Automated Network Decomposition and Relaxed Boundary-Consensus Distributed Power Flow

Power flow analysis is fundamental to power system planning, but repeated full-network solutions become increasingly demanding as system size and scenario volumes grow with distributed energy resources. This paper develops and validates a partitioned power flow framework built around PSS®E, which is treated as a closed commercial solver without access to its Jacobian or internal solver state. The framework comprises three stages: network partitioning, automated case decomposition, and iterative boundary coordination. Spectral clustering based on real power flow, inverse reactance, and Z-bus electrical distance is compared with METIS multilevel graph partitioning using solver-independent graph metrics, quantifying the trade-off between regional balance and interface size. The resulting bus-to-zone allocation is automatically converted into independently solvable regional cases in which the far end of every inter-zone tie-line is represented by a virtual reference bus. A master–worker scheme then solves the regional cases in parallel and reconciles the voltage magnitude and phase angle of every duplicated interface bus through a relaxed boundary-consensus update, which is accelerated by Aitken extrapolation or Anderson acceleration. The framework is validated against the centralized PSS®E Newton–Raphson solution on the IEEE 30-bus, IEEE 300-bus and 6717-bus Texas synthetic systems. Both solutions are obtained under the same controls-locked conditions: transformer taps, phase shifters and switched shunts are held at their case settings and generator reactive-power limits are not applied. The comparison covers bus voltage magnitudes and angles, active and reactive power at both ends of every tie-line, total network losses, and the power-balance residual of the reassembled solution. Under these conditions, every configuration converged from a flat start with both accelerators; the largest voltage-magnitude and angle deviations from the centralized solution are 9.2×10−5 p.u. and 0.043°, and tie-line active power agrees to within 0.12% of the largest tie-line flow of each system (at most 0.49 MW). Coordinating discrete controls and reactive-power limits across regions is left to future work. The partitioned implementation does not provide a wall-clock speed-up on the workstation (14 logical processors). Instead, the results demonstrate the feasibility of a fully automated domain-decomposed power flow workflow around an unmodified commercial solver and quantify the accuracy and computational trade-offs of boundary-based regional coordination.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Energies
Published
2026-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/en19204838
Primary Topic
Optimal Power Flow Distribution
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Automated Network Decomposition and Relaxed Boundary-Consensus Distributed Power Flow

Saad Mekhilef, Gokul Sidarth Thirunavukkarasu, Anojan Selvarajan, Dimuthu Dilshan Hewavithana et al.
Energies
Optimal Power Flow Distribution
article

Automated Network Decomposition and Relaxed Boundary-Consensus Distributed Power Flow

Saad Mekhilef, Gokul Sidarth Thirunavukkarasu, Anojan Selvarajan, Dimuthu Dilshan Hewavithana, Manashaa Madhavan, Tharindu Madushan Ranaweera, Mehdi Seyedmahmoudian, Wijesinghe Arachchige Ramiru Githmin De Alwis, Dimitrios J. Stavropoulos
article en

Abstract

Power flow analysis is fundamental to power system planning, but repeated full-network solutions become increasingly demanding as system size and scenario volumes grow with distributed energy resources. This paper develops and validates a partitioned power flow framework built around PSS®E, which is treated as a closed commercial solver without access to its Jacobian or internal solver state. The framework comprises three stages: network partitioning, automated case decomposition, and iterative boundary coordination. Spectral clustering based on real power flow, inverse reactance, and Z-bus electrical distance is compared with METIS multilevel graph partitioning using solver-independent graph metrics, quantifying the trade-off between regional balance and interface size. The resulting bus-to-zone allocation is automatically converted into independently solvable regional cases in which the far end of every inter-zone tie-line is represented by a virtual reference bus. A master–worker scheme then solves the regional cases in parallel and reconciles the voltage magnitude and phase angle of every duplicated interface bus through a relaxed boundary-consensus update, which is accelerated by Aitken extrapolation or Anderson acceleration. The framework is validated against the centralized PSS®E Newton–Raphson solution on the IEEE 30-bus, IEEE 300-bus and 6717-bus Texas synthetic systems. Both solutions are obtained under the same controls-locked conditions: transformer taps, phase shifters and switched shunts are held at their case settings and generator reactive-power limits are not applied. The comparison covers bus voltage magnitudes and angles, active and reactive power at both ends of every tie-line, total network losses, and the power-balance residual of the reassembled solution. Under these conditions, every configuration converged from a flat start with both accelerators; the largest voltage-magnitude and angle deviations from the centralized solution are 9.2×10−5 p.u. and 0.043°, and tie-line active power agrees to within 0.12% of the largest tie-line flow of each system (at most 0.49 MW). Coordinating discrete controls and reactive-power limits across regions is left to future work. The partitioned implementation does not provide a wall-clock speed-up on the workstation (14 logical processors). Instead, the results demonstrate the feasibility of a fully automated domain-decomposed power flow workflow around an unmodified commercial solver and quantify the accuracy and computational trade-offs of boundary-based regional coordination.

EnergiesVol. 19(20)
Swinburne University of Technology (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Optimal Power Flow Distribution
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.