Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Electrical Power and Energy Systems 29 (2007) 713–719

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijepes

Combined heat and power economic dispatch by harmony

search algorithm
a,*
A. Vasebi , M. Fesanghary b, S.M.T. Bathaee a

a
Power System Research Laboratory, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, K.N.Toosi University of Technology,
322-Mirdamad Avenue West, 19697 Tehran, Iran
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, 424-Hafez Avenue, Tehran, Iran

Received 19 September 2006; received in revised form 30 May 2007; accepted 9 June 2007

Abstract

The optimal utilization of multiple combined heat and power (CHP) systems is a complicated problem that needs powerful methods
to solve. This paper presents a harmony search (HS) algorithm to solve the combined heat and power economic dispatch (CHPED) prob-
lem. The HS algorithm is a recently developed meta-heuristic algorithm, and has been very successful in a wide variety of optimization
problems. The method is illustrated using a test case taken from the literature as well as a new one proposed by authors. Numerical
results reveal that the proposed algorithm can find better solutions when compared to conventional methods and is an efficient search
algorithm for CHPED problem.
Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Economic dispatch; Combined heat and power; Harmony search algorithm; Optimization

1. Introduction growing, more experience will be needed regarding the effi-

The conversion of primary fossil fuels, such as coal and
gas, to electricity is a relatively inefficient process. Even the
most modern combined cycle plants can only achieve effi-
ciencies of between 50–60%. Most of the energy that is
wasted in this conversion process is released to the environ-
ment as waste heat. The principle of combined heat and
power, also known as cogeneration, is to recover and make
beneficial use of this heat, significantly raising the overall
efficiency of the conversion process. The very best CHP
schemes can achieve fuel conversion efficiencies of the
order of 90%. Cogeneration systems have now been exten-
sively utilized by the industry. They can be constructed in
urban areas and used as distributed electrical energy
sources. Applications of cogeneration systems are still
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 2188462459; fax: +98 2188462066;
mobile: +98 9329411278.
E-mail address: amir_vasebi@yahoo.com (A. Vasebi).
cient operation for more energy saving.
Economic dispatch must be applied in order to obtain
the optimal utilization of CHP units. The primary objective
of economic dispatch is to minimize the total cost of gener-
ation while honoring the operational constraints of the
available generation resources. Complication arises if one
or more units produce both electricity and heat. In this
case, both of heat and power demands must be met
concurrently.
Some researches worked in the field of the combined
heat and power economic dispatch (CHPED) problem
[1–9]. Rooijers and van Amerongen [1] presented a two-
level strategy, the lower level solves economic dispatch
problem for the given power and heat lambdas, and the
upper level updates the lambda’s sensitivity coefficients.
The procedures are repeated until the heat and power
demands are met. Guo et al. [2] decomposed the CHPED
problem into two sub-problems, that is, the heat dispatch
and the power dispatch. The two sub-problems are
connected by the heat-power feasibility constraints of

0142-0615/$ - see front matter Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijepes.2007.06.006
714 A. Vasebi et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 29 (2007) 713–719

cogeneration units. The analysis and interpretation of the increases as the power generation decreases. The CHP eco-
connection have led to the development of the two-layer nomic dispatch problem of a system is to determine the
algorithm. The outer layer uses the Lagrangian relaxation unit heat and power production so that system production
(LR) technique to solve the power dispatch, and the inner cost is minimized while the heat-power demands and other
layer uses the gradient searching method to solve the heat constraints are met. Mathematically, the problem is to min-
dispatch with the unit heat capacities passed by the outer imize the following objective function:
layer. Song and Xuan [3] employed an improved penalty X
np X
nc X
nh
function formulation for the genetic algorithm (GA) to Minimize C¼ ci ðpi Þ þ cj ðhj pj Þ þ ck ðhk Þ ð1Þ
solve the CHPED problem. Chang and Fu [4] used a i¼1 j¼1 k¼1
multi-objective method by using a fuzzy decision index X
np X
nc
and GA to a seven-generator sample system. Song et al. Subject to pi þ pj ¼ P D ð2Þ
[5] introduced an ant colony search algorithm (ACSA) i¼1 j¼1

approach for CHPED problem. Sudhakaran and Slocha- X

nc X
nh

nal [6] employed a hybrid of genetic algorithm with tabu hj þ hk ¼ H D ð3Þ

j¼1 k¼1
search (GT) and applied it to a four-unit system. Su and
Chiang [7] used an incorporated algorithm (IGA_MU) pmin
i 6 pi 6 pmax
i ; i ¼ 1; . . . ; np ð4Þ
for combined heat and power economic dispatch based pmin
j ðhj Þ 6 pj 6 pmax
j ðhj Þ; j ¼ 1; . . . ; nc ð5Þ
on an improved genetic algorithm (IGA) which equipped
hmin
j ðp j Þ 6 hj 6 hmax ðpj Þ; j ¼ 1; . . . ; nc ð6Þ
with an improved evolutionary direction operator. Addi- j

tionally a multiplier updating has been used to avoid hmin

k 6 hk 6 hmax
k ; k ¼ 1; . . . ; nh ð7Þ
deforming the augmented Lagrange function but resulting
where C is the total heat and power production cost ($), c is
in difficulty of solution searching.
the unit production cost ($), p is the unit power generation,
This paper will introduce a harmony search (HS) algo-
h is the unit heat production, HD and PD are the system heat
rithm to solve the CHPED problem. Harmony search algo-
and power demands, i, j and k are the indices of conven-
rithm is a new technique in the field of optimization and it
tional power units, cogeneration units and heat- only units
is a powerful and general global optimization method,
respectively, np, nc, nh are the numbers of the kinds of units
which does not require the strict continuity of classical
mentioned above, pmin and pmax are the unit power capacity
search techniques. The HS algorithm has been successfully
limits, and hmin and hmax are the unit heat capacity limits.
applied to a number of optimization problems [10–15]. The
Usually the power capacity limits of cogeneration units
four-unit system proposed by Gou et al. [2] which is a stan-
are functions of the unit heat productions and the heat
dard test case in this field has been used as a first case
capacity limits are functions of the unit power generations
study. A new test system has been designed by the authors.
[2].
The new system augments the above mentioned system
with new generation units.
3. Harmony search algorithm
2. Formulation of the CHPED problem
Harmony search (HS) algorithm was recently developed
Fig. 1 shows the heat-power feasible operation region in an analogy with music improvisation process where
(FOR) of a combined cycle cogeneration unit. The feasible music players improvise the pitches of their instruments
operation region is enclosed by the boundary curve ABC- to obtain better harmony [10]. The steps in the procedure
DEF. Along the boundary curve BC, the heat capacity of harmony search are shown in Fig. 2. They are as follows
[15]:

Step 1: Initialize the problem and algorithm parameters.

Step 2: Initialize the harmony memory.
Step 3: Improvise a new harmony.
Step 4: Update the harmony memory.
Step 5: Check the stopping criterion.

These steps are described in the next five subsections.

3.1. Initialize the problem and algorithm parameters

In Step 1, the optimization problem is specified as

follows:

Fig. 1. Feasible operation region for a cogeneration unit.

minff ðxÞjx 2 Xg subject to gðxÞ P 0 and hðxÞ ¼ 0 ð8Þ
 A. Vasebi et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 29 (2007) 713–719 715

Fig. 2. Optimization procedure of the harmony search algorithm.

where f(x) is the objective function and g(x) is the inequal- GA [12]. Here, HMCR and PAR are parameters that are
ity constraint function; h(x) is the equality constraint func- used to improve the solution vector. Both are defined in
tion. x is the set of each decision variable, xi, and X is the Step 3.
set of the possible range of values for each decision vari-
able, that is Lxi 6 Xi 6 Uxi, where Lxi and Uxi are the lower 3.2. Initialize the harmony memory
and upper bounds for each decision variable. The HS algo-
rithm parameters are also specified in this step. These are In Step 2, the HM matrix is filled with as many ran-
the harmony memory size (HMS), or the number of solu- domly generated solution vectors as the HMS
tion vectors in the harmony memory; harmony memory 2 3
x11 x12 . . . x1N 1 x1N
considering rate (HMCR); pitch adjusting rate (PAR); 6 x2
number of decision variables (N) and the number of impro- 6 1 x22    x2N 1 x2N 77
6 7
visations (NI), or stopping criterion. 6 .. . . . .. 7
.
HM ¼ 6 . .. .. .. 7 ð9Þ
The harmony memory (HM) is a memory location 6 7
6 HMS-1 7
where all the solution vectors (sets of decision variables) 4 x1 xHMS-1
2 . . . xHMS-1
N 1 xHMS-1
N 5
are stored. This HM is similar to the genetic pool in the xHMS
1 xHMS
2 ... xHMS
N 1 xHMS
N
716 A. Vasebi et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 29 (2007) 713–719

3.3. Improvise a new harmony

A new harmony vector, x0 ¼ ðx01 ; x02 ; . . . ; x0N Þ, is generated

based on three rules: (1) memory consideration, (2) pitch
adjustment and (3) random selection. Generating a new
harmony is called ‘improvisation’ [15].
In the memory consideration, the value of the first deci-
sion variable (x01 Þ for the new vector is chosen from any
value in the specified HM range (x11  xHMS 1 Þ. Values of
the other decision variables ðx02 ; x03 ; . . . ; x0N Þ are chosen in
the same manner. The HMCR, which varies between 0
and 1, is the rate of choosing one value from the historical
values stored in the HM, while (1  HMCR) is the rate of
randomly selecting one value from the possible range of
values.
( Fig. 3. Feasible operation region for the cogeneration unit 2 (case study
  I).
x0i 2 x1i ;x2i ; ...; xHMS with probability HMCR
x0i i
x0i 2Xi with probability ð1  HMCRÞ
ð10Þ

For example, a HMCR of 0.85 indicates that the HS

algorithm will choose the decision variable value from his-
torically stored values in the HM with the 85% probability
or from the entire possible range with the 100–85%
probability. Every component obtained by the memory
consideration is examined to determine whether it should
be pitch-adjusted. This operation uses the PAR parameter,
which is the rate of pitch adjustment as follows:

Yes with probability PAR
Pitch adjusting decision for x0i
No with probability ð1  PARÞ
ð11Þ
The value of (1  PAR) sets the rate of doing nothing. If
the pitch adjustment decision for x0i is Yes, x0i is replaced
as follows: Fig. 4. Feasible operation region for the third unit of case study I and
second unit of case study II.
x0i x0i  r and ðÞ  bw ð12Þ
where bw is an arbitrary distance bandwidth, r and () is a
random number between 0 and 1.
In Step 3, HM consideration, pitch adjustment or ran-
dom selection is applied to each variable of the new har-
mony vector in turn.

3.4. Update harmony memory

If the new harmony vector, x0 ¼ ðx01 ; x02 ; . . . ; x0N Þ is better

than the worst harmony in the HM‘, judged in terms of the
objective function value, the new harmony is included in
the HM and the existing worst harmony is excluded from
the HM.

3.5. Check stopping criterion

If the stopping criterion (maximum number of improvi-

sations) is satisfied, computation is terminated. Otherwise,
Steps 3 and 4 are repeated. Fig. 5. Convergence history for case study I.
 A. Vasebi et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 29 (2007) 713–719 717

Table 1
Optimal results for case study I
Methods Optimal results Cost ($)
p1 p2 h2 p3 h3 h4
IGA_ MU [7] 0.00 160.00 39.99 40.00 75.00 0.00 9257.07
GA [3] 0.00 159.23 39.94 40.77 75.06 0.00 9267.20
LR [2] 0.00 160.00 40.00 40.00 75.00 0.00 9257.07
ACSA [5] 0.08 150.93 48.84 49.00 65.79 0.37 9452.20
GT [6] 0.00 157.92 26.00 42.08a 89.00a 0.00 9207.64
Proposed method 0.00 160.00 40.00 40.00 75.00 0.00 9257.07
a
Outside the feasible operating region of cogeneration unit 3.

Table 2 two cogeneration units and a heat-only unit. The objective

Scenarios for ceteris paribus analysis of convergence behavior is to find the minimum overall cost of units subject to con-
Scenario HMCR HMS PAR C ($) straints on heat and power production and demands. The
Standard 0.80 6 0.5 9257 heat-power feasible operation regions of the cogeneration
2 0.95 6 0.5 9323 units are illustrated in Figs. 3 and 4. The cost functions
3 0.20 6 0.5 9699 of the units are as follows:
4 0.80 1 0.5 9433
5 0.80 30 0.5 9488 c1 ¼ 50p1 ð13Þ
6 0.80 6 0.3 9272
7 0.80 6 0.8 9263 c2 ¼ 2650 þ 14:5p2 þ 0:0345p22 þ 4:2h2 þ 0:03h22 þ 0:031p2 h2

ð14Þ

c3 ¼ 1250 þ 36p3 þ 0:0435p23 þ 0:6h3 þ 0:027h23 þ 0:011p3 h3

ð15Þ

c4 ¼ 23:4h4 ð16Þ
X
4
Minimize C¼ ci i ¼ 1; . . . ; 4 ð17Þ
i¼1

Subject to 0 6 p1 6 150 MW ð18Þ

0 6 h4 6 2695:2 MWth ð19Þ
P D ¼ p1 þ p2 þ p3 ð20Þ
H D ¼ h2 þ h3 þ h4 ð21Þ
The system power and heat demands are 200 (MW) and
115 (MWth), respectively.
Fig. 6. Feasible operation region for the cogeneration unit 2 (case study
II).

4. Case studies

Two examples the one which is taken from the optimiza-

tion literature and the other one that is proposed by
authors are used to show the validity and effectiveness of
the proposed algorithm. The first example has been previ-
ously solved using a variety of other techniques (both evo-
lutionary and traditional mathematical programming
methods). For both case studies presented in this paper,
the HS algorithm parameters were set as follows:
HMS = 6, HMCR = 0.85 and PAR = 0.5.

4.1. Case study I

This case study was originally proposed by Gou et al. Fig. 7. Feasible operation region for the cogeneration unit 4 (case study
[2]. The problem consists of a conventional power unit, II).
718 A. Vasebi et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 29 (2007) 713–719

Table 3
Optimal results for case study II
Cases Method Demand Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Unit 5 C ($)
PD HD P1 P2 h2 P3 h3 P4 h4 h5
I HS 300 150 134.74 48.20 81.09 16.23 23.92 100.85 6.29 38.70 13723.20
GA 135.00 70.81 80.54 10.84 39.81 83.28 0.00 29.64 13779.50
II HS 250 175 134.67 52.99 85.69 10.11 39.73 52.23 4.18 45.40 12284.45
GA 119.22 45.12 78.94 15.82 22.63 69.89 18.40 54.99 12327.37
III HS 160 220 41.41 66.61 97.73 10.59 40.23 41.39 22.83 59.21 11810.88
GA 37.98 76.39 106.0 10.41 38.37 35.03 15.84 59.97 11837.4

After 25,000 function evaluations the best solution is c1 ¼ 254:8863 þ 7:6997p1 þ 0:00172p21 þ 0:000115p31 ð22Þ
obtained at (p1 = 0, p2 = 160, h2 = 40, p3 = 40, h3 = 75, c2 ¼ 1250 þ 36p2 þ 0:0435p22 þ 0:6h2 þ 0:027h22 þ 0:011p2 h2
h4 = 0) with corresponding function value equal to
ð23Þ
$9257.07 as shown in Fig. 5. No constraints are active
for this solution. Table 1 presents the best solution of this c3 ¼ 2650 þ 34:5p3 þ 0:1035p23 þ 2:203h3 þ 0:025h23 þ 0:051p3 h3
problem obtained using the HS algorithm and compares ð24Þ
the HS results with solutions reported by other researchers. c4 ¼ 1565 þ 20p4 þ 0:072p24 þ 2:3h4 þ 0:02h24 þ 0:04p4 h4
It is obvious from the Table 1 that the result obtained using
HS algorithm is the same as the best known solution ð25Þ
reported previously in the literature [2,7]. Although c5 ¼ 950 þ 2:0109h5 þ 0:038h25 ð26Þ
Sudhakaran and Slochanal [6] reported better solution, X
4
however, this solution due to violation of constraints is Minimize C¼ ci i ¼ 1; . . . ; 5 ð27Þ
not feasible. i¼1
To determine the impacts of different parameters of the Subject to 35 6 p1 6 135 MW ð28Þ
HS algorithm on the solution quality and convergence
0 6 h5 6 60 MWth ð29Þ
behavior, an empirical study is performed. To show the
effects of single parameter changes, seven different scenar- P D ¼ p 1 þ p2 þ p 3 þ p 4 ð30Þ
ios are tested as shown in Table 2. Each scenario is tested H D ¼ h2 þ h3 þ h4 þ h5 ð31Þ
over 30 runs and maximum number of iterations is fixed
Boiler and generator output constraints are listed in
to 40,000 for all runs. In Table 2 the average total cost
Eqs. (28) and (29). The feasible operating region of cogen-
for case study(I) is summarized.
eration units 2–4 are shown in Figs. 4, 6 and 7, respectively.
As mentioned earlier, the HMCR determines the rate of
The performance of the proposed algorithm is validated by
choosing one value from the historical values stored in the
means of comparison with an existing method such as
HM. The larger the HMCR is the less exploration is
genetic algorithm. Table 3 shows the results obtained from
achieved; and the algorithm further relies on stored values
the HS algorithm and GA method for three different heat
in HM and this potentially leads to the algorithm getting
and power demand cases. The results indicate that the pro-
stuck in a local optimum. On the other hand, choosing
posed approach can yield to better results in comparison
the HMCR too small decreases the algorithm efficiency
with those obtained using GA.
and the HS algorithm behaves like a pure random search,
with less assistance from the historical memory. As shown
in Table 2 large and small HMCR values lead to a decrease 5. Conclusion
in the solution quality. Large and small HMS values
decreases the efficiency of the harmony memory as seen This paper has introduced a harmony search algorithm
in Table 2. For most problems, a HMS between N and to solve the combined heat and power economic dispatch
2N is reasonable. It is observed that the algorithm has problem. The method illustrated using two test cases; one
small sensitivity to PAR values. is taken from the literature and the other one proposed
by authors. Three demand cases from the new test system
4.2. Case study II have been shown in details. The proposed new test system
can be used as a standard test system for assessing cogen-
A new test system is used to show the effect of the pro- eration economic dispatch algorithms. The results obtained
posed method. This problem consists of a conventional by the proposed method are compared against those gener-
power unit, three cogeneration units and a heat-only unit. ated with other (evolutionary and mathematical program-
The cogeneration unit 2 is taken from the previous case ming) techniques reported in the literature and they
study and the cost functions of the units are shown in clearly demonstrate that the proposed method is practical
Eqs. (22)–(26). and valid for CHPED applications.
 A. Vasebi et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 29 (2007) 713–719
Acknowledgement
The assistance and suggestions of Mrs. M. Partovi are
kindly acknowledged.
References
[1] Rooijers FJ, van Amerongen RAM. Static economic dispatch for
cogeneration systems. IEEE Trans Power Syst 1994;9 (3):1392–8.
[2] Guo T, Henwood MI, van Ooijen M. An algorithm for combined
heat and power economic dispatch. IEEE Trans Power Syst 1996;11
(4):1778–84.
[3] Song YH, Xuan QY. Combined heat and power economic dispatch
using genetic algorithm based penalty function method. Electric
Mach Power Syst 1998;26:363–72.
[4] Chang CS, Fu W. Stochastic multi-objective generation dispatch of
combined heat and power systems. IEE Proc-Gen Trans Distrib
1998;145 (5):583–91.
[5] Song YH, Chou CS, Stonham TJ. Combined heat and power
economic dispatch by improved ant colony search algorithm. Electric
Power Syst Res 1999;52:115–21.
[6] Sudhakaran M, Slochanal SMR. Integrating genetic algorithms and
tabu economic dispatch search for combined heat and power. Power
Syst Stabil Control 2003:67–71.
719
[7] Su CT, Chiang CL. An incorporated algorithm for combined heat
and power economic dispatch. Electric Power Syst Res
2004;69:187–95.
[8] Wong Kit Po, Algie Cameron. Evolutionary programming approach
for combined heat and power Dispatch. Electric Power Syst Res
2002;61:227/232.
[9] Eriksen Peter Børre. Economic and environmental dispatch of
power/CHP production systems. Electric Power Syst Res
2001;57:33–9.
[10] Geem ZW, Kim JH, Loganathan GV. A new heuristic optimization
algorithm: harmony search. Simulation 2001;76 (2):60–8.
[11] Kim JH, Geem ZW, Kim ES. Parameter estimation of the nonlinear
Muskingum model using harmony search. J Am Water Resour Ass
2001;37 (5):1131–8.
[12] Geem ZW, Kim JH, Loganathan GV. Harmony search optimization:
application to pipe network design. Int J Model Simulat 2002;22
(2):125–33.
[13] Lee KS, Geem ZW. A new structural optimization method based on
the harmony search algorithm. Comput Struct 2004;82 (9-10):781–98.
[14] Geem ZW, Tseng C, Park Y. Harmony search for generalized
orienteering problem: best touring in China. Springer Lect Notes
Comput Sci 2005;3412:741–50.
[15] Lee KS, Geem ZW. A new meta-heuristic algorithm for continues
engineering optimization: harmony search theory and practice.
Comput Method Appl Mech Eng 2004;194:3902–33.