Coherency identification for large electric power systems

An important problem associated with contingency and reliability studies for large-scale electric power systems is the use of dynamic equivalent models to represent the behavior of aggregable parts of the system. Fundamental to the aggregation process associated with any coherency-based approach is an ability to identify groups of coherent generators or generators that swing together in response to a contingency. Coherency identification is thus a key step in the reduction process. In this paper, an analytical process is examined which permits identification of coherent groups based upon the closed-form solution of a linearized power system model and the use of the Cayley-Hamilton theorem. The result is an algebraic characterization of coherency. Computationally practical coherency indices are developed which do not require significant computer storage. A physical interpretation of this characterization is discussed which suggests that coherency depends not only of the electrical distances between generators but also on generator inertia constants. The method of coherency identification developed in this paper is evaluated on a detailed model of a 39-bus test system.

[1]  W. T. Brown,et al.  Combination Load-Flow and Stability Equivalent for Power System Representation on A-C Network Analyzers [includes discussion] , 1955, Transactions of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers. Part III: Power Apparatus and Systems.

[2]  J. B. Ward Equivalent Circuits for Power-Flow Studies , 1949, Transactions of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers.

[3]  M. Vidyasagar,et al.  Comments on "A novel method of evaluating e At in closed form" , 1971 .

[4]  E. M. Gulachenski,et al.  Electromechanical Equivalent for Use in Power System Stability Studies , 1971 .

[5]  D.N. Ewart,et al.  Dynamic equivalents from on-line measurements , 1975, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems.

[6]  Robin Podmore,et al.  Identification of Coherent Generators for Dynamic Equivalents , 1978, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems.

[7]  M. L. Liou Evaluation of the transition matrix , 1967 .

[8]  Mathukumalli Vidyasagar A characterization of e At and a constructive proof of the controllability criterion , 1971 .

[9]  G. Bierman Finite series solutions for the transition matrix and the covariance of a time-invariant system , 1971 .

[10]  J. M. Undrill,et al.  Construction of Power System lectromechanical Equivalents by Modal Analysis , 1971 .

[11]  A.H. El-Abiad,et al.  Dynamic equivalents using operating data and stochastic modeling , 1976, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems.

[12]  Antti J. Koivo,et al.  Security Evaluation in Power Systems Using Pattern Recognition , 1974 .

[13]  Albert Chang,et al.  Power System Dynamic Equivalents , 1970 .

[14]  Fred C. Schweppe,et al.  Distance Measures and Coherency Recognition for Transient Stability Equivalents , 1973 .

[15]  R. Bruce Shipley,et al.  A Study of Stability Equivalents , 1969 .

[16]  R.T. Byerly,et al.  Normal modes and mode shapes applied to dynamic stability analysis , 1975, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems.

[17]  M. L. Liou,et al.  On the evaluation of e AT by power series , 1967 .

[18]  B. Spalding,et al.  Coherency recognition for transient stability studies using singular points , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems.