See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/333553571

Demand response-integrated economic dispatch incorporating renewable

energy sources using ameliorated dragonfly algorithm

Article  in  Electrical Engineering · June 2019

DOI: 10.1007/s00202-019-00792-y

CITATIONS READS

4 219

4 authors:

Velamuri Suresh S. Sreejith

SASTRA University National Institute of Technology, Silchar
18 PUBLICATIONS   98 CITATIONS    47 PUBLICATIONS   282 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Sureshkumar Sudabattula Vikram Kumar Kamboj

Lovely Professional University Lovely Professional University
17 PUBLICATIONS   80 CITATIONS    40 PUBLICATIONS   600 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

HGWO-PS View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Velamuri Suresh on 03 June 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Electrical Engineering
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00202-019-00792-y

ORIGINAL PAPER

Demand response-integrated economic dispatch incorporating

renewable energy sources using ameliorated dragonfly algorithm
Velamuri Suresh1 · S. Sreejith2 · Suresh Kumar Sudabattula3 · Vikram Kumar Kamboj3

Received: 12 January 2019 / Accepted: 24 May 2019

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Abstract
This paper presents an integrated demand response (DR) and dynamic economic dispatch (DED) model consisting of renewable
energy sources (RESs) and shunt FACTS (flexible AC transmission systems) devices with focus on reducing thermal energy
consumption. RESs are environment friendly and can be located close to the load centers, which helps in reducing T&D
losses as well as harmful emissions. DR helps in reducing peak power consumption and generation cost of thermal power
plants. Shunt FACTS device, static synchronous compensator (STATCOM), helps in improving voltage profile of the network.
Analyses are carried out using the proposed ameliorated dragonfly algorithm (ADFA). The efficiency of developed ADFA
is proved by comparing the obtained results with many other methods. Static economic dispatch is carried out on 6-, 17-
and 40-thermal generator test systems using ADFA, and the results are compared with other existing methods available in
the literature. Further, DED is carried out on 6- and 17-thermal generator test systems. Later, a DED is performed on a
real-time 17-thermal generator (South Indian 86-bus system) system for four seasons. Solar irradiance and wind speed are
modeled using beta distribution and Weibull distribution functions by collecting the historical data of the test system. The
developed demand response program is implemented on a real-time 17 thermal unit and 86-bus test system located in Tamil
Nadu, southern part of India. The developed DR model alters time-independent loads so that burden on generating stations
during the peak load is minimized. The effect of DR, RES and STATCOM in the test system is studied individually. Further,
a comparative analysis considering DR, RES and STATCOM together is presented. The results obtained are promising, and
it can be interpreted that by using the developed model there will be improvement in the penetration levels of RES which in
turn reduces the demand for thermal energy.

Keywords Economic dispatch · Ameliorated dragonfly algorithm · Demand response · Solar · Wind · Static synchronous
compensator

List of symbols PG Total power generated by all resources after schedul-

PD System demand ing
PL Power loss FT Fuel cost of thermal power generated
PT Thermal power generated after scheduling FS Fuel cost of solar power generated
PS Solar power generated after scheduling FW Fuel cost of wind power generated
PW Wind power generated after scheduling TC Total fuel cost

B Velamuri Suresh
velamuri.suresh@gmail.com
1 School of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, SASTRA
University, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu, India
2 School of Electrical Engineering, Vellore Institute of
Technology, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India
3 School of Electronics and Electrical Engineering, Lovely
Professional University, Phagwara, Punjab, India
1 Introduction
Integration of RES into the grid guarantees environment-
friendly sustainable energy systems. Many countries includ-
ing India have set up policies to promote RES which in
turn increase the participation of renewable generation in
electricity market. It is challenging to schedule these RESs
along with traditional power generation due to their intermit-

123

tent nature. Demand response and energy storage (ES) help
in achieving power system flexibility which in turn makes
scheduling easy and cost-effective [1]. ES has certain limi-
tations when they need to be operated in a large system. So
DR is a pertinent solution for obtaining power system flex-
ibility. DR is a change in consumption pattern of electricity
users during peak hours in response to utility [2]. Curtail-
ment of load at peak hours and adjusting the same to the
off-peak hours is one of the simpler ways to enhance the
reliability and efficiency of power systems. Price-based and
incentive-based DR schemes are the possible techniques to
schedule the demand-side resources [3]. These techniques
are implemented by the utility to balance the demand sup-
ply gap, which in turn minimizes the running cost of thermal
generators. Intermittent output from RES affects the day-
ahead generation scheduling which can also be overcome by
implementing DR program.
DR programs are implemented at various levels of the
power systems. Many researchers focused on residential and
industrial DR programs which meet the needs at the dis-
tribution level effectively. Few as such are discussed here.
Price-based DR has been implemented in [4] and [5]. Linking
the consumers sensitive to price with the electricity market
leads to decrease in robustness and increases the risk of fail-
ure of the power system [6].
Optimal scheduling of thermal generators to meet the
power demands at a lower price is called economic dispatch
(ED). Since the generators have diverse costs, it is a com-
petitive problem for retrieving the accurate solution from the
generation mix. In recent years, many computational tech-
niques were developed in the literature for solving static as
well as dynamic ED. References [7] and [8] discuss static
economic dispatch (SED) for traditional thermal generat-
ing units considering various constraints like valve point,
prohibited operating zone (POZ) and transmission losses.
In [9], SED is solved using hybrid gray wolf optimizer for
various test systems. In [10], a hybrid CE and SQP method
for solving ED considering valve point effect is shown and
compared with recent many optimization algorithms. These
methods achieved better results in terms of cost as well
as convergence time. Dynamic economic dispatch (DED)
is solved in [11] and [12] where optimization algorithms
were used to effectively handle the constraints. In [13], a
teaching learning-based optimization technique is used for
solving DED considering spinning reserve constraints. This
method is implemented on different test systems and com-
pared with some other methods. A distributed interior point
method via a θ -logarithmic barrier-based DED is presented in
[14]. Using θ -logarithmic barrier capacity constraints can be
removed. A distributed primal–dual dynamical multi-agent
system is introduced to solve DED in this work. This method
is tested on 6-bus system alone. In [15], ED incorporating
wind power is implemented where probabilistic approach of
123
Electrical Engineering
wind output is considered. In [16], a real-time ED consider-
ing solar and wind sources for a short-term scheduling period
is implemented. Optimal schedule is obtained using best fit
participation method and better solution is achieved. SED
and DED considering solar energy are solved using PSO in
[17]. This work considers cost and emission minimization
simultaneously for a system integrated with multiple ther-
mal and solar plants.
From the above, it is observed that ED is solved consid-
ering thermal generation in the recent past. Recently, with
the increased penetration of RESs, it is necessary to dis-
patch generation-side resources considering the renewable
generators. In recent works, researchers also developed DR
models suitable for implementing along with ED. In [18],
incentive-based DR program considering time-varying load
models for DED is presented. This problem is solved using
random drift PSO algorithm. In [19], ED model consid-
ering DR based on asymmetric block offers is developed.
Here, supermarket refrigeration is considered to schedule the
demand-side resources. This model is utilized in regulating
the demand supply gap by coordinating demand-side as well
as generation-side resources. Only few works focused on
ED considering various DR schemes but somehow the inter-
est shown by the researchers on scheduling the conventional
generators with the RESs and demand-side resources is less.
Many works implementing DR schemes consider domestic,
industrial commercial load patterns for their study. In this
proposed work, agricultural load whose time of operation
and the quantum of power consumption are significant is con-
sidered for the study. These loads being different from other
loads require a new method for reducing the peak demand
which is developed in this paper. It will be more interesting to
reduce the demand supply gap of the utilities by simultaneous
implementation of demand response schemes in conjunction
with ED considering RESs on generation side. Also, it will be
more effective and realistic if seasonal variations of demand
and supply are taken into account. In the defined problem,
the optimal scheduling of generators is attained, which helps
in energy and cost savings and also helps in reducing the
carbon footprint.
The summary of works in this paper are as follows
1. SED is implemented on 6-, 17- and 40-thermal generator
test systems using ADFA, and the results are compared
with existing methods.
2. DED is implemented on 6- and 17-thermal generator test
systems using ADFA method, and the results are com-
pared.
3. A new DR model considering which manages the agri-
cultural loads in countries like India is developed in this
paper.
Electrical Engineering

4. RESs (solar and wind) outputs are estimated using beta supplied and wind power supplied at tth hour, respec-
distribution and Weibull distribution function using real- tively.
time historical data of solar irradiance and wind speed. 2. Fuel cost minimization
5. A shunt FACTS device STATCOM is incorporated in the The quadratic cost function for 24-h time horizon con-
test system, and the analysis is presented. sidering renewable energy is
6. DED considering DR, RESs and STATCOM are simu-
⎧ ⎧
lated, and the obtained results are compared with the ideal ⎨T ⎨N
   n
case. min Fi,t Pi,t + F j,t (Ps j,t )
7. Ameliorated dragonfly algorithm (ADFA), an improved ⎩ ⎩
t=1 i=1 j=1
version of dragonfly algorithm, is developed and utilized

n
for solving the above-mentioned problems. + Fk,t (Pwk )
k=1


N
1.1 Paper organization 
T 
= min (ai .Pi,t 2 + bi .Pi,t + ci )
The rest of the paper is as follows. Section 2 presents problem t=1 i=1
⎫⎫
formulation. Section 3 discusses the proposed ADFA algo- 
n 
n ⎬⎬
rithm. Section 4 presents the detailed results and main finding + (d j .Ps j,t ) + (dk .Pwk,t ) , (5)
⎭⎭
of research work. In Sect. 5, conclusions of the research work j=1 k=1
are presented.
where Fi,t , F j,t Fk,t are the fuel costs and ai , bi , ci , d j , dk
are the fuel cost coefficients of thermal, solar and wind gen-
2 Problem formulation erating sources at tth hour, respectively.
Constraints to be satisfied while solving the problem are
The objective of this work is to reduce the dependability on given by the following equations. Here, Pddr,t is obtained
fossil fuel-based power generation by implementing demand by the model given in Sect. 4.
response and simultaneously considering renewable energy subjected to:
sources. Power balance constraint
The objective functions are as follows:

N 
m 
n

1. Thermal energy minimization Pi,t + Ps j,t + Pwk,t = Pd,t + PL,t (6)

i=1 j=1 k=1

min E th (1)
Renewable capacity constraint
where E th is the energy supplied, given by ⎛ ⎞
m 
n
H ⎝ Ps j,t + Pwk,t ⎠ ≤ τ × Pd,t . (7)
E th = Pi,t . dt (2) j=1 k=1

t=1
Here, Pd,t is the power demand for the system at time t and
and thermal power τ is the penetration level.
Power loss
Pi,t = Prddr,t + PL,t (3)

n 
n 
where PL = Pi Bi j P j + B0i + B00 . (8)
i=1 j=1 i∈ j
 
Prddr,t = Pddr,t − Ps j,t + Pwk,t . (4)
Here, Bi j , B0,i , B00 are the B coefficients for the system.
Here, Pi,t , Prddr,t corresponds to thermal power gen- Generating capacity constraint
erated by ith generator, residual demand after imple-
menting demand response and supplying energy from Pi,t min ≤ Pi,t ≤ Pi,t max (9)
renewable energy resources.
Pddr,t , PL,t , Ps j,t , Pwk,t are the demand response- Here, Pi,t min , Pi,t max are the minimum and maximum limits
implemented power demand, power loss, solar power of thermal power generation of ith generator at tth hour.

123
 Electrical Engineering

Prohibited operating zones (POZ) The time of operation of agricultural load can be shifted and
is represented as follows:
⎧ ⎫
⎨ Pi,t min ≤ Pi,t ≤ Pi,t,1 lb ⎬
Pi,t ∈ Pi,t,k−1 ub ≤ Pgi,t ≤ Pi,t,k lb , k = 2, 3, ...Z i,t Padr,t = Pa,t + Pc,t − Pdc,t , (18)
⎩ ⎭
Pi,t,zi ub ≤ Pi,t ≤ Pi,t max
where
(10)

np
FACTS device constraints Pc,t = Ykc,t ∗ Pkc,t (19)
Shunt converter voltage limit of STATCOM k=1
nd
Vvrmin ≤ Vvr ≤ Vvrmax (11) Pdc,t = Ykdc,t ∗ Pkdc,t (20)
k=1

Shunt converter angle limit of STATCOM

δvrmin ≤ δvr ≤ δvrmax ,
where Vvr and δvr are shunt converter voltage and angle, and
min and max refer to minimum and maximum values of the
represented quantity, respectively.
Ykc and Ykdc are the kth agricultural loads connected and
disconnected at time t.
(12) Pkc,t and Pkdc,t are the power rating of the kth agricultural
load connected and disconnected at time t.
np is the number of agricultural load type.
Now, the new demand profile also follows new load pattern
followed by agricultural loads

2.1 Demand response model Pddr,t = P f ,t + Padr,t . (21)

Demand response is traditional method to conserve electric- From Eq. 18,

ity during peak hours. This method is otherwise called as
technology-enabled economic rationing system for electric Pddr,t = P f ,t + Pa,t + Pc,t − Pdc,t . (22)
power supply. This method helps in bringing additional flex-
ibility to the power system. Here, the loads are classified into This can be proved mathematically:
fixed and time shiftable. Fixed loads are operated only at spe- Case 1: During peak hours, a set of agricultural loads will
cific time of operation, whereas the time-shiftable loads are be disconnected, which indicates that Pdc,t is a real value and
allowed to operate at convenient time of operation. By shift- Pc,t is zero in Eq. 18.
ing the loads from peak hours to off-peak hours, the operating So from Eq. 18 and by subtracting Eq. 21 from Eq. 13
cost for power generation can be minimized [20].
In this scenario, agricultural loads are considered as Pd,t − Pddr,t = Pa,t − Padr,t (23)
time-shiftable loads whose time operation can be altered
accordingly. which indicates Padr,t ≤ Pa,t

Pd,t = P f ,t + Pa,t , (13) Pddr,t ≤ Pd,t . (24)

where Case 2: During the off-peak hours, a set of agricultural

loads are connected which indicates that Pc,t is a real number
 
Pd,t = Pd,1 ; Pd,2 ; Pd,3 ; ........... Pd,H (14) in Eq. 18.
  So from Eq. 18 and by subtracting Eq. 13 from Eq. 21
P f ,t = P f ,1 ; P f ,2 ; P f ,3 ; ......... P f ,H (15)
 
Pa,t = Pa,1 ; Pa,2 ; Pa,3 ; ........... Pa,H . (16) Pddr,t − Pd,t = Padr,t − Pa,t (25)

Here, P f ,t and Pa,t are the fixed load and time-shiftable agri-
cultural loads at time t. It can be noted that for a fixed loading
P f ,t , variation in demand can be achieved by shifting the
agricultural load and the relations can be represented as fol-
lows:
Pd,t ∝ Pa,t . (17)
which indicates Padr,t ≥ Pa,t
Pddr,t ≥ Pd,t . (26)
It can be inferred from the above two cases that connection
and disconnection (changing time of operation) of agricul-
tural loads leads to change in demand profile provided that

123
Electrical Engineering


H 
H short-circuit current of PV module, K v and K i are the voltage
Pd,t = Pddr,t . (27) temperature coefficient and current temperature coefficient,
t=1 t=1
T A , TCY and NOT are the ambient temperature, PV cell tem-
perature and normal operating temperature, respectively.
2.2 Modeling of solar irradiance and output
estimation
2.3 Modeling and estimation of output from wind
For representing solar irradiance, beta distribution function is farm
a perfectly suited probability distribution function in compar-
ison with others. Beta distribution function for a time frame For characterizing wind speed, Weibull distribution function
t is given by is the best suited probability distribution function. Weibull
distribution function for wind speed in a time frame t is given
Γ (αt + βt ) (αt −1) by
f p (s, t) = s ∗ (1 − s)(βt −1) (28)
Γ (αt ) Γ (βt )  kt − 1    
kt vt vt kt
for 0 ≤ s ≤ 1 ; αt , βt ≥ 0 f v (v, t) = . exp −
ct ct ct
where αt and βt are the shape parameters, s is a random
variable, Γ is the gamma function and f p is a beta distribution for ct > 1 and kt > 0 (37)
function.
Here, where
 −1.086
μst βt σvt
αt = (29) kt = (38)
1 − μst μvt

and and
 
μst (1 + μst ) μvt
βt = (1 − μst ) −1 . (30) ct = (39)
σst 2 Γ (1 + 1/kt )

Here, μst and σst indicate mean and standard deviation at For a designed wind turbine, the power output corresponding
hour t. to wind speed is given by
For the PV panel considered, the total power output is
Nv
1
Pwi,t = Pwr ∗ f v (v, t) dv (40)
Psi,t = Po (s) ∗ f p (s, t) ds, (31)
v=1
0 ⎧
⎨ 0 v < vin or v > vout
where Pwr = (a ∗ v 3 + b ∗ Pr ) vin ≤ v ≤ vr (41)
⎩
Pr vr ≤ v ≤ vout
Po (s) = N ∗ FF ∗ Vy ∗ I y . (32)
where
The voltage–current characteristics of a PV module for a
specified radiation level and ambient temperature are calcu- Pr
a= (42)
lated using the following relations: vr3 − vin
3

VMPPT ∗ IMPPT and

FF = (33)
VOC ∗ ISC
Vy = Voc − K v ∗ Tcy (34) vin
3
b= . (43)
I y = s[Isc + K i (Tcy − 25)] (35) vr3 − vin
3
 
NOT − 20
Tcy = T A + s , (36) 2.4 Modeling of STATCOM
0.8

where N is the number of solar panels, F F is the fill fac- STATCOM comprises series connection of voltage-sourced
tor, VMPPT and IMPPT are the voltage and current maximum converter and a tap-changing transformer whose primary is
power point, Voc and Ioc are the open-circuit voltage and connected in shunt with the ac system.

123
 Electrical Engineering

Fig. 1 Equivalent Circuit of

STATCOM

The STATCOM voltage source equation given with solution becomes sub-optimal and approximate which will
respect to Fig 1 is be far beyond the expected result. Therefore, it has become
a challenge to researchers and engineers to solve nonlinear
E vr = VvR (cos δvR + j sin δvR ). (44) problems. Further, in order to always improve the solution of
the nonlinear dynamics different improvements in the exist-
Consider that STATCOM is connected at bus k. From Fig 1, ing methodologies have become a great scope for researchers.
the active and reactive power equations at the converter and Many optimization techniques had evolved in recent years for
bus k are various applications. Few techniques such as [21–36] have
gained popularity in the past decade.
PvR = VvR
2
G vR + VvR Vk [G vR cos(δvR − θk ) Dragonfly algorithm proposed by [37] is a swarm opti-
+ BvR sin(δvR − θk )] (45) mization technique based on the swarming behavior of
dragonflies. Dragonfly algorithm has high adeptness in solv-
Q vR = −VvR
2
BvR + VvR Vk [G vR sin(δvR − θk )
ing complex engineering problems. [37] proved the eminence
− BvR cos(δvR − θk )] (46) of the algorithm by testing it on standard bench-marked test
Pk = Vk2 G vR + Vk VvR [G vR cos(θk − δvR ) functions. In this method, the parameters of exploration and
+ BvR sin(θk − δvR )] (47) exploitation are very well modeled for global optimization.
Dragonflies are basically carnivorous insects which predate
Qk = −Vk2 BvR + Vk VvR [G vR sin(θk − δvR )
other small insects like mosquitoes and butterflies as food.
− BvR cos(θk − δvR )]. (48) The life cycle of dragonflies has two stages, nymph and
metamorphosis. Nymph dragonflies eat marine insects and
also small fish by utilizing their extreme skill of swimming
3 Ameliorated dragonfly algorithm (swarming). Usually, the swarms are both static and dynamic
in nature. Static swarm does hunting in which they form a
Optimization is an important tool for finding a maximum small group and predates small insects confined to a small
or minimum of a function. The optimization techniques area. Dynamic swarms form as large groups, and they travel
are categorized into linear and nonlinear techniques based in one direction for long distances. The main goal of dragon-
on the requirement. Linear optimization refers to solving flies should be attraction to the food source and distraction
an optimization problem for the models which have linear from an enemy. The three important stages in the swarming
characteristics such as lower-order polynomial equations. behavior of dragonflies are explained and mathematically
Nonlinear optimization refers to solving an optimization shown as follows (Fig. 2):
problem consisting of characteristic equations which do not
possess linear relation, and hence these models are often – Separation (S): In this stage, the swarms are separated
solved using heuristic algorithms, for example which do not from other individuals which avoid collision from the
come under linear optimization. As most of the real-world neighbors. This separation is given by
engineering problems are nonlinear, most of the researchers
in the past used to linearize the nonlinear models and solve

N
the optimization problems using linear techniques. The only Si = − X − X j, (49)
disadvantage of linearizing the nonlinear dynamics is that the j=1

123
Electrical Engineering

Fig. 2 a–e Steps for the

proposed ameliorated dragonfly
algorithm

where X and X j are the position of current individual Exploration and exploitation mainly depend on the factors
and neighboring position of jth individual, respectively. S, A, C, F and E. By proper tuning of these parameters,
Number of neighborhoods is given by N . global optimization can be achieved. In the optimization
– Alignment (A): Here, the velocity of each individual is process, neighborhood plays a key role. With the created
matched with the other. Alignment is represented by neighborhood around each individual, the performance of
the dragonflies is extremely achieved.

N
Vj The step vector is updated using the following equation:
j=1
Ai = − X, (50)
N ΔX t +1 = (s Si + a Ai + cCi + f Fi + eE i ) + wΔX t . (54)
where V j is the velocity of neighboring individual j.
– Cohesion (C): This refers to the attraction of the swarm The updated position vector is calculated as follows:
toward the center of the group of swarms
X t +1 = X t + ΔX t+1 . (55)

N
Xj
j=1 The randomness, stochastic behavior of the dragonflies
Ci = − X, (51)
N can be increased by introducing levy flight in the given
where X j is the position of the jth neighboring individual search space, thereby improving the exploration. The posi-
and X is the position of current individual, respectively. tion update of the dragonflies is given by
– Attraction toward the food (F) source is mathematically
represented by X t +1 = X t + Levy(d) × X t , (56)

Fi = X+ − X, (52) where d is the dimension of the search space and t is the

current iteration.
where X + is the food source position and X is the position
Levy flight is given by
of current individual.
– Distraction from the enemy (E) is calculated by
r1 × σ
Levy(d) = 0.01 × 1
, (57)
Ei = X− + X, (53) |r2 | β

where X − is the enemy position and X is the current where r 1 and r 2 are the random numbers in [0, 1], β is a
individual position. constant and σ is given by

123
 Electrical Engineering

⎛   ⎞ β1 the representation of dragon position would be described in

Γ (1 + β) × sin πβ
⎜ 2 ⎟ the form vector length N G . Let N P dragons are taken in the
σ =⎝   
β−1
⎠ . (58)
group; the representation of complete group in matrices form
Γ 1+β2 ×β ×2 2
is given below:
⎡ ⎤
In the proposed ameliorated dragonfly algorithm, the exploita- P11 P12 · · · P1NG
tion phase of the existing algorithm has been further ⎢ P21 P22 · · · P2NG ⎥
Group = ⎢ ⎣ ···
⎥. (63)
improved using modification in the steps of attraction toward ··· Pi j ··· ⎦
food and distraction from the enemy. PN p 1 PN P 2 · · · PN P NG
In order to ameliorate the exploitation phase of classical
dragonfly algorithm, the mathematical expression for attrac-
tion toward food sources can be represented as 3.1.3 Group initialization

Fi = X + − (X ± δ), (59) The initialization of each element described in the above

group matrices occurs randomly within capacity constraint
where X + shows the position of food source and X indicates initialization of dragon which is done through this inequality:
the current individual position.
Also, the modified distraction toward enemies can be cal- P jmin ≤ Pi j ≤ P jmax ,
culated using the following mathematical equation: ∀(i = 1, 2, ....N P ; j = 1, 2, ....N G ) (64)
−
E i = X + (X ± δ), (60) Pi = Pimin + rand () (Pimax − Pimin ). (65)

where X − indicates the enemy position and X represents the

3.1.4 Evaluation of objective function
current position of the individual.

3.1 Mathematical formulation of ameliorated To satisfy energy constraints, one of the committed units is
dragonfly algorithm for ELD chosen as a dependent/slack generator d.
This is represented by
Ameliorated dragonfly algorithm is implemented to eco- j
Pd = Z j , ∀(i = 1, 2, ....N P ; j = 1, 2, ....N G ) (66)
nomic load dispatch (ELD) problem to find the optimal power
solution while minimizing the generation cost of plant at the 
N

same time as meeting the load demand. The mathematical Z = Pd − Pi (67)

i=1,id
formulation of ameliorated dragonfly algorithm for ELD is
given below. If there is violation of operating limit by the production of
dependent/slack generator, then it is set by the following
3.1.1 Implementation equation:
⎧ j
The ADFA can be applied by exploring real power generation 
⎨ Pi ; Pi < Pi
min min
from power station. The economic load dispatch problem can j j
Pd = Pi ; Pi > Pimax
max . (68)
be formulated by the following equations: 
⎩ P j;
i P j ≤ Pi j ≤ P j
min max


n 
n
FT = F(Pi ) = (ai Pi2 + bi Pi + ci ) (61)
3.1.5 Dragonfly updating and movement in position
i=1 i=1
n n
PLoss = PGi Bi j PG j . (62) The separation process in ADFA is updated using the given
i=1 j=1 equation:


N
3.1.2 Dragonfly group representation Si = − P − PJ , (69)
J =1
Real power generation is the decision variable of economic
load dispatch problem. Group formation is done by the real where N represents the number of individuals of the neigh-
power generation. The position of dragon in group is replica boring, P represents the current position of the individual
of the set of real power generation of all committed gener- and PJ indicates the position of J th individual of the neigh-
ation units. Let if N G is the generating units in the system, boring.

123
Electrical Engineering

Fig. 3 Pseudocode for

ameliorated dragonfly algorithm

Alignment process in ADFA can be updated using the dragonflies defined mathematically by
following recursive relation:
ΔPt+1 = (s Si + a Ai + cCi + f Fi + eE i ) + wΔPt , (74)

N
VJ
J =1 where t represents the iteration counter; w represents the
Ai = , (70)
N inertia weight; E i indicates the enemy position of the ith
individual; e represents the enemy factor; Fi represents the
where V J represents the velocity of J th individual of the ith individual food source; f indicates the food factor; ci
neighboring. indicates the cohesion of ith individual; c represents the cohe-
The cohesion in ADFA can be calculated by the following sion weight; Ai represents the alignment of ith individual; a
equation: represents the alignment weight; s indicates the separation
weight; and Si represents the separation of ith individual.

N
PJ The position vectors are calculated after calculating the
J =1 step vector by using the following equation:
Ci = − P, (71)
N
where P represents the current individual position, PJ is the Pt+1 = Pt + ΔPt+1 . (75)
position of J th individual of the neighboring and N indicates
the number of neighborhoods. To get better uncertainty, exploration of the dragonflies and
The attraction toward food sources can be calculated by stochastic behavior, they are essential to fly around the search
the following equation: space by the use of unsymmetrical walk (Levy flight).
The position updating of dragonflies in this condition is
Fi = P + − (P ± δ), (72) performed by using the following equation:

where P + shows the position of food source and P indicates Pt+1 = Pt + Levy(d) × Pt , (76)
the current individual position.
Interruption outwards enemies can be calculated by the where d indicates the dimension of position vectors and t
following equation: indicates the current iteration.
Levy flight is calculated by using the following equation:
E i = P − + (P ± δ), (73)
r1 × σ
Levy(x) = 0.001 × , (77)
where P− indicates the enemy position and P represents the |r2 |1/β
current position of the individual.
The step vector (ΔP) is same as the PSO algorithm veloc- where r1 and r2 represent the two random numbers in the
ity vector, which demonstrates direction of movement of the range [0, 1], and β is a constant.

123
 Electrical Engineering

σ is calculated by using the following equation given

below

0.0325

0.0633
0.0379
⎛ ⎞

11.52

62.02
Time

2.82

0.06
0.71

0.22
NA
NA
NA
6.2
⎜ Γ (1 + β) × sin( Ŏβ/2) ⎟
σ =⎝   
β−1
⎠ (78)
Γ 1+β2 ×β ×2 2
FC ($/Hr)

15,406.51

15446.02
15445.4
15443.1

15450

15452
15443

15447

15450
15450
15450

15459
15466
4 Simulation results
PL (MW)

Static economic dispatch (SED) and dynamic economic dis-

12.9361
12.957
12.446

12.958

12.947
12.947

13.022
12.57

12.55
12.45

12.55

12.47
patch (DED) are performed on various test systems using
12.4

ameliorated dragonfly algorithm. To show the effectiveness

of this method, comparative studies are presented. Further,
DED is implemented on South Indian 86-bus test system
PG (MW)

1275.446

considering seasonal variations in load demand, DR, RES

1275.57

1275.55
1275.54

1275.55

1275.95
1275.95
1275.94

1276.03
1275.47
1276.1
1275.4

1275.7

and STATCOM. The performance of the proposed algorithm

is tested in MATLAB 2013a (8.1.0.604) software on Intel®
coreTM i-5-3470S CPU@ 2.90 GHz, 4.00 GB RAM system.
The pseudocode for ameliorated dragonfly algorithm is men-
P6 (MW)

87.07979
98.4635

87.1698
87.9761
89.0162

tioned in Fig. 3.
97.67

87.13
87.21

86.88
86.78

74.81
86.63
50

4.1 Static economic dispatch

P5 (MW)

151.2559

165.4104

165.5076
165.3002
164.7089

SED is performed on standard 6-generator (IEEE 30-bus sys-

171.76

165.48
166.02

179.37
165.23

165.58
151.9

tem), 17-generator (South Indian 86-bus test system) and

200

40-generator test system, respectively. Comparative studies

are presented for each test system, and the effectiveness of
ADFA is presented.
P4 (MW)

135.1084

138.0006

139.1279
139.4156
139.512
136.77

139.06
139.59

141.09

134.28
139.06
Table 1 Economic load dispatch for 6 generating units (load demand = 1263 MW)

139

150

4.1.1 SED on 6-generator (IEEE 30-bus) test system using

ADFA
P3 (MW)

236.4782

263.3163

263.3646
262.6804
262.3436

The IEEE 30-bus system consists of 6 generators and 1263

262.82

263.47
264.42

257.42

262.21
263.92

MW demand [38]. Scheduling is performed using ADFA,

265

289

and a comparative analysis is given in Table 1. Scheduling of

each generator, power loss, simulation time and dispatch cost
using the method are determined and compared with recent
P2 (MW)

173.2392

173.1012
173.3944
154.146

173.343

methods available. The algorithm gives better results in terms

173.08

172.58
173.01
173.32

186.55
178.64
173.18
167.9

of cost and power loss. The minimum, maximum and mean

costs, simulation run time for 50 trails are computed and
presented in Table 2. ADFA method produces competitive
results when compared with other methods. The number of
P1 (MW)

447.3997

447.4734
447.444
445.08

438.65
438.21
446.71

446.96

474.81
447.08

search agents considered in this case is 20, and maximum

447.5
500

400

iterations are set to 300. The convergence characteristics of

the proposed method for this test system are shown in Fig 4.
Unit power output

New MPSO [42]

4.1.2 SED on South Indian 86-bus system with 1796.3 MW

NPSO-LRS [44]
SOH-PSO [41]

PSO-LRS [44]

demand
NPSO [44]
BBO [40]
ABC [39]

PSO [43]

GA [43]
DE [39]

SA [39]
FA [39]
ADFA

South Indian 86-bus system is a real-time test system existing

in Tamil Nadu, India. It consists of 17 thermal generators,

123
Electrical Engineering

Table 2 Comparative study of

S. no. Algorithm Best ($/hr) Mean ($/hr) Max($/hr) Std dev Avg run time (s)
various metrics for 6 generating
units test system 1 ADFA 15,406.51 15,408.06 15,409.80 0.92 0.71
2 MCSA [45] 15,449.17 15,449.24 15,449.39 0.2681 NR
3 CBA [46] 15,450.24 15,454.76 15,518.66 2.965 0.704
4 DE [8] 15,449.58 15,449.62 15,449.65 NR 3.634
5 TS [47] 15,454.89 15,472.56 15,454.89 13.7195 20.55
6 SA [47] 15,461.10 15,488.98 15,461.10 28.3678 50.36

15,410
131 transmission lines and 86 buses. It is a complicated real-
time network operating with substantial power demand all
the times. Scheduling of thermal generators for this practical
system is quite challenging. The power demand considered 15,409

in this study is 1796.3 MW, and the test system details are

Cost ($/hr)
available in [48]. Constraints such as ramp rate, up reserve
and down reserve are considered in the problem. The number 15,408

of search agents considered in this case is 30, and maximum

iterations are set to 200 in this case.
Initially, cost minimization objective is considered in the 15,407

study and is solved using PSO and ADFA optimization tech-

niques. The generation schedule of thermal generators and
operating cost are given in Table 3. It can be inferred that all 15,406
1 50 100 150 200 250 300
the generators operate within specified limits. The operat- Iterations
ing cost obtained using ADFA method is very low compared
to ABC [48] and PSO methods. The power loss is also low Fig. 4 Convergence characteristics of 6-generator test system
compared to PSO method.
Table 3 Comparison of SED for South Indian 86-bus test system with
power loss
4.1.3 SED on 40-generator test system
Unit ABC [48] PSO ADFA

This test system consists of 40 thermal generators with a P1 (MW) 102.5 106 104.69
demand of 10,500 MW. The data for the system are taken P2 (MW) 104 103.97 103.22
from [49]. The results are presented in Tables 4 and 5. It is P3 (MW) 75.51 74.51 75.03
inferred from the results that the generators are scheduled in P4 (MW) 92.73 87.92 87.77
desired operating limits at a lowest cost of 121412.54 $/hr. P5 (MW) 160.6 158.43 158
The number of search agents considered in this case is P6 (MW) 160.8 159.98 159.18
30, and maximum iterations are set to 500 .The convergence P7 (MW) 162.3 154.12 157.59
curve is shown in Fig. 5. A smooth convergence curve can P8 (MW) 59.91 60 60
be observed from the figure for a typical run. P9 (MW) 59.91 60 60
P10 (MW) 100.7 98.94 100.59
4.2 Dynamic economic dispatch (DED) P11 (MW) 98.22 99.75 99.07
P12 (MW) 83.1 85.46 86.16
4.2.1 DED in 6-generator system P13 (MW) 117.9 118.01 119.99
P14 (MW) 115.2 117.04 116.5
The optimal scheduling of thermal generators is performed P15 (MW) 116.6 118.02 117.17
by considering operating cost and power loss minimization P16 (MW) 115.4 120.88 119.92
objectives. The results are furnished in Table 6. From the P17 (MW) 118.7 121.47 119.59
table, it can be inferred that the thermal generators are oper- PG (MW) 1844.08 1844.49 1844.47
ating in predefined limits, and the operating cost is optimized. PL (MW) 47.78 48.19 48.17
The power loss incurred for scheduling the generators is TC ($/hr) 355,588.19 355,447.94 355,427.06
66.51 MW/day. Operating cost for scheduling the thermal
generators is 12,901.90 $/day.

123
 Electrical Engineering

Table 4 Economic load

Unit Pmin Pmax Generation Unit Pmin Pmax Generation
dispatch for 40 generating units
(load demand = 10,500 MW) P1 (MW) 36 114 110.800 P21 (MW) 254 550 523.279
P2 (MW) 36 114 110.800 P22 (MW) 254 550 523.279
P3 (MW) 60 120 97.400 P23 (MW) 254 550 523.279
P4 (MW) 80 190 179.733 P24 (MW) 254 550 523.279
P5 (MW) 47 97 87.800 P25 (MW) 254 550 523.279
P6 (MW) 68 140 140.000 P26 (MW) 254 550 523.279
P7 (MW) 110 300 259.600 P27 (MW) 10 150 10.000
P8 (MW) 135 300 284.600 P28 (MW) 10 150 10.000
P9 (MW) 135 300 284.600 P29 (MW) 10 150 10.000
P10 (MW) 130 300 130.000 P30 (MW) 47 97 87.800
P11 (MW) 94 375 94.000 P31 (MW) 60 190 190.000
P12 (MW) 94 375 94.000 P32 (MW) 60 190 190.000
P13 (MW) 125 500 214.760 P33 (MW) 60 190 190.000
P14 (MW) 125 500 394.279 P34 (MW) 90 200 164.800
P15 (MW) 125 500 394.279 P35 (MW) 90 200 194.399
P16 (MW) 125 500 394.279 P36 (MW) 90 200 200.000
P17 (MW) 220 500 489.279 P37 (MW) 25 110 110.000
P18 (MW) 220 500 489.279 P38 (MW) 25 110 110.000
P19 (MW) 242 550 511.279 P39 (MW) 25 110 110.000
P20 (MW) 242 550 511.279 P40 (MW) 242 550 511.279

Table 5 Comparative study of

S. no. Algorithm Best ($/hr) Mean ($/hr) Max($/hr) Std dev Avg run time (s)
various metrics for 40
generating units test system 1 ADFA 121,412.54 121,414.38 121,416.09 1.045 6.32
2 MCSA [45] 121,412.14 NR NR NR NR
3 CBA [46] 121,412.55 121,418.98 121,436.15 1.611 1.55
4 DE [8] 121,412.68 121,439.89 121,479.63 NR 31.5
5 BSA [50] 121,415.61 121,474.882 121,524.9577 NR 13.12
6 θ-PSO [51] 121,420.90 121,509.8423 121,852.42 92.3956 103.9665
NR not reported

121,455
4.2.2 DED on 17-generator system (South Indian 86-bus
121,450 system)
121,445
DED is performed on 17-generator system using ADFA
Fuel Cost ($/hr)

121,440
method for an interval of 24 h. The dispatch for 24 h is pre-
121,435 sented in Table 7. From the table, it can be inferred that the
121,430
thermal generators are operating in predefined limits, and
the operating cost is also optimized. The total power loss and
121,425
operating cost incurred for scheduling the generators for 24
121,420 h are 1145.496 MW and 8,438,737.345 $. A comparison of
121,415
power loss and operating cost with ABC [48] method is given
in Table 8.
121,410
1 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Iterations

Fig. 5 Convergence characteristics of 40-generator test system

123
Electrical Engineering

Table 6 Hourly economic dispatch of IEEE 30-bus system with power loss
Gen/Hour P1 (MW) P2 (MW) P3 (MW) P4 (MW) P5 (MW) P6 (MW) PG (MW) PL (MW) TC ($/hr)

H1 92.16 28.37 15.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 167.54 1.54 414.42

H2 116.57 34.15 15.60 10.00 10.00 12.00 198.33 2.33 500.53
H3 142.63 40.37 17.36 10.00 10.00 12.00 232.37 3.37 602.37
H4 172.50 47.59 19.41 10.31 10.00 12.00 271.81 4.81 728.94
H5 181.80 49.88 20.06 15.03 10.00 12.00 288.76 5.36 786.39
H6 175.33 48.29 19.61 11.75 10.00 12.00 276.97 4.97 746.31
H7 156.08 43.61 18.28 10.00 10.00 12.00 249.98 3.98 657.75
H8 129.99 37.34 16.51 10.00 10.00 12.00 215.84 2.84 552.06
H9 113.42 33.40 15.39 10.00 10.00 12.00 194.21 2.21 488.69
H10 88.02 27.40 15.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 162.42 1.42 400.68
H11 76.43 24.69 15.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 148.12 1.12 363.14
H12 87.19 27.21 15.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 161.40 1.40 397.95
H13 95.48 29.16 15.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 171.63 1.63 425.53
H14 107.94 32.08 15.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 187.02 2.02 468.23
H15 126.05 36.39 16.24 10.00 10.00 12.00 210.68 2.68 536.70
H16 145.00 40.94 17.53 10.00 10.00 12.00 235.47 3.47 611.99
H17 156.08 43.61 18.28 10.00 10.00 12.00 249.98 3.98 657.75
H18 152.12 42.66 18.01 10.00 10.00 12.00 244.79 3.79 641.25
H19 148.17 41.70 17.74 10.00 10.00 12.00 239.61 3.61 624.93
H20 139.47 39.61 17.15 10.00 10.00 12.00 228.23 3.23 589.62
H21 122.88 35.65 16.03 10.00 10.00 12.00 206.56 2.56 524.54
H22 105.44 31.50 15.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 183.94 1.94 459.56
H23 88.02 27.40 15.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 162.42 1.42 400.68
H24 63.21 21.61 15.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 131.82 0.82 321.90

4.2.3 DED in South Indian 86-bus system considering
seasonality
In order to validate the considered objectives and show the
benefits of the proposed model, a real-time system existing
in Tamil Nadu region of South India is considered for the
study [48]. It consists of 17 thermal generators, 86 buses and
131 transmission lines. The existing test system is altered in
accordance with the following modifications.
A real-time load pattern of a South Indian test system is
considered for the study, and the load pattern is also con-
sidered to be intermittent in nature, varies with time and
seasons. Scheduling of generation is a simpler task with
fixed load profile. According to Indian weather conditions,
the time period of 12 months is divided into four seasons,
namely summer (May–July), fall (August–October), winter
(November–January) and spring (February–April). Since the
load profile has distinct changes in each season, seasonal
changes are considered for the analysis. In each season, an
average 24-h load profile is considered for simplicity.
In countries like India where agriculture is the backbone
for its economy, there is a necessity to take into account
the electricity consumption of the agricultural sector. It is
because of the wide usage of electricity for lift irrigation,
pumping of water to high and low terrain areas, etc. The
overall power consumption in this sector is predominant and
cannot be neglected. So in this purview there is a necessity
to regulate/schedule the agricultural loads. Further, it can be
understood that inclusion of agricultural loads in the existing
demand-side management techniques may result in proper
scheduling of available generating resources in a country like
India which will be close to the real-time analysis.
Various scenarios considered for the analysis are
1. In the first scenario, thermal generators alone are consid-
ered in the South Indian 86-bus system and the dynamic
economic dispatch analysis is carried out using ADFA
algorithm. Flexible resources such as solar, wind, demand
response and FACTS devices are not considered. In this
scenario, the objectives stated in Eqs. 1 and 5 are solved
while satisfying the constraints stated in Eqs. 6, 8–10.
2. In the second scenario, load pattern of the test system
is altered by implementing demand response in various
seasons. For the study, agricultural loads whose time
of operation is flexible are considered. An agricultural
load of 445 MW which corresponds to 30% of base load

123
123
Table 7 DED on 17-generator system for 24 h using ADFA
Gen/Hour P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 P13 P14 P15 P16 P17 PG PD

1 110.46 107.81 77.17 90.48 164.81 165.49 165.29 60.00 60.00 103.53 105.04 89.04 124.23 121.11 121.64 126.07 123.82 1915.98 1864.30
2 105.25 102.33 73.11 86.75 153.70 157.77 154.11 60.00 60.00 98.02 99.11 85.68 118.28 117.74 115.15 119.20 117.90 1824.11 1777.10
3 98.34 97.54 72.59 82.90 148.47 146.98 147.57 60.00 60.00 92.40 92.48 79.77 110.94 107.81 110.82 112.93 112.33 1733.88 1691.20
4 97.39 96.00 70.28 81.98 145.68 145.88 146.04 60.00 60.00 91.63 92.12 79.52 110.35 109.58 110.30 111.65 112.09 1720.47 1678.50
5 87.36 85.86 64.92 74.76 130.34 130.73 130.76 60.00 60.00 81.74 81.90 71.79 100.16 99.33 99.67 100.39 101.12 1560.83 1526.20
6 93.37 91.39 68.06 78.63 138.23 140.01 140.10 60.00 60.00 87.13 87.63 75.57 106.34 104.72 104.73 107.11 106.71 1649.71 1611.20
7 99.73 97.83 71.80 83.85 149.68 149.72 149.90 60.00 60.00 94.02 93.84 81.58 113.06 111.39 111.98 113.90 113.35 1755.64 1712.00
8 104.66 99.97 74.31 87.21 156.71 156.00 148.89 60.00 60.00 97.62 96.28 82.39 119.18 116.29 113.10 118.19 117.97 1808.79 1762.10
9 102.35 98.95 72.74 85.54 151.14 151.83 152.85 60.00 60.00 95.79 95.19 81.56 115.32 113.75 114.73 115.52 114.46 1781.72 1736.70
10 100.36 97.08 72.40 83.72 150.74 149.17 149.48 60.00 60.00 93.60 94.10 81.11 112.99 111.56 111.63 113.71 113.43 1755.07 1711.40
11 84.97 83.09 63.28 72.82 126.80 126.27 126.94 60.00 60.00 79.13 78.97 69.50 97.65 95.85 95.62 97.86 98.14 1516.89 1484.30
12 91.62 89.49 67.53 78.00 136.86 137.16 136.78 60.00 60.00 85.96 85.71 74.99 104.40 102.81 102.88 105.03 104.93 1624.14 1586.70
13 105.64 104.42 74.36 89.35 157.31 157.76 157.67 60.00 60.00 100.37 100.04 84.42 118.74 117.04 117.46 120.21 119.47 1844.26 1796.30
14 121.96 119.20 82.91 97.54 183.43 181.52 180.58 60.00 60.00 110.00 110.00 92.59 128.93 133.35 130.53 134.93 141.30 2068.78 2008.60
16 120.66 120.89 83.52 98.56 189.16 184.11 174.85 60.00 60.00 109.70 107.83 97.29 133.83 132.18 130.47 141.52 141.21 2085.77 2023.50
16 118.47 115.18 82.01 97.66 181.05 178.45 179.79 60.00 60.00 110.00 110.00 94.83 133.54 130.77 127.73 133.17 130.86 2043.51 1984.70
17 85.92 83.71 64.00 73.07 127.45 128.19 127.82 60.00 60.00 79.51 79.82 69.99 97.63 97.14 96.21 99.15 99.01 1528.63 1495.50
18 97.98 95.00 69.92 82.16 145.07 145.70 145.70 60.00 60.00 91.78 91.85 79.68 110.18 109.10 108.80 111.18 111.38 1715.48 1673.90
19 122.34 118.77 81.99 97.87 180.07 181.82 180.39 60.00 60.00 110.00 109.91 98.94 134.53 135.62 128.89 132.40 138.71 2072.26 2011.40
20 97.46 94.50 69.97 82.08 145.37 144.87 145.94 60.00 60.00 91.80 90.77 78.38 110.27 108.62 107.83 111.43 111.47 1710.77 1669.40
21 106.53 105.53 73.69 87.81 158.96 160.50 145.96 59.99 60.00 98.69 98.97 84.20 116.87 119.23 112.56 122.86 120.24 1832.59 1785.20
22 107.50 106.91 76.55 90.96 159.81 161.00 159.11 60.00 60.00 100.34 100.66 87.55 121.92 121.00 116.28 121.35 122.41 1873.36 1823.30
23 132.07 141.50 85.98 103.71 193.45 203.55 182.45 60.00 60.00 109.97 110.00 99.37 145.14 151.38 144.52 145.96 140.49 2209.56 2139.60
24 127.70 125.59 87.40 102.40 194.12 183.15 187.01 60.00 60.00 109.78 110.00 99.90 139.29 138.53 139.26 144.58 135.41 2144.12 2077.70
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Table 8 Comparison of power loss and operating cost
Parameter ADFA ABC [48]
Power loss (MW) 1145.50 1160.653
Operating cost ($/day) 8,438,737.34 8,584,198.00
of the system is assumed out of which 60MW is time
shiftable. Agricultural loads considered in this study are
pumps used for lift irrigation which are of two differ-
ent ratings i.e., (3 kW * 15,000 pumps and 1.5 kW *
10,000 pumps). Average operating time for agricultural
pumps is 5 h which is taken as the same in the study.
It means that only 0.04% of base load participates in
demand response scheme. Here, the demand response
model stated in Sect. 2.1 is utilized. Further, DED is car-
ried out for the new load pattern in various seasons while
satisfying the constraints stated in Eqs. 6, 8–10.
3. In the third scenario, resources such as solar and wind
are simultaneously considered along with the demand
response program. Due to intermittent output from
renewable energy sources, the generation schedule has
to be adjusted accordingly to meet the specified load
demand at any point in time. Therefore, the solar irra-
diance and wind speed for a duration of 24 h and
for time horizon of four seasons is estimated from the
available historical data using models in Sects. 2.2 and
2.3. DED considering demand response and renewable
energy resources is implemented for various seasons
while satisfying the constraints stated in Eqs. 6–10.
4. In the fourth scenario, shunt FACTS device STATCOM
is incorporated at a suitable location and DED consider-
ing demand response and renewable energy resources is
carried out while satisfying the constraints stated in Eqs.
6–12. The STATCOM model given in Sect. 2.4 is utilized
for the purpose.
Conventional DED is implemented on South Indian 86-bus
system considering the seasonal changes in system demand.
The load demand is divided into four seasons by considering
the pattern followed by southern region load dispatch cen-
ter [52]. The load curves of considered test system for four
seasons are shown in Fig 6.
The peak periods and off-peak periods identified from
the normalized seasonal load curves are as follows: Peak
period: summer (12.00 P.M–16.00 P.M.), autumn (19.00
P.M.–23.00 P.M.), winter (19.00 P.M.–23.00 P.M.) and spring
(7.00 A.M.–11.00 A.M.).
Off-peak period for each season: summer (03.00 A.M.–
07.00 A.M.), autumn (01.00 A.M.–05.00 A.M.), winter
(01.00 P.M.–05.00 A.M.) and spring (02.00 A.M.–06.00
A.M.).
2200
Summer
2100 Autumn
Winter
Spring
2000
Demand (MW)
1900
1800
1700
1600
1500
1400
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hour
Fig. 6 Hourly load profile of South Indian 86-bus system for various
seasons
It can be noticed that maximum overall demand occurs
in spring season and minimum demand in autumn season.
Constraints such as prohibited operating zones, ramp rate, up
reserve and down reserve are considered while solving the
problem. ADFA is used as an optimization tool for obtaining
the minimum cost. The number of search agents and max-
imum iterations considered for the study are 20 and 100,
respectively.
The main objectives considered for the study are cost
minimization and power loss minimization. Scheduling of
generators for each day in all seasons is calculated in accor-
dance with system demand. The flowchart for dynamic
economic dispatch using ameliorated dragonfly algorithm is
shown in Fig. 7.
The thermal power generated, system demand, power loss
and optimal cost of scheduling for a typical day in all seasons
are furnished in Table 9. It can be inferred that all the gen-
erators operate within specified limits. The generation cost
and power loss depend on the system demand in each season.
The costs as well as loss are low in autumn, whereas they are
high in spring season.
4.3 Dynamic economic dispatch considering
demand response
DED incorporating demand response is implemented on
South Indian 86-bus system considering the seasonal changes
in system demand. The demand response model explained
in Sect. 2.1 is implemented on South Indian 86-bus system.
Agricultural loads in the test system are controlled using the
demand response model. In Fig 8, the agricultural load pro-
file of South Indian 86-bus system for various seasons is
presented. It should be noted that the agricultural load refers
to a portion of original load of the test system. So if the load
pattern of agricultural load is changed simultaneously the
123
 Electrical Engineering

Fig. 7 Flowchart for solving

DED using ADFA

Table 9 Generation scheduling

Power Summer Autumn Winter Spring
in South Indian 86-bus system
before implementing demand PT (MW) 43,781.17 42,700.09 44,799.00 48,302.22
response
PD (MW) 42,630.80 41,617.37 43,610.62 46,905.63
PL (MW) 1150.37 1082.72 1188.38 1396.60
TC ($/day) 8,439,879.57 8,023,094.58 8,751,582.42 10, 029, 890.98

123
Electrical Engineering

450
Summer
Table 10 PAR before and after implementing demand response
Autumn
Parameter Summer Autumn Winter Spring
400 Winter
Spring
Before DR 1.14 1.17 1.12 1.09
350 After DR 1.11 1.13 1.08 1.07
Demand (MW)

300

250 original load curve will also get altered. Scheduling these
types of loads offers potential benefits to the utility in terms
200 of energy as well as cost. Only 0.04% of original load is
assumed to be time shiftable.
150 DR program has been executed on this agricultural load
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hour profile for reducing the peak demand, and the new agri-
cultural load profile is shown in Fig 9. It is observed that
Fig. 8 Agricultural load profile before implementing demand response the peak demand at various hours is significantly reduced,
which shows the effectiveness of developed demand response
model.
450
Summer
The hourly load variations after implementing demand
Autumn response are shown in Fig. 10. It is observed that the demand
Winter
400
Spring
at peak hours is shifted to off-peak hours such that the total
system demand is finally the same. For instance, considering
Demand (MW)

the spring season the peak demand before demand response is

350
2139.5 MW observed at 8th h of the day. After implementing
demand response, it is reduced by 2.5% (2079.5 MW) com-
300 pared to actual demand. The peak-to-average ratio (PAR)
before and after implementing demand response for the total
250
system demand is given in Table 10. For instance, the PAR
is reduced by 3.4% compared to base case in autumn season
which means that demand response program helps in reduc-
200
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ing the peak demand in the system. Similarly, a reduction in
Hour PAR in other seasons is also observed.
The DED has been implemented for the load profile after
Fig. 9 Agricultural load profile after implementing demand response
incorporating demand response, and the power schedule is
furnished in Table 11. The total thermal energy generation
2200 for meeting the system demand is reduced in all seasons.
Summer
Autumn
The cost of generation as well as power loss is reduced in all
2100
Winter seasons.
Spring
2000
Demand (MW)

1900
4.4 Dynamic economic dispatch considering
1800 demand response and renewable energy
resources
1700

1600 A solar farm of 300 MW is assumed to be incorporated at

bus 85 which refers to a nearest location Vellore (79.13◦ E,
1500
12.95◦ N). Solar irradiance for 12 months is obtained from
1400 [53]. The solar irradiance values are divided into four sea-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hour sons, and further the mean and standard deviation for each
hour of a normalized day are calculated. A 220 W PV panel is
Fig. 10 Hourly load profile of South Indian 86-bus system after demand considered for the study whose specifications are taken from
response [54]. The output from solar farm is estimated using model
presented in Sect. 2.2.

123
 Electrical Engineering

Table 11 Power scheduling in

Parameter Summer Autumn Winter Spring
South Indian 86-bus system
after demand response PT (MW) 43,778.24 42,694.70 44,794.11 48,294.13
PD (MW) 42,630.80 41,617.37 43,610.62 46,905.63
PL (MW) 1147.44 1077.29 1183.48 1388.46
TC ($/day) 8,428,223.00 8,009,368.21 8,736,531.83 10,014,248.81

0.25

0.2
Probability

0.15

0.1

0.05

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Solar irradiance (kW/m 2) Fig. 13 Expected output of wind farm at various hours of a day in
summer season
Fig. 11 Beta PDF for solar irradiance for a typical day in winter season

70

60
Solar Power output (MW)

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Solar irradiance (kW/m 2)
Fig. 14 Wind farm output for different hours of typical day all seasons
Fig. 12 Expected output of solar farm in winter season at 12th h

in winter season is shown in Fig 12. It can be noticed that the

Further, the probability of solar power output is calculated
using beta distribution function. An interval of 0.05 kW/m2 is
considered for the analysis, and the probability is plotted. In
this study, solar irradiance at 12th hour of a typical day in each
season is considered and output from solar farm is calculated.
The histogram of solar irradiance distribution at preferred
location for a typical day in winter season is shown in Fig 11.
It is observed that solar irradiance probability is distributed
over a range of 0.5–0.9, which is maximum throughout the
day. The expected solar power output for preferred location
total power generated from the solar farm is 314.736 MW
which is represented by area under curve shown in Fig 12.
A wind farm of 150 MW is assumed to be incorporated
at bus 10 which refers to Kayatharu (77.7738◦ E, 8.9460◦ N).
Wind speed for 12 months is obtained from [53] and Weibull
PDFs are generated. The wind speed is subdivided into
seasons and from which mean and standard deviation are
calculated. Here, 25 wind speed states were considered for
generating Weibull PDF. The output obtained for different
hours of a day for various wind speeds is plotted in Fig.

123
Electrical Engineering

Table 12 Generation
Parameter Summer Autumn Winter Spring
scheduling and fuel cost
considering renewable energy PT (MW) 40,020.03 39,894.73 43,057.02 46,182.96
resources
PS (MW) 1818.05 1655.08 1486.86 1870.85
PW (MW) 1755.82 1012.99 161.14 155.43
PG (MW) 43,593.91 42,562.81 44,705.02 48,209.24
PL (MW) 963.11 945.44 1094.39 1263.53
FT ($/day) 7,223,948.91 7,115,049.36 8,134,859.16 9,233,410.21
FS ($/day) 72,722.11 66,203.35 59,474.54 74,833.84
FW ($/day) 70,232.97 40,519.75 6445.42 6217.24
TC ($/day) 7,366,903.99 7,221,772.46 8,200,779.11 9, 314, 461.29

13. The total output for each hour of a normalized day in

all seasons is shown in Fig. 14. From the normalized out-
put curves of the wind farm, it is observed that the output
is high in summer season, whereas it is very low in spring
season. The power output from the renewable sources is com-
pletely subjective. It may differ with locations. The selection
of appropriate site for installation of renewable sources is
not considered in this work. The cut-in speed, cutout speed
and rated speed are considered for a VESTAS 3.0 MW wind
turbine [55]. Energy minimization objective is solved for all
the seasons incorporating DR and RESs, and the results are
furnished in Table 12. Comparison of energy, power loss and
cost for normalized daily load curve in all four seasons before
and after incorporating DR and RESs is presented. In all the Fig. 15 Energy consumption before and after considering DR and
seasons, the overall energy consumption from thermal gen- renewable energy resources
erators is reduced. From Fig 15, it can be understood that
Table 13 Comparison of power loss for all seasons
there is a reduction of 7.43% in power consumption in sum-
mer season after incorporating DR and RESs. Similarly, a Season PL Before (MW) PL After (MW) δ PL (%)
reduction of around 5.79%, 3.35% and 3.89% in power con-
Summer 1147.44 963.11 16.06
sumption is observed in autumn, winter and spring seasons,
Autumn 1077.29 945.44 12.24
respectively. The power loss at each hour is also reduced with
Winter 1183.48 1094.39 7.53
change in load profile and incorporation of RESs near loads,
Spring 1388.46 1263.53 9.00
which aids in minimization of overall power consumption
from thermal generators. A comparison of power loss before
and after implementing DR and incorporating RESs for a nor-
malized day in all seasons is given in Table 13. In summer
season, the output from renewable energy sources is high
which tends to maximum reduction of 16.06% power loss
for a day. As the renewable output is low in winter season,
the reduction in power loss is 9.00% which is also low. As
the energy supplied by the thermal generators is minimized,
the cost of generation is also reduced. Comparison of oper-
ating cost of generators in all seasons is shown in Fig. 16.
Maximum profit of 892,072 $/day is achieved in summer
season, and a minimum profit of 459,009 $/day is observed
in winter. In autumn and spring, a profit of 665,485$/day and
609,731$/day is obtained. This indicates that in addition to
DR, the output from renewable energy resources plays a key
role in energy and cost savings. Fig. 16 Fuel cost comparison in various seasons

123
 Electrical Engineering

Table 14 Generation
Parameter Summer Autumn Winter Spring
scheduling with renewable
energy resources and P1 (MW) 2238.06 2225.57 2423.56 2624.50
STATCOM
P2 (MW) 2191.97 2174.42 2368.56 2567.28
P3 (MW) 1609.76 1607.87 1718.56 1816.05
P4 (MW) 1874.68 1869.28 2017.96 2152.06
P5 (MW) 3313.91 3323.83 3612.79 3921.54
P6 (MW) 3349.50 3319.76 3602.74 3864.61
P7 (MW) 3313.95 3322.04 3616.90 3925.46
P8 (MW) 1440.00 1440.00 1440.00 1439.99
P9 (MW) 1440.00 1440.00 1440.00 1440.00
P10 (MW) 2077.56 2076.61 2267.69 2445.59
P11 (MW) 2079.13 2078.49 2272.18 2443.16
P12 (MW) 1864.04 1863.72 2014.69 2174.67
P13 (MW) 2599.25 2597.27 2814.55 3023.71
P14 (MW) 2594.80 2578.80 2789.01 3003.87
P15 (MW) 2586.75 2576.40 2779.69 3000.64
P16 (MW) 2623.60 2610.38 2828.99 3047.69
P17 (MW) 2632.99 2602.85 2834.59 3037.53
PT (MW) 39829.97 39707.29 42842.47 45928.35
PS (MW) 1818.05 1655.08 1486.86 1870.85
PW (MW) 1755.82 1012.99 161.14 155.43
PG (MW) 43403.85 42375.36 44490.47 47954.62
PL (MW) 773.05 758.00 879.84 1008.92
FT ($/day) 7,155,820.15 7,050,137.99 8,054,301.94 9,133,298.93
FS ($/day) 72,722.11 66,203.35 59,474.54 74,833.84
FW ($/day) 70,232.97 40,519.75 6445.42 6217.24
TC ($/day) 7,298,775.23 7,156,861.08 8,120,221.89 9,214,350.01

4.5 Dynamic economic dispatch considering
demand response, renewable energy sources
and STATCOM
In South Indian 86-bus system, renewable energy sources
such as solar and wind are integrated at bus 10 and bus
85, respectively. From the operating characteristics of STAT-
COM, it is observed that voltage profile is improved in the
system when it is incorporated at bus 58 of the system. STAT-
COM injects reactive power into the system and helps in
maintaining the desired voltage profile. STATCOM injects
55.56 MVAr in the system to maintain desired voltage pro-
file (1 p.u.). The reactive power injected by STATCOM is
low compared to SVC for maintaining the same voltage pro-
file.
STATCOM provides a very smooth control for the
dynamic changes in load in the system. The system load
is altered to reduce the peak demand in the system using
demand response program in all four seasons, and the
scheduling of thermal as well as renewable energy sources is
implemented in the presence of STATCOM for a time horizon
of 24 h. The dispatch schedule, power loss and operating cost
are furnished in Table 14. From the table, it is observed that
there is a substantial decrease in thermal generation from the
costly generators with the integration of renewable energy
generation. The power loss in the system is reduced in all
seasons with incorporation of STATCOM. Operating cost
for scheduling the generators is also significantly reduced in
all four seasons compared to previously discussed cases. So
it can be inferred that simultaneous allocation of renewable
energy resources as well as FACTS device STATCOM helps
in reducing thermal energy consumption and power loss in
the system.
4.6 Comparative analysis without and with
renewable energy resources and FACTS devices
In this section, a comparative study between various models
implemented for scheduling thermal and renewable energy
resources is presented. The operating cost and power loss
obtained for the developed models are summarized in Table
15. It can be inferred that demand response program will be

123
Electrical Engineering
Table 15 Comparative study of various DED models
Model Cost ($/hr) Loss (MW)
Conventional DED 8,439,879.57 1150.37
DER + DR 8,428,223.00 1147.44
DED + DR + RES 7,366,903.99 963.11
DED + DR+ RES + STATCOM 7,298,775.23 773.05
able to reduce peak demand and helps in reducing the power
loss of the system, thereby operating cost also. If renew-
able energy resources are incorporated in the system, the
power loss is significantly reduced and also the dependency
on costly thermal generators is minimized. The emission
due to thermal generation is also considerably reduced with
the incorporation of renewable energy resources. The out-
put from the renewable energy resources is intermittent in
nature, which may affect voltage profile of the system. To
overcome the drawback, shunt FACTS device STATCOM
is incorporated in the system. This device when allocated
at suitable location of the system provides reactive power
support and improved the voltage profile of the system. The
shunt FACTS device also helps in reducing the real power
loss in the system significantly. Therefore, implementing
demand response program and integrating renewable energy
resources in the presence of FACTS device helps in giving
an optimal scheduling.
5 Conclusion
A new technique, ameliorated dragonfly algorithm (ADFA),
an improved version of dragonfly algorithm, is applied to
solve SED and DED problems of different complexities. SED
using ADFA is performed on 6-, 17- and 40-thermal gener-
ator test systems with constraints such as POZ, ramp rate
and power balance. Further, DED using ADFA is performed
on 6- and 17-thermal generator test systems considering
the fuel cost and power loss minimization objectives. The
obtained results using ADFA are better when compared with
other existing methods. Later, DED is worked out on real-
time scenarios by incorporating DR, RES and STATCOM
in the existing South Indian 86-bus (17 thermal genera-
tors) system. The methodology gives an insight that DR
and RES contribute for reduction in power loss, operating
cost minimization and reduced thermal energy consumption.
Also, STATCOM compliments the efforts of DR and RES in
improving the voltage profile and reducing the power loss of
the system.
References
1. Robert FC, Sisodia GS, Gopalan S (2018) A critical review on the
utilization of storage and demand response for the implementation
of renewable energy microgrids. Sustain Cities Soc 40:735–745
2. Siano P (2014) Demand response and smart grids—a survey.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 30:461–478
3. Albadi MH, El-Saadany EF (2008) A summary of demand response
in electricity markets. Electric Power Syst Res 78(11):1989–1996
4. Chen Z, Wu L, Fu Y (2012) Real-time price-based demand response
management for residential appliances via stochastic optimization
and robust optimization. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 3(4):1822–1831
5. Corradi O, Ochsenfeld H, Madsen H, Pinson P (2013) Control-
ling electricity consumption by forecasting its response to varying
prices. IEEE Trans Power Syst 28(1):421–429
6. Roozbehani M, Dahleh MA, Mitter SK (2012) Volatility of power
grids under real-time pricing. IEEE Trans Power Syst 27(4):1926–
1940
7. Binetti G, Davoudi A, Naso D, Turchiano B, Lewis FL (2014) A
distributed auction-based algorithm for the nonconvex economic
dispatch problem. IEEE Trans Ind Inform 10(2):1124–1132
8. Elsayed WT, El-Saadany EF (2015) A fully decentralized approach
for solving the economic dispatch problem. IEEE Trans Power Syst
30(4):2179–2189
9. Jayabarathi T, Raghunathan T, Adarsh B, Suganthan PN (2016)
Economic dispatch using hybrid grey wolf optimizer. Energy
111:630–641
10. Subathra M, Selvan SE, Victoire TAA, Christinal AH, Amato
U (2015) A hybrid with cross-entropy method and sequential
quadratic programming to solve economic load dispatch problem.
IEEE Syst J 9(3):1031–1044
11. Zaman M, Elsayed SM, Ray T, Sarker RA (2016) Evolutionary
algorithms for dynamic economic dispatch problems. IEEE Trans
Power Syst 31(2):1486–1495
12. Wang M, Gooi HB, Chen S, Lu S (2014) A mixed integer quadratic
programming for dynamic economic dispatch with valve point
effect. IEEE Trans Power Syst 29(5):2097–2106
13. Niknam T, Azizipanah-Abarghooee R, Aghaei J (2013) A new
modified teaching–learning algorithm for reserve constrained
dynamic economic dispatch. IEEE Trans Power Syst 28(2):749–
763
14. Li C, Yu X, Huang T, He X (2018) Distributed optimal con-
sensus over resource allocation network and its application to
dynamical economic dispatch. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst
29(6):2407–2418
15. Hetzer J, David CY, Bhattarai K (2008) An economic dispatch
model incorporating wind power. IEEE Trans Energy Convers
23(2):603–611
16. Reddy SS, Bijwe P, Abhyankar AR (2015) Real-time economic
dispatch considering renewable power generation variability and
uncertainty over scheduling period. IEEE Syst J 9(4):1440–1451
17. Khan NA, Sidhu GAS, Gao F (2016) Optimizing combined emis-
sion economic dispatch for solar integrated power systems. IEEE
Access 4:3340–3348
18. Abdi H, Dehnavi E, Mohammadi F (2016) Dynamic economic
dispatch problem integrated with demand response (DEDDR) con-
sidering non-linear responsive load models. IEEE Trans Smart Grid
7(6):2586–2595
19. O’Connell N, Pinson P, Madsen H, O’Malley M (2016) Economic
dispatch of demand response balancing through asymmetric block
offers. IEEE Trans Power Syst 31(4):2999–3007
20. Suresh V, Sreejith S (2017) Demand response integrated dynamic
economic dispatch. In: 2017 14th IEEE India council international
conference (INDICON). IEEE, pp 1–5
123

21. Wang G-G, Tan Y (2017) Improving metaheuristic algorithms with
information feedback models. IEEE Trans Cybern 99:1–14
22. Wang G-G, Guo L, Gandomi AH, Hao G-S, Wang H (2014) Chaotic
krill herd algorithm. Inf Sci 274:17–34
23. Wang G-G, Gandomi AH, Alavi AH (2014) An effective krill herd
algorithm with migration operator in biogeography-based opti-
mization. Appl Math Modell 38(9–10):2454–2462
24. Wang G-G, Gandomi AH, Alavi AH (2014) Stud krill herd algo-
rithm. Neurocomputing 128:363–370
25. Wang G, Guo L, Wang H, Duan H, Liu L, Li J (2014) Incorporating
mutation scheme into krill herd algorithm for global numerical
optimization. Neural Comput Appl 24(3–4):853–871
26. Wang H, Yi J-H (2018) An improved optimization method based
on krill herd and artificial bee colony with information exchange.
Memet Comput 10(2):177–198
27. Wang G-G, Gandomi AH, Zhao X, Chu HCE (2016) Hybridizing
harmony search algorithm with cuckoo search for global numerical
optimization. Soft Comput 20(1):273–285
28. Wang G-G, Gandomi AH, Yang X-S, Alavi AH (2016) A new
hybrid method based on krill herd and cuckoo search for global
optimisation tasks. Int J Bio-Inspir Comput 8(5):286–299
29. Wang G-G, Deb S, Gandomi AH, Alavi AH (2016) Opposition-
based krill herd algorithm with cauchy mutation and position
clamping. Neurocomputing 177:147–157
30. Wang G-G (2018) Moth search algorithm: a bio-inspired meta-
heuristic algorithm for global optimization problems. Memet
Comput 10(2):151–164
31. Wang G-G, Gandomi AH, Alavi AH, Hao G-S (2014) Hybrid krill
herd algorithm with differential evolution for global numerical opti-
mization. Neural Comput Appl 25(2):297–308
32. Wang G-G, Deb S, Coelho LDS (2015) Earthworm optimization
algorithm: a bio-inspired metaheuristic algorithm for global opti-
mization problems. Int J Bio-Inspir Comput 7:1–23
33. Wang G-G, Gandomi AH, Alavi AH, Deb S (2016) A hybrid
method based on krill herd and quantum-behaved particle swarm
optimization. Neural Comput Appl 27(4):989–1006
34. Guo L, Wang G-G, Gandomi AH, Alavi AH, Duan H (2014) A new
improved krill herd algorithm for global numerical optimization.
Neurocomputing 138:392–402
35. Wang G-G, Gandomi AH, Yang X-S, Alavi AH (2014) A novel
improved accelerated particle swarm optimization algorithm for
global numerical optimization. Eng Comput 31(7):1198–1220
36. Wang G-G, Deb S, Gandomi AH, Zhang Z, Alavi AH (2016)
Chaotic cuckoo search. Soft Comput 20(9):3349–3362
37. Mirjalili S (2016) Dragonfly algorithm: a new meta-heuristic
optimization technique for solving single-objective, discrete, and
multi-objective problems. Neural Comput Appl 27(4):1053–1073
38. Suresh V, Sreejith S (2017) Generation dispatch of combined solar
thermal systems using dragonfly algorithm. Computing 99(1):59–
80
39. Subramanian R, Thanushkodi K (2013) An efficient firefly algo-
rithm to solve economic dispatch problems. Int J Soft Comput Eng
2(1):52–55
123
View publication stats
Electrical Engineering
40. Bhattacharya A, Chattopadhyay PK (2010) Biogeography-based
optimization for different economic load dispatch problems. IEEE
Trans Power Syst 25(2):1064–1077
41. Chaturvedi KT, Pandit M, Srivastava L (2008) Self-organizing
hierarchical particle swarm optimization for nonconvex economic
dispatch. IEEE Trans Power Syst 23(3):1079–1087
42. Kuo C-C (2008) A novel coding scheme for practical economic
dispatch by modified particle swarm approach. IEEE Trans Power
Syst 23(4):1825–1835
43. Gaing Z-L (2003) Particle swarm optimization to solving the eco-
nomic dispatch considering the generator constraints. IEEE Trans
Power Syst 18(3):1187–1195
44. Selvakumar AI, Thanushkodi K (2007) A new particle swarm opti-
mization solution to nonconvex economic dispatch problems. IEEE
Trans Power Syst 22(1):42–51
45. Mohammadi F, Abdi H (2018) A modified crow search algorithm
(MCSA) for solving economic load dispatch problem. Appl Soft
Comput 71:51–65
46. Adarsh B, Raghunathan T, Jayabarathi T, Yang X-S (2016) Eco-
nomic dispatch using chaotic bat algorithm. Energy 96:666–675
47. Pothiya S, Ngamroo I, Kongprawechnon W (2008) Application
of multiple tabu search algorithm to solve dynamic economic dis-
patch considering generator constraints. Energy Convers Manag
49(4):506–516
48. Sreejith S, Simon SP (2014) Cost benefit analysis on SVC and
UPFC in a dynamic economic dispatch problem. Int J Energy Sect
Manag 8(3):395–428
49. Su C-T, Lin C-T (2000) New approach with a hopfield mod-
eling framework to economic dispatch. IEEE Trans Power Syst
15(2):541–545
50. Modiri-Delshad M, Rahim NA (2014) Solving non-convex eco-
nomic dispatch problem via backtracking search algorithm. Energy
77:372–381
51. Hosseinnezhad V, Rafiee M, Ahmadian M, Ameli MT (2014)
Species-based quantum particle swarm optimization for economic
load dispatch. Int J Electric Power Energy Syst 63:311–322
52. Southern Regional Load Despatch Center. http://www.srldc.in/
DailyReport.aspx
53. Nrel. http://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/old_data/nsrdb/
54. Enf ltd. http://de.enfsolar.com/pv/panel-datasheet/
Polycrystalline/12187
55. Vestas. https://www.vestas.com/en/products/turbines/v136-_3_
45_mw#!
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris-
dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.