Analyzing the Impact of Battery Electric Vehicles
on Distribution Networks Using Nondeterministic
Model
V. Zdraveski, P. Krstevski, J. Vuletic, J. Angelov,
A. Krkoleva Mateska, M. Todorovski
Ss. Cyril and Methodius University
Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Information Technologies
Skopje, Republic of Macedonia
Abstract— As the penetration of electric vehicles (EV) and
plug in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) increases, the
requirement of the charging infrastructure will have an impact
on the distribution network parameters and components,
especially with the growth of sale of such vehicles. In order to
estimate this impact, probabilistic load flow method based on
Monte-Carlo simulation has been developed. The variables that
depend on the vehicles driving cycle have been obtained with
data extraction from the 2017 National Household Travel
Survey (NHTS). In addition, general household load has also
been considered in the simulation. Simulation results show
which network components could not withstand the simulated
penetration level and what measures can be taken.
Keywords—Electric vehicles (EV), Plug in hybrid electric
vehicles (PHEV), Monte Carlo simulation, 2017 NHTS
I. INTRODUCTION
With the rising level of air pollution throughout the world,
there is a higher pressure on national governments to take
measures that will prevent the increasing concentration of
pollutants. Furthermore, the rising concentration of
greenhouse gasses is a reality that has to be considered.
Therefore, in 2015 a total of 195 countries signed the first
climate change agreement which is legally binding [1].
Vehicles with internal combustion contribute with 16% to the
global carbon dioxide emissions resulting from human
activities [2]. Therefore, some national governments are
introducing incentives for PHEV and EV in a form of free
parking, free insurance and other subsidies.
Marketing activities favoring the battery electric vehicles
(BEV), from national governments and automobile industry,
will definitely increase the number of BEV on the streets. It is
expected that the combined sale share of PHEV/EV will be
50% by 2050 [3]. Therefore, the impact from the BEV
charging on the distribution network (DN) should be
investigated.
For the purposes of this paper, a simulation model has
been developed in order to estimate the impact coming from
BEV charging requirements. The charging demand of BEV
mainly depends on:
• Electric vehicle parameters (such as battery
capacity, electricity consumption per km, power
of charger and other parameters that are industry
defined).
• Driver behavior, i.e. driven distance per day and
mode of driving (sport mode or driving mode).
978-1-5386-9301-8/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE
If BEV are present in the DN, the daily load profile
depends on factors that are uncertain, such as the number of
charged BEV, their charging level, battery capacity, daily
driven distance of the vehicles, energy consumption of the
vehicles etc. Furthermore, the daily household load is
uncertain as well. Probabilistic load flow (PLF) is essential
tool in order to take into account uncertainties [4]. The
techniques for solving PLF can be classified in three
categories: Monte Carlo (MC) simulation, analytical methods
and approximate methods [5]. The MC method uses
deterministic approach to solve the problem in each step. All
uncertain variables in each step are randomly chosen. On the
other hand, analytical methods require mathematical
assumptions and convolution techniques to obtain
mathematical description of the behavior of output random
variables. Approximate methods provide description of the
statistical properties of output random variables [6]. The
computational time for solving the problem with analytical
and approximate methods is much shorter than the
computational time needed for MC simulation. However,
usually results calculated with analytical and approximate
methods are verified against results calculated with MC
method [6]-[9]. In addition, the results from this model can be
used for DN planning and in such case the calculation speed
does not have significant role. Therefore, MC method has
been chosen to solve the PLF in this model.
There are several approaches when modeling BEV
charging load profile (BCLP). For example, in [10] and [11]
the BCLP is modelled as a function of two random variables:
the start charging time (described by uniform or normal
distribution) and BEV battery state of charge at the start
charging time (described by uniform distribution). If data
coming from transportation surveys is used for modeling the
BCLP, results from the simulation model will be much
trustworthy. Therefore, in [12] the BCLP is extracted as a
function of four parameters: daily driven distance, start
charging time, BEV type and charging level. The first three
parameters are obtained from 2001 NHTS data [12].
For the purposes of this paper, the BCLP will be modeled
similarly as in [12]. Instead of using the 2001 NHTS, in this
model data from 2017 NHTS [13] has been used. Also, there
is a difference in extracting the daily driven distance per
vehicle. The procedure is explained in Section II.A.
For increasing accuracy of simulation results, the
uncertainty of the daily household load is also included.
Detailed information on how the uncertainty of the household
load is modeled, are provided in Section II.D.
1
 It may be assumed that the daily charging demand of BEV first person of the house with ID 30000082 has made five trips
will coincide with the overall peak load [14]. This can lead to during the day with vehicle ID 2. The last trip finished at
low voltage profiles in some parts of the DN. 17:26h and the total miles driven during the day are calculated
with the following equation:
One approach for solving this problem is to introduce
smart charging techniques that will shift the peak load from Tn
BEV charging. However, these smart charging techniques d m = ¦ Tmi (1)
may produce discomfort in everyday life, for example when i =1
the owner wants to charge the BEV as fast as possible [15], where d m is the total driven mileage during the day, Tm is
[16]. In order to implement smart charging techniques, smart
grid technology must be installed. Most of the present DNs do individual trip miles and Tn is the total number of trips made
not have such technology installed. during the day, using the same vehicle. Information about the
house ID and the vehicle ID from the trippub.csv file, should
Other approach for solving the problem is to reinforce the be cross-referenced with house ID and vehicle ID from the
DN only in those parts where the parameters, such as voltages, vehpub.csv file in order to extract information about the
are not satisfactory. This reinforcement can be done with vehicle type.
installing additional cables with larger cross sections. The
network reinforcement may also be seen as a tool to help smart Additional information that can be extracted from
charging techniques do the peak load shaping more easily. vehpub.csv is the annual driven miles for vehicles that are not
This would be a case since partially reinforced network will incorporated in trippub.csv. If the vehicle was not used during
require less interventions in the daily load curve shaping. The the day when the data were collected (e.g. vehicle with ID 1,
benefits of the reinforcements will be more pronounced if we from Table II), no record for that vehicle could be found in the
detect the critical network parts more precisely. Therefore, in trippub.csv file. For such cases, the daily driven miles are
this paper we are focusing on a creation of a model for calculated when the annual driven miles are divided by 365
pointing out the buses/lines of the DN where the voltage [12].
profiles are unsatisfactory, due to the charging of BEV. This As a result, more than 200,000 daily driven distances and
approach will be analyzed in details in the further sections of more than 150,000 vehicles arriving times have been obtained.
this paper. The daily driven distances are converted from miles to
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE SIMULATION TOOL kilometers. In addition, the distribution of different vehicle
types is obtained from vehpub.csv as shown in Table III.
A. Data extraction from 2017 NHTS
Fig. 1 depicts the distribution of vehicles by daily traveled
The aim of this paper is to analyze the DN given that the kilometers. This figure goes in favor of using BEV as city
daily load profile depends on two sets of variables: one commuters, since it depicts that 69% of vehicles drive less
coming from the BCLP and the other from the household than 50 kilometers per day, a distance that is easily reachable
general load. In order to support the process of randomly by today’s BEV all electric range (AER).
chosen values for BEV battery state of charge and vehicle
arrival time, set of data from the 2017 NHTS database is TABLE I EXAMPLE – TRIPPUB.CSV DATA EXTRACTION
extracted. There are four files in the 2017 NHTS report, but
only two of them are needed in order to simulate the BCLP: HOUSEID PER.ID TDTRPNUM ENDTIME TRPMILES VEHID
trippub.csv and vehpub.csv. The travel information were 30000082 1 1 7:52 2.710 2
collected between April 2016 and May 2017 [13]. 30000082 1 2 8:13 1.432 2
In the trippub.csv file, there are more than 900,000 records 30000082 1 3 8:28 0.777 2
of individual daily trips. Some of the data are not used in this 1 4 16:57 1.075 2
30000082
paper, because they contain information for trips that were
made by walking or using public transport. The following 30000082 1 5 17:26 2.727 2
steps have to be taken in order to filter only the relevant data
for simulation of BCLP: TABLE II EXAMPLE – TRIPPUB.CSV AND VEHPUB.CSV CROSS
• Trips attributed to vehicle passengers should be REFERENCE
deleted (e.g.: if two people are driving in a car, HOUSEID VEHID VEHTYPE ANNMILES
two individual trips are recorded in the
30000082 1 1 15000
trippub.csv file).
30000082 2 1 8000
• Only trips made by sedan, SUV, van or pickup
(information about the trip mode can be found
under TRPTRANS in 2017 NHTS Codebook TABLE III VEHICLE TYPE DISTRIBUTION
[13]), should be taken into consideration. Sedan [%] SUV [%] Van [%] Pickup [%]
• Trips made by walking, or by other means of 50.72 25.47 5.37 18.44
transport such as boat, public transport or train
should be removed.
After the trippub.csv file is filtered, extraction of relevant
data can be made. From this file, two sets of data are obtained:
vehicle arrival time and the daily driven distance. In Table I,
an example from the data is presented, which indicates that the

2

Fig. 1 Precentage of vehicles versus kilometers driven
Fig. 2 Percentage of vehicles versus arrival time
On the other hand, Fig. 2 depicts that vehicles arrival time
on a daily basis is concentrated in the period from 15:00h to
21:00h. It is reasonable to assume that if EV owners start
charging upon their arrival [17], an overlap will occur between
peak load coming from household consumption and peak load
coming from EV charging.
B. Modeling BCLP for a single BEV
In order to simulate the charging behavior of a single BEV,
the following information must be provided:
• Daily driven kilometers ( d km ) .
• Time of arrival of BEV (start of charging).
• Type of charger ( Pch ) .
• Type of the vehicle.
• Battery capacity in kWh ( Bcap ) .
• Energy Consumption of BEV (ECBEV)
• Electrical energy needed for charging the BEV.
The first parameter, the daily driven distance, is randomly
chosen from the extracted data. According to Fig. 1, there is
3
69% chance that the randomly chosen value will be less than
50 km.
The second parameter, the time of arrival of BEV, is also
randomly chosen value from extracted data. According to Fig.
2, there is 63% chance that the arriving time of the BEV will
be between 15:00h and 21:00h.
In [17], an assumption is made that the efficiency of the
charger is 88%. In [18] the active component of the charging
current is equal to 10A. In this paper, both of these parameters
are used for simulating charger power. The single-phase
charger power and the three-phase charger power can be
calculated with the following equations:
U1 p ⋅ I
Pch,1 p = (2)
ξ
3 ⋅U3 p ⋅ I
Pch,3 p = (3)
ξ
where U 1 p is the nominal single phase voltage (230 V), U 3 p
is the nominal three phase voltage (400 V) and ξ is the
charger efficiency. The power factor of both chargers is
assumed to be cos ϕ = 0.95 .
The type of charger is randomly chosen with 70% chance of
choosing single-phase charger. The distribution with regard to
charger type is estimated value. With this attribute, it is
possible to investigate the outlook of the BCLP as a function
from distribution of single phase and three phase chargers.
The energy consumption for different types of BEV is
presented in Table IV. The values for vehicle type “sedan” and
“SUV” are taken from Table I from [17] and for “van”, the
value is derived from the data of Ford Connect Electric
Azzure. In addition, the value for the “pickup” is derived from
the data available for the Rivan’s R1T pickup. If one assumes
that the weight of the battery does not influence the ECBEV,
battery capacity for different AER can be calculated as:
Bcap = ECBEV ⋅ AER (4)
TABLE IV CONSUMPTION OF DIFFERENT VEHICLE TYPES
Vehicle type ECBEV (kWh/km)
Sedan 0.1616
Van 0.3164
SUV 0.2858
Pickup 0.2907
Using (4), battery capacity for different types of vehicles
and different AER can be calculated. The results for BEV with
48, 64 and 96 kilometers of AER are shown in Table V. The
battery capacity is randomly chosen, as a function of the BEV
type. Battery state of charge (SOC) upon arrival mainly
depends on ECBEV and daily driven distance and it is not
necessary for modeling the BCLP.
TABLE V CALCULATED BATTERY CAPACITY FOR BEV WITH
DIFFERENT RANGE
Vehicle type BEV48 (kWh) BEV64 (kWh) BEV96 (kWh)

Sedan 7.8 10.4 15.6

Van 15.3 20.4 30.5

SUV 13.8 18.4 27.6

Pickup 14.0 18.7 28.1

On the other hand, energy needed to charge the BEV is

information that has to be provided for the modeling purposes.
Upon arrival of the BEV the electrical energy Ech needed to
fully charge the battery is calculated with:

­°Bcap d km ≥ AER Fig. 3 Stochstically generated daily BCLP for two vehicles
Ech = ® (5)
°̄ECBEV ⋅ d km d km < AER by the procedure explained in Section II.B, additionally taking
into consideration the vehicles type distribution from Table
In order to calculate the time needed to fully charge the III. All of these daily BCLPs are then randomly distributed
battery, (6) can be used. among network buses for each MC step.

E Fig. 4 depicts the cumulative stochastically generated

Tch = ch
Pch ⋅ ξ
An example of stochastically generated daily BCLPs for
two BEV are depicted on Fig. 3. The first one is generated for
the case when a single-phase charger is used. The second one
is generated for the case when three-phase charger is used.
Both vehicles are from the same type, have traveled similar
distance, have same battery capacity and arrived at different
time.
C. Modeling BCLP for a fleet of BEV
The first parameter that has to be known (or estimated),
when modeling the impact from a fleet of BEV, is the number
of households that are served by the considered DN.
By using data from vehpub.csv file, the average number of
cars per household is calculated as:
N veh, NHTS
vehav = = 1.9755
N hh, NHTS
(6) BCLP for 64 BEV, connected for charging on same bus for
one MC step. Detailed information about the DN will be
presented in Section III.
D. Modeling of daily general household load
Accounting uncertainty when modeling the general
household load adds additional unpredictability of the
outcome from the simulation model.
In order to generate cumulative daily load profile for all
the households connected at one bus, load coefficients for
every 15-minute interval are extracted from Figure 9 from
[14]. The load coefficients are calculated as the average value
of 1000 households load demand during weekday, divided by
the maximum average power.
For each 15-minute interval, the corresponding load
coefficient is multiplied by a random value from the standard
normal distribution (SND), given with (8). In (9), the mean
value of the SND is set to be equal as the deterministic value
(7) of the load power at the corresponding bus i , from the
analyzed DN.

where N hh , NHTS and N veh, NHTS are the total number of

households and vehicles respectively. With the parameter
vehav and the number of households in the area of interest,
the total number of vehicles in that area can be estimated.
Then, the total number of BEV in the area can be calculated
by multiplying the estimated number of vehicles by the
penetration level of BEV.
Finally, the connection point of each individual BEV has
to be determined. In this model, the bus for BEV charging will
be randomly chosen among the buses from the DN, but only
to those buses, who have general household load connected.
For each individual MC step, the number of stochastically
generated daily BCLP for a single vehicle is equal to the
calculated number of BEV in that area. The BCLPs are created
Fig. 4 Cumulative BCLP for BEV connected at same bus

4
 Fig. 5 Five cumulative load profiles for an area
With this approach, random variance of the deterministic load
power, for every time interval is obtained. The standard
deviation σ i is set to be 10% from its mean value μi and it
is calculated with (10).
Pi , j = c j ⋅ random( μi , σ i )
(8)
i = 1, 2...Nbus ; j = 1, 2...96
μi = Pdiscrete, i
(9)
σ i = 0.1 ⋅ μi (10)
For every new MC step, the procedure explained above is
repeated and new daily load profiles representing the general
household load are obtained. The daily load profile for five
consecutive MC steps (days) for one bus, are depicted by Fig.
5. Capasso with bottom up approach in [19] predicts the daily
load profile for an area as a cumulative from all of the
households in that area. In [19], the daily load profile for one
household is represented as a function of: socioeconomic,
demographic, lifestyle of residences in the area of interest and
operation behavior of relevant household appliances. Both
approaches, the one presented in [19] and the one presented
in this paper, give similar results. In both cases, the extreme
values occur during the same time-interval of the day and
there is a similarity in the power deviation.
III. CASE STUDY
In order to test the functionality of the proposed model, a
test network from Matpower database is used [20]. The
network has radial topology with 69 buses as depicted in Fig.
6. The base voltage is Ub = 12.7 kV and the base apparent
power is Sb = 10 MVA .
The sum of all active power loads, for all buses in the
network is Pt = 3800 kW. It is assumed that in the observed
network, there are 3,800 households and the average peak
demand is 1 kW [14]. According to (7), the expected number
of vehicles in the same area is approximately 7,500. Assuming
30% penetration level of EV, we obtain an estimate of 2,250
EV in the analyzed DN.
5
Fig. 6 Case 69 from Matpower database
For each of these BEV, the BCLP is stochastically created
according to the procedure from Section II.B. All of these
BEV are randomly distributed among the network buses for
charging. Furthermore, the uncertainty coming from general
household load is also included, as described in Section II.D.
In each MC step, 96 time-intervals are analyzed. One MC step
represents the DN behavior for one day, and with 9,996 MC
steps performed, 1,428 weeks are analyzed. For each time
interval, in every MC step, the load flow equations are solved
with Newton-Raphson method from Matpower 6.0. Most
convenient way in analyzing the DN ability to withstand the
BEV penetration level of interest is to observe the bus voltage
magnitudes.
In Table VI, the mean values of voltage magnitudes are
presented, for buses that are electrically far from the root node,
i.e. supply substation. The worst network conditions, with
regard to the bus voltages, will be at bus 65. Furthermore, the
absolute minimum voltage from all MC steps is
U min = 0.860. It occurred at bus 65 during the 4,229 MC step
(day) at 19:00 hour. The Fig. 7 depicts the voltage magnitude
distribution at bus 65, at 19:00h.
Additionally, the standard EN50160 is used as a check tool
in order to investigate the voltage behavior at buses with 30%
penetration level of BEV. The standard defines the voltage
characteristics of electricity supplied by public DNs.
According to the standard, the voltage magnitude is
acceptable, i.e. of good quality, if it is in the range of ±10%
from its nominal value, for more than 95% of the time in one
week [21].
TABLE VI MEAN VALUE FOR VOLTAGES OF BUSES THAT ARE
ELECTRICALLY FAR FROM ROOT NODE
μU 27 [ pu ] μU 35 [ pu ] μU 46 [ pu ] μU 65 [ pu ]
0.9678 0.9982 0.9984 0.9545
 Fig. 7 Distribution of voltage magnitudes at bus 65, at 19:00 h.
As mentioned above, if one MC step is a representation of
one day, then with 9,996 MC steps, 1,428 weeks are analyzed.
Fig. 8 depicts the percentage of time when the standard is not
fulfilled. From Fig. 8 it can be seen that buses 61, 62, 63, 64
and 65, never fulfill the EN50160 standard with regard to
voltage magnitude. More precisely, the voltage magnitude in
these buses is smaller than 0.9 p.u. for more than 5% of the
time in every week.
In order to get better voltage profiles at these buses, one
possible solution is to implement smart charging techniques.
With this approach, the peak demand from BEV charging will
be shifted from the peak demand from households. Other
possible solution is to add or reinforce lines connecting the
affected buses in the DN in order to improve voltage profiles.
This approach is further investigated and presented below.
Additional cable with the same characteristics as the
existing one is installed between buses 57 and 58, so there are
two cables with same properties running in parallel,
connecting bus 57 and 58. Fig. 9 depicts the percentage of
weeks when the bus voltage magnitude does not fulfill the
EN50160 standard, after installing the additional cable. It is
evident that significant improvement compared to Fig. 8 is
obtained.
Fig. 8 Percent of weeks when EN50160 is not fulfilled
6
Fig. 9 Percent of weeks when EN50160 is not fulfilled - one cable
installed between buses 57 and 58
However, buses 64 and 65 still do not fulfill the EN50160
standard for most of the time (weeks). Therefore, an additional
cable is installed between buses 56 and 57 with same
characteristics as the present cable. In this case, there are two
cables with the same characteristics in parallel connecting
buses 56 and 57. With this final cable installed, the voltage
profiles at buses 64 and 65 are corrected and now they fulfill
EN50160 requirements with respect to the voltage magnitude
for every week analyzed. The selected reinforcements are
introduced without any optimization procedure with only
following the common engineering logic. This could be done
more sophistically, which may be a subject for further work
where smart charging techniques will be taken into account as
well.
The case when BEV penetration level is 50% is also
investigated and the results are shown in Fig. 10. In this case,
there are 3,750 BEV with their charging requirements and it
can be seen that the EN50160 is not met at more busses and
more often than previously. In order to improve the voltage
profiles for 50% penetration level of BEV, a technically and
economically rationalized solution should be implemented
with the help of optimization technique. Such optimization
Fig. 10 Percent of weeks when EN50160 is not fulfilled - two cables
installed, 50% penetration level
technique exceeds the scope of this paper and it will not be
analyzed here.
IV. CONCLUSION
In the years to come the number of BEV will increase,
especially in the big metropolitan areas. Therefore, in this
study, the impact from the charging requirements of BEV on
the radial DN is examined. Furthermore, the uncertainties
from household load were also taken into consideration. As a
result, some parts of common test DN taken from the literature
could not withstand 30% penetration level of BEV, according
to EN50160 standard.
Solution with reinforcing some critical parts of the DN was
considered, which greatly improved the situation. However,
with 50% penetration level of BEV, even the reinforced DN
does not fulfill the EN50160 standard regarding the voltage
magnitude. In this simulation model, the type of charger was
chosen randomly, with 70% share of single-phase chargers. In
a future work, the effect of increased use of three phase
chargers will be investigated.
V. REFERENCES
[1] "Adoption of the Paris Agreement," United Nations,
New York, 2015.
[2] "Climate Change and CO2," Int. Organization of Motor
Vehicle Manufacturers, Paris, 2008.
[3] "Technology Road Map: Electric and Plug in Hybrid
Electric Vehicles," International Energy Agency
Report, 2009; updated 2011.
[4] P. Chen, Z. Chen and B. B. Jensen, "Probabilistic Load
Flow: A Review," in Third International Conference
on Electric Utility Deregulation and Restructuring and
Power Technologies, Nanjing, 2008.
[5] Y. Tung and B. Yen, Hydrosystems Engineering
Uncertainty Analysis, New York: McGraw-Hill, 2005.
[6] M. Morales and P.-R. Juan, "Point Estimate Schemes
to Solve the Probabilistic Power Flow," IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 22, no. 4, pp.
1594-1601, 2007.
[7] G. Li and X.-P. Zhang, "Modeling of Plug-in Hybrid
Electric Vehicle Charging Demand in Probabilistic
Power Flow Calculations," IEEE Transactions on
Smart Grid , vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 492-499, 2012.
[8] J. Usaola, "Probabilistic Load Flow with Correlated
Wind Power Injections," Electric Power Systems
Research, vol. 80, no. 5, pp. 528-536, 2010.
[9] A. Dimitrovski and R. Ackovski, "Probabilistic Load
Flow in Radial Distribution Networks," in Proceedings
of 1996 Transmission and Distribution Conference and
Exposition, Los Angeles, 1998.
[10] T. Tran-Quoe, X. L. Pivert, M. Saheli and O. Beaude,
"Stochastic Approach to Assess Impacts of Electric
Vehicles on the Distribution Network," in 2012 3rd
IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Europe
(ISGT Europe), Berlin, 2012.
[11] T. Tran-Quoc and L. Nguyen-Van, "Integration of
Electric Vehicles into An Industrial Grid: Impact
Assessment and Solutions," in 2016 IEEE Power and
Energy Society General Meeting (PESGM), Boston,
2016.
[12] D. Zahra and F. Mehdi, "Plug-in Hybrid Electric
Vehicles: Charging Load Profile Extraction Based on
Transportation Data," in 2011 IEEE Power and Energy
Society General Meeting, Detroit, 2011.
[13] "2017 NHTS Data User Guide," Administration,
Federal Highway, 2018.
[14] J. Quiros-Tortos, L. Ochoa and T. Butler, "How
Electric Vehicles and the Grid Work Together," IEEE
Power & Energy Magazine, pp. 65-76, 2018.
[15] W. Kempton and J. Tomic, "Vehicle to Grid power
fundamentals: Calculating Capacity and Net Revenue,"
Journal of Power Sources, vol. 144, pp. 268-279, 2005.
[16] W. Kempton and J. Tomic, "Vehicle to Grid Power
Implementation: From Stabilizing the Grid to
Supporting Large Scale Renewable Energy," Journal
of Power Sources, vol. 144, pp. 280-294, 2005.
[17] S. Shafiee, M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad and M. Rastegar,
"Investigating the Impacts of Plug-in Hybrid Electric
Vehicles on Power Distribution Systems," IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid , vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 1351-
1360, 2013.
[18] L. Hui-ling, B. Xiao-min and T. Wen, "Imapcts of
Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles Charging on
Distribution Grid and Smart Charging," in 2012 IEEE
International Conference on Power System Technology
(POWERCON), Auckland, 2012.
[19] A. Capasso, W. Grattieri, R. Lamedica and A.
Prudenzi, "A Bottom-up Approach to Residential Load
Modeling," IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol.
9, no. 2, pp. 957 - 964, 1994.
[20] R. Zimmerman, C. Murillo-Sánchez and others,
"Matpower," [Online]. Available:
http://www.pserc.cornell.edu/matpower/.
[21] "Standard EN50160: Voltage Characteristics in public
Distribution Systems".