Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
ScienceDirect

Energy Reports 9 (2023) 486–493

www.elsevier.com/locate/egyr

2022 The 3rd International Conference on Power and Electrical Engineering (ICPEE 2022)
29–31 December, Singapore

Voltage stability assessment for solar photovoltaic penetration using

Reactive Power–Voltage and Active Power–Voltage modal analysis
M.H. Ibrahima ,∗, S.P. Anga , M.N. Dania , Rafidah Petraa , M.A. Salamb
a Electrical and Electronic Engineering Programme Area, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Brunei, Tungku
Highway, Gadong BE1410, Brunei Darussalam
b School of Applied Science and Technology, Faculty of Science, Trades and Technology, 1001 Fanshawe College Blvd, London, Ontario, N5Y

5R6, Canada
Received 16 April 2023; accepted 20 May 2023
Available online 31 May 2023

Abstract
The assessment of voltage stability in a power system is crucial to ensure all buses in the network can maintain the
desired voltage or avoid maximum loadability when subjected to load disturbance. Current research has tended to concentrate
on developing new voltage stability assessment tools rather than identifying the best location for the penetration of solar
photovoltaic (SP) generation in the network. This paper examines and evaluate the power systems voltage stability with
increasing SP penetration levels by employing both the Active Power–Voltage (PV) and Reactive Power–Voltage (QV) modal
analysis. The effect of load flow study by penetrating SP at the weakest and the strongest load bus has been investigated in
this work. Furthermore, the analysis in this work was carried out in the modified Brunei Darussalam Department of Electrical
Services (DES) power system. The main contribution of this paper is to assess and identify the best and worst locations for
SP penetration in the simplified DES power system network in Brunei Darussalam using both the QV and PV modal analysis.
The load flow results show that the penetration of SP generation is much better at the strongest bus due to it does not influence
other load buses as compared to the least reliable bus in the network.
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 3rd International Conference on Power and Electrical Engineering, ICPEE, 2022.

Keywords: Brunei Darussalam; Weakest bus; Strongest bus; QV modal analysis; PV modal analysis; Solar photovoltaic penetration

1. Introduction
The ability of a power system to keep a consistent voltage at all buses in the presence of a disturbance is known
as voltage stability [1]. The risk of voltage instability in the power system networks has been identified as a key
issue in the design and operation of the power system [2]. This occurs as a result of an increase in load demand
as well as issues with the economy and environment. They are mostly the result of the current power system being
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: P20210003@student.utb.edu.bn (M.H. Ibrahim).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2023.05.124
2352-4847/© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 3rd International Conference on Power and Electrical Engineering, ICPEE,
2022.
M.H. Ibrahim, S.P. Ang, M.N. Dani et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 486–493

under stress, which may push it closer to its stability limit [3]. After all preventative steps are taken, a series of
events known as a voltage collapse occurs. This sequence of events causes a progressive drop in voltages that finally
causes a large section of the power system to go black [4]. This often happens when the network lacks reactive
power in places that are frequently loaded or during significant disruptions.
There are several methods available in the literature to assess voltage stability problems in a network as discussed
as follows. In [5], the most vulnerable bus in the network was identified by employing the voltage stability index.
In [6], three different indices namely the line stability index indicator, voltage collapse proximity indicator, and fast
voltage stability index indicator were employed to determine the weakest line in the network instead of the weakest
bus. In [7,8], the Jacobian matrix of the network is utilized to determine the minimum magnitude eigenvalues of
the Jacobian matrix and the singular value decomposition of the Jacobian matrix to determine the stability of the
network. In [9], the voltage collapse point was predicted using a test function based on the Jacobian matrix and
fitted using a quadratic model. In [10,11], QV and PV modal analysis was employed to determine the weakest
bus in the network based on the reduced Jacobian matrix. In [12,13], PV and QV curves were employed to
predict the voltage security of the network, by determining the maximum loadability limit at the nose of the curve.
However, employing this method is inefficient and requires a large computation time for a large network [14]. In
[15,16], several machine learning methods is used for voltage stability evaluation. Nevertheless, the accuracy of
these methodologies is greatly influenced by the nature and size of the datasets and test systems employed. In
[17], optimization technique is employed to enhance the system dynamic voltage stability as well as improving the
costs and environment by maximizing the renewable power penetration and minimize the total cost. In [18], uses
a global index to quantify system strength in terms of voltage recovery to evaluate the success of interventions to
improve short-term voltage stability. In [19], effective reactive power is investigated to determine the best position
and size for grid-connected inverter-based renewable resources and enable greater integration of renewable energy.
In [20], a three-phase unbalanced continuation power flow algorithm is employed for distribution networks with
strong renewable energy penetration. As aforementioned, most studies focus on developing new techniques for
voltage stability assessment. However, less effort is expended in investigating the best and the worst location for
SP penetration with the aid of voltage stability assessment.
Therefore, this paper focuses on the investigation of the impact of SP penetration at the best and worst locations
in the network. This paper key contribution is to identify the best and worst locations for SP penetration in the
simplified Brunei Darussalam DES network using both the PV and QV modal analysis. These analyses were
considered due to their consistent results to identify the least reliable bus of a large network as discussed in [10].
In this paper, the results show that the penetration of SP to the strongest bus is much better as compared to the
weakest bus in the network.
The structure of the paper’s remaining sections is as follows. The Brunei Darussalam DES power network’s
simplified modelling is shown in Section 2. Section 3 describes how to undertake an assessment of voltage stability
for SP penetration. In Section 4, the findings are examined, and Section 5 concludes the study.

2. Modelling of simplified DES power network in Brunei Darussalam

The simplified and modified Brunei Darussalam DES network is represented in Fig. 1 as a single line diagram,
and it comprises of line data, 10 load buses, 2 generation buses, and 1 swing bus. Every load bus in the network has a
power factor of 0.9000 at the initial operating point. It should be emphasized that in this work, there is no equipment
restrictions—such as the limit on the reactive power of the generator or a limit on the line temperature—were put
in place. Fig. 2 shows the voltage profile without the SP. It can be noticed that all voltage levels are within the
lower and upper voltage limit of 0.9500 p.u and 1.0500 p.u respectively. The lowest and highest load bus voltage
in the network were identified to be bus 8 and bus 2 respectively, which are equal to 0.9675 p.u and 1.0279 p.u
respectively.

3. Implementation of voltage stability assessment for solar photovoltaic penetration

The methodology of the evaluation of voltage stability for SP penetration is shown in the flowchart of Fig. 3.
Initially, the network as shown in Fig. 1 was modelled in MATLAB software. The base case of load flow result
487
M.H. Ibrahim, S.P. Ang, M.N. Dani et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 486–493

Fig. 1. Simplified 13 bus Brunei Darussalam DES network single line diagram.

Fig. 2. Voltage profile without solar photovoltaic penetration.

Fig. 3. Methodology of voltage stability assessment for solar photovoltaic penetration.

488
M.H. Ibrahim, S.P. Ang, M.N. Dani et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 486–493

before injecting the SP was obtained. The steady-state power flow equations in QV and PV modal analysis may be
described as in [10,11] and can be expressed as in Eq. (1) since they are linearized:
[ ] [ ] [ ]
∆P J Pθ J P V ∆δ
= . (1)
∆Q JQθ JQV ∆V
where ∆P is the change in active power,[ ∆Q is the]change in reactive power, ∆V is the change in voltage, and
J Pθ J P V
∆δ is the change in angle. Meanwhile, is the Jacobian matrix of partial derivatives. In QV modal
JQθ JQV
analysis, to obtained the reduced Jacobian matrix, Jr,qv , the value of ∆P must be equal to zero, and is expressed
as in Eq. (2):
[ ] [ ] [ ]
0 J Pθ J P V ∆δ
= . (2)
∆Q JQθ JQV ∆V
−1
∆Q = [JQV − (JQθ J Pθ J P V )]∆V (3)

−1
Jr,qv = [JQV − (JQθ J Pθ J P V )] (4)
Eq. (5) results from utilizing the eigenvalues and eigenvectors from a reduced Jacobian matrix to describe the
voltage instability modes of the power system which can be written as:
Jr,qv = ξqv Λqv ηqv (5)
where ξqv and ηqv are the left and right eigenvectors of Jr,qv , respectively, and Λqv is the diagonal eigenvalue of
Jr,qv . By using the inverse of Eq. (5), which results in Eqs. (6) and (7), it is possible to represent the change in the
voltage and reactive power relationship as:
−1
Jr,qv = ξqv Λqv
−1
ηqv (6)
∑ ξk,qv ηk,qv
∆V = ξqv Λqv
−1
ηqv ∆Q = ∆Q (7)
k
λk,qv
where ξk,qv and ηk,qv are the k T H column right and row left eigenvectors of Jr,qv , respectively, and Λk,qv is the k T H
eigenvalue. Furthermore, the k T H modal voltage variation can be described as in Eq. (8):
1
∆Vmk = ∆Q mk (8)
λk,qv
The modal eigenvalue, λk,qv , is derived from Eq. (8) and indicates the stability of a mode k with respect to reactive
power fluctuations. If λk,qv > 0, this indicate the system is voltage stable. If λk,qv < 0, this indicate the system is
voltage unstable. If λk,qv = 0, this indicate the system is at voltage stable limit. Additionally, the information about
the power system vulnerable to voltage instability is provided by the right and left eigenvectors corresponding to
the system’s critical modes. By identifying the components involved in this mode, the bus participation factor, Pi j ,
can be expressed as in Eq. (9):
Pi j = ξi j η ji (9)
where, i T H is participating bus in jT H mode. Furthermore, from Eq. (9), the bus with the highest participation factor
in the critical mode is the most crucial bus in the system.
Meanwhile, in PV modal analysis, the value of ∆Q must be equal to zero to obtained the reduced Jacobian
matrix, Jr, pv , and is expressed as in Eq. (10):
[ ] [ ] [ ]
∆P J Pθ J P V ∆δ
= . (10)
0 JQθ JQV ∆V
−1
∆P = [JQθ − (J P V JQV JQθ )]∆δ (11)

−1
Jr, pv = [J Pθ − (J P V JQV JQθ )] (12)
489
M.H. Ibrahim, S.P. Ang, M.N. Dani et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 486–493

The voltage instability modes in the power system can be written and expressed as in Eq. (13):
Jr, pv = ξ pv Λ pv η pv (13)
where ξ pv and η pv are the left and right eigenvectors of Jr, pv , respectively, and Λ pv is the diagonal eigenvalue of
Jr, pv . The inverse of Eq. (13), which produced equations (14) and (15), might be used to indicate the change in
voltage angle and active power relationship of the bus:
Jr,−1pv = ξ pv Λ−1
pv η pv (14)
∑ ξk, pv ηk, pv
∆θ = ξ pv Λ−1
pv η pv ∆P = ∆P (15)
k
λk, pv
1
∆θmk = ∆Pmk (16)
λk, pv
The modal eigenvalue, λk, pv , is derived from Eq. (16) and indicates the stability of a mode k with respect to active
power fluctuations. If λk, pv > 0, this indicate the system is voltage stable. If λk, pv < 0, this indicate the system is
voltage unstable. If λk, pv = 0, this indicate the system is at voltage stable limit. Furthermore, the bus participation
factor at the critical mode could be calculated using Eq. (9). The most vulnerable bus could be identified from the
largest bus participation factor and vice-versa. Once the weakest and strongest buses had been identified in both
QV and PV modal analysis, the SP is then injected to the selected buses. The amount of SP active power level
injected into the system can be simply calculated using Eq. (17):
y
Pdesired ∑
Psp = %× Γn (17)
100 n=1,2,3,...,y

where Pdesired is the number of SP active power desired by the user, Γ is the entire system load added together, n
is the number of load bus in the system, and y is the overall number of load buses in the system. The load flow
outcomes from the base case and the SP penetration scenario are then contrasted.

4. Results and discussion

The voltage stability assessment for SP penetration into the simplified DES power network in Brunei Darussalam
using QV and PV modal analysis is presented in this section. By determining the Pi j , at the critical mode, the load
flow result with SP at a different level was examined. The critical mode in the network was identified based on
the lowest eigenvalue of Jr , where in Fig. 4, the eigenvalues of the reduced Jacobian matrix found using both QV
and PV modal analysis are shown. It was discovered that every eigenvalue is positive. This shows that the voltage
inside the power supply is steady. Furthermore, the smallest eigenvalue in both QV and PV analysis were at modes

Fig. 4. Eigenvalues for both QV and PV analysis.

490
M.H. Ibrahim, S.P. Ang, M.N. Dani et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 486–493

equal to 10 and 7 respectively, which are equal to 6.6959 and 1.7586 respectively. These modes were considered
due to the small change in reactive or active power gives a significant contribution towards the voltage magnitude
and angle respectively.
The results of calculating the bus Pi j for various modes are shown in Fig. 5. In the QV modal analysis at
mode equal to 10, buses 8 and 7 both have high Pi j factors, where bus 8 is the highest at 0.7599. Furthermore,
buses 8, 7, and 5 are the top three buses with high participation factors in PV modal analysis at mode equal to 7,
with Bus 8 having the greatest participation factor at 0.1461 in mode 7. As a result, bus 8 represents the weakest
load bus in the network while having a voltage magnitude that is between the voltage limit and has the biggest
contribution to voltage instability. Meanwhile, the strongest load bus in the network was obtained from the lowest
load bus participation factor. It was found that from PV modal analysis, bus 2 has the lowest load bus participation
factor. As a result, bus 2 is not susceptible to voltage instability. It must be noted that bus 1, bus 3, and bus 6 are
not considered as the lowest participation factor in PV modal analysis due to its classification as a slack bus and
generation bus.

Fig. 5. Bus participation factor at critical mode for both QV and PV modal analysis.

Figs. 6 and 7 show the two case studies in injecting the SP at a different level of the total loading into the
simplified Brunei Darussalam DES power system network. In Fig. 6, the voltage profile results for Case 1 is shown,
where the SP was penetrated to the weakest bus. It was found that as the amount of SP active power increases,
the bus voltage at bus 8 and bus 7 increases. The increase in voltage at bus 7 is due to it being ranked as the
second-highest load bus participation factor in both PV and QV modal analysis.

Fig. 6. Case 1: In this case, solar photovoltaic was penetrated to the weakest load bus.

491
M.H. Ibrahim, S.P. Ang, M.N. Dani et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 486–493

Fig. 7. Case 2: In this case, solar photovoltaic was penetrated to the strongest load bus.

Meanwhile, Fig. 7 shows the voltage profile results for Case 2, where the SP was penetrated to the strongest
bus. It was found that as the amount of SP active power increases, the bus voltage at bus 2 increases insignificantly.
Furthermore, it does not influence the voltage of other load buses. This is due to bus 2 having the lowest load bus
participation factor in PV modal analysis.

5. Conclusion
In this paper, voltage stability assessment for SP using QV and PV modal analysis was successfully employed
to determine the best and the worst load bus location for SP penetration. Both QV and PV modal analysis conveys
that bus 8 and bus 2 are the weakest and the strongest respectively of the simplified DES power network in Brunei
Darussalam. This paper presents two different case studies on penetrating the SP at different levels. It was found that
the best location for SP penetration is at the strongest bus due to it does not influence other load buses. Meanwhile,
the penetration of SP at the weakest bus has a significant influence on the other load buses. The investigations
further demonstrate that voltage instability is still possible even though every voltage profile in the base scenario is
within the limit. Thus, the weakest bus in the network needed more attention to avoid over and under voltage. In
our upcoming study, we will take Brunei Darussalam’s deployment of a complete typical DES network with two
winding transformer tap changes, their vector groups, and solar irradiation into consideration.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Data availability
The authors are unable or have chosen not to specify which data has been used.

Acknowledgement
The Berakas Power Company (BPC) provided the technical information and logistical help, which the authors
are grateful.

References
[1] Taylor CW, Balu NJ, Maratukulam D. Power system voltage stability. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.
[2] Jalali A, Aldeen M. Improving voltage stability margin using STATCOM-storage devices. In: 2016 IEEE PES innovative smart grid
technologies conference Europe (ISGT-Europe). 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/isgteurope.2016.7856185.
[3] Gurusinghe DR, Ongsakul W. Particle swarm optimization for voltage stability analysis. In: 2012 IEEE electrical power and energy
conference. 2012, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/epec.2012.6474972.
492
M.H. Ibrahim, S.P. Ang, M.N. Dani et al. Energy Reports 9 (2023) 486–493

[4] Kundur P, Paserba J, Vittal V, Andersson G. Closure of definition and classification of power system stability. IEEE Trans Power Syst
2006;21:446. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/tpwrs.2005.861952.
[5] Kamel S, Mohamed M, Selim A, Nasrat LS, Jurado F. Power system voltage stability based on optimal size and location of shunt
capacitor using analytical technique. In: 2019 10th international renewable energy congress. IREC, 2019, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/irec.
2019.8754516.
[6] Albatsh FM, Ahmad S, Ahmed T, Mahmood FBK, Saha A, Chowdhury MZ, et al. A comparative analysis of line stability indices
for dynamic voltage stability. In: 2017 international conference on engineering technology and technopreneurship (ICE2T). 2017,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ice2t.2017.8215949.
[7] Gao B, Morison GK, Kundur P. Voltage stability evaluation using modal analysis. IEEE Trans Power Syst 1992;7:1529–42.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/59.207377.
[8] Ellithy K, Shaheen M, Al-Athba M, Al-Subaie A, Al-Mohannadi S, Al-Okkah S, et al. Voltage stability evaluation of real power
transmission system using singular value decomposition technique. In: 2008 IEEE 2nd international power and energy conference.
2008, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/pecon.2008.4762751.
[9] Chiang Hsiao-Dong, Jean-Jumeau R. Toward a practical performance index for predicting voltage collapse in electric power systems.
IEEE Trans Power Syst 1995;10:584–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/59.387892.
[10] Zakaria EF, Ramadan K, Eltigani D. Identification of voltage collapse vulnerable buses using modal analysis. In: 2015 international
conference on computing, control, networking, electronics and embedded systems engineering. ICCNEEE, 2015, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1109/iccneee.2015.7381398.
[11] Nor AFM, Sulaiman R. Voltage stability assessment of power system network using QV and PV modal analysis. J Telecommun
Electron Comput Eng 2016;8:7–11.
[12] Chakravorty M, Patra S. Voltage stability analysis using conventional methods. In: 2016 international conference on signal processing,
communication, power and embedded system. SCOPES, 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/scopes.2016.7955879.
[13] Dobson I, Cutsem TV, Vournas C, DeMarco CL, Venkatasubramanian M, Overbye T, et al. Voltage stability assessment: Concepts,
practices and tools. In: IEEE/PES power system stability subcommittee special publication. 2002.
[14] Kothari DP, Nagrath IJ. Modern power system analysis. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Pub. Co.; 2011.
[15] Amroune M. Machine learning techniques applied to on-line voltage stability assessment: A review. Arch Comput Methods Eng
2019;28:273–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11831-019-09368-2.
[16] Alimi OA, Ouahada K, Abu-Mahfouz AM. A review of machine learning approaches to power system security and stability. IEEE
Access 2020;8:113512–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/access.2020.3003568.
[17] Ajeigbe OA, Munda JL, Hamam Y. Optimal allocation of renewable energy hybrid distributed generations for small-signal stability
enhancement. Energies 2019;12:4777. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en12244777.
[18] Alshareef A, Shah R, Mithulananthan N, Alzahrani S. A new global index for short term voltage stability assessment. IEEE Access
2021;9:36114–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/access.2021.3061712.
[19] Alzahrani S, Shah R, Mithulananthan N. Examination of effective VAR with respect to dynamic voltage stability in renewable rich
power grids. IEEE Access 2021;9:75494–508. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/access.2021.3079292.
[20] Nirbhavane PS, Corson L, Rizvi SM, Srivastava AK. TPCPF: Three-phase continuation power flow tool for voltage stability assessment
of distribution networks with distributed energy resources. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 2021;57:5425–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/tia.2021.
3088384.

493