ISSN 1330-3651 (Print), ISSN 1848-6339 (Online) https://doi.org/10.

17559/TV-20181109235036
Original scientific paper

Overload Mitigation SIPS Based on DC Model Optimization and PMU Technology

Zoran ZBUNJAK, Igor KUZLE, Dino MAĐAR

Abstract: System integrity protection schemes (SIPS) supported by phasor measurement unit (PMU) technology are based on the concept of collecting information from
remote stations, sending the information to a central concentrator that executes a decision-making algorithm and initiates specialized actions to prevent the spread of system
disturbance. This paper gives application of overload mitigation SIPS. Described protection scheme is based on a mixed integer linear programming (MILP) optimization of
the DC power flow model whose objective is to maximize total load on the observed part of the network. Inaccuracy of the used DC model and the actual state is replaced
by using the PMU technology. In this way, the influence of reactive power that is ignored in the DC model power flow model calculation is replaced in real-time with real
synchronized measurements. Described SIPS is tested on IEEE 14 busbar test system. Conducted simulations indicate that developed optimization algorithm can mitigate
potential element overloads with extremely high accuracy by using load shedding methods. Example on real part of Croatian power transmission network is given at the end
of paper. This specific analysis demonstrates benefits of using SIPS based on synchro phasors in real world.

Keywords: optimization; overload mitigation; phasor measurement unit; system integrity protection scheme

1 INTRODUCTION unusual problems in the power system operation and take

advanced predefined measures to neutralize recorded events.
Electric power system (EPS) protection based on In 2010 a report on SIPS was published [8]. According
advanced technologies enables system integrity and safe to report the SIPS deal with congestion, thermal overload,
operation in conditions of compromised or questionable voltage, frequency and angular instability problems. Stated
security [1]. Power transmission system advanced control problems can be mitigated using different types of protection
implies joint advanced performance based on the control, schemes. Load shedding schemes together with overload
protection and measurement functions. Every defined and congestion mitigation schemes are studied within this
operation needs to work in real-time with very safe and paper.
reliable use of telecommunication network and extreme Undertaken research within the presented paper refers
speed requirements [2]. One of technologies that can support to congestions in parts of the power transmission network
development of advanced control system is PMU due to the electricity market conditions of its controlling [9].
technology. This technology has been developed in the One of synchronized measurement application for
1980s [3] and can be used in many applications like e.g. reducing excessive standing phase angle difference is given
power system state estimation described in [4]. Advanced in paper [10]. Generation control method for reducing phase
control and SIPS are specific areas where significant angle differences is described in order to bring system back
improvements can be achieved using PMU technology to normal condition.
according to [5]. Deployment of wide area monitoring, protection and
The cause of power systems blackouts, especially large control (WAMPAC) systems is recognized as one of
and rare interruptions in electricity supply, is usually a important goals in future Great Britain power system [11].
combination of a series of mutually connected events. Such With future research, wide area oscillation control in Great
a combination is very unlikely, but sometimes not a low risk, Britain power system should be developed using the
and it involves chain of a large number of cascade events [6]. synchronized measurements technology.
Protection schemes are based on the concept of This paper gives application of overload mitigation
collecting information from remote stations, sending the protection scheme. Described protection scheme is based on
information to a central unit that executes a decision-making MILP optimization of the DC power flow model whose
algorithm and initiates specialized actions to prevent the objective is to maximize total load on the observed part of
spread of system disturbance. Fig. 1 shows SIPS supported the network. Inaccuracy of the used DC model and the actual
by PMU technology. state is replaced by using the PMU technology. In this way,
the influence of reactive power, that is ignored in the DC
model power flow model calculation, is replaced in real-time
with real synchronized measurements.
A detailed mathematical description of used
optimization algorithm is given in chapter 2.
Chapter 3 presents operation analysis of the described
protection scheme on the IEEE 14 busbar test system.
Application of protection scheme on the real part of the
Croatian transmission system, subsystem Istria, is shown in
Figure 1 SIPS supported by PMU technology chapter 4 after verifying scheme on IEEE test system.
The contribution of this paper is the use of PMU
Special protection schemes are defined in [7] as technology to measure the actual loads of the monitored part
schemes designed to identify special events that cause of the network in order to determine in real time the
difference in the loads imposed by the assumptions set when

Tehnički vjesnik 27, 1(2020), 213-220 213

 Zoran ZBUNJAK et al.: Overload Mitigation SIPS Based on DC Model Optimization and PMU Technology

using the DC power flow model in relation to the actual 0 for disconnected or 1 for connected state; N - number of
power flows. nodes; δREF - reference voltage phase angle.
The node sum is defined by the following expression:
2 MILP BASED ON DC POWER FLOW MODEL
VARi ⋅ Li = Gi + ∑ j∈N Pij ; i, j ∈ N (5)
The task of the optimization algorithm is to mitigate
the overload in the network by optimizing consumption
with the aim of preserving the transmission system. The where: VARi - load shedding solution at node i, defined as
algorithm applies MILP based on the method of branching binary value 0 for load disconnection or 1 for load
and fencing. connection at node i; Li - active load power at node i in
MILP studies the optimization problems within the MW; Gi - active generation power at node i in MW.
system's default limits. Optimization can be based on the Real-time adjustment factor kQ is created in order to
problem of maximizing or minimizing the default objective compensate inaccuracy of the DC model. It represents
function by finding appropriate decision variables along impact of reactive power in the real system relative to its
with the constraints described by certain equations and neglect in the DC model.
inequalities. At MILP, a certain decision variable can take
values from a set of real or integer numbers. The method Pij ≤ kQ ⋅ SijMAX ; i, j ∈ N (6)
of branching and fencing is based on the principle of
successive solving the objective function, while the
permissible values of the decision variables do not reach where: kQ - adjustment factor that is calculated in real time
the optimal solution. The details of the integer when overloading occurs in MW/MVA according to Eq.
programming can be found in [12]. (7); SijMAX - maximum transmission power between nodes i
The mathematical model of used algorithm is based on and j in MVA.
the power flow calculation of the simplified model of the Adjustment factor is calculated in real time when
network, the so-called DC model. The DC model assumes overloading occurs in MW/MVA according to Eq. (7), and
three assumptions: its value is always less than 1.
- line resistance RL is negligible in relation to line
reactance XL, PijDC
kQ
= ; i, j ∈ N ; kQ < 1 (7)
SijREAL
RL  X L (1)
where: PijDC - calculated active power flow based on the
- per unit voltage |VN| is the same for all nodes,
DC model from node i to node j when overloading occurs;
SijREAL - real time measured apparent power of the
VN = 1 p. u. (2) overloaded connection between node i and node j when
overloading occurs.
- voltage angles difference δi − δj of the adjacent nodes As an additional release condition the model allows
is small, which derives: definition of critical loads which must remain connected
according to Eq. (8).
( ) ( ) (
sin δ i − δ j ≈ δ i − δ j ; cos δ i − δ j ≈ 1 ) (3)
VARi ≥ PRIORi ; i ∈ N (8)
Obviously, taking into account these assumptions
where: PRIORi - load shedding release condition in node i,
affects the accuracy of the DC model. According to [13],
defined as binary value 0 for loads that can be disconnected
the total error of the DC model is 5% compared to the more
or 1 for loads that must remain connected.
accurate AC nonlinear model. Though the accuracy of the
Objective function is to maximize connected load
DC model is smaller than the AC model, it is characterized
according to Eq. (9).
by the simplicity and the speed of the calculation
conditioned by its linearity, which is why it is proposed in
making SIPS. Max ( ∑ i∈N VARi ⋅ Li ) (9)

2.1 Mathematical Model Defined mathematical model finds a combination of

loads whose total real time measured sum represents
Power flow calculation for DC network model is based maximum possible load due to the constraints of
on the following expression: transmission power capacity of all connections in the real
time topology of the transmission network.
 δi − δ j  Block diagram of proposed optimization algorithm is
Pij =   ⋅ Tij ; i, j ∈ N ; δ REF = 0 (4) given in Fig. 2.
 
 X ij 

where: i, j - node tags; Pij - active power flow from node i

to node j; δi, δj - voltage phase angle for node i and j; Xij -
element reactance between nodes i and j; Tij - element
connection between nodes i and j, defined as binary value

214 Technical Gazette 27, 1(2020), 213-220

 Zoran ZBUNJAK et al.: Overload Mitigation SIPS Based on DC Model Optimization and PMU Technology

Table 1 Assumed rated power of lines and transformers

Rated power
Elements
(MVA)
Lines
1-2 (1), 1-2 (2), 1-5, 130
2-3, 2-4, 2-5, 3-4, 4-5
Transformers
85
4-7, 4-9, 5-6
Lines
6-11, 6-12, 6-13, 7-8, 7-9, 70
9-10, 9-14, 10-11, 12-13, 13-14

3.1 Base Case Scenario

Power flow calculation was carried out without any

change to default scenario using a nonlinear AC model in
the PSS/E software. IEEE 14 busbar test system is
characterized by the majority of generation in busbar 1 and
a smaller part in busbar 2. Synchronous compensators that
Figure 2 Block diagram of proposed optimization algorithm maintain voltage in the analysed model are modelled in
busbars 3, 6 and 8.
3 STUDY CASE ON IEEE 14 BUSBAR TEST SYSTEM
3.2 N-1 Analysis
Universality of described SIPS is verified on the IEEE
14 busbar test system, Fig. 3. Data for IEEE 14 busbar test N-1 analysis of IEEE 14 busbar test system including
system were downloaded from the University of assumed rated power of lines and transformers indicated a
Washington test case archive [14]. Rated power of lines situation where N-1 criterion was not satisfied. Outage of
and transformers is assumed in Tab. 1. because the one of lines 1-2 with assumed rated power of 130 MVA
standard IEEE 14 busbar test system does not define the causes overloading of the other line 1-2, Fig. 4.
specified values. PMU placement method is based on the
complete system observability that results in PMUs 3.3 Calculation of the Adjustment Factor kQ in Real Time
placement in each node that has modelled load or Based on PMU Measurements
generator. In addition to the described nodes, PMUs are
also placed on endangered network elements. DC model power flow calculation needs to be initially
performed in order to perform the adaptation of the
optimization algorithm to the nonlinear model. Power flow
on line 1-2 (2) is 127,3 MW according to the DC model
power flows. According to Fig. 4, using a nonlinear AC
model in the PSS/E software, power flow for line 1-2 (2) is
137,3 MW of active power and −19,6 MVAr of reactive
power, which gives 138,7 MVA of apparent power.
Adjustment factor kQ for case of overloading line
1-2 (2) is calculated according to Eq. (10):

P1− 2( 2 ) DC 127,3 MW MW
=kQ = = 0,92 (10)
S1− 2( 2 ) REAL 138,7 MVA MVA

Adjustment factor kQ of 0,92 MW/MVA is selected as

input parameter in the overload optimization algorithm.

3.4 Load Optimization with Selected Adjustment Factor

According to input data of generation and load in each

node, reactance of lines and transformers together with
topology matrix, optimization algorithm as a solution gives
Figure 3 IEEE 14 busbar test system with PMUs placement loads which need to be disconnected in order to optimally
mitigate overload of line 1-2 (2). Solution defines that load
at busbar 6 of 11,2 MW and at busbar 11 of 3,5 MW, which
makes total of 14,7 MW, needs to be disconnected in order
to optimal mitigate overload of line 1-2 (2), Tab. 2.

Tehnički vjesnik 27, 1(2020), 213-220 215

 Zoran ZBUNJAK et al.: Overload Mitigation SIPS Based on DC Model Optimization and PMU Technology

Figure 4 N-1 analysis of line 1-2 (1)

Figure 5 Checking optimization result on nonlinear model with implemented load supply priority

Figure 6 Line apparent power flow data for different activities

216 Technical Gazette 27, 1(2020), 213-220

 Zoran ZBUNJAK et al.: Overload Mitigation SIPS Based on DC Model Optimization and PMU Technology

Table 2 Optimization results Table 3 Optimization results with implemented load supply priority
Optimal load solution Supply priority
Load /
Busbar 0 - not connected, 0 - can be Optimal solution
MW
1 - connected Busbar Load / MW disconnected 0 - not connected,
1 0 0 1 - cannot be 1 - connected
2 21,7 1 disconnected
3 94,2 1 1 0 0 0
4 47,6 1 2 21,7 0 1
5 7,6 1 3 94,2 0 1
6 11,2 0 4 47,6 0 1
7 0 0 5 7,6 0 1
8 0 0 6 11,2 1 1
9 29,5 1 7 0 0 0
10 9 1 8 0 0 0
11 3,5 0 9 29,5 0 1
12 6,1 1 10 9 0 1
13 13,5 1 11 3,5 1 1
14 14,9 1 12 6,1 0 1
Total load before optimization / MW 259 13 13,5 0 1
Total optimized consumption / MW 244,3 14 14,9 0 0
Load that needs to be disconnected / MW 14,7 Total load before optimization / MW 259
Total optimized consumption / MW 244,1
Load that needs to be disconnected / MW 14,9
3.5 Checking Optimization Solution on Nonlinear Model
3.8 Comparison of Optimization Results
Optimization algorithm solutions are checked by
calculating nonlinear model power flows in the PSS/E. Fig. 6 shows line apparent power flow data for N-1
Outage of loads in busbars 6 and 11 was simulated. Power analysis and optimization algorithm with and without
flow calculation results in active power of 128,2 MW and supply priority in relation to the assumed rated power.
reactive power of −20,1 MVAr on line 1-2 (2), which gives Overload mitigation of line 1-2 (2) using described
apparent power of 129,77 MVA. Calculated apparent optimization algorithms can be easily detected reviewing
power is 99,82% of the assumed rated power. We can given figure. Calculated values for line 1-2 (2) are shown
conclude that described optimization algorithm offered in Tab. 4.
solution that successfully mitigates overload of line 1-2 (2)
with extremely high accuracy. Table 4 Power flows of line 1-2 (2) for different activities
N-1 line Optimal Supply
Line Unit SMAX
3.6 Implementing Load Supply Priority and Re-optimization 1-2 (1) SIPS priority
MVA 130 138,69 129,77 129,32
1-2 (2)
% 100 106,69 99,82 99,48
Situation when some of the loads for different reasons
must not be disconnected is predicted as part of described
optimization algorithm. We can say that this kind of load Fig. 7 shows busbar voltages for different activities
has a supply priority over other loads. In order to check from which is clear that implementation of described
optimization algorithms does not endanger voltage
optimization algorithm, the next step proposes the
originally chosen loads 6 and 11 as the load supply conditions in the observed test system.
priorities. After re-optimization with given conditions of
supply priority, the algorithm solution changes. The new
solution defines load at busbar 14 of 14,9 MW as one that
needs to be disconnected in order to mitigate overload on
line 1-2 (2), Tab. 3.

3.7 Checking Optimization Solution on Nonlinear Model

with Implemented Load Supply Priority

Connected state of loads in busbars 6 and 11 and

outage of load in busbar 14 were simulated using nonlinear
model in PSS/E software. Power flow calculation results in
127,7 MW of active power and −20,4 MVAr of reactive
power on line 1-2 (2), which gives apparent power of
129,32 MVA. Calculated apparent power represents
99,48% of assumed rated power, Fig. 5. We can conclude Figure 7 Busbar voltages for different activities
that optimization algorithm with implemented load supply
priority also offered solution that successfully mitigates Duration of the described simulation was about 10 ms
overload of line 1-2 (2) with extremely high accuracy. and optimal solution was reached within 14 iterations.
Extremely fast calculation of optimal solution confirms
possibility of application in SIPS.

Tehnički vjesnik 27, 1(2020), 213-220 217

 Zoran ZBUNJAK et al.: Overload Mitigation SIPS Based on DC Model Optimization and PMU Technology

4 APPLICATION ON THE REAL PART OF CROATIAN - 220 kV double line Plomin-Melina-Pehlin is

TRANSMISSION NETWORK disconnected,
- TPP Plomin is disconnected,
Part of Croatian transmission network Istria is - peak loads are selected according to summer peak
connected to the surrounding EPS through 220 kV and 110 loads, Tab. 5.
kV transmission lines (Fig. 8):
- 220 kV Plomin-Melina, Table 5 Selected busbar loads
- 220 kV Plomin-Pehlin, Busbar Name P / MW Q / MVAr S / MVA
1 Matulji 0 0 0
- 110 kV Plomin-Lovran-Matulji, 2 Kopar 0 0 0
- 110 kV Buje-Kopar. 3 Lovran 13,1 3,4 13,53
Production capacity of Istria is defined by the 4 Plomin 110 W1 0 0 0
centralized production of thermal power plant (TPP) 5 Plomin 220 0 0 0
Plomin consisting of two generators: Plomin 1 (115 MW) 6 Plomin 110 W2 0 0 0
7 Raša 18,6 7,4 20,02
and Plomin 2 (210 MW). Generator Plomin 1 is connected 8 Koromačno 5,6 1,1 5,71
to a 110 kV network and Plomin 2 to a 220 kV network. 9 Dolinka 31,7 5,4 32,16
The total production capacity of TPP Plomin 1 and 2 is 325 10 Šijana 46,0 4,2 46,19
MW. 11 T-spoj 0 0 0
During the summer months most of consumption is 12 Vinčent 8,5 0,7 8,53
13 Rovinj 25,6 6,5 26,41
concentrated in the east and west coast of Istria. The reason
14 Funtana 21,7 4,8 22,22
for this is the growing tourism development accompanied 15 Poreč 32,5 4,4 32,80
by the construction of large hotel chains. Summer peak 16 Katoro 12,2 2,9 12,54
loads of subsystem Istria is around 270 MW with a 17 Buje 30,4 9,3 31,79
tendency of further growth. 18 Buzet 7,9 0,4 7,91
19 Butoniga 2,6 0 2,60
20 Pazin 10,8 2,5 11,09
21 Tupljak 5,7 1,5 5,89
Active power / MW 272,9
Reactive power / MVAr 54,5
Apparent power / MVA 279,39

For the described base scenario, subsystem Istria is

powered by two lines: 110 kV Matulji-Lovran-Plomin and
110 kV Buje-Kopar. Matulji and Kopar are selected as
external nodes. All other nodes within the subsystem are
defined as internal. Matulji is chosen as the reference node.
Rated power of connection lines Matulji-Lovran and Buje-
Kopar are determined in accordance with the real state
which in both cases is 89 MVA.
Tab. 6 gives power flow calculations for connection
lines in nonlinear AC and linear DC model for the
described scenario.
Figure 8 Part of Croatian power system Istria
Table 6 Power flows before optimization
Nonlinear AC model before optimization
Previous analyses [15] and [16] identified events that, Line P / MW Q / MVAr S / MVA SMAX / MVA %
during large summer bursts, bring the subsystem Istria to Matulji-
161,3 51 169,2 89 190,1
the state of the endangered condition. In the situation of Lovran
unavailability of the double 220 kV transmission line Buje-
141,9 57,2 153 89 171,9
Kopar
Plomin-Melina-Pehlin system security depends on the Linear DC model before optimization
availability of TPP Plomin generators 1 and 2. Overloading Line P / MW
of remaining connections Buje-Kopar and Plomin-Lovran- Matulji-Lovran 148,1
Matulji occurs in the case of unplanned unavailability of Buje-Kopar 131,3
Plomin generators, which ultimately causes subsystem
Istria blackout. This scenario happened in reality on 12 July 4.2 Calculation of the Adjustment Factor kQ
2012 due to the unplanned unavailability of TPP Plomin,
which resulted in the complete supply disruption of According to Tab. 6, DC model power flow calculation
subsystem Istria for a total duration of 26 minutes. gives active power of 148,1 MW on line Matulji-Lovran
and 131,3 MW on line Buje-Kopar. AC model power flow
4.1 Description of Analysed Scenarios calculation gives apparent power of 169,2 MVA for line
Matulji-Lovran and 153 MVA for line Buje-Kopar.
Power subsystem Istria is modelled according to Adjustment factor kQ for case of overloading lines
Fig. 8 in the software for power flow calculation PSS/E. Matulji-Lovran and Buje-Kopar is calculated according to
Model base scenario is defined according to the Eq. (11) and (12):
following:

218 Technical Gazette 27, 1(2020), 213-220

 Zoran ZBUNJAK et al.: Overload Mitigation SIPS Based on DC Model Optimization and PMU Technology

P1−3 DC 148,1 MW MW Analyses showed that it has been successful in overload

kQ 1−3
= = = 0,86 (11) mitigation while simultaneously utilizing the available
S1−3 REAL 169,2 MVA MVA
transmission power of connection lines. It is therefore
concluded that the described algorithm can be used in
P1−17 DC 131,3 MW MW further development of SIPS in subsystem Istria.
kQ 2-17
= = = 0,86 (12)
S1−17 REAL 153 MVA MVA In further development, it is necessary to analyse
possibility of applying optimization algorithm to
Adjustment factor kQ of 0.86 MW/MVA is selected as subsystems with a high share of reactive power, as well as
input parameter in the overload optimization algorithm for to subsystems where there is electricity production at
case of overloading lines Matulji-Lovran and Buje-Kopar. certain nodes.

4.3 Optimization Results 6 REFERENCES

Tab. 7 shows output results of optimization algorithm [1] Zhang, Z., Chen, W., & Zhang, Z. (2015). Research on the
relay protection system of micro-grid. Technical Gazette,
according to the defined scenario.
22(1), 51-59. https://doi.org/10.17559/TV-20150210221236
[2] Zbunjak, Z. & Kuzle, I. (2013). Advanced Control and
Table 7 Optimization results for defined scenario
Total load before optimization 279,39 MVA
System Integrity Protection Schemes of Croatian Power
Loads that need to be disconnected 3, 8, 10, 14, 16, 18, 20 Transmission Network with Integrated Renewable Energy
Total load that needs to be disconnected 119,19 MVA Sources. Eurocon 2013, Zagreb, 706-711.
Total optimized consumption 160,20 MVA https://doi.org/10.1109/EUROCON.2013.6625060
[3] Phadke, A. G. & Thorp, J. S. (2008). Synchronized Phasor
Measurements and Their Applications. New York, NY:
Tab. 8 gives power flows for connection lines Matulji-
Springer.
Lovran and Buje-Kopar after implementing optimization [4] Kirincic, V., Skok, S., & Frankovic, D. (2016). A
algorithm. Overloading of connection lines has been noninvasive inclusion of synchrophasors in the power
mitigated and the high availability of transmission power system state estimation. Technical Gazette, 23(5), 1457-
is achieved. Power flow of 97,1 % was achieved for line 1462. https://doi.org/10.17559/TV-20150118204850
Matulji-Lovran and 92,7 % for line Buje-Kopar. [5] Martin, K. E. et al. (2008). Exploring the IEEE Standard
C37.118-2005 Synchrophasors for Power Systems. IEEE
Table 8 Power flows for connection lines after optimization Transactions on Power Delivery, 23(4), 1805-1811.
Nonlinear AC model after optimization https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2007.916092
Line P / MW Q / MVAr S / MVA SMAX / MVA % [6] Terzija, V., Valverde, G., Cai, D., Regulski, P., Madani, V.,
Matulji- Fitch, J., Skok, S., Begovic, M., & Phadke, A. (2011). Wide
84,6 17,6 86,4 89 97,1
Lovran Area Monitoring, Protection, and Control of Future Electric
Buje- Power Networks. Proceedings of the IEEE, 99(1), 80-93.
79,0 23,8 82,5 89 92,7
Kopar
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.10.724
[7] Anderson, P. M. & LeReverend, B. K. (1996). Industry
In the study of optimization algorithm on real part of Experience with Special Protection Schemes. IEEE
Croatian transmission network, supply priority was not Transactions on Power Systems, 11(3), 1166-1179.
given to individual nodes. In further development of https://doi.org/10.1109/59.535588
optimization algorithm, in cooperation with distribution [8] Madani, V., Novosel, D., Horowitz, S., Adamiak, M.,
system operator in the observed network part, it will be Amantegui, J., Karlsson, D., Imai, S., & Apostolov, A.
necessary to define criteria for selecting importance of (2010). IEEE PSRC Report on Global Industry Experiences
with System Integrity Protection Schemes (SIPS). IEEE
consumers of subsystem Istria, according to which supply
Transactions on Power Delivery, 25(4), 2143-2155.
priorities of certain nodes should be defined. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2010.2046917
[9] Zbunjak, Z. & Kuzle, I. (2011). Possible savings in
5 CONCLUSION electricity transmission using wide area monitoring
technologies in Croatian power transmission network. 8th
Optimal overload mitigation algorithm based on the International Conference on the European Energy Market
DC model and synchronized measurements is given in this (EEM11), Zagreb, 495-500.
paper. Calculation of power flows according to DC https://doi.org/10.1109/EEM.2011.5953062
network model is characterized by simplicity and speed. [10] Quiros-Tortos, J., Wall, P., & Terzija, V. (2016). Reducing
excessive standing phase angle differences: A new approach
There are no convergence problems as in other non-linear
based on OPF and wide area measurements. International
models making it suitable for use in time-limited Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 78, 13-21.
applications such as WAMPAC systems. Synchronized https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2015.11.078
phasor measurement technology allows you to collect real- [11] Cai, D., Wall, P., Osborne, M., & Terzija, V. (2016).
time network data and provide fast and reliable Roadmap for the deployment of WAMPAC in the future GB
performance of SIPS. power system. IET Generation, Transmission &
Universality of described algorithm was tested on the Distribution, 10(7), 1553-1562.
IEEE 14 busbar test system. From the analyses carried out https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-gtd.2015.0582
we can conclude that described optimization algorithm [12] Wikipedia, Integer programming. https://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Integer_programming (Accessed 2018-07-15)
offered results that successfully mitigate overloading of
[13] Purchala, K. (2005). Modelling and analysis of techno-
test system with extraordinary accuracy. economic interactions in meshed high voltage grids
Algorithm applicability on the real model of EPS has
been shown by checking algorithm on subsystem Istria.

Tehnički vjesnik 27, 1(2020), 213-220 219

 Zoran ZBUNJAK et al.: Overload Mitigation SIPS Based on DC Model Optimization and PMU Technology

exhibiting congestion. PhD thesis, University of Leuven

(K.U. Leuven), (CD edition)
[14] University Washington, Power system test case archive.
http://www.ee.washington.edu/research/pstca/pf14/pg_tca1
4bus.htm (Accessed 2017-09-23)
[15] Kotorac, D., Zbunjak, Z., Valentić, V., Sokolić, L., &
Šumberac, B. (2013). Analysis of application possibilities of
advanced control system on the electrical power subsystem
of Istria. 11th HRO CIGRÉ Session, Cavtat, (CD edition)
[16] Kotorac, D., Andrić, A., Frlan, K., Sokolić, L., & Zbunjak,
Z. (2016). Activities for preventing EPS blackouts in the
Istria region. 12th symposium on power system management,
Split, (CD edition)

Contact information:

Zoran ZBUNJAK, M. E.E.

Croatian Transmission System Operator Ltd.
Transmission Area Rijeka
Marinčićeva ulica 3, 51211 Matulji, Croatia
zoran.zbunjak@hops.hr

Igor KUZLE, PhD, E.E.

University of Zagreb
Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing
Unska 3, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
igor.kuzle@fer.hr

Dino MAĐAR, M. E.E.

Croatian Transmission System Operator Ltd.
Transmission Area Rijeka
Marinčićeva ulica 3, 51211 Matulji, Croatia
dino.madar@hops.hr

220 Technical Gazette 27, 1(2020), 213-220