Optimizing DG Penetration in Distribution Networks Concerning Protection Schemes and Technical Impact

© All Rights Reserved

2 views

Optimizing DG Penetration in Distribution Networks Concerning Protection Schemes and Technical Impact

© All Rights Reserved

- Duquesne-Light-Co-State-Tax-Adjustment
- REC Drawings
- 2019 GE Protection Fundamentals
- Electrocution Refinery
- Impact of severe storms on power grids
- PUD No 1 of Clark County - Commercial
- Supply Code
- ABBNG Profile 2009
- CableTroll_3500
- dfgfg fgsr
- Power Distribution Substations
- 01226462
- 05739138
- ABB GridShield
- Implementation of Full Adaptive Technique To
- Distributed Generation
- A Critical Analysis of Grounding Practices for Railroad Tracks in Electric Utility Stations
- Volume 4
- Solar Guidelines_ Telgana
- Distribution

You are on page 1of 10

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/epsr

protection schemes and technical impact

Hossam A. Abdel-Ghany a,∗ , Ahmed M. Azmy a , Nagy I. Elkalashy b , Essam M. Rashad a

a

Electrical Power and Machines Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt

b

Electrical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Minouﬁya University, 32511 Shebin Elkom, Egypt

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Distributed generators (DGs) provide many beneﬁts for distribution networks, however they increase

Received 17 October 2014 the fault current level and cause miscoordination between the protective devices. This paper presents a

Received in revised form 11 June 2015 framework to determine the optimal locations and permissible capacity limits of inserting DGs in the dis-

Accepted 9 July 2015

tribution system using the genetic algorithm (GA). A multi-objective function is developed based on the

Available online 28 July 2015

overall maximum capacity of DGs, voltage enhancement, power loss reduction, and fault current level.

The optimization process considers the voltage level and protective-devices coordination as two main

Keywords:

constraints. The coordination constraint including fuse–recloser and recloser–relay schemes is added

Distributed generation

Distribution systems

to the multi-objective function in an augmented ﬁtness function. Furthermore, the effects of modifying

Optimization techniques the setting of overcurrent relay on the DGs capacity are investigated. The proposed framework has been

Protection coordination implemented on a typical 11 kV overhead distribution feeder. The results show the possibility of integrat-

ing large DGs and achieving considerable loss reduction, voltage proﬁle improvement and fault current

reduction without replacing the existing protection systems.

© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction losses, the suitable location of DGs within the system has to be

investigated [4,5]. On the other hand, high penetration of DGs in

Recently, the connection and exploitation of distributed genera- distribution systems has adverse impacts on the existing protec-

tors and their controlling technologies into distribution systems tion scheme. This is attributed to the variation of fault current

(DS) have become a necessity around the world. The advantages level and its direction, which causes coordination mismatch and

of utilizing DGs include economical, environmental and technical false tripping [5–8]. Typical electrical distribution systems have

beneﬁts [1,2]. The economical aspects include their high efﬁciency radial structure with a single source, where the protection schemes

and the lower power losses. An example of the environmental depend on relay, reclosers, and fuses. In this structure, the main

beneﬁts is the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Finally, the feeders are protected against temporary faults using reclosers,

technical advantages include voltage support and higher reliability. while fuses are located at the beginning of laterals and sub-laterals

The one-way energy nature of radial distribution systems results to protect against persistent faults [3–10].

in increasing voltage regulation. The voltage is regulated by insert- Recloser–fuse miscoordination problems may appear due to the

ing load tap-changing transformers at substations, line regulators current contribution of DGs. The recloser–fuse coordination is usu-

into distribution feeders and shunt capacitors into feeders or along ally performed based on fuse-saving principles [6]. In addition, the

the line [3]. The voltage proﬁle along a certain feeder may be distribution-system short-circuit currents increase due to the con-

changed when the DGs are connected due to changing the direction tribution of DGs. This might cause a trip to healthy lines before

and magnitude of real and reactive power ﬂows [1–3]. clearing the faulty lines. If the power ﬂow in feeders remains uni-

The connection of DGs also affects the feeder losses, where DGs directional, classical protections can still be used [6].

supply local active and reactive powers. In order to reduce the In [5], operation of different protection schemes after connect-

ing DGs in distribution system is discussed. The effect of DGs on

protective device coordination is explored with different schemes

such as fuse–fuse, fuse–recloser and relay–relay arrangements.

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +20 10 97 1000 43.

In addition, the impact of DGs’ on protection coordination and

E-mail addresses: hossam saleh2000@yahoo.com (H.A. Abdel-Ghany),

azmy@f-eng.tanta.edu.eg (A.M. Azmy), nagy.elkalashy@sh-eng.menoﬁa.edu.eg operation of distribution network is analyzed in [7,8]. The study

(N.I. Elkalashy), emrashad@ieee.org (E.M. Rashad). included the increase of fault current level, malfunctioning of

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2015.07.005

0378-7796/© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

114 H.A. Abdel-Ghany et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 128 (2015) 113–122

protective devices and protection coordination. The performance of where, t is the fuse operating time; I is the fault current seen by

directional recloser is evaluated for different faults using real-time the fuse and a, b, c, and d are the fuse constants. A fuse setting

power system simulator [9]. IEEE standard 1457 recommended that means deﬁning the constants a, b, c and d, which are calculated

the DGs should be disconnected during system abnormality [11]. using the curve ﬁtting based on fuse characteristics. This proposed

This is attributed to the fact that the conventional protection coor- formula is to facilitate the fuse characteristics implementation in

dination cannot clear the fault current supplied from DGs [11]. The the optimization framework.

optimal size of DG has been calculated using Optimal Power Flow

(OPF), and considering recloser–fuse coordination in [12]. The max-

imum capacity of DG at each node of the distribution system has 2.2. Modiﬁed recloser characteristics

been determined considering the protection coordination. In [13],

a single DG in the distribution system has been studied at the ﬁrst The recloser has the priority to protect the distribution system

stage. At the second stage, two or more DGs in separate nodes prior fuse operation with suitable coordination margin. After con-

have been considered. However, the optimum DG capacities are necting DGs with high penetrations into the recloser–fuse section,

not generalized with concerning wide objectives simultaneously. the selectivity of protection scheme between fuse and recloser is

In this paper, a generic framework is developed to deﬁne the not achieved. To handle this problem, it is proposed to shift the fast

optimal location and limits of DGs within distribution systems curve characteristic of recloser to operate before the fuse melting.

to maintain a correction operation of the traditional protection Section 4 describes the effect of such modiﬁed recloser character-

scheme. One more issue considered in this paper is to study the istics on the permissible DG ratings.

effect of DGs penetration on technical impacts and fault current lev-

els. The genetic algorithm (GA) is used to perform the optimization

process due to its capability to handle economic dispatch prob- 3. Investigated overhead distribution system

lems, optimal sizing and setting problems and unit commitment

problems. Sequentially, the optimization approach is performed to An Egyptian overhead distribution system is used as a typical

ﬁnd the maximum optimal capacity limit of the inserted DG that case study that represents a rural system (Nediba feeder) supplied

not affecting on the protection coordination to ﬁnd this limit with from 66/11 kV (Khairy) substation. This system is used to study

adding the voltage proﬁle objectives, and then with adding either the effect of DGs on the recloser–fuse coordination. Fig. 1 shows

the power losses or the fault current level. The last generalized the one-line diagram of the adopted system, which contains 47

approach is developed considering all the above objectives. buses, 45 overhead sections, and one underground cable. In this

distribution feeder, each lateral is protected by a fuse, however the

2. Distribution feeder protective devices fuse of last lateral is only present in this ﬁgure and considered for

the optimization study, ﬁrst. Then, the study is done considering

Distribution feeders are commonly radial with the loads con- multi fusses protecting the laterals branched from the feeder. For

sumed the power from upper voltage levels connected to the radial correct protection coordination, all fuses downstream the recloser

feeders. The conventional distribution systems are protected by are to be coordinated with its fast and slow curves and the corre-

a combination of simple protective devices as overcurrent relays, sponding DG capacity limit should be evaluated correspondingly.

reclosers, and fuses. The feeder protection scheme objectives are to The adopted distribution system is simulated using Matlab® code.

ensure the service continuity to the maximum number of users. The total supplied current through Nediba feeder equals 196 A. The

feeder supplies loads through 16 km-Aluminum Conductor Steel

Reinforced (ACSR 70/12) overhead transmission line. The main

2.1. Functions and equations of protective devices

transformer in Khairy substation is of 25 MVA, 66/11 kV delta/star

and has an impedance of 10%. The feeder is considered with the

Before deﬁning the DGs locations and penetration limits, fault

recloser located at 10.65 km and the fuse at 13.5 km, however, the

calculations and protection settings are carried out for the origi-

study is not limited to this fuse location. More details about this

nal system. Since the highest fault current is caused usually from

system are found in [3]. A DG is connected at different locations

a three-phase fault, it is used in deﬁning the generation pene-

in the main feeder through an 11/0.4 kV delta/star earthed trans-

tration limits. This is to ensure that the installation of DGs with

former with the same rating of the DG. This transformer connection

this penetration limits will not cause miscoordination for the

that its delta is on the utility side is considered to open the zero

other phase fault types. However, DG transformer connection is

sequence loop at the transformer point during earth fault (phase

used to prevent and open the zero sequence current contributed

to earth fault type) in the distribution feeder. The delta connec-

by the DG. Accordingly the earth faults are not involved in the

tion can be replaced by a star connection that not earthed. This

study.

condition prevents the change of the distribution of earth fault

The protection coordination setting for relay and recloser is

currents in the feeder due to the DG transformer interconnection.

performed based on (1), provided that no DG is connected. The

In other words, the earth fault current distribution in the feeder is

equation has very inverse characteristic according to IEC standard

the same whenever the DG is interconnected or not interconnected

[5]:

that prevents the DG interconnection effects on the protection

coordination. The second beneﬁt of opening zero-sequence loop at

k

t = 13.5 (1) the DG transformer interconnection is to prevent DG contributing

I/IPic-up − 1 current into earth faults in the feeder that will also solve com-

pletely the effect of DG on the protection coordination of earth

where, t is the trip time in sec; K is the time multiplier; I is the

faults. Accordingly, the study is directed to evaluate the DG max-

rms measured current and IPic-up is the setting current. For the

imum capacity limit concerning protection coordination for only

current-time characteristic of fuses, it has an inverse form that is

phase fault types in practically the three-phase faults. The faults

usually plotted as a log–log curve. For its accurate representation,

are occurred behind the fuse, recloser and relay points with and

the following expression is suggested:

without different DGs penetrations. Also, the actual characteristics

t = aeb×I + ced×I (2) of the distribution system and different DGs ratings are taken into

consideration.

H.A. Abdel-Ghany et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 128 (2015) 113–122 115

15+j8

31 kVA

0.7km

40+j12 600+j40 40+j10 70+j20 180+j20 190+j30 280+j50 50+j20

35/6

kVA kVA kVA 80+j20 kVA kVA kVA kVA kVA

32 kVA

35/6

250+j40 30 50+j10

kVA 150+j30 28 0.7km 40+j12 kVA 40+j20

25 kVA 29 80+j20 34 kVA 41 kVA

36 46 47

kVA

0.2km

0.6km

70/12

70/12

70/12

0.2km

0.4km

35/6

35/6

0.4km

1km

1.2km

0.6km

35/6

70/12

70/12

70/12

0.6km

66/11KV sum

25MVA 2 Relay 3 4 5 8 9 10 0.3km11 12 13 14 15 16 17 F4 18 19 20 21 22 2 3 Fuse 2.5km 24

1 1.7km 3.5km 0.5km 0.45km6 0.5km7 0.4km 0.1km 0.1km 0.3km 0.8km 0.4km 1km 0.3km 0.3km 0.2km 0.1km 0.5km 0.2km 1.2km 0.7km

3*240XLPE F3 150/25 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12 70/12

F2 Recloser F1

Main 680+j120

kVA

0.45km

0.5km

35/6

70/12

0.4km

0.9km

35/6

0.2km

0.5km

70/12

70/12

0.5km

70/12

Substaon

70/12

0.3km

70/12

20+j5 35 42

6+j1MVA 50+j20 80+j20 40+j10 33 40 150+j40 180+j20 80+j20

kVA kVA kVA 26 27 kVA 40+j20 kVA kVA kVA

40+j15 kVA

kVA 43 70+j20

50+j15 70+j20 37 110+j30 kVA

0.16km

kVA kVA 50+j10 50+j25 kVA

70/12

kVA

0.1km

70/12

kVA 70+j20

kVA

44

38

115+j20

0.1km

15+j8

70/12

0.8km

70/12

kVA kVA

30+j10

kVA 30+j8

39 45 kVA

Fig. 1. Single line diagram of Egyptian Nediba distribution system with its protection scheme (47 bus System).

Time-current characteristic settings of protective devices.

For setting the reclosers, it is assumed that they are equipped Protective devices Time-current characteristic setting

with relays having very inverse characteristics. The recloser pickup Fuse (100 A) a = 45.68, b = 0.006984, c = 1.681, and

current is [11]: d = −0.00145

Recloser (fast curve) Current setting = 140 A, Kf = 0.05, very

IPic-up = OLF × Inom (3) inverse

Recloser (slow curve) Current setting = 250 A, Kr = 0.15, very

where OLF is an overload factor that depends on the protected inverse

equipment; Inom is the recloser and relay currents obtained from Feeder-relay Current setting = 390 A, K = 0.14, very

the load-ﬂow results. inverse

Modiﬁed-recloser (fast curve) Current setting = 250 A, time

The recloser on the main line has to be coordinated with the

setting = 0.05 s, instantaneous

fuse for all faults taking place in the fuse section, where currents

of the fuse and recloser are close to each other. The operating time

related to the fault currents of the fuse and recloser are shown in Table 2 shows the fault currents seen by relay, recloser, and fuse

Fig. 2. Both devices must be coordinated for the whole range of fault in three different cases. In case 1 with a DG located in recloser–fuse

currents on the fuse section. region and a fault occurs at F1, fault current seen by the fuse is

The coordination procedure is considered depending on fast and greater than the fault current seen by the recloser. Therefore, mis-

slow recloser curves. The time-current characteristics of feeder- coordination between fuse and recloser may occur since the fuse

relay, fuse and recloser fast and slow curves are shown in Table 1. operates before the fast mode operation of recloser. In case 2 with

The minimum margin between recloser and fuse is 0.1 sec. It is a DG inserted in relay–recloser region and a fault occurs at F1, the

required to study the range (limits) of DGs penetration without fuse operates since the fault current ﬂowing from DG is much less

affecting the protective-devices coordination with different fault than that from substation. In this case, miscoordination between

locations. The adopted DG is a synchronous generator connected to fuse and recloser may occur for large DGs capacity. Under the

the medium voltage of the distribution system through a delta/star same conditions but with a fault at F4, fault current seen by the

transformer and 0.1 km length cable. recloser is greater than that seen by the relay. Therefore, miscoor-

Regarding the microprocessor based reclosers, there are multi- dination between the fuse and recloser may occur since the relay

functions that allow the change of the recloser characteristics in may operate before the slaw mode operation of recloser. In case

a wide range of operating times and selected suitable currents. 3 with a DG inserted along feeder and a fault occurs at F1, fault

As shown in Fig. 3, it is suggested to modify the fast curve of currents seen by both fuse and recloser are increased due to the

the recloser from very inverse to instantaneous characteristics as presence of DGs. In this case, miscoordination may occur when the

shown in Table 1. fuse operates before the fast operation mode of recloser, due to

10 Fuse 100A TC

Fault current seen by Fuse

848.7A

Fuse 100A MM 10 Fault current see n by Fuse Fuse100A MM

5 Fast Recloser Curve 848.7A Rec slaw

5

Slow Recloser Curve Relay

Feeder Relay Fuse100A

Rec fast

1 1

Time (s)

Tim e (sec)

Coordination Margin

C.M Coordination Margin

C.M

0.1 0.1

857.24A Fault current seen by Recloser

857.24A

0.01

0.01 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

Current (A) Current (A)

Fig. 2. Relay, recloser and fuse characteristics. Fig. 3. Relay, modiﬁed-recloser and fuse characteristics.

116 H.A. Abdel-Ghany et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 128 (2015) 113–122

Description of fault currents seen by recloser and fuse for downstream fault.

required to consider a certain term in the objective function, except

Case DGs location Fault location Description for the ﬁrst term, the corresponding weighting factor, i.e. W2 , W3

1 Recloser–fuse region F1 Irecloser = Isubstation and and/or W4 , is set to zero.

Ifuse = Isubstation + IDG

2 Relay–recloser F1 Irecloser = Isubstation + IDG

region and Ifuse = Isubstation + IDG 5.1.1. Total capacity of DGs

F4 Irecloser = Isubstation + IDG The main objective of this paper is to maximize the capacity and

and Irelay = Isubstation number of DGs. To achieve this purpose, F1 is deﬁned as:

3 Along F1 Irecloser = Isubstation + IDGr recl

feeder

F4

and Ifuse = Isubstation + IDG

Irecloser = Isubstation + IDG

NDG

F1 = DGCi (5)

and Irelay = Isubstation

i=1

where DGCi is the capacity of the installed DGs at the ith generation

the increased DG capacity. If the short circuit capacity of DG unit in MW and NDG is the number of DGs.

increases, the probability of miscoordination is also increased. The

DG capacity inserted in relay–recloser region is adjusted to a suit-

able value. This value is given from case 2 to satisfy the coordination 5.1.2. Voltage level

between relay and recloser when fault occurs at F4. The DG impacts The voltage level improvement (F2 ) is one of the goals of setting

on protective-device coordination are investigated based on the sizing

and of DGs. It is required to reduce the voltage deviations

(V ) from the nominal value (Vnom ). The value of the voltage

three cases summarized in Table 2.

deviations V can be deﬁned as:

5. Problem formulation N

Vnom − Vj

F2 = V =

j=1

(6)

For the single-objective optimization problems, the optimal Vnom

solution is single. However, in multi-objective problem there is

where Vj is the jth bus voltage and N is the number of buses.

rather a set of different optimal solutions, not a unique solution.

When all objectives are simultaneously considered, these solu-

tions are optimal in point of view of the decision-making. There 5.1.3. Fault current level

are no other solutions in the search space that are superior to The fault current level of the network increases due to increasing

them, in which the decision maker has ﬂexibility to expect the the DGs capacity. When a DG is placed in parallel with the network,

optimality solution. The previous meaning is the deﬁnition of the the calculated impedance from a fault point diminishes and the

Pareto—front. The objective function of the problem understudy fault current level increases. Therefore, the objective term related to

incorporates terms of different nature, as to the maximize capacity the fault current, which is equal to summation of the fault currents

of DGs, the maximize voltage enhancement, the minimize power from the substation (Ifs )and the DG (IfDG ) is deﬁned as:

loss and the minimize fault current level.

The proposed optimization problem can be described math-

NDG

ematically using a four-part objective function with three F3 = If = If DG + Ifs (7)

constraints. The proposed four parts are the capacity limits (F1 ) i=1

of DGs, the voltage regulation (F2 ), the total fault current level (F3 )

and the power loss (F4 ) for the distribution system. The ﬁrst part 5.1.4. Power losses

has to be maximized, while the other three parts have to be min- Voltage proﬁle is improved by controlling the production,

imized. The upper limit of DG capacity is the main objective to be absorption and ﬂow of reactive power throughout the network.

deﬁned without affecting on the protection coordination point of Reactive power ﬂows can be minimized to reduce system losses.

view. Thus, the upper limit in this study is not to decide for the Many researches are provided just to minimize loss due to the

DG capacity, but to deﬁne the limits that have not to be violated. reactive current. From these researches, it is well known that the

Other technical factors such, as voltage drop, fault current level, distribution losses can be calculated based on the natural properties

and power losses, are considered and the same optimal location is of components in the power system: resistance, reactance, capaci-

obtained near the load location. Any other factors can be introduced tance, voltage, current, and power, which are routinely calculated

but the main concern here is to the coordination problem. Unfortu- by utility companies as a way to specify what components will be

nately, the scope of this study does not include the costs of DG units. added to the systems, in order to reduce losses and improve the

However, this study is for estimating the optimal DG limit capacity voltage levels. The centralized voltage reactive control is one such

that enhances the protection coordination concerning DG intercon- control which can help not only to keep the system voltages within

nection without any additional protection expense. Regarding the speciﬁed limits, but also to preserve the reactive power balances

DG interconnecting places, the DG optimal limit capacity is evalu- for enhanced security and to decrease the transmission losses for

ated at different allocations along with the feeder that covers the the efﬁcient system operation.

availability of DG at speciﬁc points. The losses due to the active and reactive current components

between ith and jth buses and the corresponding objective term

5.1. Multi-objective function are deﬁned as:

The general multi-objective function can be given in the fol- Plossi−j + jQlossi−j = Si−j + Sj−i (8)

lowing form with the different terms described in the following

sections:

N

N

F4 = Plossi−j + Qlossi−j (9)

max F = max (W1 · F1 − W2 · F2 − W3 · F3 − W4 · F4 ) (4) j=0 i=1

H.A. Abdel-Ghany et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 128 (2015) 113–122 117

In order to achieve the DGs limits and location in distribution constraints (∅CM ). The formulation of the proposed ﬁtness function

systems, the multi-objective function is given by: (∅f ) can be expressed as [17,18]:

NDG

N

∅f (x) = F = (W1 · F1 ) − W2 · (C2 · F2 ) − W3 · (C3 · F3 )

F = W1 DGCi − W2 Vnom − Vj /Vnom − W3

− W4 · (C4 · F4 ) (14)

i=1 j=1

N where W1 , W2 , . . . are weights of a positive constant. C2 , C3 and C4

DG

N

N

× If DG + Ifs − W4 Plossi−j + Qlossi−j (10) are scaling factors for maximization problem. The scaling factors

are assigned in terms of the objective function in order to obtain

i=1 j=0 i=1

the same effect on ﬁtness function [20].

The constraint representing coordination margin between fuse

and recloser is formulated as:

5.2. System constraints

The three constraints of the proposed optimization problem

include fuse–recloser coordination, relay–recloser coordination The constraint representing the coordination margin between

and voltage limits constraints. recloser and relay is formulated as:

5.2.1. Fuse–recloser coordination constraints ∅CM2 (x) = min 0, trelay − treclslow − min CMrelayrecl

tfuse − treclfast ≥ min CMfusereclfast (11)

where tfuse is the fuse operating time in s; treclfast is the fast curve

operating time of recloser; min CMfusereclfast is the minimum margin

between recloser and fuse. From (14) and (15), the ﬁtness function for evaluating every indi-

vidual in the population of GA including the coordination margin

5.2.2. Relay–recloser coordination constraints between fuse and recloser is deﬁned as:

max CMrelayrecl ≥ trelay − treclslow ≥ min CMrelayrecl (12) ﬁtness = ∅f (x) − W5 ∅CM1 (x) (17)

where trelay is the relay operating time; treclslow is the slow curve

From (14) and (16), the ﬁtness function for evaluating every indi-

operating time of recloser; min CMrelayrecl and max CMrelayrecl are

vidual in the population of GA including the coordination margin

minimum and maximum margins between recloser and relay.

between recloser and relay is deﬁned as:

The voltages at distribution buses depend on voltage regulation

limits and should be within speciﬁed limits [16,17]. where W5 takes a nonzero value if a violation to protection con-

straint occurs.

Vmin ≤ Vi ≤ Vmax (13) The main outlines of the proposed framework are highlighted

where Vmin and Vmax are the minimum and maximum voltage lim- using the ﬂowchart shown in Fig. 4. The genetic operator jobs

its, respectively. are to create new individuals, and to obtain the ﬁnal solution of

the genetic model. The algorithm involves the cycle is shown in

5.3. Solution of the optimization problem Fig. 4. The ﬁrst stage is the random initialization of a population

of chromosomes. Next, the ﬁtness of all the individuals (chro-

GA is used to solve the formulated optimization problem where mosomes) in the population is evaluated. The selection is based

it is a general-purpose stochastic and parallel search methods based on individual GA search algorithm and the conjecture of natural

on the natural selection and natural genetics. Real-Coded Genetic selection and genetics. Chromosomes are then selected as gen-

Algorithms (RCGA) is a highly parallel search method applied to itors for reproduction. Finally, the Genetic Operators (Crossover

direct the population towards convergence at the global opti- and Mutation) manipulate the selected individuals, modifying and

mum solution [14–19]. This algorithm requires four basic elements: combining their genetic code. This cycle deﬁnes one generation,

initial population, evaluation function, selection, and genetic oper- which will be repeated until the stop criterion is reached.

ators (crossover and mutation). The step of the random initialization is presented based on the

The GA has high global searching ability, but the computation following process:

efﬁciency is low and the optimization speed is slow, and it is hard

to be convergent, and the complexity of algorithm is higher. Par- • Read system data.

ticle Swarm Optimization (PSO) can be implemented simply, and • Perform load ﬂow, short circuit and protection devices setting

the convergence speed is quick without too many parameters, and calculations.

it has good global searching ability, because the information of par- • Calculate the coordination margin (CM) between the protection

ticle is single-directional, each particle would remember the past devices.

position, and the convergence is very quick. On the other hand, PSO • Insert DG buses and initialize chromosome population randomly.

can easily fall into local optima (infeasible solution). GA is preferred • The step of evaluated of population depends on process as fol-

with highly-constrained problems such as the investigated one. lows.

• Perform Load ﬂow to calculate the voltage proﬁle, power losses,

6. Fitness function formulation and proposed framework and per fault voltage (to perform short circuit program).

• Perform short circuit to calculate the coordination margin, and

The optimization problem can be formulated in terms of a total fault current.

multi-objective function considering DGs penetration limits, volt- • Calculate the coordination margin (CM) between the protection

age regulation, fault current limits and power losses. In addition, devices with DG.

protective devices coordination margin is considered as inequality • Evaluate ﬁtness function (Eq. (16) or (17)).

118 H.A. Abdel-Ghany et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 128 (2015) 113–122

Start Table 3

Weight values for the ﬁve approaches.

Read system data

Approach W1 W2 W3 W4

Perform Load flow, short circuit and protection App1 1 0 0 0

devices sitting calculations App2 0.5 0.5 0 0

App3 0.333 0.333 0 0.333

Calculate the coordination margin (CM) between App4 0.333 0.333 0.333 0

the protection devices without DG App5 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

Insert DG buses.

Initialize chromosome population randomly voltage drop to the DG capacity, and so on. W2, W3 and W4 are

Perform Load flow, short circuit, coordination margin, voltage positive constant factors for maximization problem. The weight

profile, power losses, and total fault current calculations values for the ﬁve approaches are summarized in Table 3. These

approaches are studied to evaluate the effect of ﬁtness function

Evaluate fitness function (Eqn. (16) or (17)) weights on the limits and locations of DGs.

Table 4 shows the optimization results of DG at different loca-

tions in recloser–fuse region for App5 with different weights. This

Select Parent from the population

table just shows a sample of results. When it is required to consider

Creation of offspring chromosomes via a certain term in the objective function, except for the ﬁrst term,

crossover & mutation the corresponding weighting factor, i.e. W2, W3 and/or W4, is set

to zero. However, it is required to consider all terms in the objective

Perform Load flow, short circuit, coordination margin, voltage

function, the corresponding weighting factors, i.e. W2, W3 and W4,

profile, power losses, and total fault current calculations

are set to 0.25. Weights are selected considering the four terms of

the multi-objective function as the same, while the operator has

Evaluate fitness function (Equ. (16) or (17))

Extract offspring

the freedom of choice to determine the weights. The selection of

population's the coordination margin constraint weight (W5 = 1000) is based

Yes fitness statistics

Termination criteria on merging the constraint with the objective function so that the

satisfied? & perform ﬁtness function equals the resulting value of objective function. In

No crossover and

mutation addition, the product of coordination margin and its weight is equal

Print unit output power and power flow results to zero.

Stop

7.1. Case 1: DGs located in recloser–fuse region

Fig. 4. Flowchart of GA evaluation process for the proposed framework.

For a fault at F1, the fuse operating time decreases with the

increase of the DGs rating. On the other hand, the recloser operating

Optimal Power Flow (OPF) is developed to calculate the volt- time is not affected because the fault occurred at the DGs terminals.

age proﬁle, power losses, and per fault voltage for each individual. At the same time, the network fault current decreases due to the

This step depends on update the system data while DG unit insert- increase of the terminal voltage of recloser. Thus, the operating

ing through cable and transformer. The previous processes are times of recloser and feeder-relay decrease maintaining their coor-

repeated while changing the DG location and penetration level in dination for a wide range of DG ratings. On the other hand, the fault

order to recloser modiﬁed. currents through recloser and feeder-relay are still the same com-

pared to the case without DGs since DG is located at fuse terminals

7. Results and discussions only.

The maximum capacity of DG that can be installed in the

The proposed ﬁtness function, including the multi-objective recloser–fuse zone is 2.55 MW at bus 23 alone. Alternatively, the

function and system constraints, which refer to the problem formu- maximum capacity of DG unit at bus 17 alone is 4.69 MW. This

lation is implemented on the adopted distribution system shown capacity satisﬁes the coordination between the recloser and fuse

in Fig. 1. The optimization process considers the coordination for traditional protection scheme. Fig. 5 shows the maximum lim-

between the protective devices with and without modifying the its of a single DG unit at different locations with a fault at F1 for

recloser fast curve. The ﬁtness function is investigated based on ﬁve conventional and modiﬁed recloser characteristics. In addition, all

approaches. The ﬁrst approach (App1) considers only the capac- values shown in this ﬁgure are obtained according to App 1.

ity limits in the objective function. The second approach (App2) is To verify the validity of the various cases shown in Fig. 5, the

when voltage regulation is also considered in the objective function. fault currents of the fuse and recloser are investigated for a fault

The third approach (App3) is when the power losses is added in the

objective function. The fourth approach (App4) considers the volt-

12 11.348 10.852 Convenonal

age regulation and total fault current level but not the power losses.

Modiﬁed recloser

DG Capacity (MW)

Finally, the ﬁfth approach (App5) is when all terms are incorporated 10 8.858

7.436

in the objective function. 8 6.975

Different scaling factors are used for different terms in the objec-

4.69

4.59

6 5.014 4.267

4.11

3.71

3.57

2.87

2.55

4

range. From experience, the proposed normalization values are set

as: voltage proﬁle (C2 = 100), total system fault current (C3 = 0.001) 2

and power losses (C4 = 10). The selection of these normalization 0

factors is based on normalization of the different terms of the objec- Bus 17 Bus 18 Bus 19 Bus 20 Bus 21 Bus 22 Bus 23

DG locaon

tive function so the resulting value of the objective function is

still meaningful. The corresponding scaling factors are refers to the Fig. 5. Max limits of a single DG at different location with a fault at F1 for conven-

reference value (DG capacity), C2 is the relation between the pu tional and modiﬁed recloser.

H.A. Abdel-Ghany et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 128 (2015) 113–122 119

10 Fuse 100A TC

0.25

0.75

0.91

0.53

0.34

0.27

0.27

0.28

0.16

98.23

0.04

Fuse 100A MM

3.6

5 Fast Recloser Curve

0

0

1371

S low Recloser Curve

15

Feeder Relay

0.75

0.25

1.44

1.33

0.17

4.07

0.06

98.06

Time (s)

1.3

0

0

0

0

0

0

1344

14

Recloser-Fuse

C.M 0.0242 s

0.1

0.13

0.22

4.42

0.22

97.93

4.07

0.06

0.8

0.2

0

0

0

0

0

0

13411

13

Fault current see n by Fuse

858.91A

1330.86A

0.01

0.43

2.47

1.21

4.11

0.18

0.06

98.05

400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

0.2

0.8

0

0

0

0

0

0

12465

Current (A)

12

fault at F1.

0.25

0.75

4.56

4.56

0.25

97.48

0.06

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1336

at F1 after inserting a 2.55 MW DG unit at bus 23as an example.

11

The calculated fault currents are shown in Fig. 6. It is clear that the

coordination margin is satisﬁed. Similar results are obtained for

0.33

0.67

4.56

4.56

0.25

97.48

0.06

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1336

10

recloser–fuse region and different ﬁtness functions for a fault at

F1. The best location and maximum sizing of the DGs are the com-

0.75

0.25

4.69

4.69

0.24

0.06

97.4

1336.9

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

and fuse. It can be concluded that App5 results in the highest pen-

9

function as shown in Table 6.

4.69

4.69

0.24

0.06

0.8

0.2

97.4

1336.9

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

8

Both active and reactive power losses are reduced in the feeder

with the increase of DG penetration. The power losses decrease

0.57

0.48

0.54

3.67

0.16

1.08

0.06

98.05

0.5

0.5

1339.7

0

0

0

0

fault current level is increased in the feeder with the increase of DG

7

penetration.

Optimization results of DG at different location in recloser–fuse region for App5 with different weights.

4.59

4.59

0.25

97.48

0.06

0.5

0.5

1339.8

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

6

beside the loads near fuse zone. The minimum value of Nediba

feeder voltage proﬁles from substation to fuse location and total

0.95

0.74

0.43

0.48

3.64

0.16

98.22

1.04

0.04

0.3

0.3

0.2

0.2

1358.2

fault current at fault bus are given in this table. Similarly, the volt-

0

age proﬁle and fault current level under best situation considering

5

App5 comprises all objective functions at the same time. In the

0.99

0.69

0.57

0.25

0.23

0.43

0.19

3.35

0.15

97.97

0.06

0.1

0.3

0.3

0.3

other words, all objective terms are enhanced at the same time

1500

4

ratings with different locations in recloser–fuse region and dif-

0.96

0.72

0.44

0.47

3.65

0.16

0.98

1.06

0.04

0.4

0.2

0.2

0.2

1358.4

0

3

from 4.69 MW to 11.35 MW without and with a recloser setting

0.24

0.36

0.35

0.19

3.05

0.07

0.7

0.1

0.1

0.1

1348.4

0

0

0

4

98

2

near recloser.

Table 8 shows the results when a fault occurs at F1 with modiﬁed

0.25

0.25

0.25

0.25

0.57

0.48

0.54

3.67

0.16

1.08

0.06

98.05

1339.7

1

0

0

all objective functions at the same time. The total fault current

1

becomes the same for all approaches due to the high DG pene-

tration.

Min voltage%

Loss-MVAR

Max. limit

Loss-MW

Bus 17

Bus 18

Bus 19

Bus 21

Bus 22

Bus 23

Bus 20

Table 4

Case

When the fault occurs at F1, the fuse and recloser operat-

W1

W2

W3

W4

If

120 H.A. Abdel-Ghany et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 128 (2015) 113–122

Table 5

DG penetration limits with different DG locations in recloser–fuse region with a fault at F1.

Location of DG

App. Bus 17 Bus 18 Bus 19 Bus 20 Bus 21 Bus 22 Bus 23 Max. limits

At one bus 4.69 4.59 4.11 3.71 3.57 2.87 2.55 4.69

App1 4.69 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.69

App2 0 4.59 0 0 0 0 0 4.59

App3 1.08 1 0.57 0.48 0.54 0 0 3.67

App4 4.69 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.69

App5 1.08 1 0.57 0.48 0.54 0 0 3.67

Table 6

Optimal system variables with different approaches for DG located in recloser–fuse region with a fault at F1.

Loss-MVAR 1.0457 0.244 0.244 0.1583 0.244 0.1583

Min voltage% 83.3972 97.40 97.40 98.052 97.40 98.052

If 877.68 1337 1337 1339.7 1337 1339.7

Table 7

DG penetration limits with different DG locations in recloser–fuse region with a fault at F1 with modiﬁed recloser fast curve.

Location of DG

App Bus 17 Bus 18 Bus 19 Bus 20 Bus 21 Bus 22 Bus 23 Max. limits

At one bus 11.35 10.85 8.86 7.44 6.98 5.01 4.27 11.35

App1 11.35 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.35

App2 10.08 0 0 0 0.38 0 0 10.46

App3 5.28 0.78 0.61 0.35 0.05 0.37 0.35 7.79

App4 8.07 0 1.63 0 0 0 0 9.7

App5 5.43 0.76 0.47 0.33 0.22 0.28 0.36 7.85

Table 8

Optimal system variables with different approaches for DG located in recloser–fuse region with a fault at F1with modiﬁed recloser fast curve.

Loss-MVAR 1.0457 0.244 0.2211 0.1528 0.1905 0.1532

Min voltage% 83.3972 97.402 98.175 98.0622 98.0335 98.0686

If 877.68 1668.3 1668.4 1668.4 1668.4 1668.4

Table 9

DG penetration limits with different DG positions in relay–recloser region with a fault at F4.

Location of DG

App Bus 4 Bus 7 Bus 10 Bus 12 Bus 13 Bus 15 Bus 16 Max. limit

At one bus 1.68 1.4 1.32 1.26 1.23 1.15 1.14 1.68

App1 1.68 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.68

App2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.14 1.14

App3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.14 1.14

App4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.14 1.14

App5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.14 1.14

relay–recloser region. The operating times of protective devices 35 33.10 33.10 33.10 33.10 33.10

F1 F4

decrease when DG units are located near the relay, and it is higher in

30

case when DG units are located near the recloser. This is attributed

DG Capacity (MW)

path is larger. The maximum limit of DG rating that satisﬁes the 20

coordination between the recloser (fast curve) and fuse is 33.1 MW. 15 12.45

10.78

For any fault at F4, the fault current through feeder-relay will

10

not change from the value without DG located near recloser but

1.68

1.40

1.32

1.26

1.23

1.15

1.14

rating that satisﬁes the coordination between the relay and recloser 0

(slow curve) is 1.68 MW. Bus 4 Bus 7 Bus 10 Bus 12 Bus 13 Bus 15 Bus 16

Fig. 7 shows the limits of the DG rating with different positions DG location

in relay–recloser region for a fault at F1 and F4 after modifying

Fig. 7. DG penetration limits with different DG positions at one bus and fault loca-

recloser fast curve. The maximum limit of DG rating is reduced

tions at F1 or F4.

from 33.1 to 1.68 MW to achieve all margins of coordination with a

H.A. Abdel-Ghany et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 128 (2015) 113–122 121

Table 10

Active and reactive power loss, total fault current and minimum value of voltage proﬁle with different DG positions in relay–recloser region and a fault at F1 and F4.

Loss-MVAR 1.0457 0.6337 0.723 0.723 0.723 0.723

Min voltage% 83.3972 89.6635 95.8824 95.8824 95.8824 95.8824

If1 877.68 959.2322 1.0585 1.0585 1.0585 1.0585

If4 1254.4 1386.9 1.5526 1.5526 1.5526 1.5526

Table 11

DG penetration limits with different DG positions along feeder.

Bus 4 to 15 Bus 16 Bus 17 Bus 18 Bus 19 Bus 20 Bus 21 Bus 22 Bus 23 Max. limit

F1 33.1 10.78 4.69 4.59 4.11 3.71 3.57 2.87 2.55 33.1

F1 & F4 0 1.14 0.73 0.60 0.30 0.19 0.16 0.32 0.47 3.91

Table 12

DG penetration limits with different DG positions at all buses and fault locations at F1 with modiﬁed recloser fast curve.

Bus 4 to 15 Bus 16 Bus 17 Bus 18 Bus 19 Bus 20 Bus 21 Bus 22 Bus 23 Max. limit

F1 33.1 10.78 11.35 10.85 8.86 7.44 6.98 5.01 4.27 33.1

F1 & F4 0 1.14 5.99 0.55 0.33 0.22 0.01 0.37 0.01 8.62

modiﬁed recloser setting. From the ﬁgure, the best location of the Following the same procedure, Table 14 shows the limits of DG

distributed generation is a DG unit located in relay–recloser section ratings with their different locations in recloser–fuse region and

and close to the relay. different approaches for a multi fuse after modifying recloser fast

Table 9 shows the DG penetration limits with different DG pos- curve. The results summarized in this table are attained consid-

itions in relay–recloser region for a fault at F4. The best location ering all terms in the objective function (as in App5). The best

and maximum sizing of the DGs are the combination of DG units alternatives to distribute units at different buses keep coordination

keeping a suitable coordination margin between recloser and relay. margin between recloser and multi fuses with the recloser. Thus,

Omitting the voltage proﬁle, total fault current and power losses it is logic to obtain reduced value compared to 2.605 MW when

and considering only the DG capacity in the objective function considering the coordination between recloser–fuse as shown in

results in placing the DG near the relay. On the other hand, consid- Table 14.

ering the voltage proﬁle, total fault current and/or power losses in The results of the network with DG units include the cases of

the objective function, results in locating the DG near the recloser. conventional protection scheme and modiﬁed recloser fast curve.

Thus similar results are obtained for App2, App3, App4, and App5 The voltage proﬁle and power losses are improved in case 3 as com-

as shown in the table. Table 10 shows the active and reactive power pared to case 1 and case 2. On the other hand the fault current level

loss, total fault current and minimum value of voltage proﬁle with is increased as shown in Table 13. This is due to the insertion of DG

different DG positions in relay–recloser region and a fault at F1 and units with high capacity beside the loads (along the feeder).

F4. The optimization problem is formulated considering the four

commonly-used factors affecting the selection of DG units. When

7.3. Case 3: DG located along feeder it is not required to consider a certain term in the objective function,

except for the ﬁrst term, the corresponding weighting factor is set to

DG rating limits for different DG positions along feeder for a zero. In addition, any other factor, such as total harmonic distortion

fault at F1 considering all terms in the objective function (App5) (THD) and number of control actions, can be added without any

are shown in Table 11. The best alternative is to distribute units at modiﬁcation of the methodology. For example a term describing

different buses keeping coordination margin between recloser and the summation of total harmonic distortion can be added to the

fuse. objective function using a suitable weighting factor. However, THD-

From Table 11, the maximum penetration of DG is reached when based objective function can be ignored as the THD of inverter-

seven units are connected at different buses in the recloser–fuse based distributed generation can be generally improved either by

region. On the other hand, the maximum capacity of DG units when involving harmonic ﬁlters or using suitable control.

located in relay–recloser region is found to be 1.14 MW. This value The algorithm is used in the planning stage to deﬁne the maxi-

is obtained from a single unit located at bus 16. This value takes mum limits of DG units that can be inserted in the network without

into account the coordination for the entire feeder. Thus, it is logic affecting the coordination problem. In addition, it deﬁnes the best

to obtain reduced value compared to 4.36 MW when considering

the coordination between recloser–fuse as shown in Table 10. In a Table 13

similar way, the DG penetration limits with different DG positions Active and reactive power loss, total fault current and minimum value of voltage

at all buses and different fault locations with modiﬁed recloser fast with different DG positions along feeder fault locations at F1 and F4.

Table 13 shows the active and reactive power loss, total fault Loss-MW 0.4441 0.0595 0.0594

current and voltage values with different DG positions along the Loss-MVAR 1.0457 0.1413 0.1464

feeder and fault locations at F1 and F4 according to case 3. In addi- Min voltage% 83.3972 98.0902 98.1128

tion, the simulation results of the system with and without DG units If1 877.68 1404.6 1668.3

If4 1254.4 2059.6 2805

are summarized in Table 13.

122 H.A. Abdel-Ghany et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 128 (2015) 113–122

Table 14

DG penetration limits with different DG positions at all buses and multi fuse with modiﬁed recloser fast curve.

* * * *

Bus 4 to 15 Bus 16 Bus 17 Bus 18 Bus 19 Bus 20 Bus 21 Bus 22 Bus 23 Max. limit

Min V (%) 98.08 Ploss 0.061 Qloss 0.1417

*

Fuse location.

location of these units with maximizing capacity to increase the feeder, in: Proceedings of the 15th International Middle East Power Systems

beneﬁts. The methodology deals only with this problem, while the Conference (MEPCON’12), December, 2012, Alexandria University, Egypt, 2012,

pp. 23–25.

operation is another problem that can be handled by the operator [4] P.P. Barker, R.W. Mello, Determining the impact of distributed generation on

of an independent system operator (ISO) of the system. power systems: Part 1—Radial distribution systems, Power Eng. Soc. 3 (2000)

1645–1656 (Summer Meeting, 2000. IEEE).

[5] S.A.M. Javadian, M.-R. Haghifam, S.M.T. Bathaee, M. Fotuhi Firoozabad, Adap-

8. Conclusion tive centralized protection scheme for distribution systems with DG using risk

analysis for protective devices placement, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 44

A proposed multi-objective function is developed to deﬁne (1) (2013) 337–345.

[6] A. Kamel, M.A. Alaam, A.M. Azmy, A.Y. Abdelaziz, Protection coordination for

the setting and sizing of DGs in the distribution system keeping distribution systems in presence of distributed generators, Electr. Power Com-

the classical protection scheme unchanged. The coordination con- pon. Syst. 41 (15) (2013) 1555–1566.

straint, including fuse–recloser and recloser–relay schemes, has [7] S. Kwon, C. Shin, W. Jung, Evaluation of protection coordination with distributed

generation in distributed networks, in: Proceedings of the 10th IET Interna-

been added to the multi-objective function in an augmented ﬁt-

tional Conference on Developments in Power System Protection (DPSP 2010),

ness function. The modiﬁed fast curve-based recloser setting has January 2010, pp. 74–78.

been used with the DG in order to increase the sizing of DG. The [8] V. Calderaro, V. Galdi, A. Piccolo, P. Siano, A Petri net based protection monitor-

ing system for distribution networks with distributed generation, Elect. Power

possibility of minimizing the network power losses, improving

Syst. Res. 79 (9) (2009) 1300–1307.

voltage proﬁle and reducing fault current level without replacing [9] A.F. Naiem, Y. Hegazy, A.Y. Abdelaziz, M.A. Elsharkawy, A classiﬁcation tech-

the existing protection system have been emphasized in the results nique for recloser–fuse coordination in distribution systems with distributed

considering single and multi DG units. generation, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery 27 (1) (2012) 176–185.

[10] J.C. Hernandez, J. De la Cruz, B. Ogayar, Electrical protection for the grid-

In practice, the choice of the best location may not be always interconnection of photovoltaic-distributed generation, Elect. Power Syst. Res.

possible owing to many constraints. However, the analysis recom- 89 (2012) 85–99.

mends that the maximum levels of DGs can be achieved when [11] IEEE Standards Coordinating Committee 21 (IEEE SCC21), IEEE Standard for

Interconnecting Distributed Resources with Electric Power Systems, IEEE Std.,

located in recloser–fuse region, especially near recloser location 2003, pp. 1–28, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/IEEESTD.2003.94285

without considering other factors. On the other hand, if the tech- [12] S. Chaitusaney, A. Yokoyama, An appropriate distributed generation sizing

nical constraints are taken into account, the optimal location of considering recloser–fuse coordination, in: Proc. IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Trans-

mission and Distribution Conf. Exhibit., 2005, pp. 1–6.

the DG units will be close to the fuse location. As a result, the [13] J. Sadeh, M. Bashir, E. Kamyab, Effect of Distributed Generation Capacity on the

maximum capacity of the DG units will be reduced by 21% com- Coordination of Protection System of Distribution Network, Transmission and

pared with its value when the technical constraints were not taken Distribution Conf. and Exp., IEEE Press, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, 2010, pp.

110–115.

into account. In brief, the optimal setting and sizing of DG depends

[14] M. Thakur, S.S. Meghwani, H. Jalota, A modiﬁed real coded genetic algorithm

on the optimization strategy of the operator according to the con- for constrained optimization, Elect. Power Syst. Res. 235 (4) (2014) 292–317.

cerned priorities and status of power system. [15] J.O. Kim, D.J. Shin, J.N. Park, C. Singh, Atavistic genetic algorithm for economic

dispatch with valve point effect, Elect. Power Syst. Res. 62 (3) (2002) 201–207.

[16] L. Sun, Y. Zhang, C. Jiang, A matrix real-coded genetic algorithm to the unit

References commitment problem, Elect. Power Syst. Res. 76 (9–10) (2005) 716–728.

[17] D. He, F. Wang, Z. Mao, Hybrid genetic algorithm for economic dispatch with

[1] P. Trichakis1, P.C. Taylor, P.F. Lyons, R. Hair, Predicting the technical impacts of valve-point effect, Elect. Power Syst. Res. 78 (4) (2008) 626–633.

high levels of small-scale embedded generators on low-voltage networks, IET [18] S. Porkar, P. Poure, A. Abbaspour Tehrani-fard, S. Saadate, Optimal allocation

Renew. Power Gener. 2 (4) (2008) 249–262. of distributed generation using a two-stage multi-objective mixed-integer-

[2] H. Zayandehroodi, A. Mohamed, H. Shareef, M. Mohammad Jafari, M. Farhood- nonlinear programming, Eur. Trans. Electr. Power 21 (2010) 1072–1087.

nea, A novel protection coordination strategy using back tracking algorithm for [19] S.A. Hossini, S.S.K. Madahi, F. Razavi, M. Karami, A.A. Ghadimi, Optimal sizing

distribution systems with high penetration of DG, in: 2012 IEEE International, and siting distributed generation resources using a multi objective algorithm,

Power Engineering and Optimization Conference (PEDCO), Melaka, Malaysia, Turk. J. Electr. Eng. Comp. Sci. 21 (2013) 825–850.

2012, pp. 187–192. [20] M.A. Abido, A novel multiobjective evolutionary algorithm for environmen-

[3] N.I. Elkalashy, N.F. Sherbilla, A.I. Taalab, T.A. Kawady, Distributed generation tal/economic power dispatch, Elect. Power Syst. Res. 65 (1) (2003) 71–81.

with fault current limiter impacts on recloser–fuse protection for distribution

- Duquesne-Light-Co-State-Tax-AdjustmentUploaded byGenability
- REC DrawingsUploaded byNagesh Rao
- 2019 GE Protection FundamentalsUploaded bymoisesramos
- Electrocution RefineryUploaded bysonn the great
- Impact of severe storms on power gridsUploaded byvojislavs
- PUD No 1 of Clark County - CommercialUploaded byGenability
- Supply CodeUploaded bySandeep Mathur
- ABBNG Profile 2009Uploaded bybjinx26
- CableTroll_3500Uploaded bylbk50
- dfgfg fgsrUploaded bySiva Vemuri
- Power Distribution SubstationsUploaded byzbjumalon
- 01226462Uploaded bytissatom
- 05739138Uploaded bykarpagasenthilpandy
- ABB GridShieldUploaded byJuanes Cevallos
- Implementation of Full Adaptive Technique ToUploaded byanoopeluvathingal100
- Distributed GenerationUploaded byBibhudatta Patnaik
- A Critical Analysis of Grounding Practices for Railroad Tracks in Electric Utility StationsUploaded byCarlos Fernandez
- Volume 4Uploaded byPulkit Sethi
- Solar Guidelines_ TelganaUploaded byvineets058
- DistributionUploaded byvenki249
- Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co - May 1, 2017 Back-Up ServiceUploaded byGenability
- 4Uploaded byPedjaVujic
- 5Uploaded byPedjaVujic
- Electrical - Main.pdfUploaded byvitthal
- 2015 Renewable Generation and Distribution Grid Expansion Planning.pdfUploaded bybdsrl
- CIRED2015_0068_finalUploaded byjkingjam
- EDS Lesson Plan 2018-2019 EEE-1 _1.pdfUploaded bySheri Abhishek Reddy
- Single and a Half BusbarUploaded byDaniel Yustriandi
- Power supply for Kertajati Aerocity 5 dec 2016.docxUploaded byArief Eko
- PhilDistCode.pdfUploaded byJoeDabid

- Utility Scale Solar Power Plants: A Guide for Developers and InvestorsUploaded byIFC Sustainability
- Module 6-Relay Setting Principles for Transmission Line Protection.pdfUploaded bySe Samnang
- FlyerUploaded bySe Samnang
- Autocoordination of Protection Settings of Series ReclosersUploaded bySe Samnang
- Guide to the Installation of Photovoltaic SystemsUploaded byWorcester Renewables
- IEEE Seminar - Fundamentals of Modern Protective Relaying - Part1Uploaded bylisused
- Fuse Saving Schemes in Feeder Relays-GET-8395.pdfUploaded bybillionsweepsanon2349
- P92x_EN_TDS_C34Uploaded bySe Samnang
- South African Grid Code Requirements for Renewable Power Plants - Version 2 8Uploaded bySe Samnang
- How to Design Solar PV SystemUploaded byMeena Dhillon
- EDD Regulation for Electricty Installaltions _En.pdfUploaded bySe Samnang
- Technical Expert to PVUploaded bySe Samnang
- rcd_handbook_dec_2010_49836.pdfUploaded byIbrahem Hussein
- 4.0 NEC and PV.keyUploaded bySe Samnang
- Rule 21 Generator Interconnection Basics.pdfUploaded bySe Samnang
- SCE InterconnectionHandbook GoodUploaded bySe Samnang
- Autoreclose.pdfUploaded bySe Samnang
- 00868775Uploaded byFilipe Costa
- 2.a Novel Fault Current Control Scheme to Reduce Synchronous DG’s Impact on Protection CoordinationUploaded bySe Samnang
- 14. an Adaptive Relaying Scheme for Fuse Saving in Distribution Networks With Distributed GenerationUploaded bySe Samnang
- An Appropriate Distributed Generation Sizing Considering Recloser-Fuse CoordinationUploaded bySe Samnang
- 25-Dynamic Model Validation of PV Inverters Under Short Circuit ConditionUploaded bySe Samnang
- Master Thesis Sample1Uploaded bySe Samnang
- WECC Solar Plant Dynamic Modeling GuidelinesUploaded byOoi Ban Juan
- JCBoemer_On_Stability_of_Sustainable_Power_Systems_June2016 Good with DG penetration with Data.pdf1.pdfUploaded bySe Samnang
- Impact of Distributed Generation on Protective RelaysUploaded bySe Samnang
- Study of Solving the Coordination CurveUploaded bySe Samnang
- Fault Analysis of a Grounding TransformerUploaded bySe Samnang

- ACTreading ReportUploaded bycarlacunhamarques2379
- aprilshowersgoals docUploaded byapi-213873867
- accounting information systems.pptxUploaded byYuswadi Mulya
- 15-07-27 Corel Software v. Microsoft Patent Infringement ComplaintUploaded byFlorian Mueller
- Example Calculations for ISO 12759(1)Uploaded byGilberto Mtz Gomez
- List of Online Applications Received-converted DoctorsUploaded byChandan Prasad
- Aquino vs. DelizoUploaded byDix Bartolome
- Teen DiaryUploaded byzrombie7
- Active Directory Service InterfacesUploaded byJosué López Acosta
- Lucy PoemsUploaded byMarija2803
- Narendra KancherapalliUploaded bysunilchopsey
- The Sound of English Free SampleUploaded byKarito Di Pietro
- Leadership StylesUploaded byk2gobe
- 97285223 Micro Finance Complete Project VijayUploaded bytafakharhasnain
- 4Core1600Twins-P35Uploaded byVera Trivan
- Equity Valuvation of FMCG Sector- ITC CompanyUploaded bySomu Hudgi
- 10 Philippine Herbal Medicines Approved by the Department of HealthUploaded byGil Benedict Labuac
- Www.studyrankers.comUploaded bySrinivas Kamapantula
- ECO 372 Final ExamECO 372 Week 5 Final Exam Answers free | UOP StudentsUploaded byUOP Students
- Milestone CertificateUploaded byBryan Gavigan
- eportfolio paper finalUploaded byapi-385640092
- Introduction to Business1Uploaded byShahid Hasan
- 2017 Deloitte Global Human Capital Trends- Rewriting the Rules for the Digital Age4670Uploaded byImad Khwaja
- Consumer SurplusUploaded bysamyee
- The Pink SwastikaUploaded byiustitiaprime
- Sr Kg 2015-16Uploaded bysabinayou
- BIOFUELS and SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY Problematizing the Energy Crisis Introduction:Uploaded byArs Synthetica
- PROYECTO C5Uploaded byJordy Lapa Ramos
- Bag-ong Lamdag (new light)Uploaded byTeresita Espina
- Computer Incident Response Team 641Uploaded byMahmoud Wagih