Acopf 1 History Formulation Testing
description
Transcript of Acopf 1 History Formulation Testing
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page2
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations
OptimalPowerFlowPaper1
MaryB.Cain,RichardP.O’Neill,AnyaCastillo
[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]
December,2012
Abstract:ThepurposeofthispaperistopresentaliteraturereviewoftheACOptimalPowerFlow(ACOPF)problemandproposeareaswheretheACOPFcouldbeimproved.TheACOPFisattheheartofIndependentSystemOperator(ISO)powermarkets,andissolvedinsomeformeveryyearforsystemplanning,everydayforday‐aheadmarkets,everyhour,andevenevery5minutes.Itwasfirstformulatedin1962,andformulationshavechangedlittleovertheyears.Withadvancesincomputingpowerandsolutionalgorithms,wecanmodelmoreoftheconstraintsandremoveunnecessarylimitsandapproximationsthatwerepreviouslyrequiredtofindasolutioninreasonabletime.Oneexampleisnonlinearvoltagemagnitudeconstraintsthataremodeledaslinearthermalproxyconstraints.Inthispaper,werefertothefullACOPFasanACOPFthatsimultaneouslyoptimizesrealandreactivepower.Today,50yearsaftertheproblemwasformulated,westilldonothaveafast,robustsolutiontechniqueforthefullACOPF.FindingagoodsolutiontechniqueforthefullACOPFcouldpotentiallysavetensofbillionsofdollarsannually.Basedonourliteraturereview,wefindthattheACOPFresearchcommunitylacksacommonunderstandingoftheproblem,itsformulation,andobjectivefunctions.However,wedonotclaimthatthisliteraturereviewisacompletereview—ourintentwassimplytocapturethemajorformulationsoftheACOPF.Instead,inthispaper,weseektoclearlypresenttheACOPFproblemthroughclearformulationsoftheproblemanditsparameters.Thispaperdefinesanddiscussesthepolarpower‐voltage,rectangularpower‐voltage,andrectangularcurrent‐voltageformulationsoftheACOPF.Additionally,itdiscussesthedifferenttypesofconstraintsandobjectivefunctions.ThispaperlaysthegroundworkforfurtherresearchontheconvexapproximationoftheACOPFsolutionspace,asurveyofsolutiontechniques,andcomputationalperformanceofdifferentformulations.
Disclaimer:TheviewspresentedarethepersonalviewsoftheauthorsandnottheFederalEnergy
RegulatoryCommissionoranyofitsCommissioners.
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page3
TableofContents
1.Introduction.......................................................................................4
2.HistoryofPowerSystemOptimization....................................7
3.Conventions,Parameters,SetsandVariables........................13
4.AdmittanceMatrixandACPowerFlowEquations...............16
5.ACOPFFormulations.......................................................................22
6.LiteratureReviewofFormulations...........................................28
7.Conclusions........................................................................................32
References
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page4
1.Introduction
TheheartofeconomicallyefficientandreliableIndependentSystem
Operator(ISO)powermarketsisthealternatingcurrentoptimalpowerflow
(ACOPF)problem.Thisproblemiscomplexeconomically,electricallyand
computationally.Economically,anefficientmarketequilibriumrequiresmulti‐part
nonlinearpricing.Electrically,thepowerflowisalternatingcurrent(AC),which
introducesadditionalnonlinearities.Computationally,theoptimizationhas
nonconvexities,includingbothbinaryvariablesandcontinuousfunctions,which
makestheproblemdifficulttosolve.Thepowersystemmustbeabletowithstand
thelossofanygeneratorortransmissionelement,andthesystemoperatormust
makebinarydecisionstostartupandshutdowngenerationandtransmission
assetsinresponsetosystemevents.Forinvestmentplanningpurposes,theproblem
needsbinaryinvestmentvariablesandamultipleyearhorizon.
Even50yearsaftertheproblemwasfirstformulated,westilllackafastand
robustsolutiontechniqueforthefullACOPF.Weuseapproximations,
decompositionsandengineeringjudgmenttoobtainreasonablyacceptable
solutionstothisproblem.Whilesuperiortotheirpredecessors,today’s
approximate‐solutiontechniquesmayunnecessarilycosttensofbillionsofdollars
peryear.Theymayalsoresultinenvironmentalharmfromunnecessaryemissions
andwastedenergy.UsingEIAdataonwholesaleelectricitypricesandU.S.and
Worldenergyproduction,Table1givesarangeofpotentialcostsavingsfroma5%
increaseinmarketefficiencyduetoimprovementstotheACOPF.(EIA2012).Small
increasesinefficiencyofdispatcharemeasuredinbillionsofdollarsperyear.Since
theusualcostofpurchasingandinstallingnewsoftwareforanexistingISOmarket
islessthan$10milliondollars(O’Neillet.al.2011),thepotentialbenefit/costratios
ofbettersoftwareareintherangeof10to1000.
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page5
TABLE1:POTENTIALCOSTSAVINGSOFINCREASEDEFFICIENCYOFDISPATCH(EIA2012)
2009gross
electricity
production
(MWh)
Productioncost
($billion/year)
assuming
$30/MWhenergy
price
Savings
($billion/year)
assuming5%
increasein
efficiency
Productioncost
($billion/year)
assuming
$100/MWh
energyprice
Savings
($billion/year)
assuming5%
increasein
efficiency
U.S. 3,724,000 112 6 372 19
World 17,314,000 519 26 1731 87
AnultimategoalofISOmarketsoftware,andatopicoffutureresearch,isthe
security‐constrained,self‐healing(correctiveswitching)ACoptimalpowerflow
withunitcommitmentovertheoptimalnetwork.Theoptimalnetworkisflexible,
withassetsthathavetime‐varyingdynamicratingsreflectingtheassetcapability
undervaryingoperatingconditions.Theoptimalnetworkisalsooptimally
configured–openingorclosingtransmissionlinesbecomesadecisionvariable,or
controlaction,ratherthananinputtotheproblem,orstate.Whenpossible,the
securityconstraintsarecorrectiveratherthanpreventive.Withpreventivesecurity
constraints,thesystemisoperatedconservativelytosurvivelossofany
transmissionelementorgenerator.Incontrast,correctiveconstraintsreconfigure
thesystemwithfast‐actingequipmentsuchasspecialprotectionsystemsor
remedialactionschemesimmediatelyfollowinglossofageneratorortransmission
element,allowingthesystemtobereliablyusedclosertoitslimits.Thisproblem
mustbesolvedweeklyin8hours,dailyin2hours,hourlyin15minutes,eachfive
minutesin1minuteandforself‐healingpost‐contingencyin30seconds.Currently,
theproblemissolvedthroughvaryinglevelsofapproximation,dependingon
applicationandtimescale,butwithincreasesincomputingpoweritmaybe
possibletoreducethenumberofapproximationsandtakeadvantageofparallel
computing.
Today,thecomputationalchallengeistoconsistentlyfindaglobaloptimal
solutionwithspeedsuptothreetofiveordersofmagnitudefasterthanexisting
solvers.Thereissomepromisingrecentevidencethatthiscouldbearealityinfive
totenyears.Forexample,inthelasttwodecadesmixed‐integerprogramming(MIP)
hasachievedspeedimprovementsof107;thatis,problemsthatwouldhavetaken
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page6
10yearsin1990canbesolvedinoneminutetoday.Asaconsequence,MIPis
replacingotherapproachesinISOmarkets.ImplementationofMIPintotheday‐
aheadandreal‐timemarkets,withtheCommission’sencouragement,hassaved
Americanelectricitymarketparticipantsoverone‐halfbilliondollarsperyear
(FERC2011).MorewillbesavedasallISOsimplementMIPandthenew
formulationsitpermitsinthenextseveralyears.
Duetoidiosyncrasiesindesign,currentsoftwareoversimplifiestheproblem
indifferentways,andrequiresoperatorinterventiontoaddressreal‐timeproblems
thatdonotshowupinmodels.Thisoperatorinterventionunnecessarilyalters
settlementpricesandproducessuboptimalsolutions.TheJointBoardonEconomic
DispatchfortheNortheastRegionstatedin2006thatimprovedmodelingofsystem
constraintssuchasvoltageandstabilityconstraintswouldresultinmoreprecise
dispatchesandbettermarketsignals,butthattheswitchtoAC‐basedsoftware
wouldincreasethetimetorunasinglescenariofromminutestooveranhour,
makinguseofACOPFimpractical,evenfortheday‐aheadmarket(FERC2006).One
exampleistheMidwestIndependentSystemOperator(MISO),whereoperators
havetocommitresourcesbeforetheunitcommitmentandeconomicdispatch
softwaremodelsareruntoaddresslocalvoltageissuesthatMISOhashaddifficulty
modelinginitsmarketsoftware(FERC2012).PJMInterconnection(PJM)employs
anapproach,calledPerfectDispatch,thatex‐postsolvesthereal‐timemarket
problemwithperfectinformation(PJM2012).ThePerfectDispatchsolutionisused
totrainoperators,wheretheycancomparethe“perfectdispatch,”whichisbasedon
“perfect”after‐the‐factinformationtotheactualdispatch,whichisbasedonthe
informationavailableatthetime.ISOmodelssolveproxiesorestimatesforreactive
powerandvoltageconstraints,wheretheycalculatelinearthermalconstraintsto
approximatequadraticvoltagemagnitudeconstraints.Thedetailsoftransmission
constraintmodelingandtransmissionpricinghavebeenneglected,butneedtobe
consideredtoimprovetheaccuracyofACOPFcalculations.Transmission
constraintscanbemodeledintermsofcurrent,realpower,apparentpower,voltage
magnitudedifferences,orangledifferences.Thechoiceofconstraintdependsonthe
typeofmodel,dataavailability,andphysicallimit(voltage,stability,orthermal
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page7
limit).Surrogateconstraintscanbecalculatedbasedonthelineflowequations,but
thesecalculationshaveinherentassumptions.OneexampleistheArizona‐Southern
Californiaoutagein2011,wheresomelinelimitsweremodeledandmonitoredas
realpowertransferlimitswhileothersweremodeledascurrenttransferlimits
(FERC/NERC2012).ThispaperseekstobetterunderstandtheACOPFproblem
throughclearformulationsoftheproblem,theoreticalpropertiesoftheproblem
anditsparameters,approximationstothenonlinearfunctionsthatarenecessaryto
maketheproblemsolvable,andtoproducecomputationalresultsfromlargeand
smalltestproblemsusingvarioussolversandstartingpoints.Discretevariables
suchasequipmentstates,generatorcommitments,andtransmissionswitching
furthercomplicatetheACOPF,butwedonotdiscusstheseinthispaper.Withthe
increasedmeasurementsandcontrolsinherentinsmartgridupgrades,thepotential
savingsaregreater,althoughtheproblemmaybecomemorecomplexwithmore
discretedevicestomodel.
Intherestofthepaper,weprovideabriefhistoryofpowersystem
optimization,presentnotationandnomenclature,formulatetheadmittancematrix
andpowerflowequations,formulateconstraints,presentdifferentformulationsof
theACOPF,andpresentaliteraturereviewofACOPFformulations.
2.HistoryofPowerSystemOptimization
Powersystemoptimizationhasevolvedwithdevelopmentsincomputing
andoptimizationtheory.Inthefirsthalfofthe20thcentury,theoptimalpowerflow
problemwas“solved”byexperiencedengineersandoperatorsusingjudgment,
rulesofthumb,andprimitivetools,includinganalognetworkanalyzersand
specializedsliderules.Gradually,computationalaidswereintroducedtoassistthe
intuitionofoperatorexperience.Theoptimalpowerflowproblemwasfirst
formulatedinthe1960’s(Carpentier1962),buthasproventobeaverydifficult
problemtosolve.Linearsolversarewidelyavailableforlinearizedversionsofthe
optimalpowerflowproblem,butnonlinearsolverscannotguaranteeaglobal
optimum,arenotrobust,anddonotsolvefastenough.Ineachelectricitycontrol
room,theoptimalpowerflowproblemoranapproximationmustbesolvedmany
timesaday,asoftenasevery5minutes.
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page8
Therearethreetypesofproblemscommonlyreferredtoinpowersystem
literature:powerflow(loadflow),economicdispatch,andoptimalpowerflow.
Threeotherclassesofpowersystemoptimization,specificallyunitcommitment,
optimaltopology,andlong‐termplanning,involvebinaryandintegervariables,and
arenotdiscussedinthispaper;butcombinedwiththeinsightsonformulationsin
thispaper,couldbepromisingareasforfutureresearch.
Table2comparesthemajorcharacteristicsofthepowerflow,economic
dispatch,andoptimalpowerflowproblems.Thepowerfloworloadflowrefersto
thegeneration,load,andtransmissionnetworkequations.Powerflowmethodsfind
amathematicallybutnotnecessarilyphysicallyfeasibleoroptimalsolution.The
powerflowequationsthemselvesdonottakeaccountoflimitationsongenerator
reactivepowerlimitsortransmissionlinelimits,buttheseconstraintscanbe
programmedintomanypowerflowsolvers.
Asecondtypeofproblem,economicdispatch,describesavarietyof
formulationstodeterminetheleast‐costgenerationdispatchtoserveagivenload
withareservemargin,buttheseformulationssimplifyorsometimesaltogether
ignorepowerflowconstraints.
Athirdtypeofproblem,theoptimalpowerflow,findstheoptimalsolutionto
anobjectivefunctionsubjecttothepowerflowconstraintsandotheroperational
constraints,suchasgeneratorminimumoutputconstraints,transmissionstability
andvoltageconstraints,andlimitsonswitchingmechanicalequipment.Optimal
powerflowissometimesreferredtoassecurity‐constrainedeconomicdispatch
(SCED);mostimplementationsofSCEDincludeonlythermallimits,andproxiesfor
voltagelimits.Thereareavarietyofformulationswithdifferentconstraints,
differentobjectivefunctions,anddifferentsolutionmethodsthathavebeenlabeled
optimalpowerflow;thesearediscussedintheformulationssectionlaterinthis
paper.FormulationsthatusetheexactACpowerflowequationsareknownas
“ACOPF.”Simplerversions,knownasDCOPF,assumeallvoltagemagnitudesare
fixedandallvoltageanglesareclosetozero.DCstandsfordirectcurrent,butisabit
ofamisnomer;aDCOPFisalinearizedformofafullalternatingcurrentnetwork
(ACOPF)andnotapowerflowsolutionforadirectcurrentnetwork.Weusethe
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page9
generaltermOPFtoincludebothACOPFandDCOPF.TheACOPFisoftensolved
throughdecoupling,whichtakesadvantageofthestructureoftheproblem,where
realpower(P)andvoltageangle(θ)aretightlycoupledandvoltagemagnitude(V)
andreactivepower(Q)aretightlycoupled,buttheP‐θandV‐Qproblemsare
weaklycoupledduetotheassumptionsthatthephaseangledifferencesbetween
adjacentbusesarerathersmall,andhigh‐voltagetransmissionnetworkshavemuch
higherreactancecomparedtoresistance.ThedecoupledOPFdividestheACOPF
intotwolinearsubproblems,onewithpowerandvoltageangleandanotherwith
voltagemagnitudeandreactivepower.Inthispaper,weusethetermACOPFto
refertothefullACOPFthatsimultaneouslyoptimizesrealandreactivepower,and
decoupledOPFtorefertothedecoupledproblemsthatseparatelyoptimizerealand
reactivepoweranditeratebetweenthetwotoreachanoptimalsolution.
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page10
TABLE2:MAJORTYPESOFPOWERSYSTEMPROBLEMS
Generalproblemtype
Problemname Includesvoltageangleconstraints?
Includesbusvoltagemagnitudeconstraints?
Includestransmissionconstraints?
Includeslosses?
Assumptions Includesgeneratorcosts?
Includescontingencyconstraints?
OPF ACOPF,orFullACOPF
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
OPF DCOPF No No;allvoltagemagnitudesfixed
Yes Maybe Voltagemagnitudesareconstant
Yes No
OPF DecoupledOPF Yes Yes Yes Yes Power‐voltageangleareindependentofvoltagemagnitude‐reactivepower
Yes No
OPF Security‐ConstrainedEconomicDispatch(SCED)
Yes No Yes Yes Voltagemagnitudesareconstant
Yes Yes
Powerflow
PowerFlow,orLoadFlow
No,butcanbeadded
Yes No,butcanbeadded
Yes No No
Economicdispatch
EconomicDispatch
No No No Depends Notransmissionconstraints
Yes No
OPF SecurityConstrainedOPF(SCOPF)
Yes Depends Yes Yes Depends Yes Yes
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page11
Wenowdiscussearlyresearchofthethreetypesofproblemsinpower
systemoptimization:economicdispatch,powerflow,andoptimalpowerflow.
Asearlyasthe1930’s,theeconomicdispatchproblemwassolvedbyhandor
specially‐developedslideruleusingtheprincipleofequalincrementalloading,
takingaslongas8hourstocomplete(Happ1977).Earlycomputationsofeconomic
dispatchwereslow.Kirchmayerestimatedthatitwouldtake10minutesof
computationaltimetoproducetheschedulesfora10generatorsystematagiven
systemprice(Kirchmayer1958).Incontrast,RTOstodaysolvesystemsofhundreds
ofgeneratorsinamatterofseconds.Inthesurveyofeconomicdispatchmethodsup
throughthe1970’s,Happprovidesanoverviewoftheevolutionofeconomic
dispatchformulationsanddifferentwaystoaccountforlosses.
Priortodigitalcomputers,asearlyas1929,thepowerflowproblemwas
solvedwithanalognetworkanalyzersthatsimulatedpowersystems(Sasson1967).
WardandHalepublishedthefirstautomateddigitalsolutiontothepowerflow
problemin1956(Ward1956).SassonandJaimesprovideasurveyandcomparison
ofearlyloadflowsolutionmethods,whicharevariousiterativemethodsbasedon
thenodaladmittancematrix(Ymatrix)oritsinverse,thenodalimpedancematrix
(Zmatrix)(Sasson1967).Earlyresearchers,includingCarpentier,usedtheGauss‐
Seidelmethod.TheNewton‐Raphsonmethodbecamethecommonlyusedsolution
methodduringthe1960’s(Peschonet.al.1968),afterTinneyandothersdeveloped
sparsitytechniquestotakeadvantageofthestructureoftheadmittancematrixin
theOPFproblem.Theadmittancematrixissparse,meaningithasmanyzero
elements;thisisbecausepowersystemnetworksarenotdenselyconnected.
Sparsitytechniquescanbeusedtoreducedatastorageandincreasecomputation
speed(Stott1974).
EarlyresearchonOPFusedclassicalLagrangiantechniquesforthe
optimalityconditions,butneglectedboundsonvariables(Squires1961).In1962,
CarpentierpublishedtheoptimalityconditionsforanOPF,includingvariable
bounds,basedontheKuhn‐Tuckerconditions;thisisgenerallyconsideredthefirst
publicationofafullyformulatedOPF(Carpentier1962).Carpentierassumesthat
theapplicablefunctionsdisplay“suitableconvexity”fortheKuhn‐Tucker(now
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page12
referredtoastheKarush‐Kuh‐TuckerorKKT)conditionstoapply(Carpentier
1962).Giventhestructureofthepowerflowequations,thismaybeabig
assumption(Hiskens2001andSchecter2012).CarpentierincludesthefullAC
powerflowequations,generatorrealandreactivepowerconstraints,busvoltage
magnitudeconstraints,andbusvoltageangledifferenceconstraintsforbuses
connectedbytransmissionelements.
HuneaultandGallianaprovideanextensivesurveyofoptimalpowerflow
literatureupto1991,surveyingover300articlesandciting163(Huneault1991).
Theyconclude,“Thehistoryofoptimalpowerflow(OPF)researchcanbe
characterizedastheapplicationofincreasinglypowerfuloptimizationtoolstoa
problemwhichbasicallyhasbeenwell‐definedsincetheearly1960’s.”Thepaper
outlinestheevolutionofOPFliterature,groupedbysolutionmethod.Thesolution
methodsincludevariousformsofgradientmethods,linearprogramming,quadratic
programming,andpenaltymethods.Theauthorsconcludethat“commercially
availableOPFalgorithmsallsatisfythefullnonlinearloadflowmodelandafullset
ofboundsonvariables.”TheauthorsfurtherconcludethattheOPFremainsa
difficultmathematicalproblem.Thepresentalgorithmscannotcomputequickly
enough,andarepronetoseriousill‐conditioningandconvergenceproblems.
Anotherareaofresearch,security‐constrainedOPF,accountsfor
transmissioncontingencyconstraintsandposesadditionalcomputational
challenges(Carpentier1979,Stott1987).Ourdiscussioninthispaperfocuseson
ACOPF.Futureresearchcouldextendtheformulationstoincludecontingency
constraintsthatarerequiredtomaintainthesystemafteranoutage.This
formulationincreasesthesizeoftheproblemformulationbyafactorequaltothe
numberofcontingenciesstudied.
ResearchershaveidentifiedchallengestosolvingtheOPF,including
modelingdiscretevariables,localminima,lackofuniformproblemdefinition,
solutionreliabilityandcomputingtime.Someofthesehavebeensolved:both
Tinneyetal.andMomohetal.discussedthechallengesinmodelingdiscrete
variablesinOPFsolutions(Tinney1988),(Momoh1997).Today,withadvancesin
mixedintegerprogramming(MIP),discretevariablescanbemodeledandincluded
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page13
inACOPFsolutions.Otherchallengespersisttoday:Koesslerstatesthatthe“lackof
uniformityinusageanddefinition”hasbeenachallengetousersanddevelopersin
OPF,andspecificallydiscusseslocalminima,whichindicatethattheproblemis
nonconvex(Momoh1997).HuneaultandGallianafoundthatalgorithmsavailablein
1991couldnotcomputeOPFsolutionsquicklyandreliablyenough,andthatthe
OPF,likemanynonlinearproblems,ispronetoill‐conditioninganddifficult
convergence(Huneault1991).
3.Conventions,Parameters,SetsandVariables
NotationandNomenclature
Whennandmaresubscripts,theyindexbuses;kindexesthetransmission
elements.Whenjisnotasuperscript,j=(‐1)1/2;iisthecomplexcurrent.Whenjisa
superscript,itisthe‘imaginary’partofacomplexnumber.Matricesandvectorsare
representedwithuppercaseletters.Scalarsandcomplexnumbersareinlowercase
letters.ForcolumnvectorsAandBoflengthn,whereakandbkarethekth
componentsofAandBrespectively,theHadamardproduct‘·’isdefinedsothatA·B
=C,whereCisacolumnvectoralsooflengthn,withkthcomponentck=akbk.
Thecomplexconjugateoperatoris*(superscript)and*(nosuperscript)isan
optimalsolution.
Weassumebalanced,three‐phase,steady‐stateconditions.Allvariablesare
associatedwithasingle‐linemodelofabalanced,three‐phasesystem.Acommon
practiceinpowersystemmodelingistheper‐unit(p.u.)representation,wherebase
quantitiesforvoltagemagnitude,current,power,andimpedance(oradmittance)
areusedtonormalizequantitiesinanetworkwithmultiplevoltagelevels.Such
normalizationisaconvenience.Weusetheconventionthataninjectionoccurs
whentherealpartofthecomplexnumberispositiveandawithdrawaloccurswhen
therealpartofthecomplexnumberisnegative.
Thetopologyofthenetworkconsistsoflocationsknownasbusesornodes
andtransmissionelementsconnectingpairedbuses.Thenetworkisanundirected
planargraph.
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page14
IndicesandSets
n,marebus(node)indices;n,mϵ{1,…,N}whereNisthenumberofbuses.(misan
aliasforn)
kisathree‐phasetransmissionelementwithterminalbusesnandm.
kϵ{1,…,K}whereKisthenumberoftransmissionelements;kcountsfrom1tothe
totalnumberoftransmissionelements,anddoesnotstartoverforeachbuspairnm.
K’isthesetofconnectedbuspairsnm(|K’|≤|K|).
Unlessotherwisestated,summations(∑)areoverthefullsetofindices.
Variables
pnistherealpowerinjection(positive)orwithdrawal(negative)atbusn
qnisthereactivepowerinjectionorwithdrawalatbusn
sn=pn+jqnisthenetcomplexpowerinjectionorwithdrawalatbusn
Wedistinguishbetweenthereal,reactive,orcomplexpowerinjectedataspecific
bus(pn,qn,andsn)andthereal,reactive,orcomplexpowerflowinginatransmission
elementbetweentwobuses:
pnmkistherealpowerflowfrombusntobusmontransmissionelementk
qnmkisthereactivepowerflowfrombusntobusmontransmissionelementk
snmkistheapparentcomplexpowerflowfrombusnontransmissionelementk.snmk
=srnmk+jsjnmk=pnmk+jqnmk
θnisthevoltageangleatbusn
θnm=θn‐θmisthevoltageangledifferencefrombusntobusm
θ–δisthepowerangle.
iisthecurrent(complexphasor);wedistinguishbetweencurrentinjectedata
specificbusandcurrentflowinginatransmissionelementbetweentwobuses:
inisthecurrent(complexphasor)injection(positive)orwithdrawal(negative)at
busnwherein=irn+jijn
inmkisthecurrent(complexphasor)flowintransmissionelementkatbusn(tobus
m).inmk=irnmk+jijnmk
vnisthecomplexvoltageatbusn.vn=vrn+jvjn
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page15
ynmkisthecomplexadmittanceontransmissionelementkconnectingbusnandbus
m(Ifbusesnandmarenotconnecteddirectly,ynmk=0.);yn0istheself‐admittance
(toground)atbusn.
V=(v1,…,vN)Tisthecomplexvectorofbusvoltages;V=Vr+jVj
I=(i1,…,iN)Tisthecomplexvectorofbuscurrentinjections;I=Ir+jIj
P=(p1,…,pN)Tisthevectorofrealpowerinjections
Q=(q1,…,qN)Tisthevectorofreactivepowerinjections
GistheN‐by‐Nconductancematrix
BistheN‐by‐Nsusceptancematrix
NotethatelementsofGandBwillbeconstantforpassivetransmissionelements
suchastransmissionlines,butcanbevariablewhenactivetransmissionelements
suchasphaseshiftingtransformers,switchedcapacitors/reactors,orpower
electronicflexibleACtransmissionsystem(FACTS)devicesareincluded.
Y=G+jBistheN‐by‐Ncomplexadmittancematrix
gnm,bnm,andynmrepresentelementsoftheG,B,andYmatricesrespectively.
FunctionsandTransformations
Re()istherealpartofacomplexnumber,forexample,Re(irn+jijn)=irn
Im()istherealpartofacomplexnumber,forexample,Im(irn+jijn)=ijn
||isthemagnitudeofacomplexnumber,forexample,|vn|=[(vrn)2+(vjn)2]1/2
abs()istheabsolutevaluefunction.
Thetransformationfromrectangulartopolarcoordinatesforcomplexvoltageis:
vrn=|vn|cos(θn)
vjn=|vn|sin(θn)
(vrn)2+(vjn)2=[|vn|sin(θn)]2+[|vn|cos(θn)]2=|vn|2[sin(θn)2+cos(θn)2]=|vn|2
Wedropthebusindexnandletθbethevoltageangleandδbethecurrentangle.
Forrealpower,
p=vrir+vjij=|v|cosθ|i|cosδ+|v|sinθ|i|sinδ=|v||i|[cosθcosδ+sinθsinδ]
=|v||i|(0.5[cos(θ‐δ)+cos(θ+δ)]+0.5[cos(θ‐δ)‐cos(θ+δ)])
=|v||i|cos(θ‐δ)
Forreactivepower,
q=vjir‐vrij=|v|sinθ|i|cosδ‐|v|cosθ|i|sinδ=|v||i|[sinθcosδ‐cosθsinδ]
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page16
=|v||i|.5[sin(θ+δ)+sin(θ‐δ)]‐|v||i|.5[sin(θ+δ)‐sin(θ‐δ)]
q=|v||i|sin(θ‐δ)
θ–δisthepowerangle.
Parameters
rnmkorrkistheresistanceoftransmissionelementk.
xnmkorxkisthereactanceoftransmissionelementk.
smaxkisthethermallimitonapparentpowerovertransmissionelementkatboth
terminalbuses.
θminnm,θmaxnmarethemaximumandminimumvoltageangledifferencesbetweenn
andm
pminn,pmaxnarethemaximumandminimumrealpowerforgeneratorn
qminn,qmaxnarethemaximumandminimumreactivepowerforgeneratorn
C1=(c11,…,c1N)TandC2=(c21,…,c2N)Tarevectorsoflinearandquadraticobjective
functioncostcoefficientsrespectively.
4.AdmittanceMatrixandACPowerFlowEquations
Inthissection,wedeveloptheadmittancematrixandthecurrent‐voltage
flowequations(IVequations),whichareadifferentformulationofthecommonly
usedpowerflowequations.Inthefollowingsections,wedeveloptheadditional
constraintsthatboundthesolutions.
Wedefinetheconductance(G),susceptance(B)andadmittance(Y)matrices,
withelementsgnm,bnm,andynmrespectively,andY=G+jB.Westartwithasimple
admittancematrixdefinedbyresistance,r,andreactance,x.Weassumeshunt
susceptanceisnegligible.TheelementsofG,BandYmatricesarederivedasfollows:
gnmk=rnmk/(rnmk2+xnmk2)forn≠m
bnmk=‐xnmk/(rnmk2+xnmk2)forn≠m
ynmk=gnmk+jbnmkforn≠m
ynmk=0forn=m
ynm=∑kynmkforn≠m
ynn=yn0‐∑n≠mynm
Transformers.Theadmittancematrixabovedoesnotincludetransformer
parameters.Foranidealin‐phasetransformer(assumingzeroresistancein
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page17
transformerwindings,noleakageflux,andnohysteresisloss),theidealvoltage
magnitude(turnsratio)isanmk=|vm|/|vn|andθn=θm,wherenistheprimaryside
andmisthesecondarysideofthetransformer.Sinceθn=θm,
anmk=|vm|/|vn|=vm/vn=‐inm/imn
Thecurrent‐voltage(IV)equationsforidealtransformerkbetweenbusesnandm
are:
inmk=anmk2ynmkvn‐anmkynmkvm
imnk=‐anmkynmkvn+ynmkvm
Forthephaseshiftingtransformer(PAR)withaphaseangleshiftofφ,
vm/vn=tnmk=anmkejφ
inm/imn=tnmk*=‐anmke‐jφ
Thecurrent‐voltage(IV)equationsforthephaseshiftingtransformerkbetween
busesnandmare:
inmk=anmk2ynmkvn‐tnmk*ynmkvm
imnk=‐tnmkynmkvn+ynmkvm
AdmittanceMatrix.IftherearenotransformersorFACTSdevices,Gispositive
semidefiniteandBisnegativesemidefinite.Amatrixwhereynn≥abs(∑mynm)is
calleddiagonallydominantandstrictlydiagonallydominantifynn>abs(∑mynm).
Iftherearenotransformersandyn0=0,GandBareweightedLaplacian
matricesoftheundirectedweightedgraphthatdescribesthetransmissionnetwork.
MuchisknownabouttheweightedLaplacianmatrices.Yisacomplexweighted
Laplacianmatrix.TheadmittancematrixisY=G+jB,whereGandBarereal
symmetricdiagonallydominantmatrices.Asymmetricdiagonallydominantmatrix
hasasymmetricfactorization,forexample,B=UUTwhereeachcolumnofUhasat
mosttwonon‐zerosandthenon‐zeroeshavethesameabsolutevalue.
Forlargeproblems,theadmittancematrix,Y=G+jB,isusuallysparse.The
densityofbothGandBis(N+2K’)/N2whereK’isthenumberofoff‐diagonalnon‐
zeroentries(theaggregateofmultipletransmissionelementsbetweenadjacent
buses)andNisthenumberofbuses.Forexample,inatopologywith1000buses
and1500transmissionelements,GandBwouldhaveadensityof
(1000+3000)/10002=.004.Thelowestdensityforaconnectednetworkisthe
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page18
spanningtree.IthasN‐1transmissionelementsandthedensityis(N+2(N‐1))/N2.
Forlargesparsesystems,(N+2(N‐1))/N2≈3/N.
TransformersandFACTSdeviceschangethestructureoftheYmatrix.If
therearetransformersandFACTSdevices,let
ynmk ifnotransformerynmk= { anmk2ynmk ifanidealtransformer tnmk*ynmk,or‐tnmkynmkvn ifaphaseshiftingtransformer
asappropriateoff‐diagonalelement,thenynn=yn0+∑k,mynmk,ynm=∑kynmk,andYis
thematrix[ynm].Ifthereareonlyidealin‐phasetransformers,theYmatrixis
symmetric.Iftherearephaseshiftingtransformers,thesymmetryoftheYmatrixis
lost.
ACPowerFlowEquations
Kirchhoff’sCurrentLaw.Kirchhoff’scurrentlawrequiresthatthesumofthe
currentsinjectedandwithdrawnatbusnequalzero:
in=∑kinmk (1)
Ifwedefinecurrenttogroundtobeyn0(vn–v0)andv0=0,wehave:
in=∑kynmk(vn‐vm)+yn0vn (2)
inmk=ynmk(vn‐vm)=gnmk(vrn‐vrm)‐bnmk(vjn‐vjm)+j(bnmk(vrn‐vrm)+gnmk(vjn‐vjm))
irnmk=gnmk(vrn‐vrm)‐bnmk(vjn‐vjm)
ijnmk=bnmk(vrn‐vrm)+gnmk(vjn‐vjm)
Currentisalinearfunctionofvoltage.Rearranging,
in=vn(yn0+∑kynmk)‐∑kynmkvm (3)
Inmatrixnotation,theIVflowequationsintermsofcurrent(I)andvoltage(V)in
(3)are
I=YV=(G+jB)(Vr+jVj)=GVr‐BVj+j(BVr+GVj) (4)
whereIr=GVr‐BVjandIj=BVr+GVj
Inanothermatrixformat,(4)is
I=(Ir,Ij)=Y(Vr,Vj)Tor
I=(Ir,Ij)= G ‐B Vr whereY= G ‐B B G Vj B G
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page19
Ifaandφareconstant,theI=YVequationsarelinear.Ifnot,thelinearityislost
sincesomeelementsoftheYmatrixwillbefunctionsofV.
PowerFlowEquations.Thetraditionalpower‐voltagepowerflowequationsdefined
intermsofrealpower(P),reactivepower(Q)andvoltage(V)are
S=P+jQ=diag(V)I*=diag(V)[YV]*=diag(V)Y*V* (5)
Thepowerinjectionsare
S=V•I*=(Vr+jVj)•(Ir‐jIj)=(Vr•Ir+Vj•Ij)+j(Vj•Ir‐Vr•Ij) (6)
where
P=Vr•Ir+Vj•Ij (7)
Q=Vj•Ir‐Vr•Ij (8)
Thepower‐voltagepowerflowequations(5)and(6)arequadratic.TheIVflow
equations(4)arelinear.
Constraints.First,weintroducethephysicalconstraintsofgenerators,load,and
transmission.
GeneratorandLoadConstraints.Thelowerandupperboundconstraintsfor
generation(injection)andload(withdrawal)are:
Pmin≤P≤Pmax (9)
Qmin≤Q≤Qmax (10)
IntermsofVandI,theinjectionconstraintsare:
Vr•Ir+Vj•Ij≤Pmax (11)
Pmin≤Vr•Ir+Vj•Ij (12)
Vj•Ir‐Vr•Ij≤Qmax (13)
Qmin≤Vj•Ir‐Vr•Ij (14)
Inequalities(11)‐(14)alongwithotherthermalconstraintsonequipment
enforcedateachgeneratorbusconstituteafour‐dimensionalreactivecapability
curve,alsoknownasa“D‐curve’sinceitisshapedlikethecapitalletterD,inthePQ
space.AdditionalD‐curvesdefiningthetradeoffbetweenrealandreactivepower
constituteaconvexsetandcanbeeasilylinearized(FERC2005).Equations(11)‐
(14)arenonconvexquadraticconstraints.Sinceherewemodelasingleperiod,
rampratesareunnecessary.
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page20
VoltageMagnitudeConstraints.Thetwoconstraintsthatlimitthevoltage
magnitudeinrectangularcoordinatesateachbusmare
(vrm)2+(vjm)2≤(vmaxm)2 (15)
(vminm)2≤(vrm)2+(vjm)2 (16)
Again,eachnonlinearinequalityinvolvesonlythevoltagemagnitudesatbusm.In
matrixterms,thevoltagemagnitudeconstraintsare:
Vr•Vr+Vj•Vj≤(Vmax)2 (17)
(Vmin)2≤Vr•Vr+Vj•Vj (18)
VminandVmaxaredeterminedbysystemstudies.Thevoltagemagnitudeboundsare
generallyintherange,[.95,1.05]perunit.Highvoltagesareoftenconstrainedby
thecapabilitiesofthecircuitbreakers.Lowvoltagemagnitudeconstraintscanbe
duetooperatingrequirementsofmotorsorgenerators.
LineFlowThermalConstraints.Smaxkisathermaltransmissionlimitonkbasedon
thetemperaturesensitivityoftheconductorandsupportingmaterialinthe
transmissionlineandtransmissionelements.Transmissionassetsgenerallyhave
threethermalratings:steady‐state,4‐hourand30‐minute.Theseratingsvarywith
ambientweather.Theapparentpoweratbusnontransmissionelementktobusm
is:
snmk=vninmk*=vny*nmk(vn‐vm)*.=vny*nmkv*n‐vny*nmkv*m)
Thethermallimitonsnmkis
(srnmk)2+(sjnmk)2=|snmk|2≤(smaxk)2 (19)
Theseconstraintsarequadraticinsrnmkandsjnmkandquarticinvrn,vjn,vrm,vjm.Since
vn=vrn+jvjnandynmk=gnmk+jbnmk,
vny*nmkv*n=(vrn+jvjn)(gnmk+jbnmk)(vrn+jvjn)
Expanding,weobtain
vny*nmkv*n=[gnmkvrn‐bnmkvjn+j(gnmkvjn+bnmkvrn)](vrn+jvjn)
Expandingagain,weobtain
vny*nmkv*n=gnmk(vrnvrn‐vjnvjn)‐bnmk(vrnvjn+vrnvjn)
+j[gnmk(vjnvrn+vjnvrn)+bnmk(vrnvrn‐vjnvjn)]
vny*nmkv*n=gnmk(vrnvrn‐vjnvjn)‐2bnmk(vrnvjn)
+j[2gnmk(vjnvrn)+bnmk(vrnvrn‐vjnvjn)] (20)
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page21
Inmatrixnotation,
Re(vny*nmkv*n)=[vrn,vjn] gnmk ‐bnmk vrn ‐bnmk ‐gnmk vjn
Im(vny*nmkv*n)=[vrn,vjn] bnmk gnmk vrn gnmk ‐bnmk vjn
Similarly,vny*nmkv*m=(vrn+jvjn)(gnmk+jbnmk)(vrm+jvjm)
Expanding,weobtain
=[gnmkvrn‐bnmkvjn+j(gnmkvjn+bnmkvrn)](vrm+jvjm)
Expandingandcollectingterms,
=gnmk(vrnvrm+vjnvjm)+bnmk(vjnvrm‐vrnvrm)+j[gnmk(vjnvrm‐vjnvjm)+bnmk(vrnvrm‐vjnvjm)]
(21)
Inmatrixnotation,
Re(vny*nmkv*m)=[vrm,vjm] gnmk ‐bnmk vrnbnmk gnmk vjn
Im(vny*nmkv*m)=[vrm,vjm] bnmk ‐gnmk vrngnmk ‐bnmk vjn
Inequality(19)becomesaquadraticconstraint.
LineFlowConstraintsasCurrentLimitations.Ascurrentincreases,linessagand
equipmentmaybedamagedbyoverheating.Theconstraintsthatlimitthecurrent
magnitudeinrectangularcoordinatesateachbusnonkare
(irnmk)2+(ijnmk)2≤(imaxnmk)2 (23)
Again,thenonlinearitiesareconvexquadraticandisolatedtothecomplexcurrentat
thebus.Generally,themaximumcurrents,imaxnmk,aredeterminedbymaterial
sciencepropertiesofconductorsandtransmissionequipment,orasaresultof
systemstabilitystudies.
LineFlowConstraintsasVoltageAngleConstraints.Thepowerflowingoveran
AClineisapproximatelyproportionaltothesineofthevoltagephaseangle
differenceatthereceivingandtransmittingends.Forstabilityreasons,thevoltage
angledifferenceforterminalbusesnandmconnectedbytransmissionelementk
canbeconstrainedasfollows:
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page22
θminnm≤θn‐θm≤θmaxnm (24)
Intherectangularformulation,thearctanfunctionappearsinsomeconstraints.
θminnm≤arctan(vjn/vrn)‐arctan(vjm/vrm)≤θmaxnm (25)
Thetheoreticalsteady‐statestabilitylimitforpowertransferbetweentwo
busesacrossalosslesslineis90degrees.Ifthislimitwereexceeded,synchronous
machinesatoneendofthelinewouldlosesynchronismwiththeotherendofthe
line.Inaddition,transientstabilityandrelaylimitsonreclosinglinesconstrain
voltageangledifferences.TheangleconstraintsusedintheACOPFshouldbethe
smallestoftheseangleconstraints,whichdependontheequipmentinstalledand
configuration.However,manytestcasesdonotincludeanyvoltageangleorline
flowconstraints.Ingeneral,systemengineersdesignandoperatethesystem
comfortablybelowthevoltageanglelimittoallowtimetorespondifthevoltage
angledifferenceacrossanylineapproachesitslimit.
5.ACOPFFormulations
Webeginwithadiscussionofobjectivefunctions,thenanoteonbustypes,
andfinallydiscussdifferentformulationsoftheACOPF.Theformulationsofthe
ACOPFpresentedhereincludealltheconstraints,butmaytakedifferentapproaches
tomodelingtheconstraints.Asdiscussedabove,current,voltagemagnitude,and
voltageangleconstraintscanbecalculatedthataresurrogatesforeachother.We
discussconstraintsfurtherin(O’Neill2012).
ObjectiveFunction.VariousauthorsformulatetheACOPFwithdifferentobjective
functions.Theyincludeminimizinggenerationcosts,maximizingmarketsurplus,
minimizinglosses,minimizinggeneration(equivalenttominimizinglosses),and
maximizingtransfers.Withoutdemandfunctions,minimizinggenerationcostsand
maximizingmarketsurplusareequivalent.
AfullACOPFthataccuratelymodelsallconstraintsandcontrolswithan
objectivefunctionofminimizingcostwouldinherentlymeettheobjectivesof
minimizinggeneratorfuelcosts,minimizinggenerationoutput,minimizinglosses,
minimizingloadshedding,andminimizingcontrolactions.
WhenitisnotfeasibletorunafullACOPFduetotimeconstraints,computing
power,orlackofarobustsolutionalgorithm,acommonsubstituteistodecouple
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page23
theproblemanditeratebetweenaDCOPFthatminimizescostsbyvaryingreal
power,thenfixthegeneratoroutputsfromtheDCOPFandrunanACOPFthat
minimizeslossesbyvaryingreactivepowerofgenerators,capacitors,etc.For
economicallydispatchingresourcesinanACOPFthatfullymodelsvoltageand
stabilityconstraints,minimizingcostisthecorrectobjectivefunction;objective
functionsofminimizinglosses,minimizinggeneration,andmaximizingtransfersfor
anACOPFareinconsistentwitheconomicprinciples,andresultinsub‐optimal
dispatch.WedonotdiscussthedetailsofdecoupledOPFhere,butsaveitfora
futurereviewofsolutionalgorithms.
Stottetal.discussbadly‐posedproblemswhenanOPFformulationdoesnot
adheretothenormalengineeringprinciplesofpowersystemoperation(Stott
1987).Theymentionafewexamplesindecoupledformulations:minimizinglosses
withgeneratorrealpoweroutputasvariableswouldmoveawayfromaminimum‐
costsolution;imposinglimitsonMWreserveswithonlygeneratorvoltagecontrols
andtransformervoltagetapcontrols,butnorealpowercontroltomeetthereserve
limit.Theystatethatitishelpfultoassociateeachcontrol,constraint,andobjective
inadecoupledOPFwitheitherorboththeactiveandreactivepowersubproblems.
Theyfurthernotethatsomeobjectivefunctionsandconstraintsarenotalgebraicor
differentiable,andthatmultiplesolutionsarelikelytoexist,inparticularwhen
therearemanyreactivepowercontrols(suchasswitchedcapacitors,FACTS
devices,orgenerators)innetworkloops.
Itispossibletoformulateanobjectivefunctionthatincludesthecostof
reactivepower.Forageneratorthecostofgenerationisafunctionoftheapparent
powergenerated,c(S)=cP(P)+cQ(Q),whereS=(P2+Q2)1/2.Ifweassumethatthe
costofreactivepowerissmallcomparedtothecostofrealpowerandifthecost
function,c(S),islinearinS,anapproximationofc(S)is
c(S)≈cP(P)+cQ(|Q|).
Bus‐type.InP,Q,|V|,θspace,therearefourquantitiesateachbus:voltage
magnitude(V),voltageangle(θ),realpower(P),andreactivepower(Q).Inapower
flowsolutionwithoutoptimization,busesareclassifiedintothreebustypes:PQ,PV
andslack.PQbusesgenerallycorrespondtoloadsandPVbusestogenerators.
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page24
GeneratorbusesarecalledPVbusesbecausepowerandvoltagemagnitudeare
fixed;loadbusesareknownasPQbusesbecauserealandreactivepowerarefixed,
thatis,Pmin=PmaxandQmin=Qmax;slackorreferencebuseshaveafixedvoltage
magnitudeandvoltageangle.Forapowerflowtosolve,theslackbusneedstohave
sufficientrealandreactivepowertomakeupforsystemlossesandholdtheslack
busvoltagemagnitudeat1;forthisreason,abuswithalargegeneratoris
commonlychosenasaslackbus.Table3comparesthedifferenttypesofbuses.
Table3:Busclassificationusedinpowerflowproblems
BusType Fixedquantities Variablequantities Physical
interpretation
PV realpower,voltage
magnitude
reactivepower,voltage
angle
generator
PQ realpower,reactive
power
voltagemagnitude,
voltageangle
load,orgeneratorwith
fixedoutput
Slack voltagemagnitude,
voltageangle
realpower,reactive
power
anarbitrarilychosen
generator
Inapowerflow,theslackbusservespartlytoensureanequalnumberof
variablesandconstraints;withoutadesignatedslackbus,thesystemwouldbe
over‐determined,withmoreequationsthanunknowns.Stottstatesthattheneedfor
aslackbusalsoarisesbecausethesystemI2Rlossesarenotpreciselyknownin
advanceoftheload‐flowcalculationforlinearDCmodelsandthereforecannotbe
assignedtoaparticulargeneratordispatch(Stott1974).Somemodelsusea
distributedslackbuswheregeneratorsatseveraldifferentbusesprovidesystem
slack.
WenotethatanACOPFthatiteratesbetweenasimplifiedOPFandanAC
powerflowmayneedaslackbusforthepowerflowiterations,buteventhenthe
voltagemagnitudeattheslackbusdoesnothavetobefixed.
WhenusinganiterativemethodsuchasNewtonorGauss‐Seideltosolvethe
powerflowequations,theconvergencetoleranceisgenerallysetbasedonthe
“mismatch”terms.Mismatchreferstothedifferencebetweenknownvaluesateach
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page25
bus,suchasPandQatloadbuses,andthevaluesP(x)andQ(x)computedwiththe
powerflowequationsateachiteration.
SincetheACOPFisanoptimizationproblem,wherethenumberofvariables
doesnothavetoequalthenumberofconstraints,specifyingaslackorreferencebus
isunnecessary.Infact,Carpentiernotedthisasearlyas1962(Carpentier1962).1In
alloptimizationformulationsherein,weforgothebustypedesignation.Inan
optimizationcontext,thesecategorizationsseemoverlyprescriptive,andcould
unnecessarilyover‐constraintheproblem.Forexample,fixingthereferencevoltage
magnitudeat1.0perunitwheninnormaloperationsgeneratorsvaryvoltage
magnitudebetween0.95and1.05perunitcouldresultinasub‐optimalsolution.
Mostmodernsolverspre‐processtheproblem,removingvariablesthathaveequal
lowerandupperboundsandreplacingthemwithaconstant.
ACOPFPower‐Voltage(PQV)Formulation.MostoftheACOPFliteratureusesthe
polarpower‐voltageformulationsbasedontheearlyworkofCarpentierduringthe
1960’s(Carpentier1962).
PolarPower‐VoltageFormulation.Thepolarpower‐voltage(polarPQV)ACOPF
(polarACOPF‐PQV)replacesquadraticequalityconstraintsin(32)withthepolar
formulationof(27)‐(28):
Network‐wideobjectivefunction:Minc(S) (26)
Network‐wideconstraints:
Pn=∑mkVnVm(Gnmkcosθnm+Bnmksinθnm) (27)
Qn=∑mkVnVm(Gnmksinθnm‐Bnmkcosθnm) (28)
Vmin≤V≤Vmax (29)
1Roughtranslationof(Carpentier1962):IfvoltageandanglearetakenasvariablesinplaceofPandQ,therestrictionof
fixingthereferencevoltagecanbelifted;voltageandangleareineffectindependentvariablesthatfixthestateofthenetwork,
anditsufficestowriteanobjectivefunctionthatisminimizedwithrespecttothesevariables.Thearbitrarilychosenreference
busdisappearsandtheproblemisthemostgeneralthatonecanpose.
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page26
θminnm≤θn‐θm≤θmaxnm. (30)
Inthisformulation,(27)and(28)represent2Nnonlinearequalityconstraintswith
quadratictermsandsineandcosinefunctionsthatapplythroughoutthenetwork.
Inthisformulation,voltageangledifferenceconstraintsarelinear.Inthe
rectangularformulationdiscussedbelow,arctanfunctionsappearintheangle
differenceconstraints.
RectangularPowerVoltageFormulation.Therectangularpower‐voltage
formulation,shownbelow,islesscommonintheliterature.Therectangularpower‐
voltage(rectangularPQV)ACOPF(rectangularACOPF‐PQV)formulationisshown
below.
Network‐wideobjectivefunction:Minc(S) (31)
Network‐wideconstraint:P+jQ=S=V•I*=V•Y*V* (32)
Bus‐specificconstraints
Pmin≤P≤Pmax (33)
Qmin≤Q≤Qmax (34)
(|snmk|)2≤(smaxk)2 forallk (35)
(29)isreplacedby:
Vr•Vr+Vj•Vj≤(Vmax)2 (36)
(Vmin)2≤Vr•Vr+Vj•Vj (37)
(30)isreplacedby:
θminnm≤arctan(vjn/vrn)‐arctan(vjm/vrm)≤θmaxnm (38)
Inthisformulation,(32)represents2Nquadraticequalitiesthatapplythroughout
thenetwork;(33)‐(34)aresimplevariableboundsateachbus;(35)and(37)
representsconvexquadraticinequalitiesateachbus;(37)representsanonconvex
quadraticinequalitiyateachbus;and(37)and(38)representsnonconvex
inequalitiesbetweeneachsetofconnectedbuses.
ACOPFCurrentInjection(IV)Formulation.Currentinjectionformulationsuse
powerflowequationsbasedoncurrentandvoltageratherthanpowerflow
equationsbasedonpowerandvoltagediscussedabove.Weonlyconsiderthe
rectangularcurrent‐voltage(rectangularIV)ACOPF(rectangularACOPF‐IV)
formulationduetotheadvantagesinexpressingthecurrentinjectionsaslinear
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page27
equalityconstraints;however,thepolarcurrent‐voltageformulationcouldbeeasily
derived.
TheIVformulationhas6Nvariables(P,Q,Vr,Vj,Ir,Ij)andtheVΘhas4Nvariables
(P,Q,|V|,Θ).
RectangularACOPF‐IVformulation.TherectangularACOPF‐IVformulationis
shownbelow.
Network‐wideobjectivefunction:Minc(S) (40)
Network‐wideconstraint:I=YV (41)
Bus‐specificconstraints:
P=Vr•Ir+Vj•Ij≤Pmax (42)
Pmin≤P=Vr•Ir+Vj•Ij (43)
Q=Vj•Ir‐Vr•Ij≤Qmax (44)
Qmin≤Q=Vj•Ir‐Vr•Ij (45)
Vr•Vr+Vj•Vj≤(Vmax)2 (46)
(Vmin)2≤Vr•Vr+Vj•Vj (47)
(inmk)2≤(imaxk)2 forallk (48)
θminnm≤arctan(vjn/vrn)‐arctan(vjm/vrm)≤θmaxnm (49)
Inthisformulation,(41)represents2Nlinearequalityconstraintsthatapply
throughoutthenetwork.ThisisincontrasttothePQVformulationswhere
quadraticandtrigonometricconstraintsapplythroughoutthenetworkandlinear
constraintsareisolatedateachbus.Equations(42)to(45)arelocalquadratic
nonconvexconstraints.Equations(46)and(48)arelocalconvexquadratic
inequalityconstraints,but(47)arenon‐convexlocalquadraticinequality
constraints.Overall,theconstraintsetisstillnonconvex,butwehypothesizethat
thisformulationmaybeeasiertosolvethanthepower‐voltageformulations,since
thenonlinearitiesareisolatedtoeachbusandeachtransmissionelement,whilethe
constraintsthatapplythroughoutthenetworkarelinear.Ingeneral,linearsolvers
solveproblemsfasterthannonlinearsolvers.Asdiscussedpreviously,thevoltage
anglelimit(49)couldbereplacedwithananalogouscurrentlimitandtheproblem
becomeslocallyquadraticwithlinearnetworkequations,and(48)and(49)are
essentiallyredundantconstraints.
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page28
PolarPQV RectangularPQV RectangularIV
Networkconstraints
2Nnonlinearequalityconstraintswithquadratictermsandsineandcosinefunctions
2Nquadraticequalities 2Nlinearequalityconstraints
Voltageangledifferenceconstraints
Linear Nonconvex(arctan) Linearifreplacedwithcurrentorapparentpowerconstraint
Busconstraints Linear Noncovexquadraticinequalities
Locallyquadratic,somenonconvex,someconvex
6.LiteratureReviewofFormulations
Mostliteratureusesthepolarpower‐voltageformulation,whileasmaller
groupofpapersusetherectangularpower‐voltageformulation.Somehavealso
proposedhybridandalternativeformulations.So,ratherthanattempttoreviewthe
vastliteratureonthetraditionalformulationbasedonpowerandreactivepower
equations,wefocusonalternativeformulationsinthissection.
Stottetal.criticizethatmuchOPFresearchsincetheclassicalformulationsof
Carpentier,DommelandTinneyhaveaddressedsimilarformulationswithout
consideringtheadditionalrequirementsneededforpracticalreal‐timeapplications,
partlybecauseOPFproblemsarestillstretchingthelimitsofappliedoptimization
technology,andalsothatutilitieshavebeenslowtoadoptsoftwaretocalculateOPF
“on‐line,”orinnear‐real‐time(Stott1987).Theyfurthernotethatitisamistaketo
analyticallyformulateOPFproblemsbyregardingthemassimpleextensionsof
conventionalpowerflow;oncethepowerflowproblemisformulatedasan
optimizationproblemwithdegreesoffreedom,problemsthatappeareasytosolve
canturnouttobebadlyposed,forexamplewithconflictingobjectivefunction,
controls,andconstraints.ForOPF,theynotethatresearchershavenotagreedon
“rulesofsolvability,”whicharetheengineeringcriterianeededforanOPFsolution
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page29
tobephysicallyvalid,especiallyforvoltageandreactivepower,andthatthese
“rulesofsolvability”havehardlyifeverbeenmentionedinthevastliteratureon
OPF.TheyalsoidentifyseveralcommonproblemswiththeOPFformulation.Mostof
theserelatetomodelingvoltagecharacteristicsofgeneration,load,and
transformers,butalsoincludeproblemswithincompatibilityofobjective,controls,
andconstraints.Forexample,oneincompatibilityproblemusesanobjectiveof
minimizinglosseswithgeneratorrealpoweroutputsasvariables,ratherthanfixing
generatorrealpoweroutputsattheminimumcostdispatchandadjustingreactive
powersettingstominimizelosses(Stott1987).
Afewresearchershavedevelopedacurrentinjectionformulationforthe
powerfloworoptimalpowerflowequations.Currentinjectionandreactivecurrent
aretermsusedintheliteratureforaformulationsimilartotheIVformulation
discussedearlierinthispaper.Additionally,someliteratureusestheterm“in
phase”fortherealcomponentofcurrent(Ir)and“quadrature”fortheimaginary
componentofcurrent(Ij);inthiscontext,quadraturereferstobeing90degreesout
ofphase.Mostofthesepapersidentifychallengesmodelinggenerator,orPVbuses,
wheretherealpowerinjectionandvoltagemagnitudeareknownbutthereactive
powerinjectionisnot.SeveralauthorshaveidentifiedwaystomodelPVbuses.We
discusstheseformulationshere.
Dommeletal.presentapowerflowformulationusingcurrentinjectionsand
amixofpolarandrectangularcoordinates,whereeachPQbusisrepresentedby
twoequationsfortherealandimaginarycomponentsofcurrentmismatchesin
termsofcomplexvoltageinrectangularcoordinates,whilePVbusesare
representedbyasingleactivepowermismatchequationandassociatedvoltage
angledeviation(Dommel1970).Tinneylatermentionsthatacurrentinjection
algorithmwithaconstantnodaladmittancematrixcouldnotbeusedforgeneral
powerflowapplicationsbecauseasatisfactorymethodofmodelingPVbuseshad
notbeendeveloped(Tinney1991).OtherauthorsalludetodifficultiesmodelingPV
busesusingcurrentinjections,andmuchofliteratureusingcurrentinjection
formulationsappliestoradialdistributionnetworkswherePVbusesareless
common.Forsomesolutiontechniques,modelingPVbuseswithcurrentinjection
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page30
equationsintroducessingularitiesintosomematricesinthesolutiontechnique.
SubstitutionsintroducedependenciesintheJacobian,meaningthattheentire
Jacobianwouldhavetoberecalculatedateachstep(GómezRomero2002).Various
authorshaveproposedsubstitutionsandapproximationstomodelPVbusesina
currentinjectionformulation.
StadlinandFletcherdiscussa“voltageversusreactivecurrent”modelfor
voltageandreactivecontrolthatiswellsuitedforusewithalinearprogramming
algorithm(Stadlin1982).ThispaperdoesnotdirectlydiscussanOPF,butprovides
amodelthatcouldbeusedinalinearprogrammingoptimizationforreactive
dispatchandvoltagecontrol.Themodelwouldbeusedafterarealpowerdispatch
model,suchasadecoupledpowerflow,wasrun,andwouldassumefixedreal
powergeneration,exceptattheswingbus.Thismodelusesrealandreactive
current(computedasP/VandQ/V,respectively).Theauthorsuseanincremental
currentmodelratherthananincrementalpowermodelbecausetheJacobian
matricesofacurrentmodelarelesssensitivetobusvoltagevariations.Inaddition,
thesensitivitycoefficientofvoltagetoreactivecurrentismuchlesssensitivethan
thesensitivitycoefficientofvoltagetoreactivepower.Theauthorsfixtheswingbus
voltageangleatzero,butallowthevoltagemagnitudetofloat.Theauthorsnote
theirassumptionsresultinamoreaccurate“decoupled”relationshipbetween
incrementalreactivecurrentandvoltagethanisgivenbytheBmatrixusedinB‐θ
decoupledOPF,andthatthismoreaccurateandmorelinearmodelreducesthe
iterationsinanoptimizationalgorithm.ThesensitivitycoefficientsintheBmatrix
areaccurateonlyinasmallrangeofvoltage,requiringrecalculationoftheBmatrix
forlargechangesinvoltage;StadlinandFletcher’smodelisaccurateandlinearover
alargervoltageoperatingrangethanaB‐θmodel.StadlinandFletcherwantedto
defineamodelwhichremainsnearlylinearforchangesinvoltageandreactive
variablessothatefficientlinearprogrammingtechniquescouldbeapplied.
DaCostaandRosanotethatfortherectangularformulation,generationor
PVbuseshavedifferentequationsthanloadorPQbuses.Atloadbuses,activeand
reactivepowermismatchesareknown.Atgenerationbuses,reactivepower
mismatchesarenotknownbutvoltagemagnitudeconstraintsareknown,because
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page31
inatraditionallyformulatedpowerflow,generatorreactivepoweroutputis
variable(DaCosta2008).Therefore,avoltagemagnitudeconstraintisaddedto
eachloadbus,resultinginadifferentJacobianmatrix.
DaCostaetal.presentarectangularformulationofaNewton‐Raphson
powerflowbasedoncurrentinjections,forbothPQandPVbuses(DaCosta1999,
Lin2008).Inthisformulation,theJacobianmatrixhasthesamestructureasthe
nodaladmittancematrix,exceptforPVbuses.ForPVbuses,theauthorsintroducea
newdependentvariable,ΔQ,andanadditionalconstraintonvoltagemagnitude
deviation.Thevoltagemagnitudeconstraintislinearized:
ΔVn=0≈(Vrn/Vn)ΔVrn+(Vjn/Vn)ΔVjn,whereVnisthevoltagemagnitudeatbus
n,Vrnistherealcomponentofvoltageatbusn,andVjnistheimaginarycomponent
ofvoltageatbusn.
DaCostaandRosanotethatthecurrentinjectionequationsarelinearfor
electricalnetworkswithonlyPQbusesandaconstantimpedanceloadmodel(Da
Costa2008).
Jiangetal.publishedapower‐currenthybridrectangularOPFformulation.
Theydividebusesintotwotypes,thosewithnon‐zeroinjections,andthosewith
zeroinjections(Jiang2009).Forbuseswithnon‐zeroinjections,thepower
mismatchformulationisused,whilethecurrentmismatchformulationisusedfor
buseswithzeroinjections.Theauthorsnotethatinthecurrentmismatch
formulation,whichissimilartotheIVformulationpresentedabove,thefirst‐order
derivativesoftheequationsareconstantsandthesecond‐orderderivativesare
zeros.Bydividingthebusesintotwogroups,thehybridmethodsavescomputation
timefortheJacobianandHessianmatrices.
MeliopoulosandTaouseaformulationreferredtoas“QuadraticPower
Flow,”withcurrentconservationequationsfromKirchhoff’scurrentlawin
rectangularcoordinatesinsteadofpowerflowequations,andaddoperational
constraintstothemodelonlywhentheyareviolatedinthepreviousiteration
(Meliopoulos2011).Theequationsmodelinggenerators,constantpowerloads,and
transformersarequadraticequationsseparatedintorealandimaginaryparts.The
objectivefunctionistominimizethesumofapenaltyfactortimesthesumof
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page32
currentmismatchesandthetotalgeneratorcosts.Themodelincludesaslackbusas
the“mismatchcurrentsource”wherethevoltagemagnitudeisastatevariableand
therealandimaginarycomponentsofcomplexvoltagearecontrolvariables,whilea
PVbushasthevoltagemagnitudeasacontrolvariableandrealandimaginary
componentsofcomplexvoltageasstatevariables.Theauthorslinearizetoeliminate
integerstatevariables.Thequadraticconstraintsarelinearizedwhentheyare
addedtothemodel.
7.Conclusions
Thispaperhaspresentedaliteraturereviewofdifferentformulationsofthe
ACOPFanddiscussedareasforfutureresearchwheretheACOPFcouldbe
improved.TheACOPFproblemisinherentlydifficultduetononconvexities,
multipartnonlinearpricing,andalternatingcurrent.Wedonotyethavepractical
approachestosolvingnonconvexproblems.TheACOPFisawell‐structured
problem,andhasdevelopedduring50yearsofresearch.Academiaandindustry
havedevelopedvariousapproachestosolvingtheACOPF,withdifferent
formulations,algorithms,andassumptions.Thetraditionalapproachhasbeento
linearizethefullACOPFproblemanddecomposeitintosubproblems.TheACOPFis
notahypotheticalproblem–itissolvedevery5minutesthroughapproximations
andjudgment.After50years,thereisnotyetacommerciallyviablefullACOPF.
ManypossibilitiesandwaystoexaminetheACOPFremain.Today’ssolversdonot
returnthegapbetweenthegivenandgloballyoptimalsolution;ifwemakearough
estimatethattoday’ssolversareonaverageoffby10%,andworldenergycostsare
$400billion,closingthegapby10%isahugefinancialimpact.
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page33
References
J.Carpentier,“Contributionál’étudedudispatchingéconomique,”BulletindelaSociétéFrançaisedesÉlectriciens,ser.8,vol.3,pp.431‐447,1962.J.Carpentier,“Optimalpowerflows,”InternationalJournalofElectricalPowerandEnergySystems,Vol.1,Issue1,pp.3‐15,Apr.1979.V.M.daCosta,N.Martins,J.L.R.Pereira,“DevelopmentsintheNewtonRaphsonPowerFlowFormulationBasedonCurrentInjections,”IEEETransactionsonPowerSystems,Vol.14,No.4,pp.1320‐1326,Nov.1999.V.M.daCostaandA.L.S.Rosa,“AComparativeAnalysisofDifferentPowerFlowMethodologies,”IEEETransmission&DistributionConferenceandExposition:LatinAmerica,”Bogota,Aug.13‐15,2008.H.W.Dommel,W.F.Tinney,andW.L.Powell,“FurtherDevelopmentsinNewton’smethodforpowersystemapplications,”IEEEWinterPowerMeeting,ConferencePaperNo.70CP161‐PWR,Jan.1970,citedinV.M.daCosta,N.Martins,J.L.R.Pereira,“DevelopmentsintheNewtonRaphsonPowerFlowFormulationBasedonCurrentInjections,”IEEETransactionsonPowerSystems,Vol.14,No.4,p.1320,Nov.1999.U.S.DepartmentofEnergy,EnergyInformationAdministration(EIA),InternationalEnergyStatistics,2012,availableathttp://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/IEDIndex3.cfm?tid=2&pid=2&aid=2;alsoWholesaleMarketData,2012,availableathttp://www.eia.gov/electricity/wholesale/.FERCStaff,“PrinciplesforEfficientandReliableReactivePowerSupplyandConsumption,”availableathttp://www.ferc.gov/eventcalendar/files/20050310144430‐02‐04‐05‐reactive‐power.pdf,Feb.2005.FERCJointBoardsonSecurityConstrainedEconomicDispatch,“StudyandRecommendationsRegardingSecurityConstrainedEconomicDispatch(SCED)intheNortheastbytheJointBoardonEconomicDispatchfortheNortheastRegion,”FERCDocketAD05‐13,page15,availableathttp://www.ferc.gov/industries/electric/indus‐act/joint‐boards/northeast‐recom.pdf,2006.
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page34
FERCStaff,“RecentISOSoftwareEnhancementsandFutureModelingPlans,”availableathttp://www.ferc.gov/industries/electric/indus‐act/rto/rto‐iso‐soft‐2011.pdf,Nov.2011.FERCandNERCstaff,“Arizona‐SouthernCaliforniaOutagesonSeptember8,2011:CausesandRecommendations,”pp.23‐59,Apr.2012.FERCOrder,MidwestIndependentSystemOperator,138FERC¶61,235,FERCDocketER12‐678(2012).A.GómezExpósito,E.RomeroRamos,“AugmentedRectangularLoadFlowModel,”IEEETransactionsonPowerSystems,Vol.17,No.2,pp.271‐274,May2002.H.H.Happ,“OptimalPowerDispatch–AComprehensiveSurvey,”IEEETransactionsonPowerApparatusandSystems,Vol.PAS‐96,no.3,pp.841‐844,May/Jun.1977.I.A.HiskensandR.J.Davy,“ExploringthePowerFlowSolutionSpaceBoundary,”IEEETransactionsonPowerSystems,Vol.16,No.3,pp.389‐395,Aug.2001.M.HuneaultandF.D.Galiana,“ASurveyoftheOptimalPowerFlowLiterature,”IEEETransactionsonPowerSystems,Vol.6No.2,May1991,pp.762‐770.Q.Y.Jiang,H.D.Chiang,C.X.Guo,Y.J.Cao,“Power‐currenthybridrectangularformulationforinterior‐pointoptimalpowerflow,”InstituteofEngineeringandTechnology(IET)Generation,TransmissionandDistribution,Vol.3,Iss.8,pp.748‐756,2009.L.K.Kirchmayer,EconomicOperationofPowerSystems,WileyandSons1958.W.M.Lin,C.H.Huang,T.S.Zhan,“AHybridCurrent‐PowerOptimalPowerFlowTechnique,”IEEETransactionsonPowerSystems,Vol.23,No.1,pp.177‐185,Feb.2008.J.A.Momoh,R.J.Koessler,M.S.Bond,B.Stott,D.Sun,A.Papalexopoulos,P.Ristanovic,“ChallengestoOptimalPowerFlow,”IEEETransactionsonPowerSystems,Vol.12,No.1,pp.444‐447,Feb.1997.R.P.O’Neill,“TheIVFormulationoftheACOPFanditsLinearizations,”FERCTechnicalconferencetodiscussopportunitiesforincreasingreal‐timeandday‐aheadmarketefficiencythroughimprovedsoftware,DocketNo.AD10‐12‐003,
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page35
availableathttp://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/Files/20120626084555‐Tuesday_SessionTB_ONeill.ppt.pdf,June26,2012.R.P.O’Neill,T.DautelandE.Krall,RecentISOSoftwareEnhancementsandFutureSoftwareandModelingPlans,StaffReport,FederalEnergyRegulatoryCommission,availableathttp://www.ferc.gov/industries/electric/indus‐act/rto/rto‐iso‐soft‐2011.pdf,November2011,andPrivatecommunicationwithISOpersonnel.J.Peschon,D.S.Piercy,W.F.Tinney,O.J.Tveit,M.Cuénod,“OptimumControlofReactivePowerFlow,”IEEETransactionsonPowerApparatusandSystems,Vol.PAS‐87,No.1,pp.40‐48,Jan.1968.PJM,“PJM’sStrivingforPerfectDispatchNetsNearly$200MillioninSavings,”NewsRelease,Jan.19,2012,availableathttps://www.pjm.com/~/media/about‐pjm/newsroom/2012‐releases/20120119‐perfect‐dispatch‐news‐release‐2012.ashx.J.RiquelmeSantos,A.GómezExpósito,J.L.MartínezRamos.“SlackBusSelectiontoMinimizetheSystemPowerImbalanceinLoad‐FlowStudies.”IEEETransactionsonPowerSystems,19(2),May2004.A.M.SassonandF.J.Jaimes,“DigitalMethodsAppliedtoPowerFlowStudies,”IEEETrans.onPowerApparatusandSystems,vol.86,No.7,pp.860‐867,Jul.1967.A.Schecter,“ExplorationoftheACOPFFeasibleRegionfortheStandardIEEETestSet,”FERCTechnicalconferencetodiscussopportunitiesforincreasingreal‐timeandday‐aheadmarketefficiencythroughimprovedsoftware,DocketNo.AD10‐12‐003,availableathttp://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/Files/20120626084625‐Tuesday,%20Session%20TC‐1,%20Schecter%20.pdf,June26,2012.R.B.Squires,“EconomicDispatchofGenerationDirectlyfromPowerSystemVoltagesandAdmittances,”AIEETrans.vol.79,pt.III,pp.1235‐1244,1961.W.O.StadlinandD.L.Fletcher,“VoltageVersusReactiveCurrentModelforDispatchandControl,”IEEETransactionsonPowerApparatusandSystems,Vol.PAS‐101,NO.10,pp.3751‐3760,Oct.1982.B.Stott,“ReviewofLoad‐FlowCalculationMethods,”ProceedingsoftheIEEE,vol.62no.7,page916,Jul.1974.
HistoryofOptimalPowerFlowandFormulations•December2012
Page36
B.Stott,O.Alsac,andA.J.Monticelli,“SecurityAnalysisandOptimization,”ProceedingsoftheIEEE,vol.75,no.12,pp.1623‐1644,1987.Y.TaoandA.P.S.Meliopoulous,“OptimalPowerFlowviaQuadraticPowerFlow,”IEEEPowerSystemsConferenceandExposition,Phoenix,May2011.W.F.Tinney,J.M.Bright,K.D.Demaree,B.A.Hughes,“SomeDeficienciesinOptimalPowerFlow,”IEEETransactionsonPowerSystems,Vol.3No.2,pp.676‐683,May1988.W.F.Tinney,“Apresentationtotheworkshopinengineeringmathematicsandcomputersciences,”EPRIpublicationEAR/EL‐7/07,pages1‐15,August1991,citedinW.‐M.Lin,C.‐H.Huang,T.‐S.Zhan,“AHubridCurrent‐PowerOptimalPowerFlowTechnique,”IEEETransactionsonPowerSystems,Vol.23,No.1,p.177,Feb.2008.J.B.WardandH.W.Hale,“DigitalComputerSolutionofPowerFlowProblems,”Trans.AIEE(PowerApparatusandSystems),vol.75,pp.398‐404,Jun.1956.