A NNALS of Faculty Engineering Hunedoara – International Journal of Engineering

Tome XVI [2018] | Fascicule 4 [November]

1.
Ali M. ELTAMALY, 2.Yehia SAYED, 2.Abou-Hashema M. EL-SAYED, 2.Amer Nasr A. ELGHAFFAR

OPTIMUM POWER FLOW ANALYSIS BY NEWTON RAPHSON

METHOD, A CASE STUDY
Electrical Engineering Department, Mansoura University, Mansoura, EGYPT
1.

Electrical Engineering Department, Minia University, Minia, EGYPT

2.

Abstract: Optimal power flow (OPF) is a critical control task for reliable and efficient operation of power grids. OPF
studies to minimize both the power distribution losses and the cost of power drawn from the substation, without
affecting on the voltage regulation. This paper discusses the Newton Raphson method that’s can uses with OPF
control for the stability of the power systems. This method has a faster solution for load flow analysis with the
optimized techno-economical and saving the stable system. The Newton Raphson method is requiring an initial
condition and work well for heavily load system when compared to another method. The expected results for load
flow are voltage magnitude, phase angle, real and reactive power. This paper simulates the Newton Raphson method
for an optimal load flow analysis with IEEE-5 buses.
Keywords: OPF, Newton Raphson, power system and load flow

1. INTRODUCTION
At the end of 19Th century the electric power started by low generation voltage level for closed areas. With the
increasing on the demand power, the electrical grid extended and classified to generation, transmission and
distribution. This extension required to increase the transmission voltage, that’s reached now to 1200kV. So, the
electric networks became more complex, that’s may cause many problems in power flow control [1-2].
Regarding this increasing, it’s important to apply optimum plans for the power system to reach to minimum
cost and without affecting the voltage in the system. The advanced development of power grid system for
future will give immediate impacts of anew connection such as power flow direction, protection, voltage
profile, power quality and stability [2-4]. The purpose of power flow studies is to plan ahead and account for
various hypothetical situations. For example, if a transmission line is being taken off- line for maintenance, can
the remaining lines in the system handle the required loads without exceeding their rated values. Smart Grid
considered as future electrical power generation, uses calculation tools methods on flow of electricity and
information to create a widely distributed automated energy delivery network. This concept is being widely
accepted in power system today and now it presents some big challenges in integrating generation with
additional of a communication network in more efficiently [4]. Optimal reactive power dispatch problem as a
sub-problem of the OPF is a very important optimization problem in power systems as proper management of
reactive power injection into the system can minimize real power loss and voltage profile deviations and
improve voltage stability [2-6]. The algorithm for the power flow calculation based on the Newton's method in
optimization allows to find a solution for the situation when initial data are outside the existence domain and
to pull the operation point onto the feasibility boundary by an optimal path. Also, it is possible to estimate a
static stability margin by utilizing Newton's method in optimization.
2. ACTIVE AND REACTIVE POWER CALCULATIONS
The formulation of the active and reactive power entering a bus, it’s need to define the following quantities [5-
8]. By assuming the voltage at the ith bus be denoted by
Vi = Vi ∠δ i = Vi (cos δ i + j sin δ i ) (1)
Also let us define the self-admittance at bus-i as
Yii = Yii ∠θ ii = Yii (cos θ ii + j sin θ ii ) = G ii + jB ii (2)
Similarly, the mutual admittance between the buses i and j can be written as
Yij = Yij ∠θ ij = Yij (cos θ ij + j sin θ ij ) = G ij + jB ij (3)
Also, assuming the power system contains a total number of n buses. So, the current injected at bus-i is given
as
n
I i = Yi1 V1 + Yi2 V2 +  + Yin Vn = ∑ Yik Vk (4)
k =1
Also, assume the current entering a bus to be positive and that leaving the bus to be negative. As a
consequence, the power and reactive power entering a bus will also be assumed to be positive. The complex
power at bus-i is then given by

51 | F a s c i c u l e 4
A NNALS of Faculty Engineering Hunedoara – International Journal of Engineering
Tome XVI [2018] | Fascicule 4 [November]

n n
Pi − jQ i = Vi∗ I i = Vi∗ ∑ Yik Vk = Vi (cos δ i − jsin δ i )∑ Yik Vk (cos θ ik + jsin θ ik )(cos δ k + jsin δ k )
k =1 k =1 (5)
n
= ∑ Yik Vi Vk (cos δ i − jsin δ i )(cos θ ik + jsin θ ik )(cos δ k + jsin δ k )
k =1

Note that
(cos δ i − j sin δ i )(cos θ ik + j sin θ ik )(cos δ k + j sin δ k ) = (cos δ i − j sin δ i )[cos(θ ik + δ k ) + j sin(θ ik + δ k )]
= cos(θ ik + δ k − δ i ) + j sin(θ ik + δ k − δ i )
Therefore, substituting in (5) we get the real and reactive power as
n
Pi = ∑ Yik Vi Vk cos(θ ik + δ k − δ i ) (6)
k =1
n
Q i = −∑ Yik Vi Vk sin(θ ik + δ k − δ i ) (7)
k =1
3. DATA FOR LOAD FLOW
The active and reactive power generated at bus-i be denoted by PGi and QGi respectively, also, the real and
reactive power consumed at the ith bus by PLi and QLi respectively [4-9]. Then the net real power injected in
bus-i is
Pi ,inj = PGi − PLi (8)
By assume the injected power calculated by the load flow program be Pi,calc. Then the mismatch between the
actual injected and calculated values is given by
∆Pi = Pi ,inj − Pi ,calc = PGi − PLi − Pi ,calc (9)
In a similar way the mismatch between the reactive power injected and calculated values is given by
∆Q i = Q i ,inj − Q i ,calc = Q Gi − Q Li − Q i ,calc (10)
The purpose of the load flow is to minimize the above
two mismatches. It is to be noted that equation (6)
and equation (7) are used for the calculation of real
and reactive power in equation (9) and equation (10).
However, since the magnitudes of all the voltages
and their angles are not known a priori, an iterative
procedure must be used to estimate the bus voltages
and their angles in order to calculate the mismatches.
It is expected that mismatches ∆Pi and ∆Qi reduce
with each iteration and the load flow is said to have
converged when the mismatches of all the buses Figure 1. The simple power system used for load flow studies
become less than a very small number. [8-11] Table (1). Line impedance and line charging
For the load flow studies, by consider the system of figure (1), data of the system of figure (1)
which has 2 generators and 3 load buses. We define bus-1 as the Line (bus Line charging
Impedance
to bus) (Y/2)
slack bus while taking bus-5 as the P-V bus. Buses 2, 3 and 4 are P- 1-2 0.02 + j0.10 j0.030
Q buses. The line impedances and the line charging admittances 1-5 0.05 + j0.25 j0.020
are given in table (1). Based on this data the Ybus matrix is given 2-3 0.04 + j0.20 j0.025
in table (2). This matrix is to be noted here that the sources and 2-5 0.05 + j0.25 j0.020
their internal impedances are not considered while forming the 3-4 0.05 + j0.25 j0.020
3-5 0.08 + j0.40 j0.010
Ybus matrix for load flow studies which deal only with the bus 4-5 0.10 + j0.50 j0.075
voltages.
Table (2) Ybus matrix of the system of fig. 1
1 2 3 4 5
1 2.6923 − j13.4115 − 1.9231 + j9.6154 0 0 − 0.7692 + j3.8462
2 − 1.9231 + j9.6154 3.6538 − j18.1942 − 0.9615 + j4.8077 0 − 0.7692 + j3.8462
3 0 − 0.9615 + j4.8077 2.2115 − j11.0027 − 0.7692 + j3.8462 − 0.4808 + j2.4038
4 0 0 − 0.7692 + j3.8462 1.1538 − j5.6742 − 0.3846 + j1.9231
5 − 0.7692 + j3.8462 − 0.7692 + j3.8462 − 0.4808 + j2.4038 − 0.3846 + j1.9231 2.4038 − j11.8942
The bus voltage magnitudes, their angles, the power generated and consumed at each bus are given in table
(3). In this table, some of the voltages and their angles are given in boldface letters. This indicates that these are
initial data used for starting the load flow program. The power and reactive power generated at the slack bus

52 | F a s c i c u l e 4
 A NNALS of Faculty Engineering Hunedoara – International Journal of Engineering
Tome XVI [2018] | Fascicule 4 [November]

and the reactive power generated at the P-V bus are unknown. Therefore, each of these quantities are indicated
by a dash (−). Since we do not need these quantities for our load flow calculations, their initial estimates are not
required. Also note from figure (1) that the slack bus does not contain any load while the P-V bus 5 has a local
load and this is indicated in the load column.
Table (3) Bus voltages, power generated and load – initial data.
Bus voltage Power generated Load
Bus no.
Magnitude (pu) Angle (deg) P (MW) Q (MVAr) P (MW) P (MVAr)
1 1.05 0 − − 0 0
2 1 0 0 0 96 62
3 1 0 0 0 35 14
4 1 0 0 0 16 8
5 1.02 0 48 − 24 11
4. OVERVIEW ABOUT NEWTON-RAPHSON METHOD
This part discusses the solution of a set of nonlinear equations through Newton-Raphson method. by
consideration that the setting of n nonlinear equations of a total number of n variables x1, x2, …, xn. Let these
equations be given by
f1 (x 1 ,  , x n ) = η1
f2 (x 1 ,  , x n ) = η2 (11)

f n (x 1 ,  , x n ) = η n
where f1, …, fn are functions of the variables x1, x2, …, xn. By define another set of functions g1, …, gn, as given
below
g 1 (x 1 ,  , x n ) = f1 (x 1 ,  , x n ) − η1 = 0
g 2 (x 1 ,  , x n ) = f2 (x 1 ,  , x n ) − η2 = 0 (12)

g n (x 1 ,  , x n ) = f n (x 1 ,  , x n ) − η n = 0
And by assume that the initial estimates of the n variables are x1(0), x2(0), …, xn(0). By add corrections ∆x1(0),
∆x2(0), …, ∆xn(0) to these variables such that result is the correct solution of these variables defined by
(0 ) (0 )
x 1∗ = x 1 + ∆x 1
(0 ) (0 )
x ∗2 = x 2 + ∆x 2 (13)

∗ (0 ) (0 )
x n = x n + ∆x n
The functions in (12) then can be written in terms of the variables given in (13) as
( (0 )
)
(0 )
( (0 ) (0 )
g k x 1∗ ,  , x ∗n = g k x 1 + ∆x 1 ,  , x n + ∆x n , k = 1,  , n (14) )
We can then expand the above equation in Taylor’s series around the nominal values of x1(0), x2(0), …, xn(0).
Neglecting the second and higher order terms of the series, the expansion of gk, k = 1, …, n is given as
(0 ) (0 ) (0 )
(
g k x , , x∗
1
∗
n ) = g (x
k 1
(0 )
, , x n
(0 )
)+ ∆x 1
(0 ) ∂g k
∂x 1
+ ∆x 2
(0 ) ∂g k
∂x 2
+  + ∆x n
(0 ) ∂g k
∂x n
(15)

(0 )
where ∂g k ∂x i is the partial derivative of gk evaluated at x2(0), …, xn(0).
Equation (15) can be written in vector-matrix form as
 ∂g 1 ∂x 1 ∂g 1 ∂x 2  ∂g 1 ∂x n 
(0 )
(
 ∆x 1 (0 )  0 − g 1 x 1 (0 ) ,  , x n (0 ) )
 ∂g ∂x
 2 1 ∂g 2 ∂x 2  ∂g 2 ∂x n 
 (0 )   (0 )
(
 ∆x 2  = 0 − g 2 x 1 ,  , x n
(0 )
) (16)
           

∂g n ∂x 1 ∂g n ∂x 2  ∂g n ∂x n 
 
∆x
(0 )  
 n   0 − g n x 1
(0 )
(, , x n
(0 )
)

The square matrix of partial derivatives is called the Jacobian matrix J with J(0) indicating that the matrix is
evaluated for the initial values of x2(0), …, xn(0). the solution of (16) can be write as
 ∆x 1 (0 )   ∆g 1 (0 ) 
 (0 )   (0 )  (17)
 ∆x 2  = J (0 )
  
[ ] −1 ∆g 2

  

 (0 )   (0 ) 
∆x n  ∆g n 

53 | F a s c i c u l e 4
A NNALS of Faculty Engineering Hunedoara – International Journal of Engineering
Tome XVI [2018] | Fascicule 4 [November]

Since the Taylor’s series is truncated by neglecting the 2nd and higher order terms, we cannot expect to find
the correct solution at the end of first iteration. We shall then have
(1 ) (0 ) (0 )
x 1 = x 1 + ∆x 1
(1 ) (0 ) (0 )
x 2 = x 2 + ∆x 2 (18)

(1 ) (0 ) (0 )
x n = x n + ∆x n
These are then used to find J(1) and ∆gk(1), k = 1, …, n. We can then find ∆x2(1), …, ∆xn(1) from an equation
like (17) and subsequently calculate x2(1), …, xn(1). The process continues till ∆gk, k = 1, …, n becomes less
than a small quantity.
5. SIMULATION OF POWER FLOW BY NEWTON RAPHSON METHOD
Let us assume that an n-bus power system contains a total number of np P-Q buses while the number of P-V
(generator) buses be ng such that n = np + ng + 1. Bus-1 is assumed to be the slack bus. We shall further use
the mismatch equations of ∆Pi and ∆Qi given in (9) and (10) respectively [9-12]. The approach to Newton-
Raphson load flow is similar to that of solving a system of nonlinear equations using the Newton-Raphson
method: at each iteration, we have to form a Jacobian matrix and solve for the corrections from an equation of
the type given in (16). For the load flow problem, this equation is of the form
 ∆δ 2 
  ∆P2 
   
 ∆δ n     (19)
 ∆V   
J 
2
 =  ∆Pn 
V2   ∆Q 2 
   
   


 ∆ V1+ n p  ∆Q 
   1+ n p 
 V1+ n p 
where the Jacobian matrix is divided into submatrices as
J J 12  (20)
J =  11
J 21 J 22 
It can be seen that the size of the Jacobian matrix is (n + np − 1) × (n + np − 1). For example, for the 5-bus
problem of figure (1) this matrix will be of the size (7 × 7). The dimensions of the submatrices are as follows:
J11: (n − 1) × (n − 1), J12: (n − 1) × np, J21: np × (n − 1) and J22: np × np
The submatrices are
 ∂P2 ∂P2 
 ∂δ  ∂δ 
 2 n  (21)
J 11 =     
 ∂Pn  ∂Pn 
 ∂δ 2 ∂δ n 
 
 ∂P2 ∂P2 
 V2 ∂ V  V1+ n p 
 2 ∂ V1+ n p  (22)
J 12 =    
 ∂Pn ∂Pn 
 V2  V1+ n p 
 ∂ V2 ∂ V1+ n p 
 
 ∂Q 2 ∂Q 2 
 ∂δ  
∂δ n
 2  (23)
J 21 =     
 ∂Q 1+ n p ∂Q 1+ n p 
 ∂δ  
 2 ∂δ n 
 ∂Q 2 ∂Q 2 
 V2 ∂ V  V1+ n p 
 2 ∂ V1+ n p 
(24)
J 22 =     
 ∂Q 1+ n p ∂Q 1+ n p 
 V2  V1+ n p 
 ∂ V2 ∂ V1+ n p 
 

54 | F a s c i c u l e 4
 A NNALS of Faculty Engineering Hunedoara – International Journal of Engineering
Tome XVI [2018] | Fascicule 4 [November]

— Load Flow Algorithm

The Newton-Raphson procedure is as follows:
Step-1: Choose the initial values of the voltage magnitudes |V|(0) of all np load buses and n − 1 angles δ(0) of
the voltages of all the buses except the slack bus.
Step-2: Use the estimated |V|(0) and δ(0) to calculate a total n − 1 number of injected real power Pcalc(0) and
equal number of real power mismatch ∆P(0).
Step-3: Use the estimated |V|(0) and δ(0) to calculate a total np number of injected reactive power Qcalc(0) and
equal number of reactive power mismatch ∆Q(0).
Step-3: Use the estimated |V|(0) and δ(0) to formulate the Jacobian matrix J(0).
Step-4: Solve (19) for ∆δ(0) and ∆|V|(0)÷|V|(0).
Step-5: Obtain the updates from
δ (1 ) = δ (0 ) + ∆δ (0 ) (25)
(0 ) 
(1 ) (0 )  ∆V (26)
V =V 1 + (0 )

 V 
Step-6: Check if all the mismatches are below a small number. Terminate the process if yes. Otherwise go back
to step-1 to start the next iteration with the updates given by (25) and (26).
— Formation of the Jacobian Matrix
Formation of the submatrices of the Jacobian matrix cab be simulate by use the active and reactive power
equations of (6) and (7) can be rewrite them with the help of (2) as
n
Pi = Vi G ii + ∑ Yik Vi Vk cos(θ ik + δ k − δ i )
2
(27)
k =1
k ≠i
n
Q i = − Vi B ii − ∑ Yik Vi Vk sin(θ ik + δ k − δ i )
2
(28)
k =1
k ≠i

A. Formation of J11
By define J11 as
L 22  L 2n 
(29)
J 11 =     
L n2  L nn 
From (21) that Mik’s are the partial derivatives of Pi with respect to δk. The derivative Pi (27) with respect to k for
i ≠ k is given by
∂P
L ik = i = − Yik Vi Vk sin (θ ik + δ k − δ i ), i ≠ k ( 30)
∂δ k
Also, the derivative Pi with respect to k for i = k is given by
∂P n
L ii = i = ∑ Yik Vi Vk sin(θ ik + δ k − δ i )
∂δ i k =1
k ≠i

Comparing the above equation with (28) we can write

∂P 2
L ii = i = −Q i − Vi B ii (31)
∂δ i
B. Formation of J21
Let us define J21 as
 M 22  M 2n 
  (32)
J 21 =     
M 
 n p 2  M n pn 
From (23) it is evident that the elements of J21 are the partial derivative of Q with respect to δ. From (28) we
can write equation (33)
∂Q i
M ik = = − Yik Vi Vk cos(θ ik + δ k − δ i ), i ≠ k (33)
∂δ k

55 | F a s c i c u l e 4
A NNALS of Faculty Engineering Hunedoara – International Journal of Engineering
Tome XVI [2018] | Fascicule 4 [November]

Similarly, for i = k we have

∂Q i n
= ∑ Yik Vi Vk cos(θ ik + δ k − δ i ) =Pi − Vi G ii
2
M ii = (34)
∂δ i k =1
k ≠i

The last equality of (34) is evident from (27).

C. Formation of J12
By define J12 as
N 22  N 2n 
 p
 (35)
J 12 =     
N 
 n2  N nn p 
As evident from (22), the elements of J21 involve the derivatives of real power P with respect to magnitude of
bus voltage |V|. For i ≠ k, we can write from (27)
∂Pi
N ik = Vk = Yik Vi Vk cos(θ ik + δ k − δ i ) = −M ik i ≠ k (36)
∂ Vk
For i = k we have
 
∂Pi  n

N ii = Vi = Vi 2 Vi G ii + ∑ Yik Vk cos(θ ik + δ k − δ i )
∂ Vi k =1 (37)
 
 k ≠i 
n
= 2 Vi G ii + ∑ Yik Vi Vk cos(θ ik + δ k − δ i ) = 2 Vi G ii + M ii
2 2

k =1
k ≠i

D. Formation of J22
For the formation of J22 let us define
 O 22  O 2n p 
  (38)
J 22 =    
O  O n pn p 
 np 2
For i ≠ k can write from (4.39)
∂Q i
O ik = Vi = − Vi Yik Vi Vk sin(θ ik + δ k − δ i ) = L ik , i ≠ k (39)
∂ Vk
Finally, for i = k we have
 
∂Q i  n

O ii = Vi = Vi − 2 Vi B ii − ∑ Yik Vk sin(θ ik + δ k − δ i )
∂ Vk (40)
 k =1

 k ≠i 
n
= −2 Vi B ii − ∑ Yik Vi Vk sin(θ ik + δ k − δ i ) = −2 Vi B ii − L ii
2 2

k =1
k ≠i

So, the submatrices J11 and J21 are computed, the formation of the submatrices J12 and J22 is fairly
straightforward. For large system, this will result in considerable saving in the computation time.
6. SOLUTION OF NEWTON-RAPHSON LOAD FLOW
The Newton-Raphson load flow program is tested on the system of figure (1) with the system data and initial
conditions given in tables (1) to (3) [11-14]. From (30) can write
sin(θ 23 + δ 3 − δ 2 ) = − Y23 sin θ 23 = −B 23 = −4.8077
(0 ) (0 ) (0 )
L 23 = − Y23 V2 V3
Similarly, from (28) we have
2 n
sin(θ 2k + δ k − δ 2 )
(0 ) (0 ) (0 ) (0 )
Q2 = − V2 B 22 − ∑ Y2k V2 Vk
k =1
k ≠2

= −B 22 − 1.05B 21 − B 23 − B 24 − 1.02B 25 = −0.6327

Hence from (31)
2
(0 ) (0 ) (0 )
L 22 = −Q 2 − V2 B 22 = −0.6327 − B 22 = 18.8269
In a similar way, the rest of the components of the matrix J11(0) are calculated. This matrix is given by

56 | F a s c i c u l e 4
 A NNALS of Faculty Engineering Hunedoara – International Journal of Engineering
Tome XVI [2018] | Fascicule 4 [November]

 18.8269 − 4.8077 − 3.9231

0
− 4.8077 11.1058 − 3.8462 − 2.4519
(0 )
J 11 =
 0 − 3.8462 5.8077 − 1.9615
 
 − 3.9231 − 2.4519 − 1.9615 12.4558 
For forming the off diagonal elements of J21 we note from (33) that
cos(θ 23 + δ 2 − δ 3 ) = −G 23 = 0.9615
(0 ) (0 ) (0 )
M 23 = − Y23 V2 V3
Also from (27) the real power injected at bus-2 is calculated as
n
(0 ) 2
cos(θ2k + δk − δ2 )= G22 + 1.05G21 + G23 + G24 + 1.02G25 = −0.1115
(0 ) (0 ) (0 )
P2 = V2 G22 + ∑ Y2k V2 Vk
k =1
k ≠2

Hence from (34) we have

2
(0 ) (0 )
M 22 = P2 − V2 G 22 = −3.7654
Similarly, the rest of the elements of the matrix J21 are calculated. This matrix is then given as
− 3.7654 0.9615 0 0.7846
=  0.9615 − 2.2212 0.7692 0.4904

(0 )
J 21
 0 0.7692 − 1.1615 0.3923
For calculating the off diagonal elements of the matrix J12 we note from (36) that they are negative of the off
diagonal elements of J21. However, the size of J21 is (3 × 4) while the size of J12 is (4×3). Therefore to avoid this
discrepancy we first compute a matrix M that is given by
M 11 M 12 M 13 M 14 
M M 22 M 23 M 24 
M =  21
M 31 M 32 M 33 M 34 
 
M 41 M 42 M 43 M 44 
he elements of the above matrix are computed in accordance with (33) and (34). can define
J 21 = M(1 : 3, 1 : 4) and J 12 = −M(1 : 4, 1 : 3)
Furthermore, the diagonal elements of J12 are overwritten in accordance with (37). This matrix is then given by
 3.5423 − 0.9615 0 
− 0.9615 2.2019 − 0.7692
(0 )
J 12 = 
 0 − 0.7692 1.1462 
 
 0.7846 − 0.4904 − 0.3923
Finally, it can be noticed from (39) that J22 = J11(1:3, 1:3). However, the diagonal elements of J22 are then
overwritten in accordance with (40). This gives the following matrix
 17.5615 − 4.8077 0 
J22 = − 4.8077 10.8996 − 3.8462
(0 )

 0 − 3.8462 5.5408 
From the initial conditions the power and reactive power are computed as
Pcalc = [− 0.1115 − 0.0096 − 0.0077 − 0.0098]
(0 ) T

Q calc = [− 0.6327 − 0.1031 − 0.1335]

(0 ) T

Consequently, the mismatches are found to be

∆P(0 ) = [− 0.8485 − 0.3404 − 0.1523 0.2302]
T

∆Q (0 ) = [0.0127 − 0.0369 0.0535]

T

Then the updates at the end of the first iteration are given as
δ2(0 )  − 4.91  V2 (0 )  0.9864
 (0 )     (0 )  
δ3  =  − 6.95 deg  V3  = 0.9817

( )
δ   − 7.19
0
 (0 )  0.9913
 3 (0 )     V4   
δ4   − 3.09
The load flow converges in 7 iterations when all the power and reactive power mismatches are below 10−6.
7. CONCLUSIONS
Today’s electric grid was designed to operate as a vertical structure consisting of generation, transmission and
distribution and advanced control support devices for reliability, stability and efficiency. Newton Raphson

57 | F a s c i c u l e 4
A NNALS of Faculty Engineering Hunedoara – International Journal of Engineering
Tome XVI [2018] | Fascicule 4 [November]

method can be uses to solve the power flow problems to save the stability system with the increasing on the
electric network. Newton Raphson method calculation steps by minimizing the square sum of discrepancies of
nodal capacities. During the power flow calculation, the determinant of matrix is positive around zero and
negative value of the Jacobian matrix determinant. The main properties of Newton Raphson method are easy
to handle P-V bus difficulties. The Newton’s method in optimization for power flow calculation the method
computational costs on each iteration will be several times greater. Each row of Jacobian matrix corresponding
to any bus contains nonzero elements corresponding to all incident buses of the scheme.
References
[1] Eltamaly, A.M. and Amer Nasr A. Elghaffar. (2017). Techno-Economical Study of Using Nuclear Power Plants for
Supporting Electrical Grid in Arabian Gulf.Technol Econ Smart Grids Sustain Energy (2017) 2: 14.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40866-017-0031-8
[2] Heinz. K. Tyll and Frank Schettler. (2009). Power System Problems solved by FACTS Devices. Power Systems
Conference and Exposition. PSCE '09. IEEE/PES, ISBN: 978-1-4244-3810-5, DOI: 10.1109/PSCE.2009.4840205.
[3] J.A. Martinez · G. Guerra “Optimum placement of distributed generation in three-phase distribution systems
with time varying load using a Monte Carlo approach” DOI:10.1109/PESGM.2012.6345040, Conference: Power
and Energy Society General Meeting, IEEE- 2012
[4] Ali M. Eltamaly, Yehia sayed and Amer Nasr A. Elghaffar. (2017). Power flow control for distribution generator in
egypt using facts devices” Acta technica corviniensis, bulletin of engineering, issn: 2067 – 3809, april-june - 2017
[5] A. Elghaffar Amer Nasr and Ali M. Eltamaly (2017). A Survey: HVDC System Operation and Fault Analysis. Annals
Engineering Jounal ISSN: 1584-2665 – Vol.4.
[6] Gerardo Guerra and Juan A. Martinez-Velasco “ A Solid State Transformer model for power flow calculations”
July 2017 · International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems 07/2017; 89:40-51. · DOI:
10.1016/j.ijepes.2017.01.005
[7] Holger Ruf, Marion Schroedter Homscheidt, Gerd Heilscher and Hans Georg Beyer “Quantifying residential PV
feed-in power in low voltage grids based on satellite-derived irradiance data with application to power flow
calculations” Solar Energy, ELSAVER-2016.
[8] Ali M. Eltamaly and Amer Nasr A. Elghaffar. (2017). Load Flow Analysis by Gauss-Seidel Method; A Survey.
International Journal of Mechatronics, Electrical and Computer Technology (IJMEC), PISSN: 2411-6173, EISSN:
2305-0543.
[9] Andrey Pazderin and Sergey Yuferev “Power Flow Calculation by Combination of Newton-Raphson Method and
Newton’s Method in Optimization” IECON 2009, IEEE 2009.
[10] Salah Kamel, Francisco Jurado and David Vera. (2014). A simple implementation of power mismatch STATCOM
model into current injection Newton–Raphson power-flow method. Electr Eng (2014) 96: 135.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00202-013-0288-4.
[11] Kang C., Yuan L. (2012) A Power Flow Solution by Newton-Raphson and Time Domain Simulation. In: Wu Y. (eds)
Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering: Theory and Practice. Advances in Intelligent and Soft
Computing, vol 114. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03718-4_102
[12] Su X., Liu X., Wang Z., Guo Y. (2011) A Study of Improvements on the Performances of Load Flow Calculation in
Newton Method. In: Hu W. (eds) Electronics and Signal Processing. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol
97. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21697-8_61
[13] Hasmaini Mohamad, Zuhaina Zakaria and Muhamad Zulfakri Bin Mazlan. (2015). Development of GUI Power
System Load Flow Analysis Tool based on Newton Raphson Method. IEEE 7th International Conference on
Engineering Education (ICEED), DOI: 10.1109/ICEED.2015.7451487
[14] S. K. Joshi and G. H. Chitaliya “A Comparative Analysis of Optimal Power Flow Techniques based on Equivalent
Current Injection with Conventional Optimal Power Flow Methods” 2011.

ISSN 1584 - 2665 (printed version); ISSN 2601 - 2332 (online); ISSN-L 1584 - 2665
copyright © University POLITEHNICA Timisoara, Faculty of Engineering Hunedoara,
5, Revolutiei, 331128, Hunedoara, ROMANIA
http://annals.fih.upt.ro

58 | F a s c i c u l e 4
© 2018. This work is published under NOCC (the “License”). Notwithstanding
the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance
with the terms of the License.