In a deregulated electricity market, congestion of the transmission lines is a major problem the independent system operator (ISO) would face. Rescheduling of generators is one of the most practiced techniques to alleviate the congestion. However, not all generators in the system operate deterministically and independently, especially wind power generators (WTGs). Therefore, a novel optimal rescheduling model for congestion management that accounts for the uncertain and correlated power sources and loads is proposed. A probabilistic power flow (PPF) model based on 2m+1 point estimate method (PEM) is used to simulate the performance of uncertain and correlated input random variables. In addition, the impact of direct electricity purchase contracts on the congestion management has also been studied. This paper uses artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm to solve the complex optimization problem. The proposed algorithm is tested on modified IEEE 30bus system and IEEE 57bus system to demonstrate the impacts of the uncertainties and correlations of the input random variables and the direct electricity purchase contracts on the congestion management. Both pool and nodal pricing model are also discussed.
1. Introduction
Congestion of transmission lines occurs when the networks fail to accommodate all the desired transactions due to the system operating limits such as branch power flow limits, voltage limits, etc. Congestion in one or more transmission lines leads to higher risk of electricity consumption, even unexpected widespread power blackouts
[1]
. Various congestion management approaches suitable for traditional power systems without intermittent energy, have been reported in recent literatures. However, the global rapid growth of wind power capacity increases the uncertainties in congestion management. Therefore, it is necessary to propose an efficient and reliable method to process congestion problem with random variables.
Optimal rescheduling of generators is generally adopted to manage the congestion for its lowcost and simplicity. Ashwani Kumar proposed a zonal sensitivitybased optimum real and reactive power generation rescheduling method for congestion management
[2]
. Another technique for optimum selection of generators to be rescheduled is demonstrated in
[3]
, which is based on generator sensitivities to the power flow on congested lines. Congestion management techniques in different deregulated electricity markets are estimated in
[4]
. Besides, congestion management scheme based on optimal power flow (OPF) is an excellent alternative method in a power system with deterministic operational constraints.
An OPFbased congestion management approach proposed in
[5]
is based on the nodal pricing framework and the pool model. Another OPFbased scheme which aims to minimize both congestion and service costs is presented in
[6]
. Various kinds of traditional congestion management models are essentially the OPF problems associated with security constraints. As system with high level wind power integration has enhanced uncertainties, a noval probabilistic OPFbased congestion management approach is addressed in this paper.
Cumulants and GramCharlier expansion theory are combined to approximate the probabilistic distribution functions (PDFs) of transmission line flows in
[7]
. As the cumulant method can’t be used to process correlated input random variables, a two PEM
[8]
is applied. Literature
[9]
reveals that the 2m+1 PEM provides the best performance among the Hong’s PEMs. So this paper uses the 2m+1 PEM
[9

10]
to process the PPF in the congestion management. In recent years, compared with other heuristic mothods
[11

14]
, ABC algorithm proposed by D. Karaboga
[11]
for fewer parameters, faster convergence and higher precision
[12]
has been widely used to solve complex nonlinear optimization problems, such as congestion management
[13]
, OPF
[14]
, etc.
Congestion management methods available in most literatures use simple power flow method without considering the uncertainties and correlations of the input variables. In this paper, the ABC algorithm combined with an extended 2m+1 PEM method is proposed to process the complex congestion problem with correlated random injections. Moreover, the impact of direct electricity purchase on the results of congestion is discussed.
This paper is organized as follows. The mathematical formulation of the congestion management model is presented in Section 2. Section 3 gives the PPF model coupled with correlated variables in detail. In Section 4, the ABC algorithm coupling with the PPF model to solve the complex congestion problem is proposed. Section 5 gives several case studies. Finally, Section 6 provides the relevant conclusions.
2. Mathematical Formulation
Congestion management is an optimization problem aims to minimize the congestion cost while satisfying the system and unit constraints. This section gives the congestion management model based on both pool and nodal pricing model in detail.
 2.1 Objective functions
 2.1.1 Cost of rescheduling in the pool model[1516]
In the pool model, the ISO determines the marketclearing price
C_{i,M}
and the output
P_{Gi}
of generator i without considering system constraints aiming to minimize the cost of electricity purchase. The original total cost of electricity purchase can be calculated by:
where
N_{G}
is the number of generators. When the congestion occurs, the cost of “constraint on” and “constraint off” generators are:
where
and
are the number of “constraint on” and “constraint off” generators, respectively;
is the output of generator
i
after rescheduling;
is the actual price bids submitted by generator
i
. Combining (12), the cost of rescheduling in the pool model is obtained:
In the above formula, the superscript ‘ − ’ denotes the expectation of the random variables.
 2.1.2 Cost of breach of direct electricity purchase contract
Actually, the direct electricity purchase contract is a kind of bilateral transactions
[16]
. If there is no static and dynamic security violation, all the requested contracts or transactions should be satisfied. Otherwise, a breach of contract will occur. Mathematically, the breach cost of a direct electricity purchase contract at generator
i
can be calculated according to
[16]
as follows:
where
P_{i,dc}
is the trading power of the direct electricity purchase contract of generator
i
,
P^{’}_{i}
is the actual active power of generation
i
, and
k
is a penalty coefficient of breach of contract.
 2.1.3 Congestion cost in different modes
Combining (34), the objective function in the pool mode is:
where
w
is a penalty coefficient trying to perform all the direct electricity purchase contracts.
Though the formula (4) is still applicable in the nodal pricing model
[5]
, the objective function is modified to:
where
S
is the set of the two endpoints of the branches;
P_{ij}
is the active power flow from bus
i
to
j
; LMPi and
LMP_{j}
is the nodal prices of bus
i
and
j
, which are two endpoints of a branch, respectively. All the nodal prices are calculated by minmizing the cost of generation.
 2.2 Constrains and limits
 2.2.1 Power flow equations
where
P_{i}
,
Q_{i}
and
V_{i}
are the active power, reactive power and voltage amplitude of bus
i
, respectively;
Gij
and
Bij
are conductance and susceptance between bus
i
and
j
, respectively;
N_{bus}
is the number of buses;
θ_{ij}
is the phase angle difference between bus
i
and
j
.
 2.2.2 Power constraints of generators
where
and
are the minimum and maximum active power of generator
i
;
and
are the minimum and maximum reactive power of generator
i
;
P_{Gi}
and
Q_{Gi}
are the active and reactive power of generator
i
.
 2.2.3 Bus voltage limits
where
Pro
(·) denotes the probability of the event (·);
and
are the lower and upper bound of voltage amplitude of bus
i
;
V_{i}
is the voltage amplitude of bus
i
;
α_{i}
is the confidence level of the bus
i
’s constraint.
 2.2.4 Line power flow limits
where
are the upper limit of transmission power flow of branch
i
;
PF_{i}
is the power flow of branch
i
;
β_{i}
is the confidence level of the branch
i
’s constraint;
N_{branch}
is the number of the branches.
 2.2.5 Direct electricity purchase contract
In a practical system, not all of the generators have direct electricity purchase contract with loads and viceversa. Mathematically, if a generator at bus
i
have this contract the active power inequality constraint of (8) is modified into:
For the objective function has already considered the penalty term of this constraint violation, only constraint (8) need to be taken into account.
3. PPF Model Managing To Process Correlations
To perform the impact of the uncertainties of loads and wind farms (WFs), probabilistic models are established. Since the correlations among loads and WFs do affect the power flows
[17]
, a modified 2m+1 PEM
[10]
capable of processing the correlations is introduced.
 3.1 Probabilistic load model
Generally, load demand is supposed to follow a normal distribution
[10
,
17]
. So the active and reactive power of load bus
L
can be expressed by:
where
μ_{PL}
and
σ_{PL}
are the mean and standard deviation of active load;
μ_{QL}
and
σ_{QL}
are the mean and standard deviation of reactive load; exp(·) represents the exponential function.
 3.2 Probabilistic correlated WFs model
Different from the probabilistic load model, the output of WFs depends on the wind speed which follows the Weibull distribution. Thus, the joint PDF of the correlated WFs’ output at bus
t
can be obtained through the correlated wind speed using Monte Carlo method.
The PDF and cumulative distribution function (CDF) of the wind speed
v_{j}
of the
j
th WF at bus
t
are as follows
[10]
:
where
k_{j}
is the shape factor and
λ_{j}
is the scale factor of
v_{j}
. Weibull distributed wind speed can be transformed into normally distributed variable through Nataf transformation.
The correlated wind speed sampling matrix
V
_{Ns×NWFs,t}
= [
v
_{1}
,
v
_{2}
,⋯,
v_{NWFs,t}
] (
N_{s}
represents the sampling times) of the
N_{WFs,t}
WFs at bus
t
can be generated as follows:

1. Generate a matrixRNs×NWFs,t=[r1,r2,⋯,rNWF,t] by the Matlab random number generator which representsNWFs,tindependent standard normal distributed random variables.

2. For the given correlation coefficient matrixCgof the wind speeds, the modified correlation coefficient matrixCmdby the Nataf transformation[19]are obtained using[10,20]:

where andare the elements atmth row,nth column ofCgandCmd, respectively;γmandγnare the coefficients of variation ofvmandvn. Then decomposeCmdby the Cholesky decomposition method[10,21]intoCm=LLT, whereLis an inferior triangular matrix.

3. Using the transformationY=LRand the inverse Nataf transformationwe can obtain the matrixVNs×NWFs,t= [v1,v2,⋯,vNWFs,t] withNWFs,tWeibull distributed variables with a correlation coefficient matrixCd.
Next, the wind speed vector
v_{j}
from the
j
th column of
V
is used to determine the output column vector
P_{WF,j}
[
N_{s}
×1] of WF
j
with
n_{j}
WTGs at the bus
t
as follows:
where
P_{r}
is the rated power of a single WTG;
v_{in}
,
v_{r}
and
v_{out}
are the cutin, rated and cutout wind speed, respectively;
n_{j}
is the number of WTGs at the bus
t
.
Applying
V
and (16), the output sampling matrix
P_{WFs}
[
N_{s}
×1] of bus
t
with
N_{WFs,t}
WFs is calculated by:
Using
P_{WFs}
, the mean
μ_{WFs,t}
and standard deviation
σ_{WFs,t}
of the WFs’ output at bus
t
can be obtained:
where
P_{WFs}
(
i
) is the
i
th element of
P_{WFs}
. The zth (z>2) order standardized central moments of the bus
t
with WFs can be calculated as:
So far, probabilistic models of loads and WFs have been established. No matter the random injections are continuous or discrete, the traditional 2m+1 PEM can be just applied to uncorrelated ones. Thus, Part C introduces a modified 2m+1 PEM capable of dealing with correlated random injections at each bus.
 3.3 2m+1 PEM for correlated random variables
As mentioned above, independent input random variables are required in the 2m+1 PEM proposed in
[9
,
10]
. For this purpose, the orthogonal transformation
[10]
based on Cholesky decomposition method
[21]
is used. A detailed description of the orthogonal transformation is given in
[10]
, which can convert a set of correlated input variables into an uncorrelated one. Based on the principle of the 2m+1 PEM
[10]
, processing the correlations of the input random variables is to process the correlations of their standardized central moments. The 2m+1 PEM for correlated input random variable is as follows:
Step 1.
According to the correlation coefficient matrix of the input random variables
p
=[
p
_{1}
,
p
_{2}
,…,
p_{m}
]
^{T}
, obtain the variancecovariance matrix
C_{p}
. Then get the matrix
B
by the Cholesky decomposition method using
C_{p}
=
LL^{T}
and
B
=
L
^{1}
.
Step 2.
Transform the correlated input variables
p
into a new set of independent variables
q
=[
q
_{1}
,
q
_{2}
,…,
q_{m}
]
^{T}
whose first four central moments satisfy:
where
μ_{p}
and
μ_{q}
are the mean vectors of
p
and
q
;
σ_{p}
and
σ_{q}
are the standard deviation vectors of
p
and
q
;
I_{m}
is the
m
dimensional identity matrix;
λ_{ql,j}
(
j
=3,4) are the coefficients of skewness and kurtosis of
q_{l}
;
b_{li}
is the element at the
l
th row,
i
th column of
B
.
Step 3.
Calculate the new transformed pairs (
q_{l,k}
,
ω_{l,k}
) of independent
q
defining the new 2m+1 PEM using follows:
where
ξ_{l,k}
can be calculated by:
Step 4.
Construct the new 2m+1 points in the form (
μ
_{q1}
,⋯,
q_{l,k}
,⋯,
μ_{qm}
),
k
=1,2 and (
μ
_{q1}
,⋯,
μ_{ql}
,⋯,
μ_{qm}
). Let
q
_{2m+1,k}
,
k
=1, 2, 3, be a
m
×
m
matrix each row of which is one point of the 2m+1 points with
l
from 1 to
m
. Then transform the 2m+1 points to the original space using
p
_{2m+1,k}
=
B
^{−1}
q
_{2m+1,k}
.
Step 5.
Calculate the deterministic power flow for each row of
p
_{2m+1,k}
for 2m+1 times using:
The solution vectors
s_{i}
(
l
,
k
) is obtained.
Step 6.
Estimate the the
j
th raw moment using:
And the PDF and CDF of the output random variable
s_{i}
can be calculated through GramCharlier expansion
[7
,
16]
:
where
φ
(·) and Φ(·) are the PDF and CDF of standard normal distribution, respectively; c
_{i}
are constant coefficients of which detailed calculation can refer to
[7
,
16]
;
μ_{si}
and
σ_{si}
are the mean and standard deviation of
s_{i}
.
4. Solution Method
A PPF model capable of managing correlated random injections has been described in the previous section to simulate the uncertainties and correlations in a congestion management problem. This section will give a detailed introduction of the ABC algorithm coupling with the PPF model to solve the complex congestion model.
 4.1 Overview of the ABC algorithm
Initially, the ABC algorithm is proposed for optimizing numerical unconstrained problems, which is a swarmbased metaheuristic algorithm
[22]
. Then it is modified in
[23]
to handle constrained optimization problems.
In the ABC algorithm, every food source represents a possible solution of an optimization problem, and nectar amount of a food source represents the fitness of the corresponding food source. The process of artificial bees’ searching for the best food source is the optimization process. The colony of artificial bees includes three groups of bees: employed bees, onlookers and scout bees. The search of food source implemented by the artificial bees can be summarized as following:

1. Employed bees find the food source within the neighborhood of the previous food source in their memory and record the nectar amount of the new food source.

2. According to the information offered by the employed bees, onlookers judge the merits of the food source and select a food source probabilistically.

3. Employed bee at abandoned inferior food source becomes a scout bee and starts search a new food source randomly.
The main steps of the ABC algorithm are as follows:
Step 1.
Initialize the randomly distributed foodsource positions
X_{i}
=[
x
_{i,1}
,
x
_{i,2}
, …,
x_{i,d}
] (solutions population) according to the upper and lower limits of the decision variables, where
i
=1,2,…,
N
(
N
represents the number of employed bees, onlooker bees and food sources),
x_{i,j}
(
j
=1,2,…,
d
) represents the
j
th decision variable of the solution
X_{i}
and
d
is the number of decision variables.
Step 2.
Compute the nectar amount of the food source
X_{i}
using their fitness values:
where
f
is the objective function value at solution
X_{i}
.
Step 3.
Determine neighborhood positions for the employed bees according to the exiting foodsource positions using:
where
x_{i,j}
is the
j
th parameter of solution
X_{i}
that was selected to be modified;
U
is a random number between [1,1];
k
≠
i
and
k
∈ {1,2,…,
N
} ;
i
∈ {1,2,…,
N
} ;
j
∈ {1,2,…,
d
}. Then record the fitness values of the new neighborhood positions using (27).
Step 4.
If the fitness value of a new neighborhood position is larger than the old one, replace the old one with the new one; otherwise, keep the old one.
Step 5.
Calculate the selection probability
Prob_{i}
of the solution
X_{i}
for the outlook bees applying:
Step 6.
Select the onlooker bee depending on the probability value. For the selected onlooker bee
Xi
, a new neighborhood position is created using (28); else go to Step 8. Then record the fitness values of the new neighborhood positions using (27).
Step 7.
Follow the Step 4.
Step 8.
Find the abandoned food sources for scout bees. If a food source is still not updated by a predetermined number of trials known as ‘limit’ value
Lim_{max}
, then that food source is abandoned and the corresponding employed bee becomes a scout. Otherwise, no abandoned food sources exist and go to Step 10.
Step 9.
For an abandoned food source
X_{i}
, update it with a completely new food source
V_{i}
through:
where
u_{i}
is a random number between [0,1];
and
are the maximum and minimum parameter of
X_{i}
, respectively.
Step 10.
Storage the global best solution obtained so far.
Step 11.
If the current iteration number (
Iter
) is larger than the maximum iteration number of the search process (
Iter_{max}
), stop and output the results. Otherwise, go back to Step 3.
There are three control parameters need to be set: 1) foodsource size
N
, representing the number of employed bees or onlooker bees; 2) ‘limit’ value, which is the number of trials determining a foodsource position abandoned or not (at least 0.5 ×
N
×
d
suggested in
[11]
); 3)
Iter_{max}
, that is the maximum iteration number.
 4.2 Congestion management strategy
After alleviating congestion in transmission grids, the congestion may occur again due to the uncertainties and correlations of loads and wind power. Moreover, direct electricity purchase contracts affect the rescheduling of generators obviously. In case of congestion again, all the generators participating in congestion management must be rescheduling properly. This paper proposes a congestion management approach using PPF considering direct electricity purchase. If congestion cannot be removed just by rescheduling, a breach of contract is done between contracted parties based on its liquidated damage.
This paper uses the following methods to handle the constraints (710). Mathematically, equality constraint (7) is solved during the determined power flow calculation. Inequality constraint (8) can be handled as follows:
Reactive power constraints of generators are processed by the similar method. Besides, if reactive power generation of any PV bus gets violated, the PV bus is treated as PQ bus.
The chance constraints (9) and (10) are handled as follows:
 4.2.1 Calculate the penalty terms:
where
Pen
_
V
and
Pen
_
P
are the penalty terms of bus voltage limits and line power flow limits; Δ
V_{i}
and Δ
P_{i}
are computed by:
where
and
 4.2.2 Modify the original objective function f into:
where
w_{V}
and
w_{P}
are the penalty factors.
 4.3 ABC algorithm coupling with PPF model
ABC algorithm coupling with PPF model is proposed to solve the congestion management problem with correlated random injections. The flowchart of the proposed ABC algorithm is illustrated in
Fig. 1
. Further studies in
[22

28]
has proved that the ABC algorithm has a better performance in results and solutions compared with other popular populationbased and heuristic optimization algorithms.
Flowchart for the ABC algorithm coupling with PPF
5. System Studies
The proposed congestion management approach has been illustrated on the modified IEEE 30bus test system
[29

30]
and IEEE 57bus test system
[31]
in the pool model in 5.1 and 5.2. The performance of the ABC algorithm is compared with that of evolutionary algorithm (EA)
[32]
and particle swarm optimization (PSO)
[32]
in 5.1. Similar study of IEEE 30bus is conducted in nodal pricing model in 5.3. All the studies are implemented in MATLAB 2012a.
 5.1 Modified IEEE 30bus case study
The modified IEEE 30bus test system consists of 6 generators (
Table 1
), 41 branches, 20 load buses whose data are from
Table 2

3
of
[30]
, and 2 WFs located at bus 28 as shown in
Fig. 2
. The active power consumption of each load is considered to be normally distributed with means equal to the values provided in
Table 3
of
[30]
with the value at bus 5 zeroed out, and standard deviations of 10% with respect to such mean values. For simplicity, the power factor of each load is kept constant. Each WF contains five 3MW WTGs and the wind speed is assumed to follow the Weibull distribution with scale and shape parameters 9, 2.205, respectively. Both WFs are correlated with a correlation coefficient 0.9 and a power factor 0.9 lag. Besides, the involved parameters are set as follows:
w_{V}
=10
^{6}
,
w_{P}
=10
^{6}
,
Iter_{max}
=200 and
Lim_{max}
=100.
Modified IEEE 30bus test system
Generator data for modified 30bus system
Bidding function: f_{B}(P)= a P + b $/MWh
Probable congested line details of 30bus system with differentrL(Line limit 32MVA)
Probable congested line details of 30bus system with different r_{L} (Line limit 32MVA)
Comparison results of different algorithms
Comparison results of different algorithms
Firstly, the original outputs of the generators are calculated by minimizing the electricity purchase cost without constraints (9)(11). Here, the output of the WFs and the loads are assumed to be independent and the correlation coefficients among load buses are
r_{L}
.
Table 2
gives the details of the line congestion in condition of the original outputs with
r_{L}
=0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.8, 0.9, respectively. From
Table 2
, with
r_{L}
increased from 0 to 0.9, the standard deviation of the power flow through the congested line 68 grows from 3.7584MVA to 3.9340 MVA, which means a 4.67% increase, while the expected power flow has no significant increase. Also, if the confidence level of the chance constraints (9)(10) is 0.95, branch 68 is the only congested line.
Fig. 3
illustrates the evolution of the congestion probability of branch 68 with
r_{L}
=0.5. As the line limit increase from 32MW to 40MW, the congestion probability decrease from 0.7662 to 0.0854. In order to obtain a wide range of feasible region for congestion management, the line limit of branch 68 is raised to 40MW.
Table 4
gives the simulated results of the congestion management with
r_{L}
= 0.5 under different confidence levels. From the table, the cost of congestion management increases obviously with the confidence level raises, especially when
α_{i}
=
β_{i}
>0.95. What’s more, when
α_{i}
=
β_{i}
= 0.97,
Pen
_
P
>0 which means the line congestion can’t be eliminate just by reschedule the generators. To avoid the violations without load shedding, the line connected with or near the WFs must be expanded.
Line limit (line 89) effect on the congestion probability
Confidence level effect on results of congestion management (rL=0.5)
Confidence level effect on results of congestion management (r_{L}=0.5)
According to the previous study, the parameters of the system are set as follows: limit of line 68 is 40MW,
r_{L}
=0.5 and
α_{i}
=
β_{i}
= 0.95. Different combinations of market structures comprising pool model and mix of pool plus direct electricity purchase contracts taken for study are:

P: pool model without direct electricity purchase contracts independent;

P1: pool model with one direct electricity purchase contract between buses 2–8;

P2: pool model with two direct electricity purchase contracts between buses 2–8 and 27–7;

P3: pool model with two direct electricity purchase contracts between buses 2–8, 12;

P4: pool model with three direct electricity purchase contracts between buses 2–8, 12 and 277;

P5: pool model with four direct electricity purchase contract between buses 2–8, 12 and buses 27–7, 24.
Here, we assume that each direct electricity purchase contract is the total active load consumption of the load bus,
k
=8 and
w
=10.
Table 3
gives the comparison results of the performance of ABC algorithm, EA
[32]
and PSO
[32]
for market structure P using the same population and iteration. From the table, the ABC algorithm has a better performance in the optimization results and can be used to solve the congestion problem properly.
The detailed simulated results and rescheduling of generators are present in
Table 5
and
Fig. 4
. The table and the figure demonstrate that direct electricity purchase contracts decrease the feasible region of generation rescheduling. Comparing P1P2 and P3P4, the added contract between buses 277 have no effect on the existing contracts. However, some added contract may affect the rescheduling results significantly based on the comparison of PP1, P1P3 and P4P5. Especially, in model P5, G
_{27}
needs to cut the contract by 0.92MW to make the system relieve the probable congestions. This can guide the generators to sign rational direct electricity purchase contracts.
Active power rescheduled of generators for modified 30bus system
Simulated cases for modified 30bus system (total load 189.2MW)
Simulated cases for modified 30bus system (total load 189.2MW)
 5.2 Modified IEEE 57bus case study
The modified IEEE 57bus test system
[31]
consists of 7 generators, 80 branches and 42 load buses. WFs are located at bus 7 and 46 and each of them has 2 WFs with a correlation coefficient 0.9 and a power factor 0.9 lag. The two WF buses are correlated with a correlation coefficient 0.8 but they are both independent with other load buses. The characteristics of loads are set as the 30bus system. Besides, we set the limit of branch 89 215MVA,
r_{L}
=0.5,
α_{i}
=
β_{i}
=0.95,
w_{V}
=109,
w_{P}
=109,
Iter_{max}
=200,
Lim_{max}
=100,
k
=8 and
w
=103.
Table 6
gives the detailed data of generators for the modified 57bus system.
Generator data for modified 57bus system
Bidding function: f_{B}(P)= a P + b $/MWh
Different combinations of market structures comprising pool model and mix of pool plus direct electricity purchase contracts are as follows:

C: pool model without any direct electricity purchase contracts.

C1: pool model with a direct electricity purchase contract between buses 68.

C2: pool model with two direct electricity purchase contracts between buses 68 and 812 (320MW).

C3: pool model with two direct electricity purchase contracts between buses 68, 13.

C4: pool model with three direct electricity purchase contracts between buses 68, 13 and 812 (320MW).

C5: pool model with three direct electricity purchase contracts between buses 68, 13 and 812 (350MW).
Here, all direct electricity purchase contracts are the total active load consumption of the lo ad bus except those with a brackets mark.
Table 7
and
Fig. 5
depict the simulated results for modified IEEE 57bus system in different market structures. Original outputs of generators are optimization results aiming to minimize the electricity purchase cost without constraints. From
Table 7
, congestion cost increases as the number of direct electricity purchase contracts grows overall. Some direct electricity purchase contracts added to the system have no effects on the original system (comparing C1C2) but some may have (comparing C3C4). In C5, in order to remove the congestion the contract between buses 812 is decreased by 8.35MW. As a result, signing direct electricity purchase contracts rationally can help relief congestion somehow. Cumulative probability distribution (CPD) of branch 89 before and after rescheduling for market structure C is presented in
Fig. 6
. The value of the power flow range decrease obviously through the rescheduling.
Active power rescheduled of generators for modified 57bus system
CPD of power flow in line 89 (model C)
Simulated cases for congested line 89 in modified 57bus system (total load 1250.8MW)
Simulated cases for congested line 89 in modified 57bus system (total load 1250.8MW)
 5.3 Nodal pricing model case study of IEEE 30bus
All the relative parameters in this part are set as the same as those in 5.1. Similar to the previous case studies, different combinations of market structures comprising nodal pricing model and mix of nodal pricing plus direct electricity purchase contracts are assumed, namely N, N1, N2, N3, N4, N5, respectively.
Table 8
shows the simulated optimization results for modified IEEE 30bus system in nodal pricing model under different direct electricity purchase contracts. Based on the table, similar concolusions as those in 5.1 can be obtained. However, as the settlement of congestion cost in the nodal pricing model is quite different from that in the pool model, the results in
Table 8
are quite different from those in
Table 5
. This indicates that suitable scheduling approaches should be adopted in different market modes. Also,
Table 8
demonstrates that the proposed congestion management model capable of processing uncertainties and correlations can be adoptd in the nodal pricing model.
Simulated cases in nodal pricing for modified IEEE 30bus system (total load 189.2MW)
Simulated cases in nodal pricing for modified IEEE 30bus system (total load 189.2MW)
6. Conclusion
In this paper, a new congestion management approach based on probabilistic power flow has been presented to process uncertainties and correlations in congestion problem. The probabilistic power flow model has been formed based on the combined method of 2m+1 PEM and Cholesky decomposition. An optimal probabilistic power flow model minimizing the congestion cost considering market structures with pool, nodal pricing and direct electricity purchase contracts has been studied. The simulated results on the modified IEEE 30bus system and IEEE 57bus system reveal the following conclusions.

1) The correlations between buses with WFs or loads have significant effect on the congestion probability but little effect on the expected power flow.

2) Higher confidence level leads to more congestion cost. Dispatchers can select appropriate confidence level according to the demand of system operation.

3) The congestion management approach based on probabilistic power flow provides a way to balance both congestion cost and congestion probability.

4) Signing direct electricity purchase contracts rationally can help relief the congestion without burdening generation rescheduling.

5) The proposed congestion management model can be used in both pool and nodal pricing model.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by National High Technology Research and Development Program 863 of China (2012AA050204).
BIO
Xu Wang He received the B.S. degree in electrical engineering from Southeast University, Nanjing, China, in 2010. Currently, he is pursuing the Ph.D. degree in the School of Electronic Information and Electrical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
ChuanWen Jiang He received the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China, in 1996 and 2000, respectively, and completed his postdoctoral research in the School of Electronic Information and Electrical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China, in 2002. He is a Professor with the School of Electronic Information and Electrical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. He is currently researching reservoir dispatch, load forecast in power systems, and the electrical power market.
Stoft S.
2002
“Power system economics: designing market for electricity”
IEEE Press & WileyInterscience
New York, USA
Ashwani Kumar S. C. Srivastava
,
Singh S. N.
2004
“A zonal congestion management approach using real and reactive power rescheduling,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
19
(1)
554 
562
Dutta Sudipta
,
Singh S. P.
2008
“Optimal rescheduling of generators for congestion management based on particle swarm optimization,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
23
(4)
1560 
1569
DOI : 10.1109/TPWRS.2008.922647
Lo K. L.
,
Yuen Y. S.
,
Snider L. A.
2000
“Congestion management in deregulated electricity markets,”
Proc. Int. Conf. Electric Utility Deregulation and Restructuring and Power Technologies
London, U.K.
47 
52
Singh H.
,
Hao S.
,
Papalexoplulos A.
1998
“Transmission congestion management in competitive electricity markets,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
13
(2)
672 
680
DOI : 10.1109/59.667399
Jian F.
,
Lamont J. W.
2001
“A combined framework for service identification and congestion management,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
16
(1)
56 
61
DOI : 10.1109/59.910781
Zhang P.
,
Lee S. T.
2004
“Probabilistic load flow computation using the method of combined cumulants and GramCharlier expansion,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
19
(1)
676 
682
Gregor Verbiˇc
,
Claudio A. Cañizares
2006
“Probabilistic optimal power flow in electricity markets based on a twopoint estimate method,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
21
(4)
1883 
1893
DOI : 10.1109/TPWRS.2006.881146
Juan. M. Morales
,
Juan. PérezRuiz
2007
“Point estimate schemes to solve the probabilistic power flow,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
22
(4)
1594 
1601
DOI : 10.1109/TPWRS.2007.907515
Morales J.M.
,
Baringo L.
,
Conejo A.J.
,
Mı´nguez R.
2010
“Probabilistic power flow with correlated wind sources,”
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib.
4
(5)
641 
651
DOI : 10.1049/ietgtd.2009.0639
Karaboga D.
2005
“An idea based on honey bee swarm for numerical optimization,” Technical Report
Erciyes University, Engineering Faculty, Computer Engineering Department
Karaboga D
,
Basturk B
2008
“On the performance of artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm,”
Applied Soft Computing
8
(1)
687 
697
DOI : 10.1016/j.asoc.2007.05.007
Deb S.
,
Goswami A.K
“Congestion management by generator rescheduling using artificial bee colony optimization technique,”
2012 Annual IEEE India Conference, INDICON 201
909 
914
Kiliç U.
,
Ayan K
2013
“Optimizing power flow of ACDC power systems using artificial bee colony algorithm,”
International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems
53
(1)
592 
602
DOI : 10.1016/j.ijepes.2013.05.036
Jung H. S.
,
Hur D.
,
Park J. K.
2003
“Congestion cost allocation method in a pool model,”
Generation, Transmission and Distribution, IEE Proceedings
150
604 
610
DOI : 10.1049/ipgtd:20030695
Kumar M.S.
,
Gupta C.P.
2012
“Congestion management in a pool model with bilateral contract by generation rescheduling based on PSO,”
Advances in Power Conversion and Energy Technologies (APCET), 2012 International Conference on
1 
6
Kaigui Xie
,
Roy Billinton
2009
“Considering wind speed correlation of WECS in reliability evaluation using the timeshifting technique,”
Electr. Power Syst. Res.
79
(4)
687 
693
DOI : 10.1016/j.epsr.2008.10.013
Yuan Y.
,
Zhou J.
,
Ju P.
,
Feuchtwang J.
2011
“Probabilistic load flow computation of a power system containing wind farms using the method of combined cumulants and GramCharlier expansion,”
IET Renewable Power Generation
5
(6)
448 
454
DOI : 10.1049/ietrpg.2010.0218
Yan Chen
,
Jinyu Wen
,
Shijie Cheng
2013
“Probabilistic load flow method based on Nataf transformation and Latin Hypercube Sampling,”
IEEE Trans. Sustainable Energy
4
(2)
294 
301
DOI : 10.1109/TSTE.2012.2222680
Peiling Liu
,
Armen Der Kiureghian
1986
“Multivariate distribution models with prescribed marginal and covariances,”
Probab. Eng. Mech.
1
(2)
105 
112
DOI : 10.1016/02668920(86)900330
Yu H.
,
Chung C.Y.
,
Wong K.P.
,
Lee H.W.
,
Zhang J.H.
2009
“Probabilistic load flow evaluation with hybrid Latin hypercube sampling and Cholesky decomposition,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
24
(2)
661 
667
DOI : 10.1109/TPWRS.2009.2016589
Chandrasekaran K.
,
Simon S.P.
2012
“Multiobjective unit commitment problem with reliability function using fuzzified binary real coded artificial bee colony algorithm,”
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib.
6
(10)
1060 
1073
DOI : 10.1049/ietgtd.2012.0193
Basturk B.
,
Karaboga D.
“An artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm for numeric function optimization,”
Proc. IEEE Swarm Intell. Symp.
Indianapolis, IN
May 1214, 2006
Karaboga D.
,
Basturk B.
2007
“A powerful and efficient algorithm for numerical function optimization: Artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm,”
J. Global Optimiz.
39
459 
471
DOI : 10.1007/s108980079149x
Rao R.S.
,
Narasimham S.V.L.
,
Ramalingaraju M.
2008
“Optimization of distribution network configuration for loss reduction using artificial bee colony algorithm,”
Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst. Eng.
1
(2)
116 
122
Karaboga D.
,
Akay B. B.
,
Ozturk C.
2007
“Artificial bee colony (ABC) optimization algorithm for training feedforward neural networks,”
Lect. Notes Comput. Sci.: Modeling Decisions for Artif. Intell.
4617
318 
319
AbuMouti F.S.
,
ElHawary M.E.
2011
“Optimal Distributed Generation Allocation and Sizing in Distribution Systems via Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm,”
IEEE Trans. Power Delivery
26
(4)
2090 
2101
DOI : 10.1109/TPWRD.2011.2158246
Quanke Pan
,
Ling Wang
,
Kun Mao
2013
“An Effective Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm for a RealWorld Hybrid Flowshop Problem in Steelmaking Process,”
IEEE Trans. Automation Science and Engineering
10
(2)
307 
322
DOI : 10.1109/TASE.2012.2204874
Ferrero R. W.
,
Shahidehpour S. M.
,
Ramesh V. C.
1997
“Transaction analysis in deregulated power systems using game theory”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
12
(3)
1340 
1347
DOI : 10.1109/59.630479
Alsac O.
,
Stott B.
1974
“Optimal load flow with steady state security”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
93
(3)
745 
751
Freris L. L.
,
Sasson A. M.
1968
“Investigation of the load flow problem,”
Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng.
115
(10)
1459 
1466
DOI : 10.1049/piee.1968.0260
Goldberg D.E.
1989
Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning
AddisonWesley Pub. Co.