Evaluation of power flow solutions in the
presence of Secondary Voltage Control
G. R. Moraes and R. S. Salgado
 such that the voltage magnitude of this bus is expected to be a
Abstract—This paper focuses on the analysis of the electrical
network loadability through the power flow model extended to
consider the Secondary Voltage Control. Unlike the conventional
power flow, the number of power flow variables is increased,
keeping constant the number of equations. The application of
Newton`s method to solve this set of nonlinear equations requires
the solution of an under-determined linear system at each
iteration. This brings flexibility to obtain operational solutions
taking into account performance indexes related to either the
iterative process or the power system operation. This so-called
extended power flow method has been computationally
implemented and tests have been performed considering
different loadability and initial solutions. The IEEE 118-bus test
system is used to illustrate the application of the proposed
methodology.
Index Terms—Power system analysis computing, Power
system management, load flow.
I. INTRODUCTION
D URING the electric power system operation, the
fluctuations of voltage magnitude resulting from load
variations require a strategy of reactive power-voltage
magnitude (QV) control. Aiming at the improvement of the
power system security and reduction of power generation cost,
the QV control is a nonlinear, multi-objective, high-
dimensioned and hierarchical problem. Some of the most used
procedures for computational simulations are based in
conventional methods such as Power Flow and Optimal Power
Flow. Sensitivity relations based on the linearization of the
power system equations are also frequently used, although the
conventional mathematical model is not accurate enough if the
network is operating close to transmission line limits.
Secondary Voltage Control (SVC) is the part of the
hierarchical QV control that deals with slow and high
fluctuations of voltage magnitude due to significant load
variations, coordinating automatically the reactive power
resources to establish a satisfactory voltage magnitude level.
Under SVC, power network is divided into areas according to
regional criteria. Each area has a specified group of generator
units (referred to as regulating units), chosen to control the
voltage magnitude of a specific bus of the area (pilot bus),
This work was supported by the Brazilian government funding agency
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico,
CNPq/Brazil.
G. R. Moraes is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Federal
University of Santa Catarina, Brazil (email: guido.moraes@labspot.ufsc.br).
R. S. Salgado is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Federal
University of Santa Catarina, Brazil (e-mail: salgado@labspot.ufsc.br).
978-1-4673-7172-8/15/$31.00 ©2015 IEEE
faithful representative of the area`s voltage magnitude profile.
The selection of the pilot buses and regulating units is a
determinant factor for a good SVC performance. Several
papers in the literature have addressed such issues [1], [2].
References [3], [4] focus on the development of algorithms to
select pilot buses. In [5], the application of SVC to the French
power network is described. Results of the application of SVC
to the Italian system have been shown in [6]. Reference [7]
proposes a security approach including both the voltage
magnitude and reactive power generation deviation in the
objective function. References [8] and [9] focus on market
aspects, considering the optimization of power losses.
In order to take SVC into account in regular power flow
studies, the power system mathematical model must be
extended to include equations related to the voltage magnitude
at pilot buses as well the amount of reactive power available
from the regulating units. In summary, the modeling of the
power flow problem is modified but the conventional Newton-
Raphson method is used to solve the new set of nonlinear
equations. Alternatively, the number of variables can be
extended, such that an under-determined system of linear
equations is solved at each iteration. [10] shows that this
approach adds flexibility to find solutions with pre-defined
features in terms of reactive power generation.
In the proposed paper, the methodology employed in [10] is
extended to model SVC in the power flow problem. The base
case is either the steady state solution of minimum voltage
deviation from a specified value or the conventional power
flow solution. The first provides a feasible operation point
with respect to the ordinary steady state constraints. A load
increase is taken into account and the solution of an extended
power flow is calculated. This procedure can be used to
determine a set of solutions with distinct loadability. Each
solution satisfies the SVC constraints. The power flow
equations are formulated in rectangular coordinates, due to its
simplicity and accuracy, and it is assumed that the pilot buses
and the regulation units are previously specified.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. The
basic concepts about the power flow problem and the
Secondary Voltage Control are summarized in Section II.
Section III describes the proposed approach, including the
peculiarities of determination of the general solution of an
under-determined linear system. Section IV presents the
numerical results and Section V summarizes the main
conclusions of the proposed application.
 2

II. ANALYTICAL MODEL pre-specified. A pilot bus is selected in each area. The latter,
named P-bus is supposed to have a controllable reactive power
device. Only its active power injection is pre-specified.
A. Power flow The constraints corresponding to the reactive power margin
The conventional power flow modeling in rectangular of the regulating buses are modeled by the so-called alignment
coordinates is constituted of 𝑛𝑒𝑞 = 2𝑛𝑏 − 2 equations and equations [3], [4], [9]. These constraints impose that the
𝑛𝑣𝑎𝑟 = 2𝑛𝑏 − 2 variables, where 𝑛𝑏 is the total number of reactive power production of any regulating bus of the area
buses of the power system. The set of equations is expressed with respect to its capacity limit must be equal to the total
in compact form as, reactive power production of the area with respect to its total
capacity limit. Analytically, this is expressed as,
𝑠𝑝𝑐 𝑠𝑝𝑐
𝑃𝑔𝑖 − 𝑃𝑑𝑖 − 𝑃𝑖 (𝑒, 𝑓) = ∆𝑃𝑖
𝑠𝑝𝑐 𝑠𝑝𝑐
𝑄𝑔𝑖 − 𝑄𝑑𝑖 − 𝑄𝑖 (𝑒, 𝑓) = ∆𝑄𝑖 (1) 𝑄𝑔𝑖 ∑𝑗∈Ωk 𝑄𝑔𝑗
𝑠𝑝𝑐 2 𝑀 =∑ 𝑀 for every 𝑖 ∈ Ωk (4)
𝑉𝑖 − (𝑒𝑖2 + 𝑓𝑖2 ) = ∆𝑉𝑖 𝑄𝑔𝑖 𝑗∈Ωk 𝑄𝑔𝑗

𝑠𝑝𝑐 𝑠𝑝𝑐
where 𝑃𝑔𝑖 and 𝑄𝑔𝑖 are the pre-specified active and reactive
𝑠𝑝𝑐 𝑠𝑝𝑐 where Ωk represents the set of regulating buses of the k-th
power generation of bus 𝑖; 𝑃𝑑𝑖 and 𝑄𝑑𝑖 refer to the pre- area, ∑𝑗∈Ωk 𝑄𝑔𝑗 is the total reactive power generation at the
specified active and reactive power demand of the 𝑖-th bus; 𝑒𝑖 area k, and the superscript M indicates the maximum limit.
and 𝑓𝑖 are the real and imaginary components of the complex The set of buses with corresponding classification are shown
𝑠𝑝𝑐
bus voltage of the 𝑖-th bus; 𝑉𝑖 is the reference voltage in Table I, where the variables V and 𝛿 correspond to the bus’
magnitude of the 𝑖-th bus; and 𝐺𝑖𝑗 and 𝐵𝑖𝑗 are constant voltage magnitude and phase, and ∆𝑄∗ refers to the alignment
components of the bus admittance matrix; 𝑃𝑖 (𝑒, 𝑓)and 𝑄𝑖 (𝑒, 𝑓) constraints stated by Eq. (4). Note that, in order to keep the
are the nodal active and reactive power injections expressed as number of power flow equations unchanged, the reactive
functions of the real and imaginary components of complex power balance equations of the regulating buses are included
voltages as shown in (2). in the set of power flow equations. This is reasonable because
the power system operator can directly control the reactive
𝑛 𝑛
power of each generation device.
𝑃𝑖 (𝑒, 𝑓) = 𝑒𝑖 ∑(𝐺𝑖𝑗 𝑒𝑗 + 𝐵𝑖𝑗 𝑓𝑗 ) + 𝑒𝑖 ∑(𝐺𝑖𝑗 𝑒𝑗 + 𝐵𝑖𝑗 𝑓𝑗 )
𝑗=1 𝑗=1 TABLE I
𝑛 𝑛 (2) BUS CLASSIFICATION
𝑄𝑖 (𝑒, 𝑓) = 𝑓𝑖 ∑(𝐺𝑖𝑗 𝑒𝑗 + 𝐵𝑖𝑗 𝑓𝑗 ) − 𝑒𝑖 ∑(𝐺𝑖𝑗 𝑓𝑗 + 𝐵𝑖𝑗 𝑒𝑗 )
𝑗=1 𝑗=1 Bus type Variables Equations
Load (PQ) 𝑉, 𝛿 Δ𝑃𝑖 , Δ𝑄𝑖
To solve the nonlinear equations (1), Newton-Raphson V-controlling (PV) 𝛿, 𝑄 Δ𝑃𝑖 , Δ𝑉𝑖
method is widely used and the linear system to be solved at Pilot (PQV) 𝛿 Δ𝑃𝑖 , Δ𝑄𝑖 , Δ𝑉𝑖
each iteration is: Regulating (P) 𝑉, 𝛿 Δ𝑃𝑖 , 𝛥𝑄∗

∆𝑷 𝑱𝟏 𝑱𝟐
∆𝒆
[∆𝑸] = [ 𝑱𝟑 𝑱𝟒 ] [ ] (3) The set of power flow equations with the inclusion of SVC
∆𝒇
∆𝑽 𝑱𝟓 𝑱𝟔 constraints is given by,

where, the amounts ∆𝑷, ∆𝑸 and ∆𝑽 are vectors with 0

𝑃𝑔𝑖 − 𝑃𝑑𝑖 − 𝑃𝑖 (𝑒, 𝑓) = 0 P, PV, PQ and PQV buses
components of active power, reactive power and voltage
0
magnitude mismatches respectively, and their magnitude must 𝑄𝑔𝑖 − 𝑄𝑑𝑖 − 𝑄𝑖 (𝑒, 𝑓) = 0 PV and PQV buses
satisfy a pre-specified tolerance (usually 10−4 per unit) at the
𝑠𝑝𝑐 2 (5)
solution. The Jacobian matrix of this linear system is squared 𝑉𝑖 − (𝑒𝑖2 + 𝑓𝑖2 ) = 0 PV and PQV buses
and has components 𝑱𝑖 , 𝑖 = 1. .6, which are the first
𝑄𝑔𝑖 ∑𝑗∈Ωk 𝑄𝑔𝑗
derivatives of Eqs. (1) with respect to variables (𝑒𝑖 , 𝑓𝑖 ). ∆𝒆 and 𝑀 = ∑ 𝑀 P buses
∆𝒇 are vectors with components 𝑒𝑖 and 𝑓𝑖 . 𝑄𝑔𝑖 𝑗∈Ωk 𝑄𝑔𝑗

It must be pointed out that the reactive power generation of

B. Secondary voltage control
To consider the SVC in the power system operation, it is
necessary to extend the power flow equations, such as to take
into account two new types of bus, the pilot bus and the
regulating bus. The former, also referred to as PQV-bus has its
active and reactive power injection and voltage magnitude
0
the regulating buses is given by 𝑄𝑔𝑖 = 𝑄𝑑𝑖 + 𝑄𝑖 (𝑒, 𝑓), which
ensures that the reactive power balance will be satisfied at the
converged solution. In addition, this reactive power generation
is subject to the alignment constraints which guarantees equal
reactive power margins for all regulating buses of the same
area.

III. PROPOSED APPROACH
A. Extended power flow
Aiming at extending the power flow modeling, the reactive
power generated by regulating buses is expressed as,
𝑟𝑒𝑓
𝑄𝑔𝑖 (𝑠𝑖 ) = 𝑄𝑔𝑖 + 𝑠𝑖 (6)
𝑟𝑒𝑓
where, 𝑄𝑔𝑖 is the reference pre-specified value of the reactive
power generation. The variables 𝑠𝑖 are added to the
conventional set of power flow variables, representing at each
iteration the reactive power generation change. The number of
equations of the power flow model remains unchanged, that is
𝑛𝑒𝑞 = 2𝑛𝑏 − 2 + 𝑛𝑔𝑟 , where 𝑛𝑔𝑟 is the number of regulating
buses. The linear system becomes under-determined, though a
Newton-based method is used to solve it. At each iteration the
linear system to be solved is given by,
𝑱𝟏 𝑱𝟐 𝟎 ∆𝒆 ∆𝑷
[ 𝑱𝟑 𝑱𝟒 𝑰𝒏 ] [∆𝒇] = [∆𝑸] (7)
𝑱𝟓 𝑱𝟔 𝟎 ∆𝒔
∆𝑽
where 𝑰𝒏 is a sparse matrix with 𝑛𝑔𝑟 columns, resulting from
the first derivative of the second and third Eqs. (5) with
respect to the variables s, whose non-zero elements are the
unit; and the other variables have been previously defined. Eq.
(7) can be written in compact form as,
𝑨𝚫𝒚 = 𝒃
(8)
where all terms can be easily identified.
With respect to the reactive power generation limits, as in
the conventional power flow solution, a PV-bus is converted
into a PQ-bus whenever its reactive power generation violates
its limit during the iterative process. A similar procedure is
adopted in case of P-buses. However, in this case all the
regulating buses in the area are converted into PQ buses.
Consequently, the voltage magnitude at the pilot bus of that
area is no longer under control, such that it also becomes a PQ
bus.
B. Solution of the linear system
The under-determined linear system of Eq. (8) has infinite
solutions. The general solution of this system is expressed as a
summation of two components, the Minimum Norm Solution
and the Null Space Solution. The former has desirable features
for practical purposes in terms of reduced deviation from a
given point. The latter can be monitored to control some
power system variables, with the aim of improving selected
performance indexes of the electrical network. Thus, if the
rank of matrix A is 𝑛𝑒𝑞 , the dimension of the null space matrix
of the rows of A is 𝑛𝑣𝑟 × (𝑛𝑣𝑟 − 𝑛𝑒𝑞 ), and the general
solution of Eq. (8) can be expressed in a reduced sub-space of
dimension (𝑛𝑣𝑟 − 𝑛𝑒𝑞 ), as a function of (𝑛𝑣𝑟 − 𝑛𝑒𝑞 )
3
variables. In the present study, the strategy to solve this
equation consists of firstly determining a general (minimum
norm) solution to Eq. (8) and to find a particular solution
subsequently, according to a pre-specified criterion, similar to
the strategy presented in [11]. The general solution of Eq. (8)
is given by [12], [13]
𝚫𝒚 = 𝚫𝒚𝟎 + 𝑻𝟎 𝒛 (9)
where 𝚫𝒚𝟎 is the solution of minimum Euclidean norm, 𝑻𝟎 is
a matrix of order 𝑛𝑣𝑟 × (𝑛𝑣𝑟 − 𝑛𝑒𝑞 ), of the null space of the
rows of 𝑨(𝒚𝒆 ), that is, 𝑨(𝒚𝒆 )𝑻𝟎 = Θ (Θ is a null matrix of
order 𝑛𝑒𝑞 × (𝑛𝑣𝑟 − 𝑛𝑒𝑞 )), and z is an arbitrary column vector
of order (𝑛𝑣𝑟 − 𝑛𝑒𝑞 ).
The minimum norm solution of Eq. (8) can be obtained by
solving the problem of optimization expressed as,
1 t
𝑀𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑧𝑒 Δ𝐲 Δ𝐲
2 0 0 (10)
𝑠𝑢𝑏𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑨Δ𝐲0 = 𝐛
that is,
Δ𝐲0 = 𝑨𝒕 [𝑨𝑨𝒕 ]−𝟏 𝒃
(11)
𝝀0 = [𝑨𝑨𝒕 ]−𝟏 𝐛
where 𝝀0 is the vector of Lagrange multipliers of the equality
constraints of Eq. (10).
In the present work, the null space matrix was evaluated
trough the application of orthogonal transformations, as in
[10], [11]. Most of the computational effort to determine a
general solution of the linear system is due to QR-
factorization, here performed by using the internal MatLab
subroutines. The definition of the components of vector z of
Eq. (9) depends on the choice of several criteria that can be
taken to calculate the particular solution based on the null
space matrix. A possible choice could be the determination of
vector z that minimizes the quadratic deviation of the reactive
power generation of the regulating buses from a reference
value, as in [10]. However, in case of the inclusion of the
SVC, the reactive power of the regulating buses is subject to
strong alignment constraints, which makes ineffective the
optimization of such an objective. In the proposed study, the
availability of the second order of the Taylor series expansion
of the extended power flow equations expressed in rectangular
coordinates is explored. The theoretical basis of this strategy,
which has been proposed in [14] is summarized as follows.
The steady state power system equations of Eq. (5) can be
expressed in compact form as
𝒈 ( 𝒚) = 𝒓 𝒔 − 𝒈 𝟎 ( 𝒚) = 𝟎 (12)
where 𝒓𝒔 is the vector of the specified variables (power
injections, voltage magnitude etc), 𝒚 is the vector of the
extended power flow variables and 𝒈𝟎 (𝒚) is a vector of the
functions related to the pre-specified variables, that is,
nonlinear functions relating 𝒓𝒔 and 𝒚.
 4

Vector 𝒈𝟎 (𝒚) can be expressed as a quadratic form, The power flow equations (1) and the operating constraints,
such as the limits of capability and voltage magnitude, are
1 included in the problem as equality and inequality constraints.
𝒈 𝟎 ( 𝒚) = 𝒚𝒕 𝑸 𝟎 𝒚 (13)
2 This provides a power flow solution with the active and
reactive power generation as well as the bus voltage
where 𝑸𝟎 is a tri-dimensional array which depends on the magnitude within limits.
transmission line parameters. Once the OPF solution is obtained, a specified increase in
The second order Taylor series expansion of Eq. (12), at the the load is applied. Subsequently, the SVC extended power
point 𝒚(𝒌), in the direction Δ𝐲, is given by flow is solved, such that the voltage magnitude in the buses
changes and the SVC shows its relevance. The methodology
1 can be summarized in the following steps:
𝒈(𝒚(𝒌) + 𝚫𝒚) = 𝒈(𝒚(𝒌) ) + 𝑱(𝒚(𝒌) )𝚫𝒚 + 𝚫𝒚𝒕 𝑸𝟎 𝚫𝒚 (14)
2
1) Solve the OPF (or the PF) problem for the base case
and therefore load to provide the initial estimative of voltage and
power generation.
1 𝒕 2) Increase the load in some selected (or all) areas.
𝚫𝒚 𝑸𝟎 𝚫𝒚 = 𝒈𝟎 (𝚫𝒚) (15)
2 3) Solve the extended power flow problem that includes
the SVC by Newton-based method.
The exact determination of the quadratic term of Eq. (15)
requires an accurate estimate of the incremental variation 𝚫𝒚,
which is available only at the end of the iteration. However, IV. NUMERICAL RESULTS
the incremental variation computed in a single iteration is
predominantly composed of the direction based on the linear The methodology was implemented in MatLab, and the
model of Newton-Raphson method. This direction, here IEEE 118-bus test system was selected to illustrate its
denoted by 𝚫𝒚𝒂 can be used to estimate with reasonable features. The system is previously divided in 4 areas with a
accuracy the quadratic term and to compute the direction 𝚫𝒚𝒃 total of 16 regulating buses. Table II presents the components
by solving the linear system of each area.

𝑱(𝒚(𝒌) )𝚫𝒚𝒃 = 𝒈𝟎 (𝚫𝒚𝒂 ) (16) TABLE II

IEEE 118-BUSES: COMPOSITION OF THE 4 AREAS
Thus, two minimal norm solutions are evaluated, with the
same coefficient matrix and different right side vectors, one of Area Number of Number of Number of
them based on the second order information. For this purpose, buses regulating units generation units
the following two under-determined linear systems must be 1 32 6 15
solved at each iteration: 2 28 2 11
3 26 3 12
1) 𝑱(𝒚(𝒌) )𝚫𝒚𝒂 = −𝒈(𝒚(𝒌) ) 4 32 5 16
2) 𝑱(𝒚(𝒌) )𝚫𝒚𝒃 = −𝒈𝟎 (𝚫𝒚𝒂 )
Figure 1 shows the bus voltage magnitude at load buses
of the solution of the power flow with SVC constraints.
such that the increment in the end of each iteration is 𝚫𝒚 =
𝚫𝒚𝒂 + 𝚫𝒚𝒃 .
This procedure has been applied to the conventional power
flow problem, reducing accentually the number of iterations
for convergence. The interested reader is referred to [14].

C. Initial solution
To provide a realistic initial solution for the SVC
simulation, the proposed approach solves an OPF problem to
determine a base case operating point. The objective function
used in this approach is the minimum deviation of the bus
voltage magnitude from a pre-specified value, that is,
𝑛𝑏
1 𝑠𝑝𝑐
ℎ(𝑒, 𝑓) = ∑ (𝑉𝑖 − √𝑒𝑖2 + 𝑓𝑖2 )2 (17)
2
𝑖=1 Fig. 1. Voltage magnitude at load and pilot buses in each area
 5

𝑉𝑝𝑞𝑣 represents the voltage at pilot buses while 𝑉𝑚𝑖𝑛 and 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 in cases cb and c1 all regulating units were set to consume
stands respectively for the minimum and maximum voltage reactive power in Area 2. In c2, however, high loading
magnitude at load buses of each area. Once that voltage drop conditions demanded all the areas to generate, and units of
is expected after load increase, Area 1 was selected to Area 4 generated 83.20% of their reactive power capacity.
specified tests.
The bus voltage profile in Area 1 is presented in Figure 2. It
can be seen that under SVC the voltage profile (𝑉𝑠𝑣𝑐 ) is higher
than that obtained by solving a conventional power flow (𝑉𝑝𝑓 )
considering the same load level.

Fig. 4. Reactive generation in regulating units of area 1 after load increase

Fig. 2. Voltage magnitude at load buses in area 1

The voltage profile was then analyzed considering a load

increase of 10% in Area 1 (case denoted by c1) and an
increase of 10% in all areas (case denoted by c2). Figure 3
shows that no load bus has presented high voltage drop with
respect to the voltage magnitude level of base case (without
load increase) denoted by cb.
Regarding reactive consumption, figure 4 presents reactive
generation level in each regulation unit of Area 1. It can be
seen that even with the load increase, all the regulating units
preserve a good level of generation with respect to the
maximum limit (𝑄𝑔𝑚𝑎𝑥 ). Fig. 5. Reactive generation in percentage in each area

Regarding to maximum loadability, a load increase of

41,15% in every area was allowed under SVC. However,
according to the modeling, the voltage magnitude of
regulating buses is not directly controlled. This may lead to a
high voltage magnitude level for these buses and for the load
buses in the neighborhood. Therefore, some strategy to
prevent these high voltage magnitude levels is necessary under
high loading conditions. In this work we included a test in the
voltage magnitude of the regulating buses. If the voltage
magnitude violates the limits, the bus is converted to PV-bus.
This has allowed an additional load increase of 86% in each
area.

Fig. 3. Voltage magnitude at load buses after load increase

Figure 5 presents the percentage of reactive power

generated in each area in every loading case. It is shown that

V. CONCLUSION
This work shows a model of power flow problem which
includes the Secondary Voltage Control. An increase in the
number of variables is adopted, such that the linear system
solved at each iteration of Newton method becomes under-
determined. The solution of the so-called extended power flow
is based on the general solution of this linear system, which is
composed of a minimal norm solution and a null space
solution. The latter can be evaluated such as either to speed up
the iterative process or to improve selected performance
indexes related to the power system operation. The inclusion
of the SVC constraints in the conventional formulation of the
power flow problem adds some difficulties to the iterative
process, although provides a better reactive power distribution.
The way of handling the generators reactive power capability
is of fundamental importance. The P-PQ conversion of a large
number of controlling buses can lead the iterative process to
useless solutions from the practical point of view, or even to
the divergence. The numerical results show that this
methodology has enough potential to aid the planning of the
power system operation. Future works in this subject includes
a refinement in the way the inequality constraints are dealt
with, particularly those involving the bus voltage magnitude.
6
VI. REFERENCES
[1] D. S. Popovic, M. S. Calovic, and V. A. Levi, "Voltage reactive security
analysis in power systems with automatic secondary voltage control", in
Proceedings of the IET Generation, Transmission and Distribution,
volume 141, pages 177-183, 1994.
[2] J. L. Sancha, J. L. Fernández, A. Cortés and J. T. Abarca, "Secondary
voltage control: analysis, solutions and simulation results for the spanish
transmission system”, in Proceedings of the IEEE PICA, volume 1,
pages 27-32, 1995.
[3] A. Conejo, J. I. De la Fuente, and S. Goransson, “Comparison of
alternative algorithms to select pilot buses for secondary voltage control
in electric power systems”, in Proceedings of the IEEE MELECON,
volume 3, pages 940-943, 1994.
[4] A. Conejo and M. Aguilar, “Secondary voltage control: nonlinear
selection of pilot buses, design of an optimal control law and simulation
results”, in Proceedings of the IET Generation, Transmission and
Distribution, volume 145, pages 77-81, 1998.
[5] P. Lagonotte, J. C. Sabonnadière, J. Y. Léost, and J. P. Paul, “Structural
analysis of the electrical system: application to secondary voltage
control in Franc”, in IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, volume 4,
1989.
[6] C. Cañizares, C. Carvalho, M. Pozzi, and S. Corsi, “Comparing
secondary voltage regulation and shunt compensation for improving
voltage stability and transfer capability in the Italian power system”,
Electric Power System Research, 40:67-76, 2005.
[7] D. S. Popovic, “Impact of secondary voltage control on voltage stability.
Electric Power System Research, 40:51-62, 1997.
[8] V. Ilea, C. Bovo, M. Merlo, A. Berizzi, and M. Eremia, “Reactive power
flow optimization in the presence of secondary voltage control”, In IEEE
PowerTech Conference, 2009.
[9] A. Berizzi, C. Bovo, C. Bruno, M. Delfanti, M. Merlo, and M. Pozzi,
“ORPF procedures for voltage security in a market framework”, In IEEE
PowerTech Conference, 2005.
[10] R. S. Salgado and G. R. Moraes, “On the application of general solutions
of under-determined linear systems to the power flow problem”, in
Proceedings of the 14th International Conference Computational and
Mathematical Methods in Science and Engineering, volume 4, pages
1161-1172, 2014.
[11] A. J. Simões Costa, S. I. Seleme Jr., and R. S. Salgado, “Equality
constraints in power system state estimation via orthogonal row-
processing techniques. In proceedings of the IFAC Symposium on
Planning and Operation of Electric Energy Systems, pages 43-49, 1985.
[12] R. J. Hanson and C. L. Lawson, “Extensions and applications of the
Householder algorithm for solving linear least squares problems”, Math,
Comput., 1969.
[13] R. J. Hanson and C. L. Lawson, “Solving at least square problems”,
SIAM, 1995.
[14] R. S. Salgado and A. F. Zeitune, “Power flow solutions trough tensor
methods”, in proceedings of the IET Generation, Transmission and
Distribution, 3(5):413-424, 2009.
VII. BIOGRAPHIES
Roberto S. Salgado received his BSc., MSc., and PhD. degrees in Electrical
Engineering from Federal University of Pará in1976, and the MSc. And Ph.D.
degrees in Electrical Engineering from Federal University of Santa Catarina,
in 1981 and UMIST, UK, in 1989, respectively. Since 1978, he has been with
Federal University of Santa Catarina. His main research interests are in the
area of power system analysis.
Guido R. Moraes received his BSc. in Electrical Engineering from Federal
University of Santa Catarina in 2013. Since 2013, he has been pursuing the
MSc. degree at the Federal University of Santa Catarina. His main research
interests are in the area of static optimization applied to steady state power
system analysis.