Three-Phase Load Flow Analysis of the Unbalanced
Distribution Networks
Denisa Rusinaru, Leonardo Geo Manescu,
Marian Ciontu
Faculty of Electrical Engineering
University of Craiova
Craiova, Romania
drusinaru@elth.ucv.ro
Abstract²This paper summarizes the results of a three-phase
load flow analysis case study. This work was part of an overall
energy systems modeling and analysis effort designed to develop
a validated power flow study that facilitates understanding of
power flow concepts for the present distribution networks
operating in asymmetry conditions. To simplify data collection
requirements and illustrate key concepts, a representative HV
power distribution network with unbalanced loads was chosen
for the study. The analysis methodology used in this illustrative
case study and the lessons learned from the study could assist the
grid operator in conducting power flow studies of operational
areas of interest.
Keywords²three-phase load flow; unbalanced load; asymmetry
factor.
I. INTRODUCTION
This paper describes how an asymmetrical electric utility
system is modeled by using a three-phase load flow technique
in order to establish a validated power flow case suitable for
simulating and evaluating alternative system scenarios [1, 2].
As we already mentioned in the previous work, the load
flow algorithm is the core of a Matlab (R2014a) computing
tool. PFASYM is a Matlab-based power system analysis and
simulation tool developed by the authors.
Though PFASYM does not have any GUI, it allows
modeling of unbalanced loads and has robust and efficient
algorithms to solve three-phase load flow. The simulation
results can be obtained in the form of static report (text output)
and plots (graphical output).
The reason behind developing the computational tool with
MATLAB programming environment is 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 PFASYM is free to download and allow
modifications (since the user owns a Matlab license) [1, 3].
The work summarizes the three-phase load flow model
simulation and validation, and describes the general
978-1-4673-8562-‹IEEE
Miron Alba
CEZ Distribution
CEZ Romania
Craiova, Romania
Miron.Alba@cez.ro
capabilities of an information query system designed to access
load flow parameters and other electrical system information.
II. SUBROUTINES OF THE THREE-PHASE LOAD FLOW PROGRAM
There are 12 subroutines making part of PFASYM, which
are designed to compute the network parameters for the
equivalent sequence circuits of the network, as well as the bus
and branch values describing the asymmetrical operation:
voltages, currents, powers and asymmetry factors, too.
Details of the unbalanced load flow model are given in the
previous works [4, 5, 6]. The equivalent phase-to-phase
admittance model proposed for the unbalanced loads
representation intends to correlate modeled electrical system
parameters with the corresponding physical equipment that
makes up the system disturbed by asymmetries.
The features of the PFASYM subroutines are given in
Table I.
TABLE I. COMPONENTS OF PFASYM LOAD FLOW PROGRAM
Subroutine Description
PARIN.mat Read and validate input network branch parameters
Computes the sequence parameters and the
TRANSFORM.m SULPLWLYHPDWUL[IRUWKHQHWZRUN¶VSRZHU
transformers
Computes the sequence parameters and the
LINE.m SULPLWLYHPDWUL[IRUWKHQHWZRUN¶VV\PPHWULFDO
(Linsim) and asymmetrical lines (Linnes)
Computes the sequence admittance matrix for the
SHUNTS.m
QHWZRUN¶VUHDFWLYHVKXQWFRPSRQHQWV
CONDEZ.m Computes the admittance matrix of the coupled
sequence networks in buses with unbalanced loads
Computes and store with sparsity technique the bus
YNODSECV.mat sequence submatrices YPP, YNN, YZZ, YPN,
YNP, YPZ, YZP, YNZ, YZN
Computes the inverse bus admittance matrices for
INVYNZ.m
the negative and zero sequence circuits ZNN, ZZZ
MSTIN.mat Read and validate input bus data
CSPOZ.m
Computes the Jacobian for the positive sequence
circuit, as well as the correspondent iteration values
Computes the actual iteration negative and zero
MSTNZ.m
components of bus voltages and currents
 Subroutine Description connecting points for railway traction substations (#1, #10,
Validates the solution convergence and computes #11) for which a high level of asymmetry (over 2.5%) was
FINAL.m the phase bus and branch values, as well as registered. The load flow input data is given in Table II. Partly
asymmetry factors of it is purchased directly from the measurements collected
EDIT.mat Writes the output data sets of the local distribution operator.
TABLE I. COMPONENTS OF PFASYM LOAD FLOW PROGRAM (CONTINUATION)
PFASYM program takes within 10 iterations until the
convergence of the three-phase load flow problems to be
III. SIMULATION RESULTS attained for this network with a tolerance of 0.001 p.u. for bus
The three-phase power flow model PFASYM was applied power mismatch criterion.
to a representative electric power system in order to validate a
power flow case study suitable for simulating and evaluating TABLE III. BUS DATA OF THE TEST NETWORK
DOWHUQDWLYHVFHQDULRVIRUWKHV\VWHP¶VSKDVHVORDGLQJ>@7KLV
network section was selected because of its technical Bus ID P [MW] Q [MW]
complexity, which allowed all major concepts pertaining to #1 3.464 1.679
power flow studies to be addressed, and its proximity to our
research center, which facilitated site visits and access to data. #2 0.000 0.000

#3 2.176 0.966
So that, a local 110 kV distribution network model was
used in the analysis ± see Fig.1. #4 5.887 1.642

#5 6.001 1.833

#6 3.615 1.201

#7 0 0

#8 22.498 12.231

#9 14.400 6.900

#10 3.226 0.803

#11 3.087 0.799

A. Study Cases
The load flow simulation performed by PFASYM tool has
resulted in calculation of the network phase values, and
consequently the asymmetry factors in the network buses.
These figures allow us to study:
Fig. 1. The test network configuration. - the voltage asymmetries propagation in the buses of
the test network;
TABLE II. BRANCH DATA OF THE TEST NETWORK
- the mutual perturbations among unbalanced
consumers.
Branch
From To R [:] X [:] Y [mS] For this purpose, the following study cases are considered:
bus bus
Case I. The first studied configuration of the network
#1 #2 0.7336 1.5298 0.0711 described by the previous information is in accordance with
#1 #12 0.8263 1.7231 0.0820 the real field data and includes 3 buses (#1, #10 and #11) with
unbalanced loads (Case I). This case configuration is
#2 #4 0.9885 2.0612 0.0960 considered as reference (named here initial configuration) for
#4 #6 0.9885 2.0612 0.0960 the following ones, described below. By running PFASYM for
this case, the simulation results are obtained as in Table IV.
#6 #9 0.1421 0.2963 0.0129
Case II. In the initial configuration the load in bus #10 is
#7 #8 0.1421 0.2963 0.0129
replaced by a balanced one. The simulation results are given in
#7 #12 3.1044 6.4736 0.3014 Table V.
#8 #11 0.8263 1.7231 0.0800 Case III. In the initial configuration the load in bus #1 is
replaced by a balanced one. The simulation results are given in
#11 #10 4.2241 8.0860 0.4103
Table VI.
For the next two study cases, the same unbalanced loads
The network model consists of 12 buses and 9 lines, with are placed at different distances by the injection bus.
branch data given in Table I. A number of 3 buses are
 Case IV. In the initial configuration the load in bus #1 is TABLE VI. BUS RESULTS FOR CASE III
added to one in #2. The simulation results are given in Table PA QA PB QB PC OC
Bus
VII. ID [MW] [MAVr] [MW] [MAVr] [MW] [MAVr]
Case V. In the initial configuration the load value in bus #1 #1 1.2230 1.8230 1.2240 1.8230 1.2240 1.8220
is added to one in #6. The simulation results are given in Table
VIII. #2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

#3 0.7240 0.3260 0.7040 0.3040 0.7100 0.3200

TABLE IV. BUS RESULTS FOR THE INITIAL CONFIGURATION (CASE I) #4 2.4230 0.5180 2.0060 0.5450 2.0450 0.5450

PA QA PB QB PC OC #5 1.9680 0.5800 1.8640 0.5780 2.0060 0.6270

Bus
ID [MW] [MAVr] [MW] [MAVr] [MW] [MAVr] #6 1.1280 0.4050 1.1780 0.4000 1.2200 0.4650
#1 1.2230 1.8230 2.2150 0.1570 0.0000 0.0000 #7 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
#2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 #8 7.6350 4.7360 7.3470 4.6120 7.7300 4.0070
#3 0.7240 0.3260 0.7040 0.3040 0.7100 0.3200 #9 4.6620 2.2340 4.6730 2.2390 4.6720 2.2380
#4 2.5430 0.5090 1.9060 0.5500 1.9450 0.5500 #10 1.9500 0.4470 0.0000 0.0000 1.1660 1.2580
#5 1.9680 0.5800 1.8670 0.5780 2.0100 0.6280 #11 2.0680 1.8950 0.5560 0.5820 0.6260 0.5230
#6 1.1280 0.4050 1.1780 0.4000 1.2230 0.3650 Pgen [MW] 250.9850 Qgen [MVAr] 215.3470
#7 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
In the Case III, a balanced repartition of the phase load
#8 7.6350 4.7360 7.3470 4.6120 7.7300 4.0070 powers has a minimal influence on the vicinity load buses (#4,
#9 4.6620 2.2340 4.6790 2.2420 4.6810 2.2430 #6), but leads to a higher network injection, which is possible
influenced by the low overall load on the B-phase of the
#10 1.9500 0.4470 0.0000 0.0000 1.1660 1.2580 network.
#11 2.0680 1.8950 0.5560 0.5820 0.6260 0.5230

Pgen [MW] 250.7830 Qgen [MVAr] 211.5410 TABLE VII. BUS RESULTS FOR CASE IV

Bus PA QA PB QB PC OC
ID [MW] [MAVr] [MW] [MAVr] [MW] [MAVr]
#1 1.2220 1.8190 2.2140 0.1570 0.0000 0.0000
TABLE V. BUS RESULTS FOR CASE II
#2 1.2130 1.8050 2.2000 0.1560 0.0000 0.0000
Bus PA QA PB QB PC OC
ID [MW] [MAVr] [MW] [MAVr] [MW] [MAVr] #3 0.7220 0.3250 0.7030 0.3030 0.7100 0.3200
#1 1.2230 1.8230 2.2150 0.1570 0.0000 0.0000 #4 1.9120 0.5070 1.9030 0.5490 1.9070 0.5510
#2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 #5 1.9650 0.5780 1.8640 0.5770 2.0100 0.6280
#3 0.7240 0.3260 0.7040 0.3040 0.7100 0.3200 #6 1.1270 0.4050 1.1700 0.3990 1.2230 0.3650
#4 2.5430 0.5090 1.9060 0.5500 1.9450 0.5500 #7 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
#5 1.9680 0.5800 1.8670 0.5780 2.0100 0.6280 #8 7.6350 4.7360 7.2560 4.5550 7.6830 3.9830
#6 1.1280 0.4050 1.1780 0.4000 1.2230 0.3650 #9 4.6550 2.2300 4.6720 2.2390 4.6820 2.2430
#7 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 #10 1.9500 0.4470 0.0000 0.0000 1.9550 1.2540
#8 7.6350 4.7360 7.3470 4.6120 7.7300 4.0070 #11 2.0570 1.9340 0.5560 0.5920 0.6260 0.5340
#9 4.6620 2.2340 4.6790 2.2420 4.6810 2.2430 Pgen [MW] 259.9320 Qgen [MVAr] 215.9640
#10 1.9500 0.4470 1.9770 0.4540 1.9810 0.4550
TABLE VIII. BUS RESULTS FOR CASE V
#11 2.0680 1.8950 0.5560 0.5810 0.6260 0.5250
Bus PA QA PB QB PC OC
Pgen [MW] 253.5520 Qgen [MVAr] 209.3550 ID [MW] [MAVr] [MW] [MAVr] [MW] [MAVr]
#1 1.2230 1.8230 2.2150 0.1570 0.0000 0.0000

In the Case II, the system phase loading leads to a slight #2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
change repartition of the phase powers on vicinity bus #11 and #3 0.7220 0.3250 0.7030 0.3030 0.7100 0.3200
minimally discharges the network injection source of reactive
power. #4 1.9060 0.5060 1.9020 0.5490 1.9070 0.5510
 Bus PA QA PB QB PC OC B. Cases Results
ID [MW] [MAVr] [MW] [MAVr] [MW] [MAVr] %DVHGRQWKHVLPXODWLRQUHVXOWVJLYHQLQ7DEOH,9«,;WKH
#5 1.9590 0.5760 1.8620 0.5770 2.0100 0.6280 voltage asymmetry factors are given in Fig.2, Fig.3 and Fig.4.
#6 2.8310 2.1750 3.3350 0.2450 1.2230 0.3650 These ones outline the differences between the six
considered study cases.
#7 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

#8 7.6350 4.7360 7.2560 4.5550 7.683 3.9830

#9 4.6280 2.2170 4.6630 2.2350 4.6820 2.2430

#10 1.9500 0.4470 0.0000 0.0001 1.1660 1.2580

#11 2.0680 1.8950 0.5680 0.5950 0.6260 0.5230 k_U

[%]
Pgen [MW] 260.3810 Qgen [MVAr] 216.0050
TABLE VIII. BUS RESULTS FOR CASE V (CONTINUATION)

For the Cases IV, V, the aggravation of the overall

asymmetry following the increase of the loads unbalance leads
to a higher network injection up to 3% compared to the initial
configuration case. Bus ID
For the next study case, the level of asymmetry for an Fig. 2. 9ROWDJHDV\PPHWU\IDFWRUVIRU&DVHV,«,9
unbalanced load is increased.
Case VI. In the initial configuration the asymmetry of the
load in bus #1 is doubled. The simulation results are given in
Table IX.
k_U
TABLE IX. BUS RESULTS FOR CASE VI [%]

Bus PA QA PB QB PC OC
ID [MW] [MAVr] [MW] [MAVr] [MW] [MAVr]
#1 2.4440 3.6380 4.4270 0.3140 0.0000 0.0000

#2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

#3 0.7230 0.3250 0.7040 0.3040 0.7100 0.3200 Bus ID

#4 1.9150 0.5080 1.9050 0.5500 1.9450 0.5500
Fig. 3. Voltage asymmetry factors for Cases IV vs. Case V
#5 1.9690 0.5790 1.8650 0.5780 2.0100 0.6280

#6 1.1290 0.4050 1.1770 0.4000 1.2230 0.3650

#7 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

#8 7.6350 4.7360 7.3470 4.6120 7.7300 4.0070

#9 4.6630 2.2350 4.6790 2.2400 4.6810 2.2430 k_U

[%]
#10 1.9500 0.4470 0.0000 0.0000 1.1660 1.2580

#11 2.0680 1.8950 0.5560 0.5820 0.6260 0.5340

Pgen [MW] 254.2060 Qgen [MVAr] 213.2410

For this case, the active power injection into the network
has a lower increase by comparison with the two previous
cases (approximately 1.3% compared to the initial case).
The validation of the PFASYM results was made for the
studied network by running the load flow program of ETAP
14.1.0 [7]. For the studied network, the PFASYM load flow
solution exhibited a maximum deviation of 3.184% (in bus #
1) from that generated by ETAP program.
Bus ID
Fig. 4. Voltage asymmetry factors for Case I vs Case VI
IV. CONCLUSIONS
This paper summarizes the results of a load flow analysis
case study performed with PFASYM program (a Matlab-based
computational tool for three-phase power system analysis).
 The analysis of data resulting from the field measurements
and the three-phase load flow solution performed with
PFASYM outlined for the studied network that in some buses
the voltage asymmetries exceeds the standards limits [8], [9].
The voltage asymmetry is high in the buses unbalanced loads,
but mostly in the bus placed centrally on the network
configuration related to the connecting points of the three
railway traction substations.
Related to the initial configuration case, the load
symmetrization in one of the unbalanced load buses leads to
decreasing of the voltage asymmetry factor in the buses of its
vicinity, while in those buses nearby that with unbalanced load
the voltage asymmetry tends to increase. The values for the
generator bus remain unchanged.
By increasing the distance between the highly unbalanced
loads and the system injection bus leads to an aggravation of
the voltage asymmetry. By doubling the bus power for the
unbalanced load the voltage asymmetry in vicinity load bus is
slightly increased.
The PFASYM results were validated by comparison with
those of ETAP simulation. Though the convergence of
solution was reached more rapidly (up to 5 iterations) in the
FDVHRIWKHSURSULHWDU\WRROWKH3)$6<0¶VUHVXOWVDUHVLPLODU
with an average error within 3.2% related to the ETAP ones.
REFERENCES
[1] D. Rusinaru, The permament unbalanced operation of the power
networks (in Romanian), 1st ed., Craiova, Universitaria Publ., 2005.
[2] J. Arrillaga, and C.P. Arnold, Three-phase load flow, in Computer
Analysis of Power Systems, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., West Sussex,
England. doi: 10.1002/9781118878309.ch3, 1990.
[3] D. Rusinaru, D. Popescu, L.G. Manescu, and D.E. Firinca, ³,QWHJUDWHG
didactic software package for computer based analysis of power
quality´, Proceeding s of 11th International Conference on Applied and
Theoretical Electricity (ICATE), Craiova, ROMANIA, p(s): 1 ± 5, 2012.
[4] '5XVLQDUX/*0DQHVFXDQG5&'LQX³Compensator configurations
for load currents' symmetrization´, International Conference on Applied
Sciences ICAS2015, Book Series: IOP Conference Series-Materials Science
and Engineering, Vol: 106, 2016, 012030.
[5] ' 5XVLQDUX ' / * 0DQHVFX DQG 0 0HUIX ³7KH /RDG 8QEDODQFH
Influence on the Power Factor Value in Three-Phase Distribution
1HWZRUNV´ 5HFHQW $GYDnces in Electrical Engineering Series 22 314-
319, 2013.
[6] ( 'HPLURN 6% 6RUHQ ' 6HUD DQG 5 7HRGRUHVFX ³7KUHH-Phase
8QEDODQFHG/RDG)ORZ7RROIRU'LVWULEXWLRQ1HWZRUNV´3URFHHGLQJVRI
the 2nd International Workshop on Integration of Solar Power Systems.
Energynautics GmbH, 2012.
[7] ETAP 14.1. User Guide. ETAP Operation Technology, Inc., 2015.
[8] Romanian Performance Standard for the Electricity Distribution Service,
ANRE, 2015.
[9] EN 50160, Voltage characteristics of electricity supplied by public
distribution systems, 1999