www.ietdl.

org
Published in IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution
Received on 22nd December 2013
Accepted on 15th July 2014
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603

ISSN 1751-8687

Analytical approach for optimal siting and sizing of

distributed generation in radial distribution networks
Sevya Naik Gopiya Naik, Dheeraj Kumar Khatod, Mahendra Pal Sharma
Alternate Hydro Energy Centre, IIT Roorkee, Roorkee 247667, Uttarkhand, India
E-mail: gopiya_s@yahoo.co.in

Abstract: This study presents an analytical approach for optimal siting and sizing of distributed generation (DG) in radial power
distribution networks to minimise real and reactive power losses. For this purpose, suitable analytical expressions have been
derived which are based on change in active and reactive components of branch currents cause by the DG placement. This
method rst determines the DG capacity causing maximum benet at different buses, and then selects the bus as the best
location for DG placement which corresponds to highest benet. The proposed method is applicable for sizing and siting of
single as well as multiple DG units. Moreover, the proposed method requires only the results of base case load ow to
determine the optimal size of DG unit(s). The proposed method is tested on 33-bus and 69-bus radial distribution test
systems. The results obtained by this proposed method validate the suitability and importance of proposed analytical method
to determine the size and site of DG unit(s).

Introduction

Electrical power systems are observing rapid changes from

large centralised generation plants connected to the bulk
transmission network into decentralised systems with small
generating systems connected directly to the distribution
networks near demand centre. The later type of generation
system is known as distributed generation (DG) [1, 2]. DG
can be powered by renewable energy sources (e.g. solar,
wind, small hydro, biomass, geothermal etc.) or
non-renewable energy sources (e.g. gas turbine,
microturbine, fuel cell, reciprocating engine etc.). The
benets of DG include reduction of power losses,
improvement in the voltage prole, deferred network
expansion cost, network reliability improvement and so on
[36]. Appropriate size and location of DG offers technical,
economical and environmental benets to distribution
networks. For optimal allocation of DG in distribution
networks, different objectives such as power loss
minimisation [728], improvement of voltage prole [7, 11,
21, 23, 2528], network investment cost minimisation [5,
29, 30], reduction of environmental impact [7] and so on
were touched by the researchers using single or multi
objective problem formulation. Different optimisation
techniques such as index-based approach [7, 25], heuristic
method [29], mixed integer non-linear programming [12],
analytical approaches [10, 1316, 2123, 28, 31], genetic
algorithm (GA) [17, 22, 30], articial bee colony [18],
particle swarm optimisation (PSO) [19], evolutionary
programming [20], hybrid GA and Tabu search (GATS)
[24], hybrid GA and PSO [26] and Pareto Frontier
differential evolution algorithm [27] have been applied to
solve the above DG allocation issues. Different DG
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 209220
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603

technologies used in distribution system planning with their

merits and demerits, the various aspects of DG planning for
power loss minimisation, and different techniques employed
in achieving the goal along with their feasibility has been
reported in [32].
A methodology for optimal allocation of DG in distribution
networks based on analytical approach (sensitivity analysis
based on equivalent current injection) for loss reduction has
been suggested by Gozel and Hocaoglu [10]. Wang and
Nehir [13] proposed an analytical method based on phasor
current injection method to optimally place DG assuming
uniformly, increasingly and centrally distributed load
pattern with in radial distribution network to minimise
power loss. These assumptions may cause erroneous results.
In [1416], analytical approach based on exact loss formula
for optimally allocating DGs was presented. This is
followed by the work of Khan and Choudhary [21] who
presented an analytic-based algorithm to site and size DG
in distribution network for reducing the power loss and
improving the voltage prole. An approach based on exact
loss formula and GA for power loss minimisation of
distribution feeder was proposed by Shukla et al. [22]. The
loss sensitivity method is used to identify the strategic
candidate locations for DG. A technique based on loss
sensitivity method for sizing and siting of DG optimally to
minimise the power losses in the distribution system was
proposed by Kashem et al. [28].
Most of the above methodologies considered the DG type,
which is capable of supplying real power only to the network.
However, there are other types of DG which can supply real
and/or reactive power into the network and improve the
performance to still better extent. Further, the majority of
the general analytical approaches for DG siting and sizing
209

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

www.ietdl.org
are based on exact loss formula and require the determination
of the bus impedance matrix (Zbus) or Jacobian matrix which
are computationally demanding. Therefore, because of the
size, the complexity and the specic characteristics of the
distribution network, the above methods are not suitable.
Therefore, the optimal allocation of DG of any type using
suitable solution technique needs further attention.
In this paper, a methodology based on analytical approach
is presented for optimal sizing and siting of DG in distribution
system so as to minimise real as well as reactive power losses.
This paper is the extension of that proposed in [23]. The
developed analytical method is based on change in active
and reactive components of branch currents cause by the
DG placement. The proposed method has been tested on
33-bus and 69-bus test radial distribution systems and the
results are found to support the suitability and benets of
proper DG allocation in power distribution system for
network performance improvement. This paper is organised
as follows: Section 2 discusses the problem formulation of
proposed method, Section 3 presents the solution algorithm
and Section 4 presents the results and discussion of the
proposed work. Finally, in Section 5, conclusions are
summarised.

Problem formulation

remaining branches are unaffected by the DG placed at bus

k. The injected current by DG placed at bus k can be
written as



I DG = IaDG + jIrDG = IaDG 1 + j tan f

where IaDG and IrDG are the real and reactive components,
respectively, of IDG and f is the phase angle of IDG.
Now, the modied current in branch i because of DG
placed at bus k can be given as






= I i Di I DG = Iai Di IaDG + j Iri Di IaDG tan f
I new
i
(2)
where Ii is the phasor current in branch I before DG
placement and I new
is the modied phasor current in branch
i
i after DG placement. The value of Di is given by the
following relation

Di =

Consider a typical N-bus radial distribution system as

shown in Fig. 1. In this gure, Ik is the phasor current in
branch k while ILk is the load phasor current of load
connected at node k.
When a DG is placed at a bus (say bus k) as shown in
Fig. 2, it injects current IDG into the network and there by
alters the currents in all the branches connected between
sub-station (bus 1) to bus k. However, the currents in the

1,
0,

if branch i is between bus 1 and bus k

otherwise.

Extending the above concept for placement of m DGs

simultaneously in an N-bus radial distribution network, the
modied current through branch I can be given as

In this section, the mathematical formulation of the proposed

analytical approach is presented. The proposed analytical
approach aims to determine the optimal size and location of
DG in a given radial distribution network so as to minimise
both real power loss and voltage drop. The proposed
approach begins with the following assumptions:
1. The radial distribution network under consideration is
balanced.
2. The power factor of DG is known.

I new
i

= Ii


m



Dik I kDG


k
Dik IaDG

k
Dik IaDG

tan f

(3)

k=1

is the modied phasor current in branch i; I kDG is

where I new
i
k
the phasor current injected current by kth DG; IaDG
and fk
are the active component and phase angle, respectively, of
I kDG and the value of Dik is given by the following relation

1,

Dik =
2.1

0,

if branch i is between bus 1 and bus at which

kth DG is placed
otherwise

Real power loss saving

The total active power loss [33], that is, PL in a typical N-bus
radial distribution system as shown in Fig. 1, can be given as
N
1


Ii2 Ri =

N
1




Iai2 + Iri2 Ri

(4)

i=1

where Ii is the current through branch i with Iai and Iri being
its real and imaginary components, respectively, and Ri is the
resistance of the branch.
Now, using (3), the total real power loss after placement of
m DGs is given by
PLnew =

N
1



2
Iinew Ri

i=1

210
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

m

k=1

m


i=1

Fig. 2 Typical N-bus radial distribution system with DG placed at

bus k

= Iai

k=1

+ j Iri

PL =

Fig. 1 Typical N-bus radial distribution system

(1)


N
1 

i=1

Iai

m

k=1

k
Dik IaDG

2 
2 
m

k
k
+ Iri Dik IaDG tan f
Ri
k=1

(5)
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 209220
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603

www.ietdl.org
Using (4) and (5), the normalised loss saving PS associated
with multiple DG placement can be given as (see (6)).
2.2

saving, respectively and should meet the following condition

w1 + w2 = 1

Reactive power loss saving

The total reactive power loss, that is, QL in a typical N-bus

radial distribution system as shown in Fig. 1, can be given as
QL =

N
1


Ii2 Xi =

N
1



i=1


Iai2 + Iri2 Xi

The DG currents for the maximum benet can be achieved by

solving the following equation

f
PS
QS

=
w
+
w
=
0

1
2
1
1
1

IaDG
IaDG
IaDG

f
PS
QS

= w1 2 + w2 2 = 0
2
IaDG
IaDG
IaDG

..
..
..

.
.
.

f
PS
QS

= w1 m + w2 m = 0

m
IaDG
IaDG
IaDG

(7)

i=1

Now, using (3), the total reactive power loss after placement
of m DGs is given by
Qnew
L

N
1



2
Iinew Xi

i=1

N
1



Iai

i=1


+ Iri

m


m


2
k
Dik IaDG

k=1

2
k
Dik IaDG
tan fk Xi

(11)

(12)

(8)
p
The partial derivative of f with respect to IaDG
can be given as
(see (13)).

k=1

Using (7) and (8), the normalised reactive power loss saving
QS associated with multiple DG placement can be given as
(see (9)).

2.3

Corresponding to (12), there will be m linear algebraic

equations each similar to (13). These equations can be
arranged in matrix form and expressed as


[A]mm I aDG m1 = [B]m1

(14)

Net benet

Now, using (6) and (9), the net benet associated with
multiple DG placement can be combined as
f = w1 PS + w2 QS

(10)

where w1 and w2 are the constants representing weights

assigned to real power loss saving and reactive power loss

The ( p, q)th elements of matrix A are calculated by the

following expression

A pq =

N
1

i=1






Ri
Xi
p
q
Dip Diq 1 + tan f tan f w1
+ w2
PL
QL
(15)

2



m
N 1 

k
k
k 2
Ri
Iai m
i=1
k=1 Dik IaDG + Iri
k=1 Dik IaDG tan f
PLnew
PS = 1
=1

N 1
2
2
PL
i=1 Iai + Iri Ri




m
2
m

N 1 m
k
k
k
k
k 2
Ri
i=1 2
k=1 Dik IaDG Iai + Iri tan f
k=1 Dik IaDG
k=1 Dik IaDG tan f
=

N 1
2
2
i=1 Iai + Iri Ri






N 1  m

m
k
k
k 2
m
k
k 2
2
D
I
I
+
I
tan
f
D
I

D
I
tan
f
Ri

ri
i=1
k=1 ik aDG ai
k=1 ik aDG
k=1 ik aDG
=
PL
2

2 


N 1 

k
k
Iai m
Dik IaDG
+ Iri m
Dik IaDG
tan fk Xi
i=1
k=1
k=1
Qnew
QS = 1 L = 1

N 1
2
2
QL
i=1 Iai + Iri Xi



m
2
m

N 1  m
k
k
k
k
k 2
Xi
2
D
I
I
+
I
tan
f
D
I

D
I
tan
f

ri
i=1
k=1 ik aDG ai
k=1 ik aDG
k=1 ik aDG
=

N 1
2
2
i=1 Iai + Iri Xi





2
m

N 1  m

m
k
k
k
k
k 2
Xi
i=1 2
k=1 Dik IaDG Iai + Iri tan f
k=1 Dik IaDG
k=1 Dik IaDG tan f
=
QL



N
1
m








f
Ri
Xi
p
k
p
k
=
2
D
I
+
I
tan
f
D
I
1
+
tan
f
tan
f
+
w
=0

D
w
p
ip ai
ri
ip
ik aDG
1
2
PL
QL
IaDG
i=1
k=1
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 209220
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603

(6)

(9)

(13)

211

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

www.ietdl.org
while the pth element of IaDG and B can be given as
p
IaDGp = IaDG

Bp =

N
1

i=1






R
X
Dip Iai + Iri tan fp w1 i + w2 i
PL
QL

(16)
(17)

Using (14), the active components of DG injected currents

can be computed by solving



I aDG = [A]1 [B]

(18)

Then, the required capacity of kth DG can be calculated as

k
S kDG = V k IaDG
(1 j tan fk )

(19)

k
fk = uk cos1 (PFDG
)

(20)

with

where k is the angle of Vk, phasor voltage of kth DG and

PFkDG is the power factor of kth DG.

Solution algorithm

The developed formulation as discussed in the previous

section can be used to determine the optimal sizes and
locations of DGs in a given radial distribution network. For
placement of m DGs in an N-bus radial distribution system,
there are NCm possible combinations of different buses. If
m N , the number of combinations becomes very high
and thus it is computationally tedious to analyse all the
combinations. Hence, the computational procedure of
proposed algorithm can be divided into the following two
broad steps:

2. Run the base case load ow using backward and forward

sweep method [34] and obtain real power loss (PL), reactive
power loss (QL) and voltage prole of the network.
3. Select the number of DGs to be placed (say m) and their
power factors (DGs may have different power factors). Also,
select the suitable values of the weights w1 and w2
considering (11).
4. Initialise DG counter, k = 1 and bus counter, i = 2.
5. Calculate the required capacity of kth DG at bus I using
(19)(21) and then compute and store the benet (say fik)
associated using (10) along with the capacity of kth DG.
6. Check whether i < N, if yes, increment bus counter,
i = i + 1 and go to step 5, otherwise go to next step.
7. Identify the bus (say bus j) that provides the highest
benet ( fjk > fik, for i = 2 to N and i j) for kth DG.
Connect kth DG at bus j with the capacity as calculated
from step 5.
8. Run the load ow with kth DG located at bus j and obtain
real power loss (PL), total reactive power loss (QL) and
voltage prole of the network.
9. Check whether k < m, if yes, increment DG counter,
k = k + 1, initialise bus counter, i = 2 and go to step 5,
otherwise go to next step.
10. At this step, a sequence of m buses is known, which are
suitable for DG connection. Now, calculate the required
capacities of all m DGs at m buses using (18)(20).
A owchart for the proposed algorithm to determine the
optimal sizes and locations of DGs in a given radial
distribution network is given in Fig. 3.

I. Firstly, a sequence of m buses suitable for DG connection is

identied. For this, rst the optimal size of a DG (say kth DG)
is calculated at a bus using the following equation which is
obtained from (18) by substituting m = 1





Di Iai + Iri tan fk w1 (Ri /PL ) + w2 (Xi /QL )



N 1

k 2
w1 (Ri /PL ) + w2 (Xi /QL )
i=1 Di sec f

N 1
k
IaDG

i=1

(21)
At the same time, the benet associated kth DG is also
computed using (10) and this procedure is repeated for all
other buses. The bus which gives the highest benet is
selected as the candidate bus and kth DG is connected with
this bus. Then the above procedure is repeated to identify
next and subsequent candidate buses.
II. The optimal sizes of all the DGs at m buses, identied
during previous step, are then determined simultaneously by
using (18)(20).
Various steps involved in the proposed method are as
follows:
1. Read the data regarding number of buses (N ),
conguration/connectivity, resistances and reactances of
different branches, real and reactive power demand at
different buses of distribution network under consideration.
212
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

Fig. 3 Flowchart for the proposed algorithm for the optimal sizing
and siting of DGs
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 209220
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603

www.ietdl.org

Fig. 4 Single line diagram of 12.66 kV, 33-bus radial distribution system

Results and discussion

The developed algorithm has been implemented under

MATLAB environment and applied on two test systems to
determine the optimal sizing and siting of DGs. For each
test system, different values of w1 and w2 have been
considered as (a) w1 = 1 and w2 = 0; (b) w1 = 0.5 and w2 =
0.5; and (c) w1 = 0 and w2 = 1. Apart from this, two
different values of DG power factors have also been
considered as: (a) all DGs are operating at unity power

factor; and (b) all DGs are operating at a power factor equal
to the power factor of total load of the system [15].
The following test systems have been considered for the
optimal placement and sizing of DGs by the developed
algorithm.
4.1

33-Bus radial distribution system

The single line diagram of a 12.66 kV, 33-bus radial

distribution system is illustrated in Fig. 4. The relevant data

Fig. 5 Optimal DG size of unity power factor at different buses for maximum real power loss saving

Table 1 Results for UPF DG installation in 33-bus test system with w1 = 1 and w2 = 0
Initial system condition
System description

original base case

2.48 MVA, UPF DG connected to bus 6
2.48 and 0.41 MVA, UPF DG connected to buses 6
and 16, respectively
2.48, 0.41 and 0.65 MVA, UPF DG connected to
buses 6, 16 and 25, respectively
original base case
1.73, 0.53 and 0.77 MVA, UPF DG connected to
buses 6, 16 and 25, respectively

Result with DG installation

Active power
loss, kW

No. of DG
placed

Bus for DG
placement

DG size,
MVA

Active loss
saving, kW

202.68
104.08
92.48

1
1
1

6
16
25

2.48
0.41
0.65

91.80
10.26
7.81

84.16

202.68

6, 16, 25

116.75

79.51

1.73,
0.53, 0.77

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 209220

doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603

213

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

www.ietdl.org
Table 2 Results for LPF DG installation in 33-bus test system with w1 = 1 and w2 = 0
Initial system condition
System description

Result with DG installation

Active power
loss, kW

No. of DG
placed

Bus for DG
placement

DG size,
MVA

Active loss
saving, kW

202.68
61.72
46.07

1
1
1

6
32
25

3.01
0.60
0.68

135.19
14.82
8.47

37.38

202.68

6, 32, 25

127.79

26.63

1.85,
0.90, 0.85

original base case

3.01 MVA, LPF DG connected to bus 6
3.01 and 0.60 MVA, LPF DG connected to buses 6
and 32, respectively
3.01, 0.60 and 0.68 MVA, LPF DG connected to
buses 6, 32 and 25, respectively
original base case
1.85, 0.90 and 0.85 MVA, LPF DG connected to
buses 6, 32 and 25, respectively

for this test system are acquired from [35]. This test system
has the total demand of (3715 + j2300) kVA with the power
factor of total load as 0.85 lagging.
The number of DG to be placed is taken as 3. In order to
determine 3 suitable buses for DG installation at unity

power factor (UPF) in 33-bus test system for benet

maximisation with w1 = 1 and w2 = 0, rst the optimal size
of a single DG and the corresponding benet are
determined using (21) and (10), respectively. For this case,
Fig. 5 shows the DG size for all the buses in the system

Table 3 Results for UPF DG installation in 33-bus test system with w1 = 0.5 and w2 = 0.5
Initial system condition
System description

original base case

2.44 MVA, UPF DG connected to
bus 6
2.44 and 0.44 MVA, UPF DG
connected to buses 6 and 15,
respectively
2.44, 0.44 and 0.66 MVA, UPF DG
connected to buses 6, 15 and 25,
respectively
original base case
1.66, 0.58 and 0.76 MVA, UPF DG
connected to buses 6, 15 and 25,
respectively

Result with DG installation

Active
power loss,
kW

Reactive
power loss,
kVAr

No. of DG
placed

Bus for DG
placement

DG size,
MVA

Active loss
saving, kW

Reactive loss
saving, kVAr

202.68
104.20

135.14
74.78

1
1

6
15

2.44
0.44

91.78
10.72

55.41
8.67

92.04

65.09

25

0.66

7.83

5.68

83.71

59.07

202.68

135.14

6, 15, 25

117.11

75.00

79.20

55.60

1.66,
0.58,
0.76

Table 4 Results for LPF DG installation in 33-bus test system with w1 = 0.5 and w2 = 0.5
Initial system condition
System description

Result with DG installation

Active
power loss,
kW

Reactive
power loss,
kVAr

No. of DG
placed

Bus for DG
placement

DG size,
MVA

Active loss
saving, kW

Reactive loss
saving, kVAr

original base case

2.97 MVA, LPF DG connected to
bus 6
2.97 and 0.62 MVA, LPF DG
connected to buses 6 and 31,
respectively
1.78, 0.62 and 0.69 MVA, LPF DG
connected to buses 6, 31 and 25,
respectively
original base case

202.68
61.83

135.14
48.54

1
1

6
31

2.97
0.62

135.17
15.58

82.03
11.51

45.39

36.33

25

0.69

8.54

6.37

36.64

29.78

202.68

135.14

6, 31, 25

128.03

83.41

1.81, 0.93 and 0.84 MVA, LPF DG

connected to buses 6, 31 and 25,
respectively

26.07

22.43

1.81,
0.93,
0.84

214
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 209220

doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603

www.ietdl.org
Table 5 Results for UPF DG installation in 33-bus test system with w1 = 0 and w2 = 1
Initial system condition
System description

Result with DG installation

Reactive power
loss, kVAr

No. of DG
placed

Bus for DG
placement

DG size,
MVA

Reactive loss
saving, kVAr

original base case

2.00 MVA, UPF DG connected to bus 7
2.00 and 0.58 MVA, UPF DG connected to
buses 7 and 31, respectively
2.00, 0.58 and 0.70 MVA, UPF DG connected to
buses 7, 31 and 25, respectively
original base case

135.14
75.46
63.57

1
1
1

7
31
25

2.00
0.58
0.70

55.78
10.32
6.50

56.72

135.14

7, 31, 25

77.59

1.38, 0.71 and 0.77 MVA, UPF DG connected to

buses 7, 31 and 25, respectively

53.36

1.38,
0.71, 0.77

except the sub-station bus and corresponding benet (active

power loss saving). The active power loss saving obtained
by running load ow is also plotted in this gure for the
sake of comparison. The loss saving computed by proposed
method is close to that computed by running load ow and
both are following similar trends.
It is evident from Fig. 5 that the highest active power loss
saving of 91.8 kW can be achieved by placing a 2.48 MVA,
UPF DG at bus 6. However, the actual active power loss
saving calculated by running load ow is 98.6 kW. This is
because, in the developed analytical method, the expression
for active power loss saving has been derived because of
change in branch currents only caused by DG placement.
When branch currents are reduced by DG placement, the
voltage drops in different branches are also reduced which
in turn improves the voltage prole of the system. Thus, an
extra saving of 6.8 kW can also be achieved by placing a
2.48 MVA, UPF DG at bus 6 because of voltage prole
improvement.
After placing a 2.48 MVA, UPF DG at bus 6, the above
procedure is repeated to identify next and subsequent
candidate buses. The results for this case are summarised in
Table 1. From this table, it is clear that buses 6, 16 and 25
are the suitable location for DG installation at UPF. Now,
the optimal sizes of DGs determined simultaneously by
using (18)(20) are 1.73, 0.53 and 0.77 MVA at buses 6, 16
and 25, respectively. This alternative of DG sizes results in
a total real power loss of 79.51 kW against 202.68 kW
power loss of base case system.
This approach is extended to size and site 3 DGs, operating
at load power factor (LPF) in 33-bus test system for benet
maximisation with w1 = 1 and w2 = 0. The obtained results

for this case are summarised in Table 2. For this case, the
optimal sizes of DGs are 1.85, 0.90 and 0.85 MVA at buses
6, 32 and 25, respectively. This alternative of DG sizes
results in a total real power loss of 26.63 kW or 86.86%
real power loss reduction as compared with base case system.
Further, optimal locations and sizes of 3 DGs are also
computed for different values of w1 and w2. Tables 3 and 4
present the optimal locations and sizes of 3 DGs operated at
UPF and LPF, respectively, with w1 = 0.5 and w2 = 0.5. At
UPF operation of DGs, their optimal sizes are 1.66, 0.58
and 0.76 MVA at buses 6, 15 and 25, respectively, resulting
in (79.20 + j55.60) kVA loss in the network. On the other
hand, 1.81, 0.93 and 0.84 MVA LPF DGs connected at
buses 6, 31 and 25, respectively, result in (26.07 + j22.43)
kVA loss in the network.
Tables 5 and 6 summarises the results of optimal locations
and sizes of 3 DGs operated at UPF and LPF, respectively,
with w1 = 0 and w2 = 1.0. In this case, at UPF operation of
DGs, their optimal sizes are 1.38, 0.71 and 0.77 MVA at
buses 7, 31 and 25, respectively, causing 53.36 kVAr
reactive power loss. While at LPF operation of DGs, their

Table 7 Comparison of results for 33-bus test system

Particulars

DG size, MVA
DG power factor
location
loss saving, %

Acharya
et al. [14]
2.49
UPF
6
47.33

Murthy and
Kumar [36]
2.5
UPF
6
47.32

3.01
0.9 lag
6
66.39

Proposed
method
2.48
UPF
6
48.65

3.01
0.85 lag
6
69.55

Table 6 Results for LPF DG installation in 33-bus test system with w1 = 0 and w2 = 1
Initial system condition
System description

Result with DG installation

Reactive power
loss, kVAr

No. of DG
placed

Bus for DG
placement

DG size,
MVA

Reactive loss
saving, kVAr

original base case

1.80 MVA, UPF DG connected to bus 30
1.80 and 0.77 MVA, UPF DG connected to buses
30 and 14, respectively
1.80, 0.77 and 1.06 MVA, UPF DG connected to
buses 30, 14 and 24, respectively
original base case

135.14
48.62
24.28

1
1
1

30
14
24

1.80
0.77
1.06

83.55
23.81
9.44

14.70

135.14

30, 14, 24

82.73

1.39, 0.81 and 1.14 MVA, UPF DG connected to

buses 30, 14 and 24, respectively

11.76

1.39,
0.81, 1.14

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 209220

doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603

215

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

www.ietdl.org

Fig. 6 Voltage prole of 33-bus test system for different cases

optimal sizes are 1.39, 0.81 and 1.14 MVA at buses 30, 14 and
24, respectively, resulting in 11.76 kVAr reactive power loss.
Summarising different cases presented in Tables 16, it is
evident that the optimal locations and sizes of DGs vary
depending upon the objective considered (values of w1 and w2)

and power factor of DG. For a considered objective, LPF

operation of DGs improves the system performance in a
better way compared with UPF operation.
Finally, to validate the proposed method, the results
obtained by it are compared with those obtained by the

Fig. 7 Single line diagram of 12.66 kV, 69-bus distribution system

Table 8 Results for UPF DG installation in 69-bus test system with w1 = 1 and w2 = 0
Initial system condition
System description

Result with DG installation

Active power
loss, kW

No. of DG
placed

Bus for DG
placement

DG size,
MVA

Active loss
saving, kW

original base case

1.81 MVA, UPF DG connected to bus 50
1.81 and 0.51 MVA, UPF DG connected to buses
50 and 17, respectively
1.81, 0.51 and 0.72 MVA, UPF DG connected to
buses 50, 17 and 39, respectively
original base case

225.00
83.37
71.71

1
1
1

50
17
39

1.81
0.51
0.72

133.03
11.01
1.51

70.20

225.00

50, 17, 39

149.28

1.72, 0.52 and 0.72 MVA, UPF DG connected to

buses 50, 17 and 39, respectively

70.29

1.72,
0.52, 0.72

216
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 209220

doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603

www.ietdl.org
Table 9 Results for LPF DG installation in 69-bus test system with w1 = 1 and w2 = 0
Initial system condition
System description

original base case

2.22 MVA, LPF DG connected to bus 50
2.22 and 0.61 MVA, LPF DG connected to buses 50
and 17, respectively
2.22, 0.61 and 0.88 MVA, LPF DG connected to
buses 50, 17 and 39, respectively
original base case
2.12, 0.62 and 0.88 MVA, LPF DG connected to
buses 50, 17 and 39, respectively

Result with DG installation

Active power
loss, kW

No. of DG
placed

Bus for DG
placement

DG size,
MVA

Active loss
saving, kW

225.00
23.88
8.19

1
1
1

50
17
39

2.22
0.61
0.88

200.11
15.60
2.27

5.92

225.00

50, 17, 39

153.91

5.66

2.12,
0.62, 0.88

methods reported in the literature for 33-bus test system and

presented in Table 7. The results presented in this table are
for siting and sizing of single DG to minimise the real
power loss only. From this table, it is evident that more
active power loss saving is possible by the proposed method
compared with the other methods reported in the literature.

The voltage proles of 33-bus test system for different

cases considered are given in Fig. 6. These voltage proles
are obtained after placing 3 DGs as given in the last row of
Tables 16. It is evident from Fig. 6 that the installation of
DG units in 33-bus test system by proposed method
signicantly improves the voltage prole of the network.

Table 10 Results for UPF DG installation in 69-bus test system with w1 = 0.5 and w2 = 0.5
Initial system condition
System description

original base case

1.83 MVA, UPF DG connected to
bus 50
1.83 and 0.52 MVA, UPF DG
connected to buses 50 and 17,
respectively
1.83, 0.52 and 0.72 MVA, UPF DG
connected to buses 50, 17 and
39, respectively
original base case
1.73, 0.53 and 0.72 MVA, UPF DG
connected to buses 50, 17 and
39, respectively

Result with DG installation

Active
power loss,
kW

Reactive
power loss,
kVAr

No. of DG
placed

Bus for DG
placement

DG size,
MVA

Active loss
saving, kW

Reactive loss
saving, kVAr

225.00
83.29

102.17
40.62

1
1

50
17

1.83
0.52

133.01
10.85

57.88
4.39

71.76

35.95

39

0.72

1.51

3.70

70.25

32.24

225.00

102.17

50, 17, 39

149.29

67.50

70.24

32.30

1.73,
0.53,
0.72

Table 11 Results for LPF DG installation in 69-bus test system with w1 = 0.5 and w2 = 0.5
Initial system condition
System description

original base case

2.25 MVA, UPF DG connected to
bus 50
2.25 and 0.62 MVA, UPF DG
connected to buses 50 and 17,
respectively
2.25, 0.62 and 0.88 MVA, UPF DG
connected to buses 50, 17 and
39, respectively
original base case
2.13, 0.64 and 0.88 MVA, UPF DG
connected to buses 50, 17 and
39, respectively

Result with DG installation

Active
power loss,
kW

Reactive
power loss,
kVAr

No. of DG
placed

Bus for DG
placement

DG size,
MVA

Active loss
saving, kW

Reactive loss
saving, kVAr

202.68
23.87

102.17
14.67

1
1

50
17

2.25
0.62

200.08
15.38

87.08
6.19

8.38

8.45

39

0.88

2.27

5.55

6.11

2.89

202.68

102.17

50, 17, 39

153.81

69.94

5.66

2.79

2.13,
0.64,
0.88

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 209220

doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603

217

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

www.ietdl.org
Table 12 Results for UPF DG installation in 69-bus test system with w1 = 0 and w2 = 1
Initial system condition
System description

Result with DG installation

Reactive power
loss, kVAr

No. of DG
placed

Bus for DG
placement

DG size,
MVA

Reactive loss
saving, kVAr

original base case

1.86 MVA, UPF DG connected to bus 50
1.86 and 0.53 MVA, UPF DG connected to buses
50 and 17, respectively
1.86, 0.53 and 0.72 MVA, UPF DG connected to
buses 50, 17 and 39, respectively
original base case

102.17
40.56
35.96

1
1
1

50
17
39

1.86
0.53
0.72

57.89
4.31
3.70

32.26

102.17

50, 17, 39

67.51

1.74, 0.55 and 0.72 MVA, UPF DG connected to

buses 50, 17 and 39, respectively

32.27

1.74,
0.55, 0.72

However, the degree of improvement is different depending

upon the objective considered (values of w1 and w2) and
power factor of DG. Among different cases considered, the
best voltage prole is observed when DGs are operated at
LPF with w1 = 0 and w2 = 1.0.
4.2

69-Bus radial distribution system

The single line diagram of a 12.66 kV, 69-bus distribution test

system is shown in Fig. 7. The necessary data for 12.66 kV,

69-bus distribution test system are obtained from [37]. This

test system has the total demand of (3802.19 + j2694.6)
kVA with the power factor of total load as 0.82 lagging.
For this test system also, the number of DG to be placed is
taken as 3. To determine 3 suitable buses for DG installation
at UPF in 69-bus test system for benet maximisation with
w1 = 1 and w2 = 0, similar procedure is employed as
discussed for 33-bus test system. The results for this case
are summarised in Table 8. The installation of 1.72, 0.52
and 0.72 MVA UPF DGs at buses 50, 17 and 39,

Table 13 Results for LPF DG installation in 69-bus test system with w1 = 0 and w2 = 1
Initial system condition
System description

Result with DG installation

Reactive power
loss, kVAr

No. of DG
placed

Bus for DG
placement

DG size,
MVA

Reactive loss
saving, kVAr

102.17
14.63
8.53

1
1
1

50
17
39

2.28
0.64
0.88

87.10
6.07
5.55

2.97

102.17

50, 17, 39

69.90

2.77

2.14,
0.66, 0.88

original base case

2.28 MVA, UPF DG connected to bus 50
2.28 and 0.64 MVA, UPF DG connected to buses
50 and 17, respectively
2.28, 0.64 and 0.88 MVA, UPF DG connected to
buses 50, 17 and 39, respectively
original base case
2.14, 0.66 and 0.88 MVA, UPF DG connected to
buses 50, 17 and 39, respectively

Fig. 8 Voltage prole of 69-bus test system for different cases

218
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 209220

doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603

www.ietdl.org
Table 14 Comparison of results of 69-bus test system
Particulars

Acharya et al.
[14]

Murthy and
Kumar [36]

DG size, MW
power factor

1.81
UPF

1.85
UPF

location
loss saving, %

50
62.86

50
63.02

2.20
0.9
lag
50
87.59

Proposed
method
1.81
UPF
50
62.95

2.22
0.82
lag
50
89.39

respectively, results in a total real power loss of 70.29 kW

against 225 kW power loss of base case system.
To size and site 3 DGs, operating at LPF in 69-bus test
system for benet maximisation with w1 = 1 and w2 = 0, the
obtained results are summarised in Table 9. From this table,
it is clear that buses 50, 17 and 39 are the suitable locations
for DG installation at LPF. The optimal sizes of DGs are
2.12, 0.62 and 0.88 MVA at buses 50, 17 and 39,
respectively, and results in a total real power loss of 5.66 kW
or 97.78% real power loss reduction compared with base
case system.
Further, optimal locations and sizes of 3 DGs are also
computed for different values of w1 and w2. Tables 10 and
11 present the optimal locations and sizes of 3 DGs
operated at UPF and LPF, respectively, with w1 = 0.5 and
w2 = 0.5. Tables 12 and 13 summarise the results of optimal
locations and sizes of 3 DGs operated at UPF and LPF,
respectively, with w1 = 0 and w2 = 1.0.
Summarising different cases presented in Tables 812, it is
evident that the optimal locations for DGs are the same
irrespective of the objective considered and power factor of
DG. Also, the optimal sizes of DGs are approximately
similar for a given power factor irrespective of the objective
considered. Among different power factor, LPF operation of
DGs improves the system performance in a better way as
compared with UPF operation.
A comparison of results obtained by different methods for
single DG allocation to minimise real power loss in 69-bus
systems is given in Table 14. From this table, it is evident
that more active power loss saving by the proposed method
is in good agreement with the other methods reported in the
literature.
The voltage proles of 69-bus test system for different
cases considered are given in Fig. 8. These voltage proles
are obtained after placing 3 DGs as given in the last row of
Tables 812. It is evident from Fig. 8 that the installation of
DG units in 69-bus test system by proposed method
signicantly improves the voltage prole of the network.
Since it is seen from Tables 812 that the optimal sizes of
DGs are approximately similar despite of the objective
considered and mainly depends on the power factor of DG,
the same can be observed in Fig. 8 also. The best voltage
prole is observed when DGs are operated at LPF,
irrespective of the objective considered.

Conclusions

This paper presents an analytical approach-based

methodology for optimal sizing and siting of DGs in the
radial distribution networks. Both real as well as reactive
power loss minimisation are the objectives for DG
placement. Suitable analytical expressions have been
derived to compute the real as well as reactive power loss
saving because of change in branch current caused by DG.
The developed method is able to optimise the size and
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 209220
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603

location of single as well as multiple DGs. The developed

methodology has been tested on 33-bus and 69-bus test
distribution networks with different values of DG power
factor. Results obtained by this proposed method show
better loss reduction as well as voltage prole improvement
in the given distribution networks. Further, comparison of
results for loss reduction with other reported methods
shows the effectiveness of the proposed method.

References

1 Energy white paper: meeting the energy challenge: Department of trade

and industry, UK (DTI), 2007
2 Ackermann, T., Andersson, G., Soder, L.: Distributed generation: a
denition, Electr. Power Syst. Res., 2001, 57, (3), pp. 195204
3 Frias, P., Gomez, T., Cossent, R., Rivier, J.: Improvement in current
European network regulation to facilitate the integration of distributed
generation, Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2009, 31, pp. 445451
4 Jenkins, N., Allan, R., Crossley, P., Kirschen, D., Strbac, G.: Embedded
generation, Institution of Electrical Engineers, London, 2000
5 Mendez, V.H., Rivier, J., De la Fuente, J.I., et al.: Impact of distributed
generation on distribution investment deferral, Int. J. Electr. Power
Energy Syst., 2006, 28, (4), pp. 244252
6 Federico, J., Gonzalez, V., Lyra, C.: Learning classiers shape reactive
power to decrease losses in power distribution networks. Proc. of IEEE
Power Eng. Soc. General Meet., June 2005, vol. 1, pp. 557562
7 Chiradeja, P., Ramkumar, R.: An approach to quantify the technical
benets of distributed generation, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers.,
2004, 19, (4), pp. 764773
8 Mendez Quezeda, V.H., Abbad, J.-R., Gomez, T.: Assessment of
energy distribution losses for increasing penetration of DG, IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., 2006, 21, (2), pp. 533540
9 Ochoa, L.F., Harrison, G.P.: Minimizing energy losses: optimal
accommodation and smart operation of renewable DG, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., 2011, 26, (1), pp. 198205
10 Gozel, T., Hocaoglu, M.H.: An analytical method for the sizing and
siting of distributed generators in radial system, Int. J. Electr. Power
Syst. Res., 2009, 79, (6), pp. 912918
11 Hedayati, H., Nabaviniaki, S.A., Akbarimazd, A.: A method for
placement of DG units in distribution network, IEEE Trans. Power
Deliv., 2008, 23, (3), pp. 16201628
12 Atwa, Y.M., EI-Saadany, E.F., Salama, M.M.A., Seethapathy, R.:
Optimal renewable resource mix for distribution system energy loss
minimization, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2010, 25, (1), pp. 360370
13 Wang, C., Nehir, M.H.: Analytical approaches for optimal placement of
distributed generation sources in power system, IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., 2004, 19, (4), pp. 20682076
14 Acharya, N., Mahat, P., Mithulananthan, N.: An analytical approach for
DG allocation in primary distribution network, Int. J. Electr. Power
Energy Syst., 2006, 28, pp. 669678
15 Hung, D.Q., Mithulananthan, N., Bansal, R.C.: Analytical expressions
for DG allocation in primary distribution networks, IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers., 2010, 25, (3), pp. 814820
16 Hung, D.Q., Mithulanathan, N., Bansal, R.C.: Multiple distributed
generators placement in primary distribution networks for loss
reduction, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2010, 60, (4), pp. 17001708
17 Mithulanathan, N., Oo, T., Phu, L.V.: Distributed generator placement
in power distribution system using genetic algorithm to reduce losses,
Thammasat Int. J. Sci. Tech., 2004, 9, (3), pp. 5562
18 Abu-Mouti, F.S., El-Hawary, M.E.: Optimal distributed generation
allocation and sizing in distribution systems using articial bee colony
algorithm, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2011, 26, (4), pp. 20902101
19 AlRashidi, M., AlHajri, M.F.: Optimal planning of multiple distributed
generation sources in distribution networks: a new approach, Energy
Convers. Manage., 2011, 52, pp. 33013308
20 Khatod, D.K., Pant, V., Sharma, J.: Evolutionary programming based
optimal placement of renewable distributed generators, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., 2013, 28, (2), pp. 683695
21 Khan, H., Choudhary, M.A.: Implementation of distributed generation
(IDG) algorithm for performance enhancement of distribution feeder
under extreme load growth, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2010,
32, (9), pp. 985997
22 Shukla, T.N., Singh, S.P., Srinivas Rao, V., Naik, K.B.: Optimal sizing
of distributed generation placed on radial distribution systems, Electr.
Power Compon. Syst., 2010, 38, (3), pp. 260274
23 Gopiya Naik, S., Khatod, D.K., Sharma, M.P.: Sizing and siting of DG
in distribution networks for real power loss minimization using
219

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

www.ietdl.org
24
25

26

27

28

29

analytical approach. Int. Conf. on Power, Energy, and Control (ICPEC),

Dindigul (TN), India, February 2013, pp. 740745
Gandomkar, M., Vakilian, M., Ehsan, M.: A genetic based tabu search
algorithm for optimal DG allocation in distribution networks, Electr.
Power Compon. Syst., 2007, 33, (12), pp. 13511362
Gopiya Naik, S., Khatod, D.K., Sharma, M.P.: Optimal allocation of
distributed generation in distribution system for loss reduction. Int.
Conf. on Product Development and Renewable Energy Resources
(ICPDRE), Coimbatore, India, 2012, pp. 4246
Moradi, M.H., Abedini, M.: A combination of genetic algorithm and
particle swarm optimization for optimal DG location and sizing in
distribution systems, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2012, 34, (1),
pp. 6674
Moradi, M.H., Tousi, M.R., Abedini, M.: Multi-objective PFDE
algorithm for solving the optimal sitting and sizing problem of
multiple DG sources, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2014, 56,
pp. 117126
Kashem, M.A., Le, A.D.T., Negnevitsky, M., Ledwitch, G.: Distributed
generation for minimization of power losses in distribution systems.
Power Engineering Society General Meeting, Montreal, Quebec, 2006,
pp. 18
EI-Khattam, W., Bhattacharya, K., Hagazy, Y.G., Salama, M.M.A.:
Optimal investment planning for distributed generation in a
competitive electricity market, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2004, 19,
(3), pp. 16741684

220
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015

30 Celli, G., Ghiani, E., Mocci, S., Pilo, F.: A multi-objective evolutionary
algorithm for siting and sizing of distributed generation, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., 2005, 20, (2), pp. 750757
31 Willis, H.L.: Analytical methods and rules of thumb for modeling
DG-distribution interaction. Proc. IEEE Power Engineering Society
Summer Meeting, 2000, vol. 3, pp. 16431644
32 Gopiya Naik, S., Khatod, D.K., Sharma, M.P.: Planning and operation
of distributed generation in distribution networks, Int. J. Emerg.
Technol. Adv. Eng., 2012, 2, (9), pp. 381388
33 Haque, M.H.: Capacitor placement in radial distribution systems for
loss reduction, IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrb., 1996, 146, (5),
pp. 501505
34 Haque, M.H.: Efcient load ow method for distribution systems with
radial or mesh conguration, IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrb., 1996,
143, (1), pp. 3338
35 Baran, M.E., Wu, F.F.: Network reconguration in distribution systems
for loss reduction and load balancing, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1989,
4, (2), pp. 14011407
36 Murthy, V.V.S.N., Kumar, A.: Comparison of optimal DG allocation
methods in radial distribution systems based on sensitivity
approaches, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2013, 53, pp. 450467
37 Chiang, H.D., Jean-Jumeau, R.: Optimal network recongurations in
distribution systems: Part 2: solution algorithms and numerical
results, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1990, 5, (3), pp. 15681574

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 209220

doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603