ECEN 615

Methods of Electric Power

Systems Analysis
Lecture 19: Equivalents, Voltage Stability

Prof. Tom Overbye

Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Texas A&M University
[email protected]
Announcements
• Read Chapters 3 and 8 from the book
• Homework 4 is due today
• Homework 5 is due on Tuesday November 12

2
QR Factorization
• Used in in SE since it handles ill-conditioned m by n
matrices (with m >= n)
• Can be used with sparse matrices
• As before we will first split the R-1 matrix
1 1
1
H R HH R
T T 2
R 2
H  H T H

• QR factorization represents the m by n H' matrix as

H  Q U
with Q an m by m orthonormal matrix and U an upper
triangular matrix (most books use Q R but we use U to
avoid confusion with the previous R) 3
QR Factorization
• We then have H T H  U T Q T Q U
• But since Q is an orthonormal matrix, Q T Q  I
• Hence we have H T H  U T U
1
Originally x   H T R 1H  H T R 1  z meas  f ( x) 

With H T R 1H  H T H  H T H  U T U
Q is an m by m
1 matrix
Let z   Q T R 2  z meas  f (x) 

1 1 1 1 1
x   U T U  H T R 2
R 2  z meas  f (x)    U T U  U T Q T R 2  z meas  f (x) 

U T Ux  U T z  x  U 1z 
4
QR Factorization
• Next we’ll briefly discuss the QR factorization
algorithm
• When factored the U matrix (i.e., what most call the R
matrix ) will be an m by n upper triangular matrix
• Several methods are available including the
Householder method and the Givens Method
• Givens is preferred when dealing with sparse matrices
• All good reference is Gene H. Golub and Charles F. Van
Loan, “Matrix Computations,” second edition, Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1989.

5
Givens Algorithm for Factoring a
Matrix A
• The Givens algorithm works by pre-multiplying the
initial matrix, A, by a series of matrices and their
transposes, starting with G1G1T
– If A is m by n, then each G is an m by m matrix
• Algorithm proceeds column by column, sequentially
zeroing out elements in the lower triangle of A, starting
at the bottom of each column If A is sparse,
G1  G p G ...G A  QU
T T then we can take
p 1
advantage of
G1  G p  Q sparsity going up
the column
G Tp ...G1T A  U
6
Givens Algorithm
• To zero out element A[i,j], with i > j we first solve
with a=A[k,j], b= A[i,j] To zero out an element
c  s   a   r  we need a non-zero
 s c  b   0 pivot element in column j;
     assume this row as k.
r

r  a2  b2
• A numerically safe algorithm is
If b=0 then c=1, s=0 // i.e, no rotation is needed

Else If |b > a| then   a / b; s  1/ 1   2 ; c  s

Else   b / a; c  1/ 1   2 ; s  c
7
Givens G Matrix
• The orthogonal G(i,k,q) matrix is then
1  0  0  0 To zero out an element
     we need a non-zero
 pivot element in column j;
0  c  s  0
  assume this row as k. Row
G (i, k, )        k here is the first non-zero
0   s  c  0 above row i.
 
    
0  0  0  1 

• Premultiplication by G(i,k,q)T is a rotation by q
radians in the (i,k) coordinate plane
8
Small Givens Example
• Let 4 2 First start in column j=1; we will
1 0  zero out A[4,1] with i=4, k=2
A
0 5
 
2 1
• First we zero out A[4,1], a=1, b=2 giving s= 0.8944,
c=-0.4472
1 0 0 0   4 2 
0 0.4472 0 0.8944   2.236 0.8944 
G  GTA   
1 0 0 1 0  1  0 5 
   
0 0.8944 0 0.4472   0 0.4472 
9
Small Givens Example
• Next zero out A[2,1] with a=4, b=-2.236, giving
c= -0.8729, s=0.4880
 0.873 0.488 0 0  4.58 2.18 
 0.488 0.873 0 0   0 0.195 
G   G TG T A   
2  0 0 1 0 2 1  0 5 
   
 0 0 0 1  0 0.447 

• Next zero out A[4,2] with a=5, b=-0.447, c=0.996,

s=0.089 1 0 0 0   4.58 2.18 
0 1 0 0   0 0.195
G   G TG TG T A  
3 0 0 0.996 0.089 3 2 1  0 5.020
   
 0 0 0.089 0.996   0 0 
10
Small Givens Example
• Next zero out A[3,2] with a=0.195, b=5.02,
c=0.996, s=0.089
1 0 0 0  4.58 2.18 
0 0.039 0.999 0   0 5.023
G  G TG TG TG T A  U   
4 0 0.999 0.039 0 4 3 2 1  0 0 
   
0 0 0 1  0 0 

• Also we have
0.872 0.019 0.487 0 
 0.218 0.094 0.387 0.891 
Q  G1G 2G 3G 4   
 0 0.995 0.039 0.089 
 
 0.436 0.009 0.782 0.445 
11
 Start of Givens for SE Example
• Starting with the H matrix we get  0 10 0 
 10 0 10 
 
1  0 10 0 
H  R H  100  
2

 10 0 10 
 1 0 0 
 
 0 0 1 
• To zero out H'[5,1]=1 we have
b=100, a=-1000, giving 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 
c=0.995, s=0.0995  1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
G  
Here the column (j) is 1, while
0 0 0 0.995 0.0995 0 
1

i is 5 and k is 4. 0 0 0 0.0995 0.995 0 

 
0 0 0 0 0 1
12
 Start of Givens for SE Example
• Which gives
 0 10 0 
 10 0 10 
 
 0 10 0 
G H  100  
T

1
10.049 0 9.95 
 0 0 0.995 
 
 0 0 1 

• The next rotation would be to zero out element

[4,1], continuing until all the elements in the
lower triangle have been reduced

13
Givens Comments
• For a full matrix, Givens is O(mn2) since each
element in the lower triangle needs to be zeroed
O(nm), and each operation is O(n)
• Computation can be drastically reduced for a
sparse matrix since we only need to zero out the
elements that are initially non-zero, and any that
become non-zero (i.e., the fills)
– Also, for each multiply we only need to deal with the
nonzeros in the impacted row
• Givens rotation is commonly used to solve the SE

14
Power System Equivalents
• No electric grid model is ever going to completely
represent a real electric grid
– “All models are wrong but some models are useful”
• A key modeling consideration is how much of the
electric grid to represent
– For large-scale systems the distribution system is usually
equivalenced at some point; this has few system level
ramifications if it is radial; if it is networked then there are
potential issues
– At the transmission level either the full interconnect is
represented or it is equivalenced
– In an SE model in large grids (like the Eastern Interconnect) it
is always an electrical equivalent 15
Kron Reduction, Ward Equivalents
• For decades power system network models have been
equivalenced using the approach originally presented
by J.B. Ward in 1949 AIEE paper “Equivalent Circuits
for Power-Flow Studies”
– Paper’s single reference is to 1939 book by Gabriel
Kron, so this is also known as Kron’s reduction or a
Ward equivalent
• System buses are partitioned into a study system (s) to
be retained and an external system (e) to be eliminated;
buses in study system that connect to the external are
known as boundary buses
16
Ward Equivalents
• The Ward approach is based on the below relationship

• No impact on study, non-boundary buses

• Equivalent is created by doing a partial factorization of
the Ybus
– Computationally efficient

17
Other Types of Equivalents
• There are many different methods available for creating
power system equivalents
– A classic paper is by S. Deckmann, et. al., “Studies on Power
System Load Flow Equivalencing,” IEEE Transactions Power
App. And Syst., Nov/Dec 1980
– Companion paper covers numerical testing of equivalents
• The major equivalencing types are
– Ward-Type Equivalence: this is what we’ll be covering, with
the major differences associated with how the generator buses
and equivalent loads are represented
– REI Equivalents: All boundary buses connect to one “REI” bus
– Linearized Methods: Linearize about an operating point
– Others: PTDF-based, backbone type 18
Equivalent System Properties
• An equivalent is usually created from a larger model
– In the Eastern Interconnect there are full grid models that are
used for wide-area planning, these are equivalenced for real-
time usage or more specialized studies
• The equivalent is usually smaller and less detailed
– Solves quicker
– Requires less storage
– Requires less up-to-date data
• Equivalences contain fictitious elements
– This can make modeling/updating more difficult
• The equivalent only approximates the behavior of the
original
19
Study vs External System
• The key decision in creating an equivalent is to divide
the system into a study portion that is represented in
detail, and an external portion that is represented by the
equivalent
• The two systems are joined at boundary buses, which
are part of the study subsystem
• How this is done is application specific; for example:
– for real-time use it does not make sense to retain significant
portions of the grid for which there is no real-time information
– for contingency analysis the impact of the contingency is
localized
– for planning the new system additions have localized impacts
20
Ward Type Equivalencing

21
Ward Type Equivalencing
Considerations
• The Ward equivalent is calculated by doing a partial
factorization of the Ybus
– The equivalent buses are numbered before the study buses
– As the equivalent buses are eliminated their first neighbors are
joined together
– At the end, many of the boundary buses are connected
– This can GREATLY decrease the sparsity of the system
– Buses with different voltages can be directly connected

22
Ward Type Equivalencing
Considerations
• At the end of the Ward process often many of the new
equivalent lines have high impedances
– Often there is an impedance threshold, and lines with
impedances above this value are eliminated
• The equivalent lines may have unusual values, including
negative resistances
• Load and generation is represented as equivalent current
injections or shunts; sometimes these values are
converted back to constant power
• Consideration needs to be given to loss of reactive
support
• The equivalent embeds the present load and gen values2233
B7Flat_Eqv Example
• In this example the B7Flat_Eqv case is reduced,
eliminating buses 1, 3 and 4. The study system is
then 2, 5, 6, 7, with buses 2 and 5 the boundary buses
0 MW 0 MW 0 MW 0 MW 0 MW
A A

For ease of
1.04 pu MVA 1.04 pu MVA

Bus 1 Bus 3 Bus 4 1.04 pu

0 MW 0 MW
comparison
0 MW 0 MW 0 MW
AGC OFF
A A

system is
MVA MVA
A 0 MW
A
Case Hourly Cost MVA AGC OFF
MVA
0 MW 3454 $/h

modeled
0 MW
0 MW A
0 MW
1.04 pu 0 MW
MVA
0 MW 1.04 pu
Top Area Cost
unloaded
Bus 2 Bus 5
2122 $/h
0 MW 0 MW 0 MW
0 MW
A
A 0 MW AGC OFF MVA
MVA 0 MW
0 MW 0 MW 0 MW
A

1.04 pu MVA 1.04 pu

Bus 6 0 MW 0 MW Bus 7
A
MVA
0 MW Left Area Cost Right Area Cost 0 MW
slack

0 Mvar 832 $/h 500 $/h 0 Mvar

0 MW AGC OFF -0 MW AGC OFF

24
B7Flat_Eqv Example

• Original Ybus
 20.83 16.67 4.17 0 0 0 0 
 16.67 52.78 5.56 5.56 8 .33 16 .67 0 
 
 4.17 5.56 43.1 33.3 0 0 0 
 
Ybus  j 0 5.56 33.3 43.1 4.17 0 0 
 0 8.33 0 4.17 29.17 0 16.67 
 
 0 16.67 0 0 0 25 8.33 
 0 0 0 0 16.67 8.33 25 

 20.833 4.167 0 
Yee  j  4.167 43.056 33.333 
 0 33.333 43.056 

25
B7Flat_Eqv Example
16.667 5.556 5.556 
16.667 0 0 0  0 4.167 
Yes  j  5.556 0 0 
0
0 Yse  j 
 0 0 0 
 5.556 4.167 0 0   
 0 0 0 

 52.778 8.333 16.667 0  Note Yes=Yse'

 8.333 29.167 0 16 .667 
if no phase
Yss  j  
 16.667 0 25.0 8.333  shifters
 
 0 16 .667 8 .333 25 .0 
 28.128 11.463 16.667 0 
 11.463 28.130 0 16 .667 
Y ss  Yse ee Yes 
Y 1
 j
 16.667 0 25.0 8.333 

 
 0 16. 667 8 .333 25 .0 
26
Equivalencing in PowerWorld
• Open a case and solve it; then select Edit Mode, Tools,
Equivalencing; this displays the Power System
Equivalents Form
Next step is then to
divide the buses into
the study system and
the external system;
buses can be loaded
from a text file as
well

27
Equivalencing in PowerWorld
• Then go to the Create The Equivalent page, select the
desired options and select Build Equivalent System
Maximum
impedance
lines to retain

’99’ or ‘EQ’
Click to create the equivalent
are common
circuit values
for equivalent
lines

Removes equivalenced objects from the oneline 28

Small System Equivalent Example
• Example shows the creation of an equivalent for
Aggieland37 example First example is
Aggieland Power and Light
33%
A

MVA

52%
MVA
A
SLACK345
simple, just removing
WHITE138 (bus 3);
Total Load 1420.7 MW 1.02 pu HOWDY345
slack
641 MW
A A A

1.02 pu
TEXAS345 Total Losses: 24.72 MW 69%
MVA
69%
MVA SLACK138
52%
MVA

A 0.99 pu HOWDY138
79% A
A
MVA 22% 1.03 pu

note TEXAS138 is
MVA A 26%
0.98 pu TEXAS138 53 MW 85%
MVA

1.01 pu
21 Mvar MVA
A
29 MW
54%
MVA
1.0375 tap 0.0 Mvar 8 Mvar
1.02 pu HOWDY69
100 MW
A A
27 MW
1.01 pu TEXAS69 BATT69 64% 72% 30 Mvar
0.99 pu MVA 4 Mvar MVA
A

37 MW 44% 0.99 pu NORTHGATE69 A A

now directly joined to

A MVA 74% 16%
21%
14 Mvar
A
MVA
12MAN69 MVA
MVA 0.98 pu BONFIRE69
A 29% 34 MW
WHITE138
69% MVA
0 Mvar
MVA A
A
78%
20 MW 35% CENTURY69 MVA

8 Mvar
MVA
31 MW
0.0 Mvar A

78% PLUM138
0.957 pu
A
13 Mvar WEB138 MVA

RELLIS138..
40% 0.98 pu
MVA GIGEM69 A A
0.98 pu
MAROON69 93 MW 96%
82 MW
REVEILLE69
65 Mvar
53%
MVA MVA 1.0875 tap 49 MW
59 MW 17 Mvar
27 Mvar
17 Mvar 34%
A
0.999 pu
MVA WEB69
TREE69 0.97 pu 1.01 pu
0.0 Mvar 0.98 pu
A 100 MW
0.0 Mvar A
16%
MVA 30 Mvar

A
A

64%
MVA 0.0 Mvar FISH69
64% MVA
A
MVA 93 MW 63%
1.005 pu A
KYLE138
SPIRIT69 58 Mvar 51% 0.961 pu MVA
MVA
1.01 pu
A
A

51% 63%
A
1.0000 tap
YELL69 24% 35 MW
MVA
MVA MVA
0.0 Mvar A

11 Mvar 0.98 pu A
KYLE69 67% MVA
A 0.985 pu MVA

25 MW 41%
A
MVA 61 MW
10 Mvar A 17 Mvar
MVA
1.00 pu 50%
A

MVA 57%
A MVA
A 58 MW A
0.99 pu
39% 47%
13% 0.0 Mvar 96 MW MVA
BUSH69 17 Mvar 0.0 Mvar MVA
A
MVA
20 Mvar 21%
0.97 pu 0.97 pu MSC69 MVA A
A

55% 70 MW 59 MW RING69
RELLIS69 MVA
MVA

0.97 pu RUDDER69 0 Mvar 6 Mvar

1.000 pu
A A 36 MW
1.0213 tap 22 MW A

66%
MVA
70%
MVA
1.0213 tap 24 Mvar
0 Mvar
46%
MVA

38 MW 0.98 pu AGGIE138 AGGIE345

RELLIS138 10 Mvar 0.990 pu REED69
0.982 pu
0.99 pu HULLABALOO138
0 deg A

54%
A MVA A

14% 59%
MVA A 0.989 pu REED138 A MVA

34% 57%
MVA MVA

45%
MVA
A 1.03 pu
1.01 pu
59%
MVA

Case is Aggieland37_HW5
29
 Small System Equivalent Example
Aggieland Power and Light Only bus 3 was
A
SLACK345
33%
MVA

removed; the new

A

52%
MVA

Total Load 1420.7 MW 1.02 pu HOWDY345

slack
641 MW
A A A

1.02 pu Total Losses: 24.70 MW 69% 69%

SLACK138
52%

equivalent line was

TEXAS345 MVA MVA MVA

A 0.99 pu HOWDY138
79% A
A
MVA 22% 1.03 pu
MVA A 26%
0.98 pu TEXAS138 53 MW 85% MVA

21 Mvar MVA 1.01 pu

A
29 MW
54%
1.0375 tap 0.0 Mvar 1.02 pu HOWDY69

auto-inserted.
MVA 8 Mvar 100 MW
A A
27 MW
1.01 pu TEXAS69 0.99 pu BATT69 64% 72% 30 Mvar
MVA 4 Mvar MVA
A

37 MW 44% 0.99 pu NORTHGATE69 A A

MVA 74% 16%

14 Mvar MVA
A
MVA
12MAN69
0.98 pu BONFIRE69
A 29% 34 MW
MVA
69% 0 Mvar
MVA A
A
78%
35% CENTURY69 MVA
MVA
31 MW 0.0 Mvar A

78% PLUM138
0.957 pu
A
13 Mvar WEB138 MVA
40% 0.98 pu
MVA GIGEM69 A A

MAROON69 REVEILLE69 93 MW 96%

82 MW 65 Mvar
53%
MVA MVA 1.0875 tap 49 MW
59 MW 17 Mvar
27 Mvar
17 Mvar 34%
A
0.999 pu
MVA WEB69
TREE69 0.97 pu 1.01 pu
0.0 Mvar 0.98 pu
A 100 MW
0.0 Mvar A
16%
MVA 30 Mvar

A
A

64%
MVA 0.0 Mvar FISH69
64% MVA
A
MVA 93 MW
1.005 pu A
KYLE138 63%

Don’t save the

SPIRIT69 58 Mvar 51% 0.961 pu MVA
MVA
1.01 pu
A
A

51% 63%
A
1.0000 tap
YELL69 24% 35 MW MVA MVA
0.0 Mvar A
MVA
11 Mvar 0.98 pu A
KYLE69 67% MVA
A
0.985 pu MVA

25 MW 41%
A
MVA 61 MW

equivalent with the

10 Mvar A 17 Mvar
MVA
1.00 pu 50%
A

MVA 57%
A MVA
58 MW A
0.99 pu
39%
0.0 Mvar 96 MW MVA
BUSH69 17 Mvar 0.0 Mvar 47%
MVA A
20 Mvar 21%
0.97 pu 0.97 pu MSC69 MVA A
A

same name as the

RELLIS69 55% 70 MW 59 MW RING69 MVA
MVA
0.97 pu RUDDER69 0 Mvar 6 Mvar
1.000 pu
A A 36 MW
1.0213 tap 22 MW A
66%
MVA
70%
MVA
1.0213 tap 24 Mvar
0 Mvar
46%
MVA

38 MW 0.98 pu AGGIE138 AGGIE345

original, unless you

RELLIS138 10 Mvar 0.990 pu REED69
0.982 pu
0.99 pu HULLABALOO138
0 deg A

54%
A MVA A

14% 59%
MVA A 0.989 pu REED138 A MVA

34% 57%
MVA MVA

want to lose the

A

45%
MVA
A 1.03 pu
1.01 pu
59%
MVA

original

30
Small System Equivalent Example
• Now remove buses at WHITE138 and TEXAS and
RELLIS (1, 3, 12, 40, 41, 44); set Max Per Unit
Impedance for Aggieland Power and Light
Equivalent
SLACK345

52%
MVA

Total Load 1376.0 MW 1.02 pu HOWDY345

slack
641 MW
Total Losses: 24.61 MW
A A A

Lines to
69% 69% 52%
MVA MVA SLACK138 MVA

0.99 pu HOWDY138
A
1.03 pu
A 26%
53 MW 85%
MVA

21 Mvar MVA 1.01 pu

29 MW
0.0 Mvar 8 Mvar
1.02 pu HOWDY69
100 MW

99 (per unit)
A
27 MW A

0.99 pu BATT69 64% 72% 30 Mvar

MVA 4 Mvar MVA

0.99 pu NORTHGATE69 A A

74% 16%
12MAN69
MVA MVA
A
0.98 pu BONFIRE69
29% 34 MW
MVA
0 Mvar

to retain all
A

78%
CENTURY69 MVA

31 MW 0.0 Mvar A

78% PLUM138
13 Mvar 0.957 pu
A
WEB138 MVA
40% 0.98 pu
MVA GIGEM69 A A

MAROON69 REVEILLE69 93 MW 96%

82 MW 65 Mvar
53%
MVA MVA 1.0875 tap 49 MW
59 MW 17 Mvar
27 Mvar A
0.999 pu

lines. Again
17 Mvar 34%
WEB69
TREE69 0.97 pu
MVA
1.01 pu
0.0 Mvar 0.98 pu
A 100 MW
0.0 Mvar A
16%
MVA
30 Mvar

A
A

64%
MVA 0.0 Mvar FISH69
64% MVA
A
MVA 93 MW
1.005 pu A
KYLE138 63%

to an auto-
SPIRIT69 58 Mvar 51% 0.961 pu MVA

1.01 pu MVA

A
A

51% 63%
A
1.0000 tap
YELL69 24% 35 MW MVA MVA
0.0 Mvar A
MVA
11 Mvar 0.98 pu A
KYLE69 67% MVA
A
0.985 pu MVA

25 MW 41%
MVA
61 MW
10 Mvar A
17 Mvar

insert to show
1.00 pu 50%
A

MVA 57%
58 MW
MVA
A
0.99 pu
BUSH69 17 Mvar 0.0 Mvar 47%
MVA
A

0.97 pu 0.97 pu MSC69 21%

MVA A

70 MW 59 MW RING69 MVA

0.97 pu RUDDER69 0 Mvar 6 Mvar

the equivalent
36 MW
22 MW A
24 Mvar 46%
0 Mvar MVA

38 MW 0.98 pu AGGIE138 AGGIE345

10 Mvar 0.990 pu REED69
0.99 pu HULLABALOO138
0 deg A

54%
MVA A

lines.
59%
A 0.989 pu REED138 A MVA

34% 57%
MVA MVA

1.03 pu
1.01 pu A

31
59%
MVA
Small System Equivalent Example
• Now set the Max Per Unit Impedance for Equivalent
Lines to 2.5.
Aggieland Power and Light
SLACK345

52%
MVA

Total Load 1376.7 MW 1.02 pu HOWDY345

sla ck
641 MW
A A A

Total Losses: 23.85 MW 69%

MVA
69%
MVA SLACK138
52%
MVA

0.99 pu HOWDY138
A
1.03 pu
A 26%
MVA
53 MW 85%
1.01 pu
21 Mvar MVA

29 MW
0.0 Mvar 8 Mvar
1.02 pu HOWDY69
100 MW
A A
27 MW
BATT69 64% 72% 30 Mvar
0.99 pu MVA 4 Mvar MVA

0.99 pu NORTHGATE69 A A

74% 16%
MVA
A
MVA
12MAN69
0.98 pu BONFIRE69
29% 34 MW
MVA
0 Mvar
A

78%
CENTURY69 MVA

31 MW 0.0 Mvar A

78% PLUM138
0.957 pu
A
13 Mvar WEB138 MVA
40% 0.98 pu
MVA GIGEM69 A A

MAROON69 REVEILLE69
82 MW
93 MW
65 Mvar
53%
MVA
96%
MVA
1.0875 tap 49 MW
59 MW 17 Mvar
27 Mvar
17 Mvar 34%
A
0.999 pu
MVA
WEB69
TREE69 0.97 pu 1.01 pu
0.0 Mvar 0.98 pu
A 100 MW
0.0 Mvar A
16%
MVA
30 Mvar

A
A

64%
MVA 0.0 Mvar FISH69
64% MVA
A
MVA 93 MW 63%
1.005 pu A
KYLE138
SPIRIT69 58 Mvar 51% 0.961 pu MVA
MVA
1.01 pu
A
A

51% 63%
A
1.0000 tap
YELL69 24% 35 MW MVA MVA
0.0 Mvar A
MVA
11 Mvar 0.98 pu A
KYLE69 67% MVA
A 0.985 pu MVA

25 MW 41%
MVA 61 MW
10 Mvar A
17 Mvar
1.00 pu 50%
A

MVA 57%
58 MW A MVA
0.99 pu
BUSH69 17 Mvar 0.0 Mvar 47%
MVA
A

0.97 pu 0.97 pu MSC69 21%

MVA A

70 MW 59 MW RING69 MVA

0.97 pu RUDDER69 0 Mvar 6 Mvar

36 MW
22 MW A
24 Mvar 46%
0 Mvar MVA

38 MW 0.98 pu AGGIE138 AGGIE345

10 Mvar 0.990 pu REED69

0.99 pu HULLABALOO138
0 deg A

54%
MVA A

59%
A
0.989 pu REED138 A MVA

34% 57%
MVA MVA

A
1.03 pu
1.01 pu
59%
MVA

32
Large System Example: 70K Case
• Original System has 70,000 buses and 71,343 lines

33
Large System Example: 70K Case
• Just retain the Oklahoma Area; now 1591 buses and
1745 lines (deleting ones above 2.5 pu impedance)

TYRONE 6

S COFFEYVI LLE

COPAN
TURPIN 1
FORGAN
NEWKI RK
BUFFALO 77
ALVA 1
BLACKWELL 3
PONCA CI TY 1 MIAMI 81
M EDFORD 18 SHIDLER DEWEY 1
GOODWELL BUFFALO 76 PAWHUSKA 1
HOOKER PAW HUSKA 3
DEWEY 2
PONCA CITY 3 BARTLESVI LLE 2
KEYES ALVA 3 BL ACKW ELL 2
GUYM ON 1 GUYM ON 2
CHEROKEE 7 BLACKWELL 1

BOI SE CI TY GUYM ON 3 BEAVER 8 PONCA CI TY 5 BARTLESVI LLE 3

PONCA CI TY 9
TURPIN 2 PAW HUSKA 2
LAVERNE 2 PONCA CI TY 2 PONCA CITY 7 PONCA CI TY 10
VI NI TA 3
PONCA CITY 4
W OODWARD 7
POND CREEK
PONCA CI TY 8
PONCA CI TY 6 BARTLESVI LLE 5
TONKAWA 2
TEXHOM A 2 TONKAWA 1
LAVERNE 1
LAVERNE 3
TEXHOM A 1 FAIRFAX 22
WOODWARD 8 HUNTER 2
FORT SUPPLY
WAYNOKA
GUYMON 5 WOODW ARD 6 ALINE HELENA 7
GU YMON 4 GARBER 1
WOODWARD 4 ENI D 6 HOMI NY 2

TEXHOM A 3 ENI D 5
WOODWARD 3 M OORELAND 2 M ORRI SON 4
GAGE LAHOMA 1
MOORELAND 3 OOLOGAH 2
W OODWARD 5 FAIRVIEW 15 ENID 7
ENID 4
MORRI SON 5 LANGLEY 2
RI NGWOOD 3 ENID 1 PAWNEE 3
OOLOGAH 3
LAHOM A 2 ENID 3 PE RRY 23
GARBER 2
WOODWARD 9

WOODW ARD 10 FAIRVI EW 16

WAUKOM I S
STI LLWATER 11 GLENCOE 6 OW ASSO 1 SALINA 4
VI CI M ARSHALL 44
FAIRVIEW 17
SHATTUCK

STILLW ATER 9
TULSA 7 PRYOR 5
CLEVEL AND 95
SEI LI NG 1 OK EENE 1
SEILING 3 STI LLWATER 10 YALE 3 CHOU TEAU 3
ORLANDO 58
STILLWATER 16
SAND SPRI NGS 5
SEI LI NG 2 OKEENE 2
STI LLWATER 12
HENNESSEY
DRUMRIGHT 2
BROKEN ARROW 13
ARNETT STI LLW ATER 14
CANTON 58
TALOGA
DRUM RI GHT 1

OAKW OOD 5
CANTON 59 CRESCENT CUSHING 5 BROKEN ARROW 14
J ENKS 5
TAHLEQU AH 3
WATONGA 1

PU TNAM 3 WATONGA 2
LEEDEY

FORT GIBSON 4

THOM AS 2
EDMOND 17
GEARY 1
CHEYENNE 1 MUSKOGEE 9
LU THER 4
OKLAHOMA CI TY 67
ARAPAHO GEARY 2
CALUMET 5
CLI NTON 63 GORE 2
HAMMON
ELK CI TY 3
WEATHERFORD 1
CALUM ET 4 BOLEY

CHEYENNE 2 HARRAH 4 OKMULGEE 1

HI NTON 7 YU KON 5
CLINTON 64 WEATHERFORD 2
ELK CI TY 1
SW EETWATER 4 ELK CITY 2
BURNS FLAT 2 HI NTON 5 OKEM AH 1
OKEM AH 3
HENRYETTA 1
HYDRO

OKEM AH 2

CANUTE HI NTON 6
SHAWNEE 2
MINCO 5 HENRYETTA 3

SAYRE 4 CORDELL 2 MU STANG 3 HE NRYETTA 2 EUFAULA 5

SALLI SAW 5
SAYRE 3
EUFAULA 6
PORUM 3
BURNS FLAT 1
WETUM KA 1 WELEETKA 2
SAYRE 5 MI NCO 3 WELEETKA 1 STI GLER 3
MU STANG 2 OKLAHOMA CI TY 17 ST IGLER 1
EUFAULA 4
SENTI NEL
WETUM KA 2
ERICK PANAMA
CARTER
FORT COBB
QUINTON 4
FLETCHER 4CORDELL 1 CARNEGI E 6
ANADARKO 3 HOLDENVI LLE 1

ANADARKO 4 M CALESTER 1
CARNEGI E 5
HOBART 6 HOLDENVILLE 2 M CALESTER 4
RED OAK 5
GRANITE
KONAWA 1
MCALESTER
M CALESTER 2
3
WISTER 1
M ANGUM 2 HOBART 7 KONAW A 3
WI LBURTON 2
KONAWA 4 WISTER 2
WI LBURTON 1
M ANGUM 1
ADA 8 KI OW A 2
BLAIR 2
CARNEGIE 8 HARTSHORNE
HE AVENER
ALLEN 1
CALVIN TALIHINA 2
ADA 11

ADA 9

ALTUS 3 PAU LS VALLEY 2

STRATFORD 14
ALLEN 2
M ARLOW 2 ADA 10 KI OWA 1 HODGEN 1
ALTUS 5 HODGEN 2

HOLLIS 2 SNYDER I NDIAHOM A M ARLOW 1 ELM ORE CI TY 1

PAULS VALL EY 1
COALGATE 3
KI OWA 3 CLAYTON 18 TUSKAHOM A

ELM ORE CI TY 2 STONEWALL 2

TALIHINA 1
M ARLOW 3
ALTUSALTUS
2 4 COALGATE 1
DAVI S 7

ELDORADO 3
DUNCAN 4 ELM ORE CITY 3
ROFF SM ITHVILLE 9
SULPHUR 9
DUNCAN 3
LAWTON 17 DUNCAN 6 SULPHUR 10
COALGATE 2
CACHE 3 DUNCAN 5 STONEW ALL 3 M OYERS
DAVIS 6
FREDERI CK 16

RATLI FF CI TY HENNEPIN 2 WATSON 3

WALTERS 1
DAVIS 5
ATOKA 2
WALTERS 2
COMANCHE 1
BETHEL 13
FREDERICK 15 ATOKA 3

ATOKA 4
HEALDTON 2
M ANNSVILLE
WALTERS 3 TI SHOM INGO 1 RATTAN
GRANDFI ELD
COLEM AN 5
ARDM ORE 4
TI SHOM INGO 3 ANTLERS 2
RANDLETT TEM PLE 4 WAURIKA 2
ARDMORE 6
ARDM ORE 3 ANTLERS 1
LONE GROVE CADDO
ARDMORE 5 WRIGHT CI TY 3
BROKEN BOW 1
WAURIKA 1 BROKEN BOW 2 BROKEN BOW 4
RI NGLING M ADI LL 2
BROKEN BOW 3
KI NGSTON 24
M ADI LL 3 SOPER HUGO 5 FORT TOWSON 1
WILSON 12 DURANT 6 EAGLETOWN

DURANT 7
DURANT 4 HUGO 7 VALLI ANT
M ARI ETTA 19 M EAD
BOSW ELL 3 FORT TOW SON 2
CALERA 5
BENNI NGTON 4
GARVI N
TERRAL
DU RANT 5 BOKCHI TO 2
IDABEL 2
BURNEY VI LLE KI NGSTON 25 CALERA 4
I DABEL 3
HAWORTH
I DABEL 1
COLBERT 2

BOKCHI TO 1

THACKERVILLE

HE NDRI X

34
Grid Equivalent Examples
• A 2016 EI case had about 350 lines with a circuit ID of
’99’ and about 60 with ‘EQ’ (out of a total of 102,000)
– Both WECC and the EI use ’99’ or ‘EQ’ circuit IDs to
indicate equivalent lines
– One would expect few equivalent lines in interconnect wide
models
• A ten year old EI case had about 1633 lines with a
circuit ID of ’99’ and 400 with ‘EQ’ (out of a total of
65673)
• A ten year old case with about 5000 buses and 5000
lines had 600 equivalent lines
35