1
Improvement in Phasor Measurement by Phasor
Measurement Unit
Author, _____________________________________
Abstract—The knowledge of the operator about the state of the
transmission system can be improved by using innovative
technologies such as Phasor Measurement Units (PMU). This
improvement will guarantee high efficient and reliable operation.
Indeed, PMUs are powerful devices that provide rich streams of
frequent, time-stamped data on transmitting system conditions
that system operators can use to reduce the risk of wide-area
blackouts, anticipate contingencies, enhance system efficiency,
and improve system models.
Index Terms— Phasor Measurement Units (PMU),time-
stamped data, wide-area blackouts
I. INTRODUCTION Figure 1(b) Region affected by the blackout.
The objective of this experiment is therefore to emulate a
A system without PMU could lead to wrong measurement scenario as the one described previously when the 2003
of important variables such as power flow between two buses blackout occurred. Notice that without PMU the distance
[1]. Fig. 1(a) shows the phase angle difference as a function of between each Bus and the control center will play an
time between Cleveland and Michigan leading up to the 2003 important role on how the information measured at each bus
outage, which occurred throughout parts of the Northeastern will arrive at the control center. For instance, Fig. 2(a) shows a
and Midwestern United States and the Canadian province of scenario where Bus 2 is physically close to the control center,
Ontario as highlighted in Fig. 1(b).
and therefore there is no delay time on the information
received.
Analysis of phase angle measurements presented in Fig. 1(a)
revealed a slow divergence nearly an hour before the start of
the blackout. This could have been avoided if PMUs were
used on that network, which would allow real-time phase II.PHASOR MEASUREMENT UNIT
angle monitoring and consequently, system operators would This is basic design of Phasor Measurement Unit (PMU) as
have had more knowledge of the impending problem and an shown in Fig.2(a) .
opportunity to take remedial actions.[2-3]
Figure 1(a) Phase angle difference between Cleveland and Michigan Figure 2(a) Situation where the absence of PMU may cause errors
leading up to the 2003 outage due to data measurement delays
2
13000
∗12900
√ 2
3∗
Pest = √2 ∗sin ( 5−35 )=−25.1550 MW
5
Table 1 Calculation of estimated and Real Power measurment
Phase error Estimated Power ( Pest Real
Figure 2(b) Electrical scheme of the introduced by ): Measured
the block Power ( Pmeas )
“Delay”:
On the other hand, Bus 1 is far away from the control
0º 4.384805MW 4.383MW
center, which introduces some delay error on the information
transmitted to the control center.
5º 0 4.383MW
A. Working Principal
1. Emulates a two-bus system with voltages equal to 17º -10.46003717 4.383MW
^1=13 kV ∠ 0 and V
V ^2=12.9 kV ∠ 5 and power
35º -25.15500MW 4.383MW
line impedance of X l =5 Ω, see Fig. 2(b). Assume a
power line modeled with only inductors, disregard
the resistance shown schematically in Fig. 2(b). Start Where X is the month the year you were born; Y is the day
your analysis with a delay equal to zero. you were born (if Y<13 => Y=13 and Y>20 => Y=20).
2. Compare the power flow information used by the
control center to take protection decisions on this III. SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM AND RESULT
power line and compare the measured power flowing This experiment is implement in MATLAB. The schematic
from Bus 1 to Bus 2. Notice that the control center diagram is shown in Fig 3
will estimate the power with this expression:
V 1+¿V
Pest = sin(θ)¿
2
Xl
On the other the measured power ( Pmeas ) is measure
by multiplying voltage and current for each phase and
summing them.
3. Change the angle displacement introduced by the
block Delay. Notice that this will affect the variable
θ' (output of the block Delay) in Fig. 2(b);
4. Calculation:
13000 12900
3∗ +
Pest =
√2 √ 2 ∗sin ( 5−0 )=4.384805 MW
5
Figure 3 Schematic Diagram of PMU
13000 12900
3∗ +
√ 2 √ 2 ∗sin ( 5−5 )=0 MW Following figure shows the graphical result of the
Pest =
5 experiment .Fig 4
13000
∗12900
√ 2
3∗
Pest = √2 ∗sin ( 5−17 )=−10.460037 MW
5
3
be able to visualize the importance of using PMU, which will
guarantee that there is no error on the phasor measurement
even with a long-distance bus due to GPS capability.
REFERENCES
[1] A. Abur, A. Gomez-Exp ´ osito, ´ Power System State Estimation:
Theory and Implementation, Marcel Dekker, April 2004.
[2] A. Gomez-Exp ´ osito, A. de la Villa Ja ´ en, C. G ´ omez- ´ Quiles, P.
Rousseaux, T. Van Cutsem, “A Taxonomy of Multi-Area State
Estimation Methods,”, Electric Power Systems Research, in press
[3] A. Gomez-Exp ´ osito and A. Abur A, “Use of Locally ´ Synchronized
Voltage and Current Measurements for State Estimation”, Probabilistic
Figure 4 Graphical View of PMU result Methods Applied to Power Systems Conference (PMAPS), September
22- 26, 2002, Naples, Italy.
IV. CONCLUSION
At the end of this experiment, it can conclude that we can
