Coherency recognition for transient stability studies using singular points

Spalding, Branch; Yee, H.; Goudie, D.B.

doi:10.1109/t-pas.1977.32463

Cited by 38 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(c) Singular points [5]. Computation of singular points of the post-fault power system provides the closest unstable singular point.…”

Section: Coherency Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Variations, such as that described by Reference 6, fall into this category. But an interesting approximation is the one made by the method of the singular points [5], which relates the critical clearance time to a post-fault type-1 unstable singular point. If that is the closest unstable singular point and the fault is cleared at that time, the system will eventually reach that point, although later in time.…”

Section: R Ke Coherency Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The comparison of the new method with the other techniques was performed using a modified full transient stability (MFTS) program and two specially built new programs [9], one using the RKE method and the second using the singular points (SP) method [5]. This last method recognises coherency by comparing angle differences between the original load-flow solution and the closest unstable singular point.…”

Section: Computer Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the simplest case, it is , 3. 14), (0), (5,6,7,8,9) (a, X.5. 6), (0) (a, 3, 14), (5,6,7,8,9) (a.…”

Section: Computer Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6), (0) (a, 3, 14), (5,6,7,8,9) (a. 3), (5,6,8,9) RKE method uses integration steps of 0.05 s SP method has a limit of 30 iterations for convergence to be achieved SP method uses angle tolerance of 5° and admittance distance ratio of 0.02 RKE method uses acceleration tolerance of 50% and admittance distance ratio of 0.02 Modified full transient stability uses angle tolerance of 20°. Integration is done for 1 s (*) Group of machines separates from the rest of the system.…”

Section: Computer Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Power-system dynamic equivalents:coherency recognition via the rate of change of kinetic energy

Rudnick¹,

Patino²,

Brameller³

1981

IEE Proc. C Gener. Transm. Distrib. UK

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The coherency aggregation method has proved very successful in the determination of dynamic equivalents of sections of a power system, its main drawback being the extensive computation times required to recognise the coherent groups with full-time simulation. The paper demonstrates the advantages of using the new 'rate of change of kinetic energy' method for coherency recognition in relation to other existing methods. A fault is applied on the power system, an approximate critical clearance time is obtained and machine conditions at that stage are used for recognition. Studies in a large power system are reported. Equivalents are obtained and compared with those produced through full simulation and with the method of the singular points. The effect of fault location on the equivalents obtained is reported. The transient responses of the equivalents produced by the different methods are compared with those of the original system. List of symbols RKE = rate of change of kinetic energy P m . = mechanical power of the ith machine P e . = electrical power of the / th machine p = d/dt derivative CJ,-= machine speed 6,-= internal machine angle co 0 = synchronous speed n = number of machines [/] = vector of nodal currents [Y] = admittance matrix [V] = vector of nodal voltages li = complex value of injected current V t = complex value of nodal voltage M t = inertia a t = post fault acceleration of the ith machine

show abstract

“…(c) Singular points [5]. Computation of singular points of the post-fault power system provides the closest unstable singular point.…”

Section: Coherency Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: R Ke Coherency Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Computer Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the simplest case, it is , 3. 14), (0), (5,6,7,8,9) (a, X.5. 6), (0) (a, 3, 14), (5,6,7,8,9) (a.…”

Section: Computer Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%