1

On the Properties of the Compound Nodal
Admittance Matrix of Polyphase Power Systems

arXiv:1712.08764v1 [] 23 Dec 2017

Andreas Martin Kettner, Member, IEEE, and Mario Paolone, Senior Member, IEEE

Abstract—Most techniques for power system analysis model
the grid by exact electrical circuits. For instance, in power flow
study, state estimation, and voltage stability assessment, the use
of admittance parameters (i.e., the nodal admittance matrix)
and hybrid parameters is common. Moreover, network reduction
techniques (e.g., Kron reduction) are often applied to decrease the
size of large grid models (i.e., with hundreds or thousands of state
variables), thereby alleviating the computational burden. However, researchers normally disregard the fact that the applicability
of these methods is not generally guaranteed. In reality, the nodal
admittance must satisfy certain properties in order for hybrid
parameters to exist and Kron reduction to be feasible. Recently,
this problem was solved for the particular cases of monophase and
balanced triphase grids. This paper investigates the general case
of unbalanced polyphase grids. Firstly, conditions determining
the rank of the so-called compound nodal admittance matrix
and its diagonal subblocks are deduced from the characteristics
of the electrical components and the network graph. Secondly, the
implications of these findings concerning the feasibility of Kron
reduction and the existence of hybrid parameters are discussed. In
this regard, this paper provides a rigorous theoretical foundation
for various applications in power system analysis.
Index Terms—Admittance parameters, hybrid parameters,
Kron reduction, multiport network, nodal admittance matrix,
polyphase power systems, unbalanced power grids

I. I NTRODUCTION

I

NHERENTLY, techniques for power system analysis need
an exact analytical description of the grid. This description
is normally deduced from an equivalent electrical circuit. For
instance, in Power Flow Study (PFS, [1]–[3]), State Estimation
(SE, [4]–[6]), and Voltage Stability Assessment (VSA, [7]–[9]),
the use of admittance parameters (i.e., the nodal admittance
matrix) or hybrid parameters (i.e., hybrid parameters matrices)
is a common practice. Since the solution methods employed for
these applications are computationally heavy (e.g., [10]–[14]),
network reduction techniques like Kron reduction (see [15]) are
often applied in order to reduce the problem size. Thereby, the
computational burden is decreased, and the execution speed is
increased without the use of high-performance computers (e.g.,
[16]). However, neither the reducibility of the nodal admittance
matrix nor the existence of hybrid parameters are guaranteed
a priori. In order for this to be the case, the nodal admittance
matrix has to satisfy certain properties (i.e., the corresponding
diagonal subblocks have to be invertible).
Interestingly, most researchers and practitioners apparently
ignore this fact. There exist a handful of publications which
investigate the feasibility of Kron reduction (e.g., [17]) and
the existence of hybrid parameters matrices (e.g., [18]–[20]),
but their validity is limited. The former base their reasoning
upon trivial cases (i.e., purely resistive or inductive monophase
grids), and the latter establish feeble guarantees (i.e., hybrid
This work was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation through
the National Research Programme NRP 70 “Energy Turnaround”.
The authors are with the Faculté Sciences et Techniques de l’Ingénieur
(STI) of the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) in Lausanne,
Vaud, Switzerland (e-mail: andreas.kettner@epfl.ch, mario.paolone@epfl.ch).

parameters may only exist for one partition of the nodes). Recently, the authors proved that the feasibility of Kron reduction
and the existence of hybrid parameters matrices (for arbitrary
partitions of the nodes) are ensured for electrical circuits which
are connected and have lossy branch impedances (see [21]). As
the development is based on two-port equivalents, the findings
hold for monophase grids or balanced triphase grids, which can
be equivalently transformed into positive-sequence networks
using the method of symmetrical components (see [22]).
This paper investigates the general case of unbalanced polyphase power systems (i.e., grids which cannot be decomposed
via the method of symmetrical components). As the method of
symmetrical components is not applicable, the polyphase grid
cannot be equivalently represented by decoupled monophase
grids. Hence, the electromagnetic coupling between the phases
has to be explicitly accounted for. For this purpose, the concept
of compound electrical parameters (see [23]) is adopted. The
authors of this paper argue that physical electrical components
are represented by equivalent circuits whose compound electrical parameters are symmetric, invertible, and passive. Using
mathematical derivation and physical reasoning, it is proven
that any diagonal subblock of the compound nodal admittance
matrix has full rank if the network graph is connected. Based
on this, it is demonstrated that the feasibility of Kron reduction
and the existence of hybrid parameters are guaranteed under
practical conditions. In that sense, this paper provides – for the
first time in the literature – a rigorous theoretical foundation
for the analysis of polyphase power systems, in particular for
PFS, SE, and VSA (cf. [24]–[26]).
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: First,
the basic theoretical foundations are laid in Sec. II. Thereupon,
the properties of the compound nodal admittance matrix are
developed in Sec. III. Afterwards, the implications with respect
to Kron reduction and hybrid parameters matrices are deduced
in Sec. IV. Finally, the conclusions are drawn in Sec. V.
II. F OUNDATIONS
A. Numbers
Scalars are denoted by ordinary letters. The real and imaginary part of a complex scalar z ∈ C are denoted by ℜ{z} and
ℑ{z}, respectively. Thus, z can be expressed in rectangular
coordinates as z = ℜ{z} + jℑ{z}. The complex conjugate of
z is denoted by z ∗ . The absolute value and the argument of
z are denoted by |z| and arg (z), respectively. Thus, z can be
expressed in polar coordinates as z = |z| ∠ arg (z).
B. Set Theory
Sets are denoted by calligraphic letters. The cardinality of
a set A is denoted by |A|. The (set-theoretic) difference A \ B
of two sets A and B is defined as
A \ B := {x | x ∈ A, x ∈
/ B}

(1)

The Cartesian product A × B of A and B is defined as
A × B := {(a, b) | a ∈ A, b ∈ B}

(2)

2

(5)

Let MI′ ×J′ (I′ ⊆ I, J′ ⊆ J) be the submatrix consisting of
the blocks Mij (i ∈ I′ , j ∈ J′ ). Now, consider the particular
case I′ := I \ {|I|} and J′ := J \ {|J|}, and define




MI′ ×J′
MI′ ×{|J|}
A B
:=
M=
(12)
C D
M{|I|}×J′ M|I||J|

(6)

If D is invertible, the Schur complement M/D of D in M is

A partition of a set A is a family of sets {Ak | k ∈ K}, where
K := {1, · · · , |K|} is an integer interval, for which
Ak ⊆ A ∀k ∈ K

(3)

Ak 6= ∅ ∀k ∈ K

(4)

Ak ∩ Al = ∅ ∀k, l ∈ K, k 6= l
[
Ak = A
k∈K

M/D := A − BD−1 C

That is, the parts Ak are non-empty and disjoint subsets of A,
whose union is exhaustive. If all parts are proper subsets of A
Ak ( A (∀k ∈ K)

(7)

The following properties hold.
Lemma 6. det(M) = det(D) det(M/D) (see [30]).
Lemma 7. The Schur complement can be computed blockwise


Aij Bi
−1
(M/D)ij = Aij − Bi D Cj =
/ D (14)
Cj D

and {Ak | k ∈ K} 6= {A} (i.e., the partition is non-trivial).
C. Linear Algebra
Matrices and vectors are denoted by bold letters. Consider a
matrix M = (Mrc ) (r ∈ R, c ∈ C), where R := {1, · · · , |R|}
and C := {1, · · · , |C|} are the sets of row and column indices.
The field of matrices of size |R| × |C| over a field of numbers
F is denoted by M|R|×|C| (F). The transpose MT of M is
(M T )cr := Mrc (∀r ∈ R, ∀c ∈ C)

(13)

(8)

If M = MT , it is called symmetric. The rank of a matrix is
the dimensionality of the vector spaces spanned by its row or
column vectors. The following properties hold

where i ∈ I′ and j ∈ J′ .
Proof. Writing (13) in block form yields


A11 · · · A1|J′ |


..
..
..
M/D = 

.
.
.
′
′
′
A|I |1 · · · A|I ||J |


B1


 . 
−  ..  D−1 C1 · · · C|J′ |
B|I′ |

Lemma 1. rank(MT M) = rank(M) ∀M ∈ M|R|×|C| (C).

The claim follows straightforward.

Lemma 2. Let A ∈ M|R|×|R| (C) and B ∈ M|C|×|C| (C) be
non-singular. Then, for any matrix M ∈ M|R|×|C| (C), it holds
that rank(AM) = rank(M) = rank(MB).

D. Graph Theory

A non-singular complex matrix is called unitary if its inverse
equals its conjugate transpose, that is M−1 = (M∗ )T .
T

(15)

A directed graph G = (V, E) consists of a set of vertices
V ( G) := V and a set of directed edges E ( G) := E, where
E ( G) ⊆ {(v, w) ∈ V ( G) × V ( G) | v 6= w}

(16)

Lemma 3. A matrix M ∈ M|R|×|R| (C), for which M = M ,
can be factorized as M = UT DU, where U ∈ M|R|×|R| (C)
is unitary, and D ∈ M|R|×|R| (R) is non-negative diagonal
(Autonne-Takagi factorization, see [27]). If M is non-singular,
then D is positive diagonal.

The sets of outgoing and incoming edges of a vertex v ∈ V ( G)
are denoted by Eout ( G, v) and Ein ( G, v). Formally

A real symmetric matrix is called positive definite (M ≻ 0) or
negative definite (M ≺ 0), respectively, when

A set of internal edges Eint ( G, W) with respect to W ⊆ V ( G)
contains all directed edges that start and end in W. So

M ≻ 0 : xT Mx > 0 ∀x 6= 0
T

M ≺ 0 : x Mx < 0 ∀x 6= 0

Eint ( G, W) := {(u, v) ∈ E ( G) | u, v ∈ W ⊆ V ( G)} (19)

(10)

A cut-set Ecut ( G, W) with respect to W ( V ( G) contains all
directed edges that start in W and end in V ( G) \ W. That is
(
)
u ∈ W ( V ( G) ,
(20)
Ecut ( G, W) := (u, v) ∈ V ( G)
v ∈ V ( G) \ W

Lemma 4. Let M ∈ M|R|×|R| (C) and ℜ{M} ≻ 0. Then, M
is non-singular and ℜ{M−1 } ≻ 0 (see [28]).
Lemma 5. Let M ∈ M|R|×|R| (C) and ℑ{M} ≻ 0. Then, M
is non-singular and ℑ{M−1 } ≺ 0 (see [29]).

Let {Ri | i ∈ I} and Cj | j ∈ J be partitions of R and C,
where I := {1, · · · , |I|} and J := {1, · · · , |J|}. The block
formed by the intersection of the rows Ri (i ∈ I) with the
columns Cj (j ∈ J) is denoted by Mij . Accordingly


M11
· · · M1|J|
 

..
..
..
M = Mij = 
(11)

.
.
.
· · · M|I||J|

(17)
(18)

(9)

If the inequality includes 0, M is called positive semi-definite
(M  0) or negative semi-definite (M  0).

M|I|1

Eout ( G, v) := {e ∈ E ( G) | e = (v, w), w ∈ V ( G)}
Ein ( G, v) := {e ∈ E ( G) | e = (w, v), w ∈ V ( G)}

The connectivity of the graph G is given by its (edge-to-vertex)
incidence matrix A G , whose elements are given by (see [31])

 +1 if ei ∈ Eout ( G, v)
−1 if ei ∈ Ein ( G, v)
A G,iv :=
(21)

0 otherwise
A directed graph G is said to be weakly connected if there
exists a connecting path (which need not respect the directivity
of the edges) between any pair of vertices.
Lemma 8. If the directed graph G is weakly connected, then
rank(A G ) = | V ( G) | − 1 (see [32]).

3

m∈N

n∈N

polyphase nodes (i.e., physical and virtual). The vertices are
V := N ∪ G

P

ZΠ,(m,n)

P

The edges fall into two categories, namely polyphase branches
and polyphase shunts. The former connect a pair of polyphase
nodes, the latter a polyphase node and ground. Let LΠ ⊆ N×N
and LT ⊆ N × NT be the polyphase branches associated with
the Π-section and T-section equivalent circuits, respectively.
The set of all polyphase branches is L := LΠ ∪ LT . Similarly,
let TE := NE × G and TT := NT × G be the polyphase shunts
associated with NE and NT , respectively. Thus, the set of all
polyphase shunts is T := TE ∪ TT . The edges are obtained as

P

YΠ,m|(m,n)

YΠ,m|(m,n)

g∈G
(a) Π-section equivalent circuit.
x ∈ NT

m∈N
P

E := L ∪ T
n∈N

P

ZT,(m,x)

(22)

ZT,(x,n)

P

YT,x

g∈G
(b) T-section equivalent circuit.
Fig. 1. Multiport equivalents of electrical components.

E. Power System Analysis
Consider the case of an unbalanced polyphase power system,
which is equipped with a neutral conductor. With regard to the
wiring, the following is assumed:
Hypothesis 1. The reference point of every voltage or current
source is connected with the neutral conductor. Furthermore,
the neutral conductor is grounded using an effective earthing
system, which is capable of establishing a null voltage between
the neutral conductor and the physical ground (see [33], [34]).
Therefore, the phase-to-neutral voltages effectively correspond
to phase-to-ground voltages. Let G := {0} be the ground node,
and P := {1, . . . , |P|} the phases. An array of terminals which
belong together (one for every phase p ∈ P) form a polyphase
node. Define NE := {1, . . . , |NE |} as the set of the physically
existent polyphase nodes of the grid (i.e., where actual voltages
and currents could be measured). The grid consists of electrical
components that link the polyphase nodes with each other and
the ground. As to the grid, the following is presumed:
Hypothesis 2. The grid consists of electrical components that
are linear and passive. Further, electromagnetic coupling only
matters inside of electrical components, but not between them.
Hence, they are represented either by Π-section or T-section
equivalent circuits without mutual coupling as shown in Fig. 1
(see [23]).
Every T-section equivalent circuit comes with an additional
polyphase node (see Fig. 1b). These nodes are purely virtual.
That is, they are part of the model, but do not exist in reality.
Let NT encompass all virtual polyphase nodes originating from
the T-section equivalent circuits. The topology of the grid
model is described by the directed graph G = (V, E), which is
constructed as follows. Define N := NE ∪ NT as the set of all

(23)

The polyphase branches are related to the longitudinal electrical parameters of the multiport equivalents. More precisely,
every polyphase branch ℓi ∈ L is associated with a compound
branch impedance ZP
L,i , which is defined as follows
(
ZP
if ℓi ∈ LΠ
P
Π,ℓi
(24)
ZL,i :=
P
ZT,ℓi if ℓi ∈ LT
Similarly, the polyphase shunts relate to the transversal electrical parameters of the multiport equivalents. The aggregated
P
shunt admittance YΠ,n
at the polyphase node n ∈ N resulting
from the connected Π-section equivalent circuits is given by
X
X
P
P
P
:=
YΠ,n|(n,x)
YΠ,n|(x,n)
YΠ,n
+
(25)
(n,x)∈LΠ

(x,n)∈LΠ

P
The compound shunt admittance YT,n
at the polyphase node
n ∈ N is therefore given by
(
P
YΠ,n
if n ∈ NE
P
YT,n :=
(26)
P
YT,n if n ∈ NT

With respect to the compound electrical parameters of the grid
model, the following assumption is made:
Hypothesis 3. The compound branch impedances ZP
L,k given
in (24) are symmetric, invertible, and passive. That is
P T
ZP
L,i = (ZL,i )

∀ℓi ∈ L :

P
−1
∃YL,i
= (ZP
L,i )

ℜ{ZP
L,i }

(27)

0

In particular, this implies ZP
L,k 6= 0. Conversely, the compound
P
shunt admittances YT,n
given in (26) may be zero. If not, then
they are also symmetric, invertible, and passive. That is
P
P
YT,n
= (YT,n
)T
P
if YT,n
6= 0 :

P
−1
∃ZP
T,n = (YT,n )
P
ℜ{YT,n
}

(28)

0

In practice, the above-stated assumptions are valid for a broad
variety of power system components, like transmission lines,
transformers, and various FACTS devices. Further information
about this subject is given in App. A.
Let Vn,p and In,p be the phasors of the nodal voltage and the
nodal current in phase p ∈ P of the polyphase node n ∈ N.
By definition, the nodal voltage is referenced to the ground
node, and the nodal current flows from the ground node into
the corresponding terminal (see Fig. 2). Analogous quantities
are defined for a polyphase node as a whole
P
:= col (Vn,p ), p ∈ P
VN,n

IP
N,n

:= col (In,p ) , p ∈ P

(29)
(30)

4

P

P

P

IN,|N|

IN,1

n

IN,|N|

IN,1

P

P

ZL,j

P
bN
V
′

...

...

G

B
P

ZL,i
+

′

B

P

P

VN,|N|

VN,1

P
bG
V

G
In,p

P
YT,n

Vn,p

(a)

P
YT,n

P

(b) ∃n ∈ N s.t. YT,n 6= 0.

= 0 ∀n ∈ N.

Fig. 3. Proof of Theorem 1 (surfaces indicate weakly connected graphs).
−
P
In other words, YN
is non-singular if there is at least one nonzero shunt admittance in the circuit, and singular otherwise.

Fig. 2. Definition of the nodal quantities.

The proof is conducted separately for the two cases.
and for the grid as a whole
P
P
:= col (VN,n
), n ∈ N
VN

IP
N

:=

col (IP
N,n )

, n∈N

(31)

P
P
:= diag(YL,i
YL
) , ℓi ∈ L

(33)

YTP

(34)

:=

n∈N

P
P T P P
) YL AB
YN
= (AB

(32)

P
The primitive compound branch admittance matrix YL
and
P
the primitive compound shunt admittance matrix YT are built
in the following way

P
diag(YT,n
),

P
Proof (Case I: YT,n
= 0 ∀n ∈ N, see Fig. 3a.). From (34),
P
it follows that YT = 0. Therefore, (37) simplifies to

(39)

P
YL

According to (33),
is block diagonal. By Hypothesis 3, its
P
blocks YL,i
(ℓi ∈ L) are symmetric and invertible. Therefore,
P
YL
is also symmetric and invertible. According to Lemma 3,
there exists a factorization of the form
P
T P P
YL
= (UP
L ) DL UL

UP
L

(40)

DP
L

Let B := (N, L) be the subgraph of G comprising the
branches only. Define its polyphase incidence matrix AP
B as

where
is unitary and
is positive diagonal. Therefore,
P T P
there exists a matrix EP
such
that DP
L
L = (EL ) EL , which
P
is itself positive diagonal. Hence, YN can be written as

P
AB
: AP
B,ij := AB,ij I|P|

P
T
P
P
P P P
YN
= (MP
L ) ML , ML = EL UL AB

(35)

(41)

where I|P| is the identy matrix of size |P|×|P|. The compound
P
P
nodal admittance matrix YN
, which relates IP
N with VN as

P
Note that the term EP
L UL is non-singular. Therefore, it follows
from Lemmata 1 & 2 that

P P
IP
N = YN VN

P
P
rank(YL
) = rank(MP
L ) = rank(AB )

(36)

is given by (see [23], [32])
P
YN

P T

= (AB )

Recall the definition of AB (35). It is evident that
P P
YL
AB

+

YTP

(37)

P
By definition (31)–(32), VN
and IP
N are block vectors, whose
blocks correspond to the polyphase nodes of the grid. ThereP
P
P
fore, YN
can be written in a block form as YN
= (YN,mn
),
P
P
P
where the block YN,mn relates IN,m and VN,n (m, n ∈ N).
As known from circuit theory
P P
P P
P
Lemma 9.
YN,nx =
YN,yn = YT,n
(see [32]).
x∈N

(42)

P

y∈N

III. P ROPERTIES
The properties of the compound nodal admittance matrix are
developed in two steps. First, it is proven that the compound
shunt admittances determine the rank of the whole matrix in
Sec. III-A. Afterwards, it is shown that the compound branch
impedances determine the rank of its diagonal blocks in III-B).
A. Rank
Theorem 1. Suppose that Hypotheses 1–3 hold. If the branch
graph B = (N, L) is weakly connected, it follows that

P
(|N| − 1)|P| if YT,n
= 0 ∀n ∈ N
P
rank(YN
)=
(38)
|N||P|
otherwise

rank(AP
B ) = |P| · rank(AB )

(43)

Since B = (N, L) is weakly connected, rank(AB ) = |N| − 1
according to Lemma 8. This proves the claim.
P
Proof (Case II: ∃n ∈ N s.t. YT,n
6= 0, see Fig. 3b.). Introduce
′
a virtual ground node G , and build a modified grid by turning
the original ground node into another polyphase node. That is

N′ := N ∪ G

(44)

Accordingly, polyphase shunts with non-zero admittance become polyphase branches in the modified grid. That is
n
o
P
L′ = L ∪ (n, g) ∈ T | YT,n
6= 0
(45)

Hypothesis 3 implicates that the compound branch impedances
′
′
ZP
L ,i (ℓi ∈ L ) are symmetric and invertible. By construction
(
ZP
if ℓi ∈ L
P
L,i
(46)
ZL′ ,i =
P
(YT,n
)−1 if ℓi = (n, g) ∈ L′ \ L
The claimed properties follow from (27) and (28), respectively.
Let B′ := (N′ , L′ ) be the analogon of B for the modified grid.
Obviously, if B is weakly connected, B′ is weakly connected,
too. Clearly, the modified grid satisfies the conditions required

5

for the application of Theorem 1. Observe that the compound
shunt admittances from the polyphase nodes N′ to the virtual
ground node G′ are zero by construction. That is
YTP′ ,n = 0 ∀n ∈ N′

B

(47)

Ecut (B, Mk )

Therefore, the first part of (38), which has already been proven,
can be applied. Accordingly
P
′
′ ) = (|N | − 1)|P| = |N||P|
rank(YN

C

Ck
Ecut (B, N \ Mk )

(48)

Now, define yTP as
P
), n ∈ N
yTP := col(YT,n

(49)
(a) Branch graphs (surfaces indicate weakly connected graphs).

Given that the voltages of the modified grid are referenced to
the virtual ground node, Ohm’s law (36) reads as follows

 


P
P
P
P
−yT
YN
bN
V
IN

=


(50)
P P 

P T
P
P
Y
−(y
)
bG
T,n
T
IG
V

m ∈ Mk

ℓj ∈ L k

n ∈ Mk

eP
Z
L,j

ℓi ∈ X k

x ∈ N \ Mk

P

ZL,i

n∈N

P
′ is given in block form as
That is, YN


P
−yTP
YN


P
′ = 
YN
P P 
YT,n
−(yTP )T

P

YT,n

P
e T,n
Y

(51)

n∈N

It is known that elementary operations on the rows and column
of a matrix do not change the rank. Thus, one can add the first
P
′ to the last block row / column
|N| block rows / columns of YN
without affecting its rank. Using Lemma 9, one finds


P
YN
−yTP
X


rown (52)
P P  row|N|+1 +=

P T
−(yT )
YT,n
n∈N
n∈N


P
−yTP
YN
0
0
 P

YN 0
0
0



col|N|+1 +=

X

coln

(53)

n∈N

(54)

It follows straightforward that
P
P
′ ) = |N||P|
rank(YN
) = rank(YN

(55)

g∈G
(b) Grounding of branches in the fictional grid.
Fig. 4. Proof of Theorem 2.

(i.e., Eint ( B, M)) persist, whereas those interconnecting M
and N \ M (i.e., Ecut (B, M) and Ecut (B, N \ M)) become
polyphase shunts in the modified grid. The remaining branches
are described by the graph

C := (M, Eint (B, M))

(58)

In general, C is disconnected. However, since B is connected
as a whole, there exists a partition {Mk | k ∈ K} of M so that
the subgraphs Ck associated with Mk

Ck := (Mk , Eint (B, Mk )), k ∈ K

(59)

are weakly connected, and mutually disconnected (see Fig. 4a).
P
Therefore, YN,M×M
is block diagonal. Namely

which proves the claim.
B. Block Rank

P
P
YN,M×M
= diag(YN,M
), k ∈ K
k ×Mk

Theorem 2. Suppose that Hypotheses 1–3 hold. If the branch
graph B = (N, L) is weakly connected, and all the compound
branch impedances ZP
L,i (ℓi ∈ L) are strictly passive
ℜ{ZP
L,i } ≻ 0 ∀ℓi ∈ L

(56)

P
rank(YN,M×M
) = |M||P| ∀M ( N

(57)

then it follows that

That is, every proper diagonal subblock of the compound nodal
P
admittance matrix YN
has full rank.
P
Proof. As known from circuit theory, YN,M×M
relates IP
N,M
P
P
and VN,M supposing that VN,N\M = 0 (i.e., the polyphase
nodes N\M are short-circuited). This is due to the assumption
that the state of each electrical component is composed solely
P
of ground-referenced nodal voltages. In that sense, YN,M×M
can be regarded as the compound nodal admittance matrix of
a fictional grid obtained by grounding the polyphase nodes
N \ M. Therefore, the polyphase branches internal to M

(60)

P
In turn, YN,M
can be interpreted as the compound nodal
k ×Mk
admittance matrix of a fictional grid, which is constructed by
grounding the polyphase nodes N \ Mk .
eP
Now, it is shown that the compound branch impedances Z
L,i
P
e
and compound shunt admittances YT,n of this fictional grid
satisfy Hypothesis 3. To keep the notation concise, define

Lk := E ( Ck ) = Eint (B, Mk ) ⊂ L

(61)

The grounding process does not modify the compound branch
impedances. Thus, there is a simple one-to-one correspondence
P
eP
Z
L,i = ZL,i , ℓi ∈ Lk

(62)

Xk := Ecut ( B, Mk ) ∪ Ecut (B, N \ Mk )

(63)

eP
Therefore, (27) of Hypothesis 3 obviously applies to Z
L,i , too.
In constrast, the compound shunt admittances are changed, as
some of the polyphase branches become polyphase shunts. The
set Xk containing these polyphase branches is given by

6

From IP
N,Z = 0, it follows straightforward that

Since B is weakly connected, it holds that
Xk 6= ∅ ∀k ∈ K

This implies that, for every Mk , at least one polyphase branch
of the original grid becomes a polyphase shunt in the modified
grid (see Fig. 4b). It follows that
X
X
P
P
P
P
e T,n
Y
= YT,n
+
YL,i
+
YL,i
, n ∈ Mk (65)
ℓi ∈Xk
ℓi =(n,x)

ℓi ∈Xk
ℓi =(x,n)

If the sums are empty, (28) of Hypothesis 3 obviously applies.
Otherwise, it follows from Hypothesis 3, (56), and Lemma 4
P
e T,n
that Y
is symmetric and invertible, and has positive definite
real part. Hence, (28) of Hypothesis 3 applies in this case, too.
As Hypothesis 3 holds, Theorem 1 can be applied. Due to
the fact that Xk 6= ∅ ∀k ∈ K, it follows that ∃m ∈ Mk ∀k ∈ K
P
P
e T,m
for which Y
6= 0 even if YT,n
= 0 ∀n ∈ Mk . Therefore
P
rank(YN,M
) = |Mk ||P| ∀k ∈ K
k ×Mk

(66)

P
P
Since YN,M×M
is block diagonal with blocks YN,M
k ×Mk
X
P
P
rank(YN,M×M ) =
rank(YN,Mk ×Mk )
(67)
k∈K

= |P|

X

|Mk |

(68)

k∈K

= |P||M|

(69)

This proves the claim.
IV. I MPLICATIONS
Using the properties developed in the pevious section, the
findings of [21] can be extended to polyphase power systems.
First, is is proven that Kron reduction is feasible in Sec. IV-A.
Then, it is demonstrated that hybrid parameters matrices exist
for arbitrary partitions of the polyphase nodes in Sec. IV-B.
A. Kron Reduction
Corollary 1. Suppose that Theorem 2 applies. Let Z ( N be
a non-empty subset of N with zero current injection. That is
IP
N,Z

=0

(70)

Then, the voltages at the zero-injection buses Z linearly depend
on those at the other polyphase buses Z∁ := N \ Z. Therefore,
Ohm’s law (36) reduces to
P
P
bP P
bP
IP
N,Z∁ = YZ∁ VN,Z∁ , YZ∁ := YN /YN,Z×Z

(71)

P
bZ
The reduced compound nodal admittance matrix Y
satisfies
∁


P
bZ
rank Y
= |M||P| ∀M ( Z∁
(72)
∁ ,M×M
P
P
bZ
That is, Y
has the same properties as YZ
with
∁ ,M×M
∁ ,M×M
respect to the rank of its proper diagonal subblocks.

Concerning (70), observe that a zero-injection node has zero
current injection in every single of its phases.
Proof. Observe that Z and Z∁ form a partition of N. Therefore,
Ohm’s law (36) can be written in block form as
# "
"
#"
#
P
P
P
YN,Z
Y
IP
V
N,Z∁
N,Z
×Z
N,Z
×Z
∁
∁
∁
∁
=
P
P
P
IP
VN,Z
YN,Z×Z
YN,Z×Z
N,Z
∁
(73)
P
has full rank. Therefore
According to Theorem 2, YN,Z×Z
P
−1
∃ZP
N,Z×Z := (YN,Z×Z )

P
P
P
= −ZP
VN,Z
N,Z×Z YN,Z×Z∁ VN,Z∁

(64)

(74)

(75)

P
P
is a linear function of VN,Z
So, VN,Z
as claimed. Substitute
∁
this formula back into Ohm’s law, and obtain
P
P
P
P
IP
N,Z∁ = YN,Z∁ ×Z∁ VN,Z∁ + YN,Z∁ ×Z VN,Z
"
P
P
YN,Z
VN,Z
∁ ×Z∁
∁
=
P
P
P
P
−YN,Z
Z
N,Z×Z YN,Z×Z∁ VN,Z∁
∁ ×Z


P
P
P
VN,Z
= YN
/YN,Z×Z
∁

=

P
P
bZ
Y
VN,Z
∁
∁

(76)
(77)
(78)
(79)

This proves the first claim (71). According to Lemma 7, the
P
bZ
diagonal block of Y
associated with M ( Z∁ is given by
∁


P
P
P
bZ
Y
(80)
=
Y
/Y
,M×M
N
N,Z×Z
∁
M×M
"
#
P
P
YN,M×M
YN,M×Z
P
=
/ YN,Z×Z
(81)
P
P
YN,Z×M YN,Z×Z
P
P
= YN,(M∪Z)×(M∪Z)
/YN,Z×Z

(82)

From M ( Z∁ = N\Z and Z ( N, it follows that M∪Z ( N.
That is, both M ∪ Z and Z are proper subsets of N. According
P
to Theorem 2, the diagonal subblocks of YN
associated with
M ∪ Z and Z therefore have full rank. By consequence


P
6= 0
(83)
DM∪Z := det YN,(M∪Z)×(M∪Z)


P
DZ := det YN,Z×Z
6= 0
(84)

From Lemma 6, it follows that


P
bZ
= DM∪Z · DZ 6= 0
det Y
,M×M
∁

P
bZ
Therefore, Y
has full rank. Namely
∁ ,M×M


P
bZ
rank Y
= |M||P|
,M×M
∁

(85)

(86)

As M ( Z∁ is abitrary, this proves the second claim (72).

This reduction technique is widely known as Kron reduction.
P
Obviously, eliminating the redundant variables VN,Z
reduces
the size of the model. Thereby, computationally heavy tasks
such as PFS, SE, and VSA can be accelerated without having
to use high-performance computers (see [10]–[14] and [16]).
Interestingly, researchers and practicioners hardly ever verify
whether Kron reduction is truly feasible, although the method
is frequently applied. In fact, not even the inventor (i.e., [15])
considered this issue. Lately, some researchers (i.e., [17], [21])
investigated the problem, but neither of them covered the case
of generic polyphase grids. This gap in the literature is closed
by Corollary 1, which provides a guarantee for the feasibility
of Kron reduction in polyphase grids.
Finally, it is worthwhile to note that Corollary 1 has another
fundamental implication.
Observation 1. Kron reduction preserves the property which
enables its applicability in the first place (i.e., that every proper
diagonal subblock of a compound nodal admittance matrix has
full rank). Therefore, if Z is partitioned as {Zk | k ∈ K}, the
parts Zk can be reduced one after another, and the (partially or
fully) reduced compound nodal admittance matrices obtained
after every step of the reduction also exhibit the rank property.
Performing a reduction partially, or sequentially rather than
“en bloc”, can be beneficial in terms of computational burden,

7

as the Schur complement (13) involves a matrix inversion. This
operation is computationally expensive, and scales poorly with
problem size (even if the inverse is not computed explicitly).
B. Hybrid Parameters
Corollary 2. Suppose that Theorem 2 applies. Let M ( N be
non-empty, that is M and M∁ := N \ M form a partition of N.
Then, there exists a compound hybrid parameters matrix HP
N,
and the grid is described by the hybrid multiport equations
#
" P
#
" P
VN,M∁
IN,M∁
P
(87)
= HN
IP
VP
N,M
N,M
The blocks of HP
N are given as follows
HP
N,M×M
HP
N,M×M∁
HP
N,M∁ ×M
HP
N,M∁ ×M∁

P
= (YN,M×M
)−1

=
=
=

P
P
)−1 YN,M×M
−(YN,M×M
∁
P
−1
P
YN,M
(Y
)
N,M×M
∁ ×M
P
P
YN
/YN,M×M

(88)
(89)
(90)
(91)

Proof. Write Ohm’s law (36) for IP
N,M
P
P
P
P
IP
N,M = YN,M×M∁ VN,M∁ + YN,M×M VN,M

(92)

P
According to Theorem 2, YN,M×M
has full rank, and is hence
P
P
invertible. Define ZN,M×M := (YN,M×M
)−1 , and solve the
P
aforementioned equation for VN,M . This yields


P
P
P
P
(93)
= ZP
VN,M
N,M×M IN,M − YN,M×M∁ VN,M∁
P
P
P
= HP
N,M×M IN,M + HN,M×M∁ VN,M∁

(94)

as claimed in (88)–(89). Write Ohm’s law (36) for IP
N,M∁ , and
P
substitute the above formula for VN,M
. This yields
P
P
P
P
IP
N,M∁ = YN,M∁ ×M∁ VN,M∁ − YN,M∁ ×M VN,M

P
IP
ZP
YN,M
∁ ×M N,M×M N,M

P
P
=
 +YN,M∁ ×M∁ VN,M∁
P
P
P
−YN,M
ZP
YN,M×M
VN,M
∁ ×M N,M×M
∁
∁
P
P
P
= HP
N,M∁ ×M IN,M + HM∁ ×M∁ VN,M∁

(95)
(96)

(97)

as claimed in (90)–(91).
Various works have studied hybrid descriptions of multiport
circuits, but they only treat the single-phase case. Most of these
works exhibit further theoretical shortcomings or limitations.
Some authors plainly describe how the hybrid representation is
obtained given that it exists at all (e.g., [35]–[37]). Others do
provide criteria for the existence of the hybrid representation,
but only for some (i.e., perhaps one sole) partition of the nodes
(e.g., [18]–[20]). Moreover, the existing works apply to special
cases of polyphase grids at best, such as balanced triphase grids
(e.g., [21]). In contrast, Corollary 2 guarantees the existence of
hybrid parameters for arbitrary numbers of phases and arbitrary
partitions of the nodes.
Finally, it is worth noting that compound hybrid parameters
matrices also exist for Kron-reduced grids. Namely
Observation 2. The existence of compound hybrid parameters
matrices is based on the same rank property as the feasibility
of Kron reduction. Since Kron reduction preserves this property
(recall Observation 1), compound hybrid parameters matrices
can be obtained from unreduced, partially reduced, and fully
reduced compound nodal admittance matrices. In this regard,
P
P
bZ
YN
can be replaced by Y
in Corollary 2.
∁

V. C ONCLUSIONS
This paper examined the properties of the compound nodal
admittance matrix of polyphase power systems, and illustrated
their implications for power system analysis. Using the concept
of compound electrical parameters, and exploiting the physical
characteristics of electrical components, rank properties for the
compound nodal admittance matrix and its diagonal subblocks
were deduced. Notably, it was proven that the diagonal blocks
have full rank if the grid is connected and lossy. Based on these
findings, it was shown that the feasibility of Kron reduction and
the existence of hybrid parameters are guaranteed in practice.
Thus, this paper provided a rigorous theoretical foundation for
the analysis of generic polyphase power systems.
A PPENDIX A
P OWER S YSTEM C OMPONENTS
A. Transmission Lines
Consider a multiconductor transmission line with |P| phase
conductors plus one neutral conductor. Let v(z, t) and i(z, t)
describe the phase-to-neutral voltages and the phase conductor
currents, respectively. That is

v(z, t) = col vp (z, t) , p ∈ P
(98)

i(z, t) = col ip (z, t) , p ∈ P
(99)

where z is the position along the line. If (i) the electromagnetic
parameters of the line are state-independent, (ii) the conductors
are parallel, and the perpendicular distance between any two of
them is much shorter than the wavelength, (iii) the conductors
have finite conductance, (iv) the electromagnetic field outside
of the conductors produced by the charges and currents inside
of them is purely transversal, and (v) the sum of the conductor
currents is zero, then Maxwell’s equations simplify to the socalled telegrapher’s equations (see [38])


∂
′
′ ∂
i(z, t)
(100)
v(z, t) = − R + L
∂z
∂t


∂
∂
v(z, t)
(101)
i(z, t) = − G′ + C′
∂z
∂t
R′ and L′ are the resistance and inductance per unit length of
the conductors, G′ & C′ are the conductance and capacitance
per unit length of the dielectric. These matrices are symmetric.
Consider a segment of infinitesimal length ∆z at position z.
Let Ee (z, t) and Em (z, t) be the energy stored in the electric
and magnetic field, respectively. They are given by (see [38])
∆z
(v(z, t))T C′ v(z, t)
2
∆z
(i(z, t))T L′ i(z, t)
Em (z, t) =
2
Ee (z, t) =

(102)
(103)

As Ee (z, t) > 0 ∀v(z, t) 6= 0 and Em (z, t) > 0 ∀i(z, t) 6= 0,
it follows straightforward that C′ ≻ 0 and L′ ≻ 0. Similarly,
let Pd (z, t) and Pc (z, t) be the power dissipated in the conductors and the ambient dielectric. They are given by (see [38])
Pd (z, t) = ∆z · (v(z, t))T G′ v(z, t)
T

′

Pc (z, t) = ∆z · (i(z, t)) R i(z, t)

(104)
(105)

Since real systems are lossy, Pd (z, t) > 0 ∀v(z, t) 6= 0 and
Pc (z, t) > 0 ∀i(z, t) 6= 0. Therefore, G′ ≻ 0 and R′ ≻ 0. If a
transmission line is electrically short (i.e., its length |zm −zn | is

8

significantly shorter than the wavelength), it can be represented
by a Π-section equivalent circuit with

 ′
G + jωC′
P
(106)
YΠ,m|(m,n)
= |zm − zn |
2
P
P
YΠ,n|(m,n)
= YΠ,m|(m,n)

ZP
Π,(m,n)
′

′

′

m

n
P

ZΛ,(m,n)

(107)

′

′

= |zm − zn |(R + jωL )
′

compensator

(108)

P

B. Transformers
When analyzing power systems operating at rated frequency,
transformers are represented by a T-section equivalent circuits,
which correspond one-to-one to the composition of the devices
(see [39]). Consider a polyphase transformer connecting two
polyphase nodes m, n ∈ N. Let m be its primary side, and n
its secondary side. In this case, the parameters of the T-section
equivalent circuit are given as

P

YΛ,m|(m,n)

P
YΠ,m|(m,n)
,

As G , C , R , and L are real positive definite,
P
YΠ,n|(m,n)
, and ZP
Π,(m,n) are symmetric with positive definite
real part. So, according to Lemmata 4 & 5, they are invertible.
This is in accordance with Hypothesis 3.

P

ZΓ,(m,n)

YΛ,n|(m,n)

g
(a) Series compensation.
m

n
P

ZΛ,(m,n)

P

YΛ,m|(m,n)

compensator

P

YΓ,n

P

YΛ,n|(m,n)

ZP
T,(m,x) = Rw,1 + jωLℓ,1

(109)

ZP
T,(x,n)
P
YT,x

= Rw,2 + jωLℓ,2

(110)

g

= Gh + jωBm

(111)

(b) Shunt compensation (for simplicity, only one compensator is shown).

The resistance matrices Rw,1 and Rw,2 represent the winding
resistances, and the inductance matrices Lℓ,1 and Lℓ,2 the
leakage inductances of the coils on the primary and secondary
side, respectively. The former are positive diagonal, the latter
are positive definite. The conductance matrix Gh represents
to the hysteresis losses, and the susceptance matrix Bm to the
magnetization of the transformer’s core. The former is positive
diagonal, the latter is positive definite. Therefore, according to
P
P
Lemmata 4 & 5, ZP
T,(m,x) , ZT,(x,n) , and YT,x are invertible.
This applies irrespective of whether the polyphase transformer
is implemented using a single core with multiple legs or several
separate cores. In the latter case, Lℓ,1 , Lℓ,2 , and Bm simply
become diagonal, since the separate cores are magnetically
decoupled. In either case, the compound electrical parameters
satisfy the assumptions of Hypothesis 3.
C. FACTS Devices
There exist three families of FACTS devices, namely series
compensators, shunt compensators, and combined series-andshunt compensators (see [40]). Here, the first two cases are
P
P
discussed. Let ZP
Λ,(m,n) , YΛ,m|(m,n) , and YΛ,n|(m,n) be the
compound electrical parameters describing a transmission line
without compensation (see App. A-A). If a series compensator
is installed, the compound branch impedance of the respective
transmission line is altered. In the Π-section equivalent circuit,
this is reflected by adding the compound impedance ZΓ,(m,n)
of the compensator to the compound branch impedance of the
transmission line (see Fig. 5a). Namely
P
ZP
Π,(m,n) = ZΛ,(m,n) + ZΓ,(m,n)

(112)

Conversely, if shunt compensators are installed, the compound
shunt admittances are altered. This is accounted for by adding
the compound admittances YΓ,m and YΓ,n of the compensators to the compound shunt admittances of the transmission
line (see Fig. 5b). That is
P
P
YΠ,m|(m,n)
= YΛ,m|(m,n)
+ YΓ,m
P
YΠ,n|(m,n)

=

P
YΛ,n|(m,n)

+ YΓ,n

(113)
(114)

Fig. 5. Incorporation of FACTS devices into the transmission line model.

Typically, this kind of compensators are implemented as banks
of capacitors or reactors, which can be stepwise connected and
disconnected. Such devices are symmetrical with respect to the
phases, and lossy. By consequence
ZΓ,(m,n) = ZTΓ,(m,n) , ℜ{ZΓ,(m,n) } ≻ 0
YΓ,m/n =

T
YΓ,m/n
,

ℜ{YΓ,m/n } ≻ 0

(115)
(116)

Recall that the compound electrical parameters of transmission
lines comply with Hypothesis 3 (see App. A-A). Accordingly,
the results of (112) & (113)–(114) are symmetric, have positive
definite real part, and are thus invertible (see Lemma 4). Hence,
it can be concluded that transmission lines which are equipped
with series or shunt compensators satisfy Hypothesis 3.
R EFERENCES
[1] B. Stott, “Review of Load-Flow Calculation Methods,” Proc. IEEE,
vol. 62, no. 7, pp. 916–929, Jul. 1974.
[2] F. Milano, Power System Modelling and Scripting. Berlin, BER, DE:
Springer Science & Business Media, 2010.
[3] A. J. Monticelli, A. Garcia, and O. Saavedra, “Fast Decoupled Load
Flow: Hypothesis, Derivations, and Testing,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1425–1431, Nov. 1990.
[4] F. F. Wu, “Power System State Estimation: A Survey,” Int. J. Elect.
Power Energy Syst., vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 80–87, Apr. 1990.
[5] A. J. Monticelli, State Estimation in Electric Power Systems: A Generalized Approach. Berlin, BER, DE: Springer Science & Business Media,
1999.
[6] A. Abur and A. Gómez Expósito, Power System State Estimation: Theory
and Implementation. Boca Ranton, FL, USA: CRC Press, 2004.
[7] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, N. J. Balu and M. G.
Lauby, Eds. New York City, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill Education, 1994.
[8] E. W. Kimbark, Power System Stability. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John
Wiley & Sons, 1995.
[9] T. Van Cutsem and C. D. Vournas, Voltage Stability of Electric Power
Systems. Berlin, BER, DE: Springer Science & Business Media, 1998.
[10] V. Ajjarapu and C. Christy, “The Continuation Power Flow: A Tool for
Steady State Voltage Stability Analysis,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 7,
no. 1, pp. 416–423, Feb. 1992.
[11] J. N. Mendel, “Computational Requirements for a Discrete Kalman
Filter,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 748–758, Dec.
1971.

9

[12] A. M. Kettner and M. Paolone, “Sequential Discrete Kalman Filter for
Real-Time State Estimation in Power Distribution Systems: Theory and
Implementation,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 66, no. 9, pp. 2358–
2370, Sep. 2017.
[13] P.-A. Löf, G. Andersson, and D. J. Hill, “Voltage Stability Indices for
Stressed Power Systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 8, no. 1, pp.
326–335, Feb. 1993.
[14] G. Irisarri, X. Wang, J. Tong, and S. Mokhtari, “Maximum Loadability
of Power Systems using Interior Point Nonlinear Optimization Method,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 162–172, Feb. 1997.
[15] G. Kron, Tensors for Circuits, 2nd ed. Mineola, NY, USA: Dover
Publications, 1959.
[16] S. K. Khaitan and A. Gupta, Eds., High-Performance Computing in
Power and Energy Systems. Berlin, BER, DE: Springer Science &
Business Media, 2013.
[17] F. Dörfler and F. Bullo, “Kron Reduction of Graphs with Applications to
Electrical Networks,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I: Reg. Papers, vol. 60,
no. 1, pp. 150–163, Jan. 2013.
[18] H. C. So, “On the Hybrid Description of a Linear n-Port Resulting from
the Extraction of Arbitrarily Specified Elements,” IEEE Trans. Circuit
Theory, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 381–387, Sep. 1965.
[19] J. Zuidweg, “Every Passive Time-Invariant Linear n-Port has at least
one H Matrix,” IEEE Trans. Circuit Theory, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 131–
132, Mar. 1965.
[20] B. Anderson, R. Newcomb, and J. Zuidweg, “On the Existence of H
Matrices,” IEEE Trans. Circuit Theory, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 109–110, Mar.
1966.
[21] A. M. Kettner and M. Paolone, “On the Properties of the Power Systems
Nodal Admittance Matrix,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 33, no. 1, pp.
1130–1131, Jan. 2018.
[22] C. L. Fortescue, “Method of Symmetrical Co-Ordinates Applied to the
Solution of Polyphase Networks,” Trans. AIEE, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 1027–
1140, Jun. 1918.
[23] J. Arrillaga and C. P. Arnold, Computer Analysis of Power Systems.
Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, 1990.
[24] S. N. Tiwari and L. P. Singh, “Mathematical Modelling and Analysis of
Multiphase Systems,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., no. 6, pp. 1784–
1793, Jun. 1982.
[25] ——, “Six-Phase (Multiphase) Power Transmission Systems: A Generalized Investigation of the Load Flow Problem,” Elect. Power Syst. Res.,
vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 285–297, 1982.
[26] A. S. Meliopoulos and F. Zhang, “Multiphase Power Flow and State
Estimation for Power Distribution Systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 939–946, May 1996.
[27] R. A. Horn and C. R. Johnson, Matrix Analysis, 2nd ed. Cambridge,
CAM, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
[28] D. London, “A Note on Matrices with Positive Definite Real Part,” Proc.
AMS, vol. 82, pp. 322–324, Jul. 1981.
[29] K. Fan, “Generalized Cayley Transforms and Strictly Dissipative Matrices,” Lin. Alg. Applicat., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 155–172, 1972.
[30] F. Zhang, The Schur Complement and its Applications. Berlin, BER,
DE: Springer Science & Business Media, 2006.
[31] J. L. Gross, J. Yellen, and P. Zhang, Handbook of Graph Theory, 2nd ed.
Boca Ranton, FLA, USA: CRC Press, 2013.
[32] C. Desoer and E. Kuh, Basic Circuit Theory. New York City, NY, USA:
McGraw-Hill Education, 1969.
[33] J. C. Das and R. H. Osman, “Grounding of AC and DC Low-Voltage
and Medium-Voltage Drive Systems,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 34,
no. 1, pp. 205–216, Jan. 1998.
[34] T.-H. Chen and W.-C. Yang, “Analysis of Multi-Grounded Four-Wire
Distribution Systems Considering the Neutral Grounding,” IEEE Trans.
Power Del., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 710–717, Oct. 2001.
[35] I. N. Hajj, “Computation of Hybrid Equations of Linear Multiports,”
IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst., vol. 24, no. 11, pp. 655–656, Nov. 1977.
[36] S. Sun and L. Qian, “Formulation of Generalised State Equations and
Multiport Equations: A Novel Approach,” IEE Proc. G - Circuits Devices
Syst., vol. 137, no. 1, pp. 49–52, Feb. 1990.
[37] J. Augusto and C. Almeida, “Use of Modified Nodal Analysis to Write
Multiport Hybrid Matrix,” IET Electron. Lett., vol. 27, no. 19, pp. 1750–
1752, Sep. 1991.
[38] C. R. Paul, Analysis of Multiconductor Transmission Lines. Hoboken,
NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
[39] M. J. Heathcote, The Johnson & Phillips Transformer Book, 12th ed.
Oxford, OXF, UK: Newnes, 2011.
[40] S. Gerbex, R. Cherkaoui, and A. J. Germond, “Optimal Location of
Multi-Type FACTS Devices in a Power System by Means of Genetic
Algorithms,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 537–544, Aug.
2001.

