$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
Calculation of line failure probability under typhoon disaster
Overhead transmission lines and towers supported circuits are highly vulnerable to the spatially varying wind loads imposed by a translating typhoon20. When the wind speed of a typhoon is too high, it is very easy to cause transmission equipment to fail21,22. Empirical wind field formulations, such as the Jelesnianski wind field model, enable the reconstruction of time-varying wind speed fields over the storm's footprint. When these wind field outputs are coupled with the vulnerability models for individual line sections or towers, it becomes possible to translate spatiotemporal wind loads into cumulative fault probabilities23.
Typhoon wind field model
The simulation in Jelesnianski's model was divided into two steps: firstly, the axisymmetric wind field of the typhoon was derived based on a predefined analytical formulation, and the translational wind field associated with the typhoon's movement was superimposed to obtain the resultant wind field. This typhoon model utilized parameters such as the typhoon's highest wind speed and the radius of highest wind speed to estimate the tangential wind component of the cyclonic circulation, which was given in the following formula:
(1)
Where Vs is the tangential wind speed of the typhoon circulation at a distance r from the typhoon center; Vmax is the highest wind speed; R0 is the radius of the highest wind speed.
The moving wind field of the typhoon model was then calculated using the following equation:
(2)
Where Vd is the speed of the typhoon at a distance r from its center; Vc is the speed of movement of the typhoon center.
When 7th-level wind circle data were available, the radius of maximum wind was typically estimated as 1/10th of the radius of the Beaufort scale level-seven wind field. For typhoons lacking observational data on the radius of the level seven gale wind field, the highest wind radius was calculated by an empirical relationship equation21:
(3)
Where Rk is an empirical constant, usually between 30 and 60; P0 is the pressure at the center of the typhoon.
The wind field velocity formula for the typhoon model was obtained by superimposing the typhoon circulation tangential wind speed Vs and the moving speed Vd as follows:
When 0 ≤ r ≤ R0
(4)
(5)
When R0 ≤ r ≤ ∞
(6)
(7)
Where Vx is the velocity component of the typhoon on the x-axis at a distance r from the center of the typhoon; Vy is the velocity component of the typhoon on the y-axis at a distance r from the center of the typhoon; Vdx and Vdy are the two components of the speed of the center of the typhoon on the x-axis and y-axis; x0 and y0 are the two coordinate values of the typhoon center on the x-axis and y-axis; x and y are the two coordinate values on the x-axis and y-axis at a distance r from the center of the typhoon; θ is the typhoon inflow angle.
Figure 1 shows a schematic of the movement process of the typhoon after landfall. From the typhoon wind field model, it can be seen that the horizontal wind speed of the typhoon increases and then decreases from the center outward. Taking a position O on the transmission branch as an example, at the moment of t1, the maximum wind radius of the typhoon is rmax(t1), and the distance between the center of the typhoon and O is d(t1). This time, d(t1) is greater than rmax(t1), and as the typhoon moves, the distance between O and the typhoon center decreases, so the wind speed at O increases. At the moment of t2, d(t2) is less than rmax(t2) and d(t2) is decreasing, so the wind speed at O decreases. At moment t3, d(t3) continues to increase but is less than rmax(t3), so the wind speed at O will increase. Similarly, at t4, d(t4) continues to increase and is larger than rmax(t4), so the wind speed at O decreases as the typhoon center moves away. It can be seen that the wind speed at any location on the transmission branch changes with time, and even on the same transmission branch, the wind speed changes at different locations are not the same.
Transmission branch vulnerability model
The strong impact of typhoon disasters on the transmission network may cause transmission branch outages and potentially trigger regional or widespread power outages24. The probability of failure in different segments of the same transmission branch is not the same. Due to the large size and complex structure of the transmission grid, modeling the vulnerability of transmission branches can lead to huge computations if every transmission device in it is modeled and analyzed25. Therefore, this section only focuses on transmission line segments and towers to establish a transmission branch vulnerability model that reflects the mapping relationship between transmission branch failure probability and typhoon wind speed. Both temporal and spatial dimensions will be used to model the probabilistic vulnerability of transmission branch failures, reflecting the impact of typhoon disasters. It takes the wind speed information that changes in space and time within the typhoon wind field as the input quantity, and the cumulative failure risk of overhead components (including line segments and support structures under typhoon impact) is evaluated based on local wind speed fluctuations. Subsequently, the fault probability of each transmission path is determined through the application of a series-structure model under established reliability assessment frameworks.
When solving for the failure probability of a certain transmission equipment, it was possible to solve for its failure rate first, and then select an appropriate stochastic process model based on its failure characteristics to determine its failure probability during the period affected by the typhoon disaster. Failure rate was defined as the number of failures of transmission equipment per unit of time26, which reflected the average intensity of its failures during the typhoon impact time. For ease of calculation, it was assumed that the transmission line sections connected between every two transmission towers were subjected to the same wind speed, and the total duration Tw of the typhoon disaster was divided into T time intervals of length Δt, with the wind speed remaining constant during each time interval. The schematic diagram of the m transmission branch was shown in Figure 2, where the failure rate of the l transmission line section t at the time interval could be calculated using the following equation:
(8)
Where vm,l(t) is the typhoon wind speed sustained by the I transmission line section of the m transmission branch at the t time interval; vd,line is the design wind speed of this transmission line section, which was taken as 30 m/s in this paper; Δl is the length of this transmission line section in kilometers. Since the typhoon wind speed remained constant over the range of lengths of each transmission line section and over the range of time intervals selected for typhoon impacts, the failure rate of individual transmission line sections remained constant. Accordingly, the accumulated risk of failure for the segment l within the transmission path m during the typhoon exposure period Tw could be evaluated using the following expression:

(9)

Similarly, the failure rate of the k transmission tower of the m transmission branch at the t time interval of the typhoon impact time Tw could be calculated by the following equation:
(10)
Where vm,k(t) is the typhoon wind speed that the k transmission tower of the m transmission branch is subjected to in the t time interval; γ is a model parameter, the value range was 0-0.4, in this paper, γ was set to 0.2; vd,tower is the structural wind load threshold of the transmission tower, which can be determined according to the destructive test; this paper took 35 m/s.
Correspondingly, the cumulative failure probability of the k transmission tower of the m transmission branch during the typhoon impact time Tw was denoted as:
![figure-protocol-13 Probability equation, pm,k=1-exp[-∫(λm,k/(1-λm,k))dt], symbolizing transient analysis.](/files/ftp_upload/69423/69423eq11a.jpg)
(11)

Transmission branches were viewed as a series model consisting of multiple transmission line sections in series with multiple transmission towers. According to the method of calculating the probability of failure of the series model in the reliability assessment theory, assuming that the failures of each transmission line section and pole tower are independent of each other, the failure of any transmission line section or pole tower might lead to the interruption of the transmission of electric energy of the entire transmission branch circuit27. Therefore, the probability of failure of the m transmission branch was calculated using the following equation:
(12)
Where L is the number of transmission line segments included in the m transmission branch line; K is the number of transmission towers included in the m transmission branch.
Prevention and control measures based on fault chains
To mitigate the risk of cascading failures and large-scale blackouts triggered by faults on high-risk transmission lines during extreme disasters, the power system requires preventive control. Based on the previous section, each line with a high failure probability under extreme disasters was obtained. Each high-risk branch was sequentially used as the initial open branch for the fault chain search. Based on all fault chains, the prevention and control method was carried out, aiming at minimizing the impacts of cascading failures and providing decision support for grid dispatch operators28.
Proposed method
Figure 3 outlined the step-by-step framework of the proposed prevention and control method, which addressed fault chains under extreme weather scenarios.
Data loading and initial fault chain identification
First, load all basic input data, such as the power grid model, normal operating mode, and meteorological information under extreme disaster. The power grid model was in MATPOWER (.m) format, containing bus parameters, generator specifications, branch parameters, and network topology.The meteorological forecast data for the extreme disaster was in JSON format, providing the typhoon center coordinates,translation speed, radius of maximum wind, and central pressure.
Next, screen high-risk transmission lines by calculating the failure probability for all branches. This process involved two core computational models.The Jelesnianski typhoon wind field model was first executed to compute the time-varying wind speed. Subsequently, the transmission branch vulnerability model was applied to calculate the failure rate for each line segment and tower based on the local wind speed.
Finally, select one or more high-risk branches from the initial contingency set as the initial outage branches to initiate fault chain searching. Disconnect the selected branch, modify grid topology parameters, perform DC power flow calculation on the target power grid, identify overloaded branches as subsequent outage branches, and repeat this process. The fault chain search terminated when the system collapse occurred, the preset maximum search depth was reached, or no additional overloaded branches were found.
Fault chain evaluation and optimization model solving
This phase established the optimization framework, solved the model, and validated the final solution through the following procedure.
First, establish a piecewise linear function representing the influence of transmission line outages on branch power flows. Compute the risk value of each fault chain based on DC power flow calculations. Specifically, risk values were determined by multiplying the probability of each fault chain and the minimal load shedding value required to ensure branch power flow safety. Select fault chains with higher risk values and incorporate them into the candidate fault chain set.
Next, execute the two previous steps for each line in the initial contingency set until all branches have been processed. This systematic iteration ensured comprehensive coverage of all potential fault initiation points, resulting in a complete candidate fault chain set that represents the union of all identified high-risk fault paths.
Finally, solve the optimization model using commercial solvers such as GUROBI and evaluate whether new severe fault chains occur after optimization. This validation was performed by re-executing the fault chain search process with the optimized generation dispatch. If new fault chains emerge, incorporate them into the candidate fault chain set and repeat the optimization process. If no severe fault chains were generated, output the optimized generator power output and load shedding plan to reduce the risk of cascading failures.
Final output and archival
Output the optimized generator power output and load shedding plan. Systematically archive all relevant input data, configuration files, intermediate results, and the final output scheme for documentation and reproducibility.This comprehensive archival practice ensured full reproducibility, facilitated post-event analysis, and provided reference cases for future grid resilience enhancement projects.
Fault chain search
One or more branches with high fault probability were selected for fault chain search. Take the selected high-risk branches as the initial open branches of the fault chain, disconnect them, modify the network parameters, carry out DC power flow calculation for the target grid, take all the overloaded branches as the next stage open branches of the fault chain in turn, and repeat the process. The fault chain search terminated when the stopping condition was satisfied. Then, all the fault chains starting with this high-risk branch were obtained.
Disregarding the influence of the external environment, when the line power flow did not exceed its power flow limit, the probability of transmission line fault tripping was the hidden fault probability of relay protection, whose value was close to 0. In the process of the development and propagation of the fault chain, the grid dispatchers tended to take the corresponding blocking measures, so that the depth of search of the fault chain would not exceed the set maximum depth (usually 4). The grid islanding triggered by a fault chain usually leads to the occurrence of a major blackout. Therefore, in this paper, the stopping condition of the fault chain search was set as: 1) the grid islanding occurred; 2) the fault chain search reached the maximum search depth; and 3) a certain stage of the fault chain search did not lead to overloading of any branches. The fault chain search stopped when any of the conditions were satisfied.
Utilize a piecewise linear function to describe the relationship between the transmission line's fault probability and line power flow, given by:
(13)
Where pl is the probability of fault occurrence on l; pl is the real power flow on l; Pl,max is the transmission capacity limit of l; PH is the probability of hidden protection failure; b is the overload threshold multiplier, typically set to 1.4, which implies that if the power flow transmitted by a line exceeds 1.4 times its rated transmission capacity, protection devices will operate and trip the line, resulting in a fault probability of 1.
Calculation of the risk value for the fault chain
Suppose a certain fault chain involves faults on k transmission lines. Upon the removal of these k lines, the minimum level of load curtailment ensuring secure DC power transfer within the network was calculated. The objective function was then defined as follows:
(14)
Where nB represents the total count of buses in the power system; Di_cut is the amount of load shedding at the node i. The constraints to be satisfied include:
Node load shedding constraints
(15)
Where SN is the set of buses in the power system; Di is the original load at the node i.
Generator output constraints
(16)
Where SG is the set of generator nodes in the power system; PGi denotes the power output from the generator at node i; PGi_min and PGi_max represent the minimum and maximum technical generation limits at the node i, respectively.
Line power flow security constraints
(17)
Where SL is the set of transmission lines in the power system; Pij is the power flow on line ij; Pij_max is the transmission capacity limit for the line ij.
Node power balance constraints
(18)
DC power flow constraints
(19)
Where θi and θj denote the voltage angles at buses i and j, xij is the reactance of the line ij.
For a given fault chain L with v stages, the probability of its occurrence PL is:
(20)
Where pl0 is the probability of the initial failure event of the event chain; Pl1 ~ Plv are the probabilities of occurrence of each stage in the fault chain. The risk value RL for the fault chain L is defined as:
(21)
Where DL is the amount of load shedding caused after the occurrence of the fault chain L.
The fault chain search allowed multiple high-risk branches to be simultaneously selected as initial outages. Assuming independence among initial branch failures, the joint probability of the initial event was the product of the independent failure probabilities of each high-risk branch.
Prevention and control optimization model
Based on the obtained set of fault chains, construct a prevention and control optimization model. The objective function was formulated as:
(22)
Where nG represents the total number of generator nodes; ai and ΔPGi represent the cost coefficient and the power adjustment amount of the generator node i, respectively; ΔLj represents the amount of load shedding at the node j. nR refers to the number of fault chains; Rk denotes the risk value of the fault chain k; and b is the cost coefficient of load shedding.
The constraints are as follows:
Power balance constraint
(23)
Generator output adjustment constraints
(24)
Line power flow security constraints
(25)
Where PTDF is the power flow transfer distribution factor matrix of the grid; P is the power injection vector; ΔPG is the generation adjustment vector; and Fmax is the vector of line transmission capacity limits.
Considering the propagation stage t in a fault chain (1 ≤ t ≤ v), assume the preceding outage branch is km. The impact of the km branch outage on the flow redistribution in the remaining network was assessed using the DC power flow model. The grid operation satisfied the following conditions before the outage of the branch km
(26)
After the outage of the branch km

(27)
Neglecting the small second-order terms, it becomes:
(28)
Combining equations (26) and (28), the following is obtained:
(29)
Further simplification leads to:
(30)
Where Pkm denotes the active power flow on branch km; is a row vector in which the k-th entry is 1, the m-th entry is -1, and all remaining components are zero.
According to equation (30), at propagation stage t of the event chain L, when branch km was disconnected, the incremental active power flow in subsequent branches was represented as a linear function related to the active power flow of branch km. Further, based on equation (13), this increment was directly mapped to the fault probabilities of subsequent branches.
In the power flow optimization model established in this section, the objective function involved the product of fault probabilities of each stage of the event chain. Considering the probability of failure at each stage of the fault chain as variables, the model was difficult to solve if the order of multiplication of the variables is too large. Employing heuristic algorithms such as particle swarm optimization or genetic algorithms typically makes it difficult to obtain global optimal solutions. Therefore, this paper treated the multiplication product of the failure probabilities of different stages in the fault chain as a single new variable, thereby effectively reducing the multiplication order of variables in the objective function. Afterwards, commercial optimization solvers such as CPLEX and GUROBI were used to obtain solutions.