1136
3, August 1997
SEVERITY INDICES FOR CONTINGENCY SCREENING
IN DYNAMIC SECURITY ASSESSMENT
V. Brandwajn, A.B.R. Kumar, A. Ipakchi Anjan Bose
ABB Systems Control Co., Inc. Washington State University
Santa Clara, CA 9505 1 Pullman, WA 99164
bstract
At present, the computational requirement for dynamic
security assessment (DSA) is a hurdle for a comprehensive
on-line DSA to be implemented in Energy Management
Systems. In addition to faster time domain solutions, novel
approaches and techniques are being developed for
contingency screening and remedial actions. This paper
describes one such development in the area of contingency
screening which can be seen as an extension of techniques
developed over the years for static security analysis. Some
new concepts and methods are suggested for both
contingency ranking and contingency classification
(stable/unstable). Results from realistic test systems illustrate
the capabilities and performance of the new approach.
Key words: Severity Index, Contingency Screening,
Dynamic Security Analysis, Artificial Neural Network
1. INTRODUCTION
The computational requirements of DSA (in this paper,
as in most of the literature, DSA refers to the short term
dynamics or transient stability rather than the full range of
time scales) by conventional methods are two or three orders
of magnitude higher than those of static security assessment
(SSA). In addition, the lack of experience with contingency
screening methods in DSA makes it difficult to handle large
numbers of contingencies, a common procedure today in
SSA.
This paper describes an important development aimed at
enabling contingency screening, i.e., selecting a small
number of severe cases from a large set of contingencies,
thus reducing the computational requirements of time-
domain simulations. The techniques and concepts described
96 SM 483-8 PWRS A paper recommended and approved by the
IEEE Power System Engineering Committee of the IEEE Power
Engineering Society for presentation at the 1996 IEEWPES Summer
Meeting, July 28 - August 1, 1996, in Denver, Colorado. Manuscript
submitted February 1, 1996, made available for printing April 23,1996.
0885-8950/97/$10.00 0 1996 IEEE
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 12, No.
Steve D.Kuo
Integrated Micro Solutions
San Jose, C A 95 125
in the subsequent sections can be seen as an extension of the
state-of-the-art of the SSA. In SSA, screening is usually
achieved by ranking contingencies according to some
seventy index. This paper defines a set of contingency
seventy indices capable of capturing the dynamic state of the
power system immediately following fault clearance. In
addition to ranking, however, classifying the contingencies
into stable and unstable cases is important in DSA. This
paper suggests a contingency classification method using an
artificial neural network (ANN), which together with the new
ranking method can form an efficient contingency screening
procedure.
This paper starts from a review of the existing concepts
of contingency severity measures used in static security
analysis. Then an extension of these concepts into the area of
dynamic simulations is discussed. First, some severity
indices that work well for DSA ranking are presented. The
use of artificial neural networks (ANN) for contingency
classification is described next. Appropriate test examples
are then shown to illustrate the validity of the new
methodology.
2. CONTINGENCY RANKING IN SSA
The concept of contingency screening implies
performing a set of simplified fast calculations and using
their results to rank the severity of each contingency. This
ranking can then be used as a basis of selection of
contingencies which should be analyzed further using more
CPU intensive algorithms. The resulting selection should
ensure that no severe contingency is missed and, at the same
time, the number of contingencies selected for further
analysis is significantly reduced. The need to identify the
definitely harmless (safe) contingencies results from the
physical reality that a vast majority of contingencies in a
power system does not endanger its integrity.
Contingency ranking and selection have been developed
many years ago in the context of determining branch M w
flow limit violations in h e a r (DC) contingency analysis [I].
this approach, the severity index has been
calculated using closed-form formulas, i.e., there was no need
to perform any power flow solutions. The original
formulation suffered from several drawbacks with the main

one being its susceptibility to masking effects. Thus, a
network solution followed by an explicit calculation of a
severity index to rank the contingencies became the adopted
approach. [2].
The concept of severity indices was next extended to
other types of system characteristics such as bus voltages and
reactive generation. Although closed formulations were
ultimately developed for this more complex problem [3], they
still suffered from the masking effects and were not used.
Instead, a simplified or partial solution was performed and
the appropriate severity indices calculated based on this
solution [4-71. This was a very important step toward on-line
implementation of Static Security Analysis.
The success of the ranking approach led to further
developments in this area. New types of indices were
defined and the formulation of the existing ones was
changed. A typical example of such developments can be
found in [6,7] where indices were defined to measure not
only the violations but also to capture the shift from the pre-
contingency system state. In addition, the masking problem
was successfully addressed by changing the exponent of the
severity index from 2 (which allowed closed form solutions)
to a higher value. In this way, the effects of small violations
or changes were given a smaller weight than those of larger
ones.
The experience from the development of an on-line
implementation contingency screening in the static security
analysis can be summarized as follows:
1. No single severity index can reliably capture the entire
system state.
2. A combination of complementary indices can be used to
reliably rank and select contingencies while each of
individual indices may not provide a 100 percent
accurate ranking. Such composite indices are suggested
here for DSA.
3. Indices can be calculated using the results of partial or
simplified calculations.
1137
Some researchers have advocated the use of an index
based solely on the Transient Energy Function (TEF)[8-IO].
Various approximations to this function can be calculated and
used to rank the contingencies [16]. Such an approach is
feasible from the computational point of view and the
validity of these approximations is being addressed. The
TEF based indices are useful in capturing certain aspects of
system security, but others are presented here as a
multiplicity of indices is expected to be more effective.
Some alternative indices are presented in this paper.
Rather than to search for a single all-encompassing severity
measure, it is proposed to use a set of complementary
measures (indices). Each of these indices should capture a
different aspect of system security and in combination with
other indices lead to a reliable contingency ranking and
selection scheme. The calculation of these indices should not
be CPU time demanding.
In the static security analysis, severity indices are
normally calculated from the results of a single iteration of
the power flow, i.e., from a partial network solution [ 5 ] . Due
to the significantly higher complexity of the dynamic
simulation, the concept of a partial solution has to be adapted
to the needs of DSA. One has to recognize that partial
solution can apply only to the system configuration resulting
from the last user defined switching, for example following
fault clearing.
It is also intuitively obvious that the propagation of
switching effects through the power system is not
instantaneous and accounting for this propagation time is of
extreme importance for the reliability and consistency of the
indices. Compare, for example the consistency of an index
calculated for a set of contingencies at two different time
instances. The index values shown in Figure 1 were
calculated at the time of the last switching while those shown
in Figure 2 were calculated 0.05 sec. later.

3. RANKING IN DYNAMIC SECURITY ASSESSMENT

Similar to the SSA, the DSA requires a fast and reliable

evaluation of hundreds of potential contingencies, the vast
majority of which does not affect the integrity of the power
system. Consequently, the use of contingency screening, via
ranking and selection of the potentially severe ones, is called
for if an on-line implementation is to become feasible.
However, appropriate screening algorithms and approaches
for DSA have not yet been extensively studied. At the same
time, dynamic behavior of power systems is significantly
more complex than static behavior making classification
more difficult. The problem is especially apparent in the area
of defining contingency seventy measures (indices) for
ranking. Figure 1 Index value right after fault clearing
1138
Figure 2 Index value 5 steps after fault clearing
Even a superficial analysis of these two figures clearly
illustrates the need to continue the simulation past the last
switching point. At the last switching, the index is still quite
random while after a short time, in Fig. 2, the index is highly
correlated with the severity of the contingency. As can be
seen, however, the index does not become completely
monotonic and is a function of the index itself and the time
period after the last switching. In our tests, .05 sec. after fault
clearing seemed to be the smallest time interval when these
indices become reliable. This consideration is somewhat
analogous to the fact that in the TEF calculations, finding the
unstable mode requires the calculation of the faulted
trajectory.
4. COMPOSITE INDEX APPROACH
As mentioned earlier, the original SSA severity
(performance) indices were designed to capture only the
severity of limit violations. Multiple severity indices
capturing changes in different state variables (not only limit
violations) due to a contingency followed next. The idea is
to define measures of system state each describing a specific
aspect of the power system security. The number of these
indices i s independent of the size of the power system model.
A composite severity measure can then be derhed based on
the individual ones.
Several indices were developed to capture the change in
various aspects of the power system state. These indices
describe the change in the conditions of the power system
between the pre-fault steady-state and the post-fault clearing
state, i.e., the deviation from the pre-fault steady-state. A
few illustrative types of indices [ 111 are listed below:
* Change in generator rotor angles with respect to the
center of inertia
* Change in bus voltages
0 Change in rotor speed of generators
* Change rate in transient energy of generators
* Acceleration of generators
The indices are computed by summing the changes for
each individual component. To reduce the effects of
"masking," an appropriately high exponent is used in the
calculation of the individual terms.
Other types of measures capturing only the maximum
change can also be used. The most successful of them are:
Maximum difference between rotor angles O R )
Maximum difference of rotor speeds @W)
Maximum difference of the rate of change in generator
transient energy (DV)
From the energy function point of view, the combination
of the DW and DR is a measure of the transient energy as the
rotor angle spread is related to potential energy while the
speed differential is related to kinetic energy. For any power
system, the kinetic energy increases during the fault.
Following the fault clearing, kinetic energy would be
transferred into potential energy. Therefore, a composite
index with different weighting factors is called for.
Contingency screening consists of ranking and selection
of contingencies. The severity indices can be used for
contingency ranking. The purpose of ranking is to reliably
determine the relative severity order of the contingencies.
The purpose of the selection process is to classify the
contingencies into two distinct groups:
Definitely harmless, i.e., those that do not require any
further evaluation
* Potentially harmful, i.e., those that require further
evaluation
But in DSA, a major consideration is the stability of the
system after a contingency, and all contingencies that may
produce instability must be classified as potentially harmful.
An artificial neural network (ANN) is shown later to be a
good classifier of stability and suggested for selection.
5. TEST RESULTS WITH COMPOSITE INDEX
One of the most important characteristics to evaluate the
quality of a severity index is its capture ratio. The capture
ratio is defined as the ratio of the flagged critical contingency
cases to the actual critical contingency cases. Another related
characteristic is the capture number defined as the
consecutive number of actual critical contingency cases that
are included in the ranked list of the severity index. This
characteristic is used to check if any critical contingencies
have been missed in the ranking.
The test results for the E E E 162-bus 17-generator
system with increased loading are shown in Figure 3 that
plots the capture ratios for the most successful individual
severity indices, DW, DR, and DV. To demonstrate that a
composite index has better capture ratio than individual
indices, the capture ratio of (DW.OR.DR) is plotted in the
same figure. This shows that either DW or DR captures all
 1139
However, a composite index has to be a numerical
combination like a weighted sum. Different weighted sums of
individual indices were tested. The combination of 30% DW
1.o
and 70% DR (denoted DW3+DR7 in Table 1) worked best
for the systems tested.

h
0.8
i%
v

.-0
Y

E 0.6
2B I
U
0.4 - DW I

- 145-bus,50-gen I 120 I 201.48 I 1261.08 I 6.3

0.2
-
-
DR
DV
DW.OR.DR
Table 1 summarizes the CPU times on a DEC V M 6 4 10
V M S computer. The times for calculating the DW3+DR7
index 5 steps after the fault clearing time is compared to that
0.0 for calculating the exact energy margin by the transient
0 100 200 300 energy function (TEF) method. The speedups of 4 to 6 show
that the computation time for using such severity indices is
Number of contingencies comparable to approximate TEF indices and can be used to
Figure 3 Capture ratio for the 162-bus system augment them.

300 6. CLASSIFICATION VIA NEURAL NETWORKS

- DW

-
- DR
/ One of the most successful applications of the artificial
neural networks (ANN) technology is in the area of pattern
recognition. In the context of the DSA, this could mean the
-
DV
DW OR.DR recognition of patterns indicating either stability or instability
200 of different cases. When the above ranking is augmented by
this classification, the resulting accuracy of the contingency
E screening is expected to be high.
2
e Earlier attempts [15] at deployment of neural networks
a in the DSA were restricted to rather small power system
U models consisting of 10 or so buses. Even for these small
100
examples, the training of the neural networks required a
significant amount of work and it called for the preparation
of hundreds or even thousands of cases. This was due to the
fact that the entire information about the power system state
was used in a practically raw, unreduced form. Clearly, this
0 straightforward approach could not be scaled up and applied
0 100 200 300 to practical, large scale power system models.
The key issue is the selection of an appropriate set of
Number of contingencies
measures to be used as input to the ANN and the selection of
Figure 4 Capture number for the 162-bus system its architecture. Instead of using all state variables as input, a
large set of indices was first defined [ 111 and then a class-
severe cases while each of them by itself misses some.
mean feature selection similar to that of [I21 was used to
Figure 4 shows the capture number for the 162-bus system.
Again, the individual indices, especially DR, seem to miss select a reduced set of indices. A simple architecture of a
neural network was then selected and submitted to a
critical cases, sometimes by a large margin (measured by the
comprehensive set of tests. As described later on in this
deviation from the diagonal in the figure). The capture
paper, these tests verified the validity of the selected
number for (DW.OR.DR), on the other hand, is far better and
approach.
much more acceptable for ranking.
The above figures show that a combination of indices The application of a fixed number of severity measures
would work significantly better than an individual one. as input to a neural network eliminates most of the perceived
1140
restrictions on the use of neural networks in the DSA by
fixing the neural network size and architecture. The need for
a large number of training cases can be eliminated through a
simple observation that in order to be successful, the neural
network must recognize a change in the pattern of the input
variables close to the stability boundary. This implies that
training cases should be concentrated around the stability
boundary and only a few very stable or very unstable cases
are needed. The number of training cases is thus
significantly reduced without affecting the accuracy of the
classification by the neural network.
7. NEUFL4L NETWORK TEST RESULTS
A 436 bus system model of a major utility with 2400
lines and 88 generators was used in testing of the
classification of results. The necessary tests data were
created by different pre-contingency conditions, different
contingencies and fault clearing times. For each case, a set of
24 indices was computed 5 time steps after fault clearing.
In the training mode, the desired output of the neural
network was set to 0.0 for definitely harmless cases and 1.0
for potentially harmful ones. In the testing mode, an output
value greater than 0.5 was considered to imply a potentially
harmful contingency.
Neural networks of different complexity were tested. A
three layer neural network was found to be sufficient to
classify contingencies in DSA. The first layer consists of one
node for each input. The final layer consists either of one
node for the entire power system or a few nodes, one for each
problem area in the system. The intermediate layer consists
of only a few nodes (3-8 hidden nodes were used in these
tes;s). A more detailed description is available in [ 111.
The results of two selected neural networks are presented
in this section. The first network was trained to recognize
unstable operating conditions in a given pre-contingency
configuration with respect to several contingencies whereas
the second one was trained to recognize unstable operating
conditions for several pre-contingency configurations with
respect to a single contingency.
Neural Network Trained with Several Contingencies:
A single pre-contingency topology of the power system was
considered for which 378 cases were created. Of this 378
cases, 300 were randomly selected as training cases and the
remainder used as test cases. The tests were repeated with
different selections of training and test cases. The
classification by the neural network was very good, i.e., no
potentially severe contingency was classified as a harmless
one.
The output of the neural network for cases involving a
specified contingency is presented in Figure 5 in the form of
a contour plot. In this figure, the X and Y axes represent the
fault clearing time and the generation level, respectively.
The thick curve represents the stability boundary determined
by the neural network, i.e., output = 0.5. The piece-wise
linear curve to the left of this stability boundary is the
envelope of the stable cases as determined by step-by-step
simulations. The piece-wise linear curve to the right is the
envelope of unstable cases.
. . . . . *
, . . . *
. * * . e *
.-. 4 . . . *
. . . . .
0.0
2.8
Figure 5 Stability boundary by A"
Neural Network Trained with Several Pre-
Contingency Configurations: Six different precontingency
configurations were considered each with 7 different levels of
generation at a given plant. A single contingency with
different fault clearing time was applied in all 6
configurations. A single neural network of the same smcture
as that in the previous test was used. Again, the classification
of the contingencies by the neural network was was quite
accurate.
The typical CPU times required for training the neural
network in the above tests were in the range of 5 to 50
seconds on a 15.6 MIPS workstation. The CPU time required
for classification of a case by a trained network is of the order
of milliseconds. The training time can be further reduced by
a judicious selection of the training cases.
8. CONCLUSION
This paper presents a new approach for contingency
screening in DSA. A combination of a ranking procedure for
all contingencies together with an ANN based classification
method to separate stable and unstable contingencies is
suggested.
First, it is shown that several severity indices work well
when combined together. These indices are calculated for the
system states a few steps after fault clearing using the usual

time domain simulation. The characteristics of capture ratio
and capture number are used to verify the quality and the
reliability of the severity indices. The test results show that
some composite severity indices can rank contingencies quite
reliably and the computation speed is suitable for screening.
Then, the paper suggests that an ANN based
classification of contingencies into stable and unstable cases
be used for the selection of the more severe cases from the
ranked contingencies. The ANN and its training procedure
using severity indices rather than state variables, are
described. Results show that the classification of the
contingencies was quite accurate.
The successful results presented above is another step
towards finding practical screening procedures. Search for
better indices and faster calculation of these indices must go
on to achieve more accurate ranking. Search for better
selection procedures is also important. Although ANNs with
simpler training methods were found, ANNs that would work
well for operating conditions far from those envisaged during
training, are still needed.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This work was supported by the Electric Power Research
Institute and the National Science Foundation. The authors
would like to extend their thanks for project guidance from
Mr. Gerry Cauley of EPRI and valuable inputs in the ANN
area from Professor M. A. El-Sharkawi of the University of
Washington.
REFERENCES
1. G. C. Ejebe and B. F. Wollenberg, "Automatic Contingency
Selection," IEEE Trans. on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol.
PAS-98, pp. 92-104,JanlFeb 1979.
2. V. Brandwajn, "Efficient Bounding Method for Linear
Contingency Analysis," IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, vol. 3,
no. 1, pp. 38-43, Feb. 1988.
3. Y. Chen and A. Bose, "Direct Ranking for Voltage
Contingency Selection," IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, vol.
4, no. 4, pp. 1335-1344, October 1989.
4. G. C. Ejebe, H. P. Van Meeteren and B. F. Wollenberg, "Fast
Contingency Screening and Evaluation for Voltage Security
Analysis," IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, vol. 3, no. 4, pp.
1582-1590,NOV.1988.
5. F. Albuyeh, A. Bose and B. Heath, "Reactive Power
Considerations in Automatic Contingency Selection," IEEE
Trans. on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-101, pp.
107-112, J ~ ~ U X1982.
Y from Arizona State University in 1993 and is employed by
6. V. Brandwajn, Y. Liu, and M. G. Lauby, 'Re-Screening of
Single Contingencies Causing Network Topology Changes,"
IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 30-36, Feb.
1991.
7. V. Brandwajn and M. G. Lauby, "Complete Bounding Method
for AC Contingency Screening," IEEE Trans. on Power
Systems, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 724-729, May 1989.
8. A. A. Fouad, Chairman, "Dynamic Security Assessment
Practices in North America." IEEE Committee Report, IEEE
1141
Trans. on Power Systems, vol. 3 no. 3, pp. 1310-1321, Aug.
1988.
9. A. Bose, Chairman, "Application of Direct Methods to
Transient Stability Analysis of Power Systems," IEEE
Committee Report, IEEE Trans. on Power Apparatus and
Systems, vol. PAS-103, no. 7, pp. 1629-1636,July 1984.
10. F. A. Rahimi, M. G. Lauby, J. N. Wrubel , I<. L. Lee,
"Evaluation of The Transient Energy Function Method for On-
line Dynamic Security Analysis," IEEE Trans. on Power
Systems, vol. 8. no. 2, pp. 497-507, May 1993.
11. A. B. R. Kumar, V. Brandwajn and A. Ipakchi, "Power
Systems Dynamic Security Analysis Using Artificial
Intelligence Systems, Phase I- Feasibility Evaluation," Final
Report RP3103-2, EPRI.
12. S. Weerasooriya and M. A. El-Sharkawi, "Feature Selection for
Static Security Assessment Using Neural Networks," IEEE
International Symposium on Circuits and System, San Diego,
CA May 1992.
13. Y. Mansour et.al., "B.C.Hydro's On-Line Transient Stability
Assessment Model Development, Analysis and Post
Processing," IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, pp. 241-253,Feb
1995.
14. C.K. Tang et. al., 'Transient Stability Index from Conventional
Time Domain Simulation," IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, pp.
1524-1530, Aug 1994.
15. Y.H. Pao, "Combined Use of Unsupervised and Supervised
Learning for Dynamic Security Assessment," IEEE Trans. on
Power Systems,pp. 878-884, May 1992.
16. "Analytical Methods for Contingency Selection and Ranking
for Dynamic Security Analysis," EPRI TR-104352 Final
Report September 1994.
BIOGRAPHIES
Vladimir Brandwajn is Senior Pnncipal Consultant at ABB
Systems Control and is responsible for R&D in power system
analysis. He is well-known for his substantial contributions in
power system security analysis and the analysis of
electromagnetic transients.
Ranjit Kumar is a Principal Engineer at ABB Systems
Control. He was Principal Investigator on EPRI's RP2496-1
entitled, "Dynamic Security Assessment for Power Systems:
Research Plan," and is currently involved in EPRI's RP3102-
2 entitled "Contingency Ranking and Screening for DSA
Using Artificial Intelligence Techniques."
Ali Ipakchi is Manager of Analytic Applications at ABB
Systems Control. He is responsible for contract R&D
projects.
Steve D. Kuo received his Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering
Integrated Micro Solutions in San Jose, CA. His main
interests are in transient stability analysis, security analysis
and system planning.
Aqjan Bose is the Distinguished Professor in Power
Engineering and Director of the School of Electrical
Engineering and Computer Science at Washington State
University in Pullman, WA.
1142

1. We did not propose a systematic way of deciding the

type of indices and their weights when used in combination.
BJeyasurya (Memorial University of Newfoundland, St.John's, From the test results, we know that this is very system
NF, Canada): The authors are to be congratulated for presenting dependent but it
is quite difficult to relate these types or
a new method for contingency screening in dynamic security
assessment. An integrated approach of conventional time-domain weights of the indices with particular power system
simulation, direct methods and artificial neural network will make parameters. For the static contingency screening where
on-line dynamic security assessment feasible in Energy similar combinations of indices can be used, it has been
Management Systems. The authors' comments on the following suggested that some learning or adaptive algorithms can be
points would be greatly appreciated. used to set the weights but we are not aware of any particular
implementation.
1. A specific combinationof the two indices DW and DR have
been used for the power systems tested. Do the authors propose a 2. One of the reasons the ANN described here can
systematic way of deciding the type of indices and their weight in successfully predict stability is because it is trying to
the combination for any power system ? Or is it by trial and error
only '? accomplish a simple discrimination, namely, whether the
system is stable. Those ANNs that have tried to map
2. The output of the proposed neural network gives stable or operating conditions to stability measures have had difficulty
unstable information. A quantitative measure of the stability of the with both training and prediction accuracy. The main point of
power system will be very useful to the operators. It may be this paper is to suggest the use of a simple ANN to determine
possible to design an ANN which can map the operating conditions which disturbances are unstable and then to use indices as a
of the power system to a suitable measure of stability. measure of the severity of the fault for the stable cases. Unlike
in static security assessment where post-disturbance severity
3. In the studies presented in the paper, the training cases is the only measure, dynamic security assessment needs to
have been limited around the stability boundary. What will be the
effect on the training time and accuracy of the ANN if wide range ascertain stability, and for the stable cases the 'nearness' to
of (realistic) operating conditions are considered in the training instability is also of interest.
set ?
3. Since the ANN is only discriminating among stable
Manuscript received August 14, 1996. and unstable, its training is relatively simple. We did not try
training the ANN with cases far from the stability boundary
as this was not necessary for our purpose. However, the
literature suggests that the training time increases and the
V. ~ r a n ~ w a j n
A., mar, A. Ipakchi, A. Bose, S.D. accuracy decreases when the ANN has to deal with a much
Kuo: We thank the discussor for his interest and the larger set of operating conditions.
opportunity to clarify the issues he raises. Manuscript received November 26, 1996.