Page 210 - Mathematical Models and Algorithms for Power System Optimization
P. 210

Discrete Optimization for Reactive Power Planning 201

                    Table 6.18 Transformer tap location solutions (per-unit value) of 5-node test system
                    Node I2Node J                   Expert Rules          Simple Rounded-Off

                    1–4                                0.95                     0.95
                    2–5                               0.925                     0.95


                             Table 6.19 VAR source solutions (group) of 5-node test system
                          Node No.              3               4              5

                          Expert rules          10              6               8
                          rounded-off           10              6               8



               6.5.4.2 230-Node practical system
               Fig. 6.8 shows a 230-node practical system, with basic calculation conditions given in
               Table 6.20. All initial values and constraints are given by the planning engineer.

               Under the 1995 forecasting load conditions given in Table 6.21, expert rules and a simple
               rounded-off method are used to obtain tap ratio position and capacitor bank number. ΣΔU (per-
               unit value) in the table is the sum of absolute value of voltage violations, and maxΔU (per-unit
               value) is the maximum value of voltage violations. Table 6.21 shows that the effect of expert
               rules is obvious, because both the amount and quantity of constraint violations are smaller.
               Results of Case 952D show that integer-feasible solution can be obtained by expert rules alone.

               Fig. 6.9 shows comparison of initial tap ratio, optimal tap ratio, and rounded-off tap ratio.
               From Fig. 6.9A, only 10% of tap ratio solutions obtained by expert rules are different
               from rounded-off ones. However, the effect of expert rules is quite different, as shown in
               Table 6.21. Fig. 6.9B and Fig. 6.9C show that the initial tap ratio must be changed to meet the
               requirement of the voltage level.

               Table 6.22 shows that the initial number of nodes and costs for VAR allocation are greatly
               reduced through discrete VAR optimization calculation. All calculation cases demonstrate that
               discrete VAR optimization calculation can reduce VAR investment costs and installation
               capacity.
               Table 6.23 shows the number of nodes at which VAR sources are initially installed. However,
               the node number after optimization is different from the original node. In addition to existing
               and newly installed VAR sources, VAR optimization calculation also must consider adding
               new VAR units to existing nodes. This can be easily done with the algorithm proposed in
               this section. “Original nodes” in the table refers to the nodes at which the original VAR units
               are installed. “Original+new” refers to adding new VAR unit to the original VAR nodes.
               “New nodes” refers to new VAR nodes. All calculation cases show that discrete VAR
               optimization calculation is able to reduce the number of VAR installation nodes.
   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215