
island energy systems–The case of the Island of Mljet,” International journal of
hydrogen energy, vol. 34, no. 16, pp. 7015–26, Aug. 2009.

[92] Ø. Ulleberg, and R. Glöckner, “HYDROGEMS-Hydrogen energy models,” in

Proceedings of WHEC, 2002.

[93] Argonne National Laboratory, “Electricity Market Complex Adaptive System

(EMCAS),” [Online]. Available: http://ceeesa.es.anl.gov/projects/emcas.html.

[94] Universität Karlsruhe, Institute for Industrial Production [Online]. Available:

http://www.iip.kit.edu/65.php.

[95] M. B. Blarke, “The missing link in sustainable energy: Techno-economic

consequences of large-scale heat pumps in distributed generation in favour of a
domestic integration strategy for sustainable energy”, Ph.D. dissertation, Dept.
Development and Planning, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark, 2008.

[96] GTMax model, Center for Energy, Environmental, and Economic Systems
Analysis [Online]. Available: http://ceeesa.es.anl.gov/projects/Gtmax.html.

[97] ENPEP-BALANCE, Center for Energy, Environmental, and Economic Systems

Analysis [Online]. Available: http://ceeesa.es.anl.gov/projects/Enpepwin.html.

[98] MAED, International Atomic Energy Association [Online at]: http://www-

pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/CMS-18_web.pdf.

[99] Tools, International Energy Agency [Online]. Available:

www.ieaetsap.org/web/tools.asp.

[100] University of Washington, “Power System Test Case Archive” [Online]. Available:
http://www.ee.washington.edu/research/pstca/pf14/pg_tca14bus.htm.

98
[101] Illinois Center for a Smarter Electric Grid, “Publicly available power flow and
transient stability cases” [Online]. Available:
http://publish.illinois.edu/smartergrid/.

[102] M. Sedghi, M. A. Golkar, “Analysis and Comparison of Load Flow Methods for
Distribution Networks Considering Distributed Generation,” Int. Journal of Smart
Electrical Engineering, vol.1, no.1, pp.27-32, 2012.

[103] Anderson P. M. and A. A. Fouad “Power system control and stability,” The Iowa
State University Press, USA, 1986.

[104] Anderson P. M., “Analysis of faulted power systems,” IEEE Press, 1995, pp. 487–
491.

[105] Pai A. “Energy Function Analysis for Power System Stability,” Springer, 1989.

[106] I. Hiskens, “Benchmark Systems for Stability Controls,” IEEE PES Task Force,
2013.

[107] M. Abdel-Akher, and K. M. Nor, “Fault Analysis of Multiphase Distribution

Systems Using Symmetrical Components,” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery,
vol. 25, no.4, pp.2931–39, 2010.

[108] G. T. Heydt, A. Bose, N. Nimpitiwan, Y. Zhang and A. P. S. Meliopoulos, “New

implications of power system fault current limits ,” PSERC, 2005.

[109] J. Machowski, J. W. Bialek and J. R. Bumby, “Power System Dynamics: Stability

and Control,” Wiley, 2nd Ed., UK, John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 2008.

[110] P. Anderson and D. Farmer, “Series Compensation of Power Systems”, PBLSH!

Inc. ISBN 1888747013, p. 559, 1996.

[111] Dynamic data for Anderson-Farmer, 9-bus system base case. [Online]. Available:
http://www.sel.eesc.usp.br/ieee/webpage20120813/TestCaseWeb/anderson_farme
r/base.htm.

[112] N. Hashim, N. Hamzah, M. F. A. Latip, A. A. Sallehhudin, “Transient Stability

Analysis of the IEEE 14-Bus Test System Using Dynamic Computation for Power
Systems (DCPS),” in 3rd International Conference on Intelligent Systems,
Modelling and Simulation (ISMS), pp.481–86, Feb. 2012.

[113] R. Foster, “Small Wind Turbines May Change the Future of Energy in Developing
Countries,” Sustainable Development Law & Policy, vol.11, no.3, pp. 27–28, 2011.

[114] A. M. Omer, “Energy, environment and sustainable development,” Renewable and

Sustainable Energy Review, vol.12, pp.2265–2300, 2008.

[115] Forbes [Online]. Available:

99
 http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikescott/2014/10/31/emerging-markets-are-
leading-the-way-on-clean-energy-growth/.

[116] Blazejczak, Jürgen, et al. “Economic effects of renewable energy expansion: A

model-based analysis for Germany,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,
vol.40, pp.1070–80, 2014.

[117] M. Asif and T. Muneer, “Energy supply, its demand and security issues for
developed and emerging economies,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,
vol.11, pp.1388–1413, 2007.

[118] A. Haines, K. R. Smith, D. Anderson, P. R. Epstein, A. J. McMichael, I. Roberts,

P. Wilkinson, J. Woodcock, J. Woods, “Policies for accelerating access to clean
energy, improving health, advancing development, and mitigating climate change”,
The Lancet, vol.370, no.9594, pp.1264–81, 2007.

[119] Y. Kumar, J. Ringenberg, S. S. Depuru, V. K. Devabhaktuni, J. W. Lee, E.

Nikolaidis, B. Andersen, and A. Afjeh, “Wind energy: Trends and enabling
technologies,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 53, pp. 209–224,
2016.

[120] A. R. D. Smedley, A. R. Webb, and A. J. Wilkins, “Potential of wind turbines to

elicit seizures under various meteorological conditions,” Epilepsia, vol. 51,
pp.1146–51, 2010.

[121] R. Passey, T. Spooner, I. MacGill, M. Watt and K. Syngellakis, “The potential

impacts of grid-connected distributed generation and how to address them: A
review of technical and non-technical factors,” Energy Policy, vol.39, pp.6280–90,
2011.

[122] P. Bousseau, F. Fesquet, R. Belhomme, S. Nguefeu and T. C. Thai, “Solutions for

the grid integration of wind farms—a survey,” Wind Energy, vol.9, pp.13–25, 2006.

[123] A. S. Anees, “Grid integration of renewable energy sources: Challenges, issues and
possible solutions,” in IEEE 5th India International Conference on Power
Electronics, pp.1–6, 2012.

[124] Y. Z. Sun, Z. S. Zhang, G. J. Li and J. Lin, “Review on frequency control of power

systems with wind power penetration,” International conference on power system
technology, 2010.

[125] H. Zhao, Q. Wu, S. Hu, H. Xu and C. N. Rasmussen, “Review of energy storage

system for wind power integration support,” Applied Energy, 2014

[126] Electropaedia, “Battery and Energy Technologies,” [Online]. Available:

http://www.mpoweruk.com/grid_storage.html.

100
[127] S. N. Backhaus, M. Chertkov and K. Dvijotham, “Operations-based planning for
placement and sizing of energy storage in a grid with a high penetration of
renewable,” Los Alamos National Laboratory, Report no. LA-UR-11-03619, 2011.

[128] “Dynamic wind power plant simulation with NEPLAN” [Online]. Available:
http://support.neplan.ch/html/e/pdf_e/e_dynamic_wind_power_simulation.pdf.

[129] “Renewable Transient stability modelling for wind and solar plants” [Online].
Available: http://www.powerworld.com/knowledge-base/renewable-transient-
stability-modeling-for-wind-and-solar-plants.

[130] MATPOWER mail archive [Online]. Available: https://www.mail-

archive.com/matpower-1@cornell.edu/.

[131] O. L. Bekri, M. K. Fellah, M. F. Benkhoris, “Impact of the wind generator on the

power flow in the electric grid,” in IEEE conference on Environmental Friendly
Energies and Applications (EFEA), pp.1–6, 2014.

101
 Appendix A

IEEE Test Systems Load Data

The data for the standard test power systems are given as below.

A.1 IEEE 9-Bus Data

Table A.1: Line data IEEE-9 bus system.

Line From To Line Impadance (p.u) Half Line

No. Bus Bus Resistance Reactance Charging
1 1 4 0 0.0576 Susceptance0
2 4 5 0.017 0.092 (p.u)
0.158
3 5 6 0.039 0.17 0.358
4 3 6 0 0.0586 0
5 6 7 0.0119 0.1008 0.209
6 7 8 0.0085 0.072 0.149
7 8 2 0 0.0625 0
8 8 9 0.032 0.161 0.306
9 9 4 0.01 0.085 0.176

A.2 IEEE 14-Bus Data

102
The system data for IEEE 14-bus system is given in Tables A.2-A5

Table A.2: Exciter data for IEEE 14-bus system.

Exciter
Bus No. 1 2 3 6 8
KA 200 20 20 20 20
TA 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
TB 0 0 0 0 0
Tc 0 0 0 0 0
VRmax 7.32 4.38 4.38 6.81 6.81
VRmin 0 0 0 1.395 1.395
KE 1 1 1 1 1
TE 0.19 1.98 1.98 0.7 0.7
KF 0.0012 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
TF 1 1 1 1 1

Table A.3: Synchronous machine data for IEEE 14-bus.

Machine
Bus no. 1 2 3 6 8
MVA 615 60 60 25 25
xl (p.u.) 0.2396 0 0 0.134 0.134
ra (p.u.) 0 0.0031 0.0031 0.0014 0.0041
xd (p.u.) 0.8979 1.05 1.05 1.25 1.25
x′d (p.u.) 0.2995 0.185 0.185 0.232 0.232
x′′d (p.u.) 0.23 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.12
T′do 7.4 6.1 6.1 4.75 4.75
T′′do 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.06
xq (p.u.) 0.646 0.98 0.98 1.22 1.22
x′q (p.u.) 0.646 0.36 0.36 0.715 0.715
x′′q (p.u.) 0.4 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.12
T′qo 0 0.3 0.3 1.5 1.5
T′′qo 0.033 0.099 0.099 0.21 0.21
H 5.148 6.54 6.54 5.06 5.06
D 2 2 2 2 2

Table A.4: Bus data of IEEE-14 Bus system.

103
 P Q P Q Q Q
Bus
Bus No. Generated Generated Load Load Generated Generated
Type
(pu) (pu) (pu) (pu) max. (pu) min. (pu)
1 2.32 0 0 0 2 10 -10
2 0.4 -0.424 0.217 0.127 1 0.5 -0.4
3 0 0 0.942 0.19 2 0.4 0
4 0 0 0.478 0 3 0 0
5 0 0 0.076 0.016 3 0 0
6 0 0 0.112 0.075 2 0.24 -0.06
7 0 0 0 0 3 0 0
8 0 0 0 0 2 0.24 -0.06
9 0 0 0.295 0.166 3 0 0
10 0 0 0.09 0.058 3 0 0
11 0 0 0.035 0.018 3 0 0
12 0 0 0.061 0.016 3 0 0
13 0 0 0.135 0.058 3 0 0
14 0 0 0.149 0.05 3 0 0

Table A.5: Line data IEEE-14 Bus system.

Half line
Line Impedance (p.u)
From charging
Line No. To Bus MVA
Bus susceptance
Resistance Reactance
(p.u.)
1 1 2 0.01938 0.05917 0.0264 120
2 1 5 0.05403 0.22304 0.0219 65
3 2 3 0.04699 0.19797 0.0187 36
4 2 4 0.05811 0.17632 0.0246 65
5 2 5 0.05695 0.17388 0.017 50
6 3 4 0.06701 0.17103 0.0173 65
7 4 5 0.01335 0.04211 0.0064 45
8 4 7 0 0.20912 0 55
9 4 9 0 0.55618 0 32
10 5 6 0 0.25202 0 45
11 6 11 0.09498 0.1989 0 18
12 6 12 0.12291 0.25581 0 32
13 6 13 0.06615 0.13027 0 32
14 7 8 0 0.17615 0 32
15 7 9 0 0.11001 0 32
16 9 10 0.03181 0.0845 0 32
17 9 14 0.12711 0.27038 0 32
18 10 11 0.08205 0.19207 0 12
19 12 13 0.22092 0.19988 0 12
20 13 14 0.17093 0.34802 0 12

104
A.3 IEEE 39-Bus Data

Table A.6: Line data IEEE 39 bus system.

Line Impedance (p.u) Half line

From charging
Line No. To Bus
Bus susceptance
Resistance Reactance (p.u.)
1 1 2 0.0035 0.0411 0.6987
2 1 39 0.001 0.025 0.75
3 2 3 0.0013 0.0151 0.2572
4 2 25 0.007 0.0086 0.146
5 2 30 0 0.0181 0
6 3 4 0.0013 0.0213 0.2214
7 3 18 0.0011 0.0133 0.2138
8 4 5 0.0008 0.0128 0.1342
9 4 14 0.0008 0.0129 0.1382
10 5 6 0.0002 0.0026 0.0434
11 5 8 0.0008 0.0112 0.1476
12 6 7 0.0006 0.0092 0.113
13 6 11 0.0007 0.0082 0.1389
14 6 31 0 0.025 0
15 7 8 0.0004 0.0046 0.078
16 8 9 0.0023 0.0363 0.3804
17 9 39 0.001 0.025 1.2
18 10 11 0.0004 0.0043 0.0729
19 10 13 0.0004 0.0043 0.0729
20 10 32 0 0.02 0
21 12 11 0.0016 0.0435 0
22 12 13 0.0016 0.0435 0
23 13 14 0.0009 0.0101 0.1723
24 14 15 0.0018 0.0217 0.366
25 15 16 0.0009 0.0094 0.171
26 16 17 0.0007 0.0089 0.1342
27 16 19 0.0016 0.0195 0.304
28 16 21 0.0008 0.0135 0.2548
29 16 24 0.0003 0.0059 0.068
30 17 18 0.0007 0.0082 0.1319
31 17 27 0.0013 0.0173 0.3216
32 19 20 0.0007 0.0138 0
33 19 33 0.0007 0.0142 0
34 20 34 0.0009 0.018 0
35 21 22 0.0008 0.014 0.2565
36 22 23 0.0006 0.0096 0.1846
37 22 35 0 0.0143 0
38 23 24 0.0022 0.035 0.361

105
 39 23 36 0.0005 0.0272 0
40 25 26 0.0032 0.0323 0.531
41 25 37 0.0006 0.0232 0
42 26 27 0.0014 0.0147 0.2396
43 26 28 0.0043 0.0474 0.7802
44 26 29 0.0057 0.0625 1.029
45 28 29 0.0014 0.0151 0.249
46 29 38 0.0008 0.0156 0

A.4 Anderson-Farmer 9-Bus System Data

Anderson-Farmer system data of exciters, turbine governors, and PSS as well as line,

generators and load data is given as below.

Table A.7: Exciter (AVR) data for Anderson-Farmer model.

Machine Machine
2 3
No. 1 2 No.
TR 0.04 0.04 K 200 200
KA 100 100 T1 1 1
TA 0.4 0.4 T2 0.06 0.06
TB 3 3 T3 4 4
TC 1 1 T4 0.006 0.006
Vset point 1.03 1.02 VEmax 4 4
VEmin ‒4.0 ‒4.0
Vset point 1.05 1.032

Table A.8: PSS data. Table A.9: Switched shunt data.

Machine
2 3 Switch
Bus no. Bus Switch
R X in time
K 15 20 no. in time
service
TW 10 10 7 1.00e+05 ‒0.123457 0 inf
T1 0.1 0.1
T2 0.01 0.01
T3 0.12 0.12
T4 0.01 0.01
VPSS max 0.1 0.1
VPSS min ‒0.1 ‒0.1

106
 Table A.10: Line data. Table A.11: Generator data.

From To Machine
Bus Bus R (pu) XL (pu) Bc (pu) No. 2 3
1 5 0 0.0002 MVA 1300 4400
ra 1.4615e‒4 7.0455e‒5
2 6 0 0.0066 xd (p.u.) 0.16792 0.038636
3 8 0 0.002 x′d (p.u.) 0.031769 0.005568
4 9 0 0.000143 x′′d (p.u.) 0.026077 0.004205
T′do 5.69 5.9
5 6 0.003226 0.020851 1.449019 T′′do 0.041 0.033
5 7 0.003618 0.024241 1.767004 xq (p.u.) 0.16592 0.037273
6 7 0.003618 0.024241 1.767004 x′q (p.u.) 0.098846 0.008636
x′′q (p.u.) 0.025538 0.004205
7 8 0.003226 0.069502 1.449019
T′qo 1.5 0.54
8 9 0.003226 0.069502 1.449019 T′′qo 0.144 0.076
xl 0.018923 0.0025
M =2H 0.18221 0.92437
D 0.068967 0.23343
Machine
No. 1 4
M = 2H 7.3784 14.5945
D 3.1831 3.7136
ra 7.6667e‒6 1.4286e‒6
xd 0.003517 0.002557

Table A.12: Power and voltage set points.

Active Reactive V (pu)

Bus No Component power Power
(pu) (pu)
1 Gen-1 410 1.03 1.03
2 Gen-2 12 1.05 1.05
3 Gen-3 37.801 1.032 1.032
4 Gen-4 Slack bus 1.02 1.02
5 Load-5 400 80
6 Load-6 5 1
7 Load-7 27.5 5.5
8 Load-8 17.5 2
9 Load-9 500 120

107