Author's personal copy
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. B
DOI 10.1007/s40031-015-0208-2
ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION
Multi-objective Decision Based Available Transfer Capability
in Deregulated Power System Using Heuristic Approaches
Gopi Krishna Pasam1 • T. Gowri Manohar2
Received: 31 July 2014 / Accepted: 28 May 2015
 The Institution of Engineers (India) 2015
Abstract Determination of available transfer capability
(ATC) requires the use of experience, intuition and exact
judgment in order to meet several significant aspects in the
deregulated environment. Based on these points, this paper
proposes two heuristic approaches to compute ATC. The
first proposed heuristic algorithm integrates the five
methods known as continuation repeated power flow,
repeated optimal power flow, radial basis function neural
network, back propagation neural network and adaptive
neuro fuzzy inference system to obtain ATC. The second
proposed heuristic model is used to obtain multiple ATC
values. Out of these, a specific ATC value will be selected
based on a number of social, economic, deregulated envi-
ronmental constraints and related to specific applications
like optimization, on-line monitoring, and ATC forecasting
known as multi-objective decision based optimal ATC. The
validity of results obtained through these proposed methods
are scrupulously verified on various buses of the IEEE
24-bus reliable test system. The results presented and
derived conclusions in this paper are very useful for
planning, operation, maintaining of reliable power in any
power system and its monitoring in an on-line environment
of deregulated power system. In this way, the proposed
heuristic methods would contribute the best possible
& Gopi Krishna Pasam
rishipragnatha@gmail.com
1 approaches; these create an ambiguous state for the power
Engineering Department, IBRA College of Technology,
Al-Yehamadi, Ibra, Al-Sharqiyya North Governarate 400,
Oman
2
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering,
Sri Venkateswara University , Tirupathi 517502, India
approach to assess multiple objective ATC using integrated
methods.
Keywords Available transfer capability

Optimal power flow
Continuation power flow

RBFN network
BPNN
ANFIS
Introduction
Heuristic (Greek) means discovery. Heuristic methods are
based on experience, rational ideas and more on common
sense than on mathematics. Heuristics are the only way to
solve many problems which do not have an algorithm or
formula. Humans use a lot of heuristics in their everyday
life to solve various problems, from simple ones like rec-
ognizing various objects, to more complex problems like
driving a car in a highly crowded environment. The
knowledge heuristics is obtained throughout our life and
that is where computers fail. They cannot learn ‘com-
monsense knowledge’, at least not as much and as fast as
humans can. To incorporate heuristics in computers is a
major problem of artificial intelligence (AI). Even simple
heuristics, which every child can learn quickly, may not be
easy to represent in a computer program [1]. Therefore, the
aforementioned discussion will motivate to invent new
heuristics like proposed methods presented in this paper
will be helpful to incorporate the problem solving ideas
into the computer.
Advancements in the technology involve multiple
engineers while taking the decisions pertinent to multiple
objectives which are based on several individual or com-
bined factors like social, economic, flexibility and relia-
bility. In these circumstances the continuous assessment of
123
 Author's personal copy
available transfer capability (ATC) in deregulated power
system is known as the multi-objective decision based
(MODB) ATC and this type of determination of ATC is a
challenging issue [2], as requires the use of intuition,
experience and integrated approaches.
ATC is a measure of the transfer capability existing in
the physical transmission network apart from the commit-
ted usage of power (base load). Mathematically [3], ATC is
defined as the total transfer capability (TTC) less the
transmission reliability margin (TRM), less the capacity
benefit margin (CBM). In this paper, the TRM and CBM
are considered as an equivalent to base load at each bus.
Therefore the ATC computations will be obtained from
ATC = TTC - Base Load.
The determination of ATC is one of the critical issues in
the power management, which clearly fits into the broad
field of multi-objective optimization problems of interest
today and currently, such problems have not been proven to
be solvable in strongly polynomial-time. Therefore, evo-
lutionary algorithms and heuristic techniques such as ant
colony optimization may yield excellent near-optimum
results in short periods of time, which is important and
essential for good power management and dispatch [4].
This supports the proposed heuristic algorithms and
methods discussed in this paper.
The contingency constrained optimal power flow
(CCOPF), fuzzy multi objective CCOPF and conven-
tional OPF methods are used to determine ATC in [5].
The multiple objectives such as base operating cost,
maximum permissible operating cost, ramp rate limits on
the unit’s real power outputs and operating cost based on
different contingencies were considered in [6] to model
Fuzzy multi objective CCOPF to evaluate ATC between
two areas of IEEE 30-bus and 118-bus system. But the
neural networks and ANFIS are the best to develop the
models based on learning as compared with Fuzzy
models alone. Hence in this paper, ATC is determined
by integrating CRPF, CROPF, RBFNN, BPNN and
ANFIS methods through proposed multi-objective deci-
sion based ATC model in order to meet multiple
objectives such as optimal voltage constraints, most
common requirement, appropriate, differences in lower
and upper limits, future prediction, more power demand
and less power demand.
For typical multi-objective problems, the goal is to seek
a utopian solution to meet several competing objectives. In
such problems, the satisfaction of the objective functions
becomes a combination of vector maximizations or mini-
mizations. However, in most cases, a global maximum of
any particular individual objective function may not be a
satisfactory solution for the remaining objectives [7].
Because of this, a simple approach to meet multiple
objectives is introduced in this paper.
123
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. B
A hybrid multi-objective optimization algorithm based
on particle swarm optimization (PSO) and differential
evolution (DE) is used to solve the highly constrained
environmental or economic dispatch problem involving
multiple objectives [8]. This algorithm is strengthened by
integrating several techniques like time variant acceleration
coefficients, external repository of elite particles, the
crowding distance-based approach and the local version of
DE. Similar to this algorithm, a proposed algorithm is used
in this paper to integrate different methods in order to
obtain MODB ATC.
In general, the multi-objective optimization comprises
more computational effort than the single-objective opti-
mization. Unless the preferences are unrelated or com-
pletely understood, solution of several single objective
problems may be essential to obtain a reasonable final
solution. In fact, the efficiency of many of the methods
depends on the number of objective functions being eval-
uated and the optimization being used, which has been
proved in [9–15].
The multi-objective optimization methods presented in
[9–15] are fuzzy in terms of their mathematical uncer-
tainty, comprehensive coverage, algorithm presentation,
general applicability to engineering design and these are
targeting to specific application [16]. So these are giving a
scope to implement simple an easy way to achieve
MODBATC computations in the deregulated power sys-
tem. This is accomplished by using integrated methods as a
first time in this paper when compared with the available
literature in MODB approaches towards ATC
computations.
ATC by Continuation Repeated Power Flow
(CRPF) and Repeated Optimal Power Flow
(ROPF)
The CRPF method uses the combined features of repeated
power flow (RPF) [17] and continuation power flow (CPF)
[18]. The CRPF and ROPF solve the power flow equations
in a single program run from a known base load to maxi-
mum loading point on the selected load bus and the cor-
responding ATC is determined at each step variation using
ATC = TTC-Base Load. In this paper, the CRPF method
is taken as reference to compare the ROPF and other
methods discussed in the following sections.
The RPF and ROPF solve the power flow equations
repeatedly at a succession of points, along specified load
increments with a constant power factor and for optimal
power flow the voltage is considered as an optimization
parameter represented in Eq. (5). These methods use the
Newton–Raphson’s method [19] in polar co-ordinates and
its summary is described as follows with Eqs. (1)–(9).
 personal copy
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. B

The complex power at bus ‘p’ is Pn

wpq Þ2
!
p¼1 ðxp
/p ¼ exp ð10Þ
Pp jQp ¼ Vp Ip ð1Þ 2r2
n 
where /p is the hidden neuron’s activation function; xp is
X
jQp ¼ Vp \
 
Pp dp Ypq Vq \ðhpq þ dq Þ ð2Þ
q¼1 the input vector; wpq is the connection weight between pth
neuron and qth neuron and r is the spread of RBF.
Separating the real and imaginary parts The RBFNN has become more popular because it is the
n  
X   best function approximation technique. In order to obtain
Pp ¼ Vp Ypq Vq  cosðhpq dp þ dq Þ ð3Þ ATC, the prerequisite to train RBFNN is training data and
q¼1
checking data (data patterns), these are obtained from the
n  
X   simulation results of conventional load flow using Newton–
Qp ¼ Vp Ypq Vq  sinðhpq dp þ dq Þ ð4Þ
q¼1
The Eqs. (3) and (4) constitute a set of non-linear algebraic
equations in terms of the independent variables, voltage
magnitudes per unit, and phase angle in radians. Expanding
these two equations in Taylor series about the initial esti-
mator and neglecting all the higher order terms results in
the set of linear equations in the form of Jacobian matrix.
The optimal power flow problem [20] can be repre-
sented mathematically as follows
8 9
< Minimise f ðxÞ =
Such that gp ðxÞ ¼ 0 for p ¼ 1; 2; . . .; m\n ð5Þ
hq ðxÞ  0 for q ¼ 1; 2; . . .; i
: ;
where f ðxÞ is the objective function (voltage profiles); x 2
Rn and x ¼ ½V d tŠT vector of voltage magnitudes, angles
and taps.
gp ðxÞ is load flow equations represented in Eqs. (3) and
(4). hq ðxÞ is limits on x as well as function constraints.
This is a general nonlinear-optimization model repre-
sents a simplified version of the optimal power flow
ðKÞ ðKÞ
problem. The terms DPp and DQp are the difference
between the scheduled and calculated values, known as the
power residuals, given by
DPpðKÞ ¼ PðschÞ PðKÞ ð6Þ
p p
DQpðKÞ ¼ QðschÞ QðKÞ ð7Þ
p p
The new estimates of bus voltage magnitudes and phase
angles can be obtained from Eqs. (8) and (9) respectively.
Raphson’s method, the data patterns are the inputs of real
power, total transfer capability, voltage magnitudes, volt-
age angles at various buses and the output is ATC, with
these the RBFNN is under go for training, once the desired
goal is reached, the trained RBFNN would undergo for the
checking of its performance with the checking data. Once
the results obtained from the trained RBFNN are accurate
then it is said to be ATC obtained using RBFNN.
ATC by Back Propagation Neural Network (BPNN
ATC)
Back-Propagation Training Algorithm [22]:
Given are P training pairs {z1, d1, z2, d2, …, zp, dp},
where zi is input vector of size (I 9 1), diis output vector
ofsize (K 9 1)and i = 1,2, …, P.
Step 1: g [ 0, Emax chosen and output layer weights W
and hidden layer weights V are initialized at small
random values, W is (K 9 J), V is (J 9 I). Set q = 1,
p = 1 and E = 0.
Step 2: Training step starts here, Input is presented and
the layers outputs computed [f(net)] as z ¼ zp ; d ¼ dp
yj ¼ f ðVji zÞ, for j = 1, 2,…, J where vj, a column vector,
is the jth row of V, and ok ¼ f ðwkj yÞ, for k = 1, 2, …, K
where wk, a column vector, is the kth row of W.
Step 3: Error value is computed E ¼ 12 ðdk ok Þ2 þ E for
k = 1, 2, …, K.
Step 4: Error signal vectors do and dy of both layers are
 ðKþ1Þ  ðKÞ  ðKÞ computed. Vector do is (K 9 1), dy is (J 9 1). The error
 Vp  ¼ Vp  þ DVp  ð8Þ
dpðKþ1Þ ¼ dpðKÞ þ DdpðKÞ
ATC by Radial Basis Function Neural Network
(RBFNN ATC)
The architecture of RBFNN [21] consists of input layer,
hidden layer and output layer. The radial basis function
(RBF) represented in Eq. (10), is used as an activation
function for the hidden neurons in the RBFNN.
signal terms of the output layer in this step are
ð9Þ dok ¼ 12 ðdk ok Þð1 o2k Þ, for k = 1, 2, …, K. The error
signal terms of the hidden layer in this step are
dyj ¼ 12 ð1 y2j Þ Kk¼1 dok wkj , for j = 1, 2, …, J
P
Step 5: Output layer weights are adjusted
w0kj ¼ wkj þ gdok yj , for k = 1, 2, …, K and j = 1, 2,
…, J
Step 6: Hidden layer weights are adjusted
vji ¼ vji þ gdyj zi , for j = 1, 2, …, J and i = 1, 2, …, I
Step 7: If p \ P then p = p ? 1, q = q ? 1, and go to
step2; otherwise, go to step 8.
123
 Author's personal copy
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. B

Step 8: The training cycle is computed. For E \ Emax i xÞpi þ ðw

z ¼ ðw i yÞqi þ w
 i ri ; i ¼ 1; 2:
terminate the training session. For E [ Emax then E = 0,
p = 1, and initiate the new training cycle by going to step 2.
Similar to the RBFNN training the BPNN is also needs Similar to the RBFNN training the ANFIS is also needs
training data and checking data same as RBFNN to training data and checking data same as RBFNN to
determine ATC. determine ATC.

Proposed Heuristic Methods for Determining ATC

ATC by Adaptive Neuro Fuzzy Inference System
(ANFIS ATC) The five methods known as CRPF, ROPF, pre-trained
RBFNN, pre-trained BPNN and pre-trained ANFIS dis-
A typical architecture of an ANFI Shaving a circle indi- cussed in the earlier sections are integrated with the fol-
cates a fixed node, whereas a square indicates an adaptive lowing proposed heuristic algorithm to obtain the ATC
node [23]. For simplicity, consider two inputs x, y and one values of x1, x2, x3, x4 and x5 respectively.
output z. Among many FIS models, the Sugeno Fuzzy
model is the most widely applied one for its high inter- Proposed Heuristic Algorithm to Compute ATC
pretability and computational efficiency, and built-in opti- using Integrated and Intelligent Methods
mal and adaptive techniques. For a first order Sugeno
Fuzzy model, a common rule set with two Fuzzy If–Then Step 1: Choose any load bus from any test system.
rules can be expressed as: Step 2: Initiate CRPF method.
Rule 1: If xis A1 and y is B1 then z1 ¼ p1 x þ q1 y þ r1 ; Step 3: Enter the step change of real power applicable to
Rule 2: If x is A2 and y is B2 then z2 ¼ p2 x þ q2 y þ r2 all methods.
Step 4: Run the power flow till the method is converged.
where Ai and Bi are the fuzzy sets in the antecedent; and pi, Step 5: Compute the ATC at converged real power and
qi and ri are the design parameters that are determined store this ATC value to variable x1.
during the training process. Step 6: Initiate ROPF method.
Layer 1: Every node i in the first layer employ a node
function given by
O1i ¼ lAii ðxÞ; i ¼ 1; 2; O1i ¼ lBii ðxÞ; i ¼ 3; 4
where lAii , lBii can adopted Gaussian fuzzy membership
function (MF).
Layer 2: Every node in this layer calculates the firing
strength of a rule through multiplication
O2i ¼ wi ¼ lA i ðxÞ:lB i ðyÞ; i ¼ 1; 2
Layer 3: The i-th node in this layer calculates the ratio of
the i-th rule’s firing strength to the sum of all rules firing
strengths
wi
O3i ¼ wi ¼ ; i ¼ 1; 2
w 1 þ w2
where wi is referred to as the normalized firing strengths.
Layer 4: In this layer, every node i has the function of
O4i ¼ w i zi ¼ w
i ðpi x þ qi y þ ri Þ; i ¼ 1; 2 where, w i is
the output of layer 3 and {pi, qi, ri} is the set of
parameters. The parameters in this layer are referred to
as the consequent parameters.
Layer 5: The single node in this layer computes the
overall output as the summation of all incoming signals,
which is expressed as O5i ¼ 2i¼1 w þw2 z2
i zi ¼ w 1wz11þw
P
2
. The
final output z in Fig. 1, can be rewritten as Fig. 1 IEEE 24-bus reliable test system

123
 Author's personal copy
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. B

ATC 1
Step 13: Run the trained BPNN till its execution status
is 1.
CRPF Step 14: Compute the ATC at final real power and store
ATC(x1) ATC 2
BUS - 1 this ATC value to variable x4.
ROPF Step 15: Initiate the pre-trained ANFIS.
ATC (x2) ATC 3 Step 16: Run the trained ANFIS till its execution status
is 1.
BUS - 2 RBFNN Step 17: Compute the ATC at final real power and store
ATC (x3) ATC 4
this ATC value to variable x5.

BPNN ATC 5
ATC (x4) Proposed Heuristic Model for Multi-objective
BUS - N Decision Based ATC (MODB ATC)
ATC 6
ANFIS
ATC (x5) A proposed heuristic model as shown in Fig. 2 is used to
ATC 7 compute MODB ATC based on the ATC values obtained
through proposed algorithm as discussed in the later. Using
Fig. 2 Proposed heuristic model for MODB ATC method this model ATC1 to ATC7 are obtained based on the
multiple objectives as discussed in the later.
Step 7: Run the optimal power flow till the method is
converged. Proposed Heuristic Approach to Find Multi-
Step 8: Compute the ATC at the converged real power objective Decision Based ATC
and store this ATC value to variable x2.
Step 9: Initiate the pre-trained RBFNN. 1. ATC1 = Mean (x1, x2, x3, x4 and x5); This ATC1 is
Step 10: Run the trained RBFNN till its execution status useful for most common use.
is 1. 2. ATC2 = Harmonic Mean (x1, x2, x3, x4 and x5); This
Step 11: Compute the ATC at final real power and store ATC2 is useful for obtaining optimal ATC.
this ATC value to variable x3. 3. ATC3 = Geometric Mean (x1, x2, x3, x4 and x5);
Step 12: Initiate the pre-trained BPNN. This ATC3 is useful to know appropriate ATC.

Table 1 CRPF ATC against RBFNN, BPNN, and ANFIS ATC comparison data obtained through the proposed algorithm at bus-5 without
contingency
Test patterns Real power Method-1: CRPF (modified reference Method-3: RBFNN ATC error, %
(checking data) P5, MW conventional method) Method-4: BPNN
Method-5: ANFIS

TTC, MW ATC, MW C.S TTC, MW ATC, MW C.S

1 105 534 34 1 534.0013 34.00135 1 -0.003970

569.8317 26.03223 1 30.60000
534 34.00007 1 -0.000205
2 420 849 349 1 849 348.9998 1 0.000050
849.005 349.005 1 0.001430
849.0009 348.9999 1 0.000020
3 595 1024 524 1 1024 524 1 0.000000
1008.479 513.039 1 2.135020
1023.999 524.0001 1 0.000019
4 629.6 1058.6 558.6 1 1058.6 558.6 1 0.000000
1058.6 558.6 1 0.000000
1058.6 558.5999 1 0.000017
5 629.7 1058.7 558.7 0 1058.7 558.7 0 0.000000
1058.7 558.699 0 0.000178
1058.7 558.6999 0 0.000000

123
 Author's personal copy
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. B

Table 2 CRPF ATC against RBFNN, BPNN, and ANFIS ATC comparison data obtained through the proposed algorithm at bus-5 with
contingency
Test patterns Real power Method-1: CRPF (modified reference Method-3: RBFNN ATC error, %
(checking data) P5, MW conventional method) Method-4: BPNN
Method-5: ANFIS

TTC, MW ATC, MW C.S TTC, MW ATC, MW C.S

1 105 534 34 1 534.001 34.001 1 -0.002941

506.045 50.61967 1 -32.83243
533.9998 34.00005 1 -0.000147
2 420 849 349 1 849 349 1 0.000000
849 349 1 0.000000
849.0006 348.9999 1 0.000028
3 595 1024 524 1 1024 524 1 0.000000
1024.172 524.172 1 -0.003281
1024 524 1 0.000000
4 605.6 1034.6 534.6 1 1034.6 534.6 1 0.000000
1034.6 534.6 1 0.000000
1034.6 534.6 1 0.000000
5 605.7 1034.7 534.7 0 1034.7 534.7 0 0.000000
1034.7 534.699 0 0.000187
1034.7 534.7 0 0.000000

Table 3 Multi-objective decision based ATC

Test system and bus number Method ATC, MW Multi-objective decision based ATC, MW
ATC-1 ATC-2 ATC-3 ATC-4 ATC-5 ATC-6 ATC-7

IEEE 24-bus reliable test system CRPF 558.6 496.598 447.0945 474.0939 376.92 137.564 558.6 248.6
and bus-5 without contingency
ROPF 248.6
RBFNN 558.6
BPNN 558.6
ANFIS 558.59
IEEE 24-bus reliable test system CRPF 534.6 477.14 433.8056 457.2136 559.92 725.48 534.6 247.3
and bus-5 with contingency
ROPF 247.3
RBFNN 534.6
BPNN 534.6
ANFIS 534.6

4. ATC4 = Median (x1, x2, x3, x4 and x5); This ATC4 is 6. ATC6 = Maximum (x1, x2, x3, x4 and x5); This
useful when ATC is extreme difference in lower and ATC6 is useful when power demand is more.
upper limits 7. ATC7 = Minimum (x1, x2, x3, x4 and x5); This ATC7
5. ATC5 = Mode (x1, x2, x3, x4 and x5); This ATC5 is is useful when the power demand is less and voltages
useful for predicting future ATC. are at specified limits.

123
 Author's personal copy
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. B

ATC at Bus-5 without Contingenc ATC at Bus-5 with Contingency

600

Varying Load on Bus-5, MW

600 x=534.6

Varying Load on Bus-5 (MW)

x=558.6
500 500

400 400

300 300

200 200

100 100

0 0
100 200 300 400 500 100 200 300 400 500
ATC at Bus-5, MW ATC at Bus-5 (MW)

Fig. 3 CRPF ATC plot at bus-5 without contingency Fig. 6 CRPF ATC plot at bus-5 with contingency

ATC at Bus-5 without Contingency ATC at Bus-5 with Contingency

300 X= 248.6 300 X= 247.3

Y= 319.6 Y= 318.3
Varying Load on Bus-5, MW

Varying Load on Bus-5, MW

250 250

200 200

150 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
ATC at Bus-5, MW ATC at Bus-5, MW

Fig. 4 ROPF ATC plot at bus-5 without contingency Fig. 7 ROPF ATC Plot at bus-5 with contingency

CRPF and RBFNN ATC Comparison Plot CRPF and ANFIS ATC Comparison Plot
at Bus-5 Without Contingency at Bus-5 With Contingency

600
600 X: 534.7
X: 558.6
Varying Load at Bus-5, MW

Y: 605.7
Varying Load at Bus-5, MW

Y: 629.6 500
500

400 400

300 300

200 200

100 CRPF CRPF

100
RBFNN ANFIS
0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
0 100 200 300 400 500
ATC at Bus-5, MW
ATC at Bus-5, MW
Fig. 5 RBFNN ATC plot at bus-5 without contingency
Fig. 8 ANFIS ATC plot at bus-5 with contingency

123
 Author's personal copy
Fig. 9 BPNN ATC plot at bus-5 with contingency
Test System and Results
Test System
To test the proposed methods scrupulously, the IEEE
24-BusReliable Test System [24] as shown in Fig. 1 is
considered as test system and the results presented in this
paper are obtained using MATLAB software [25] and Mat
power 4.1 package [26].
Case Scenarios for IEEE 24-Bus Reliable Test
System Using 5-Methods
For contingency cases, a line outage between bus-9 to bus-
11 is created and is considered as contingency.
Case 1: Varying Load on Bus-5 without Contingency
In this case, the load at bus-5 is varied with constant power
factor, the corresponding TTC and ATC results are
obtained through 5 methods are presented in Tables 1, 2
and 3 and the variation between real power and ATC value
can be observed at Figs. 3, 4 and 5.
Case 2: Varying Load on Bus-5 with contingency
Similar to Case-1, the corresponding TTC and ATC
results are presented in Tables 1, 2 and 3 and the variation
between real power and ATC value can be observed at
Figs. 6, 7, 8 and 9. On these figures the maximum ATC
value is indicated with an arrow mark and these maximum
ATC values used in Table 3.
Even though there are different methods used to compute
ATC and the values obtained from those are similar, but in the
specific appliaction point of view the ATC values are different
and that can be clearly observed in Table 3. These ATC values
are called as multi-objective decision based ATC.
Conclusion
This paper suggests a simple way of implementation of
multi-objective decision based available transfer capability
(MODB ATC) using proposed heuristic approaches. The
123
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. B
main intension of integrating conventional methods and
intelligent methods through proposed algorithm is to showa
path to the power engineers for taking appropriate deci-
sions in determining and monitoring the MODB ATC as a
continuous parameter at various load dispatch centres by
establishing ATC digital meters for their ready reference in
the deregulated environment. The effectiveness and relia-
bility of the proposed heuristic methods have been tested
on various test systems like IEEE 9-bus, IEEE 24-bus,
Indian southern region extra high voltage (SREHV)
24-bus and SREHV 72-bus. It is found that the accuracy
of heuristic methods on these test system is almost sim-
ilar. Hence, in this paper the results are demonstrated on
IEEE 24-bus reliability test system. In this paper, ATC-1
to ATC-7 obtained from the proposed heuristic model are
of different values, these indicate that there is skew in
these ATC values and this skew proves that possibility of
the existence of multiple objectives in ATC. Therefore the
multi-objective decision based ATC is required in the
deregulated environment to meet different objectives such
as most common usage of ATC, voltage constrained
optimal ATC, appropriate ATC, extreme difference in
lower and upper ATC, to predict future expansion ATC,
high demand ATC and low demand ATC. These objec-
tives may be further extended and modified based on the
requirement.
References
1. K.N. Kasabov, Foundations of Neural Networks, Fuzzy Systems,
and Knowledge Engineering (Marcel Alencar, 1996)
2. P.W. Sauer, Technical challenges of computing available transfer
capability (ATC) in electric power systems. In System Sciences,
1997, Proceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Con-
ference, vol. 5 (IEEE, 1997)
3. Available transfer capability definitions and determination: a
reference document prepared by TTC task force, North American
Electric Reliability Council, June 1996
4. M. Dorigo, T. Stützle, Ant colony optimization (MIT Press,
Cambridge, 2004)
5. T.K. Hahn et al., Evaluation of available transfer capability using
fuzzy multi-objective contingency-constrained optimal power
flow. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 78(5), 873–882 (2007)
6. M.K. Kim, D. Hur, J.-K. Park, Determination of available transfer
capability using multi-objective contingency constrained optimal
power flow with post-contingency corrective rescheduling.
Electr. Eng. 90(4), 243–253 (2007)
7. S. Gass, Linear Programming: Methods And Applications, 5th
edn. (Dover Publications, Mineola, 2003), pp. 224–250
8. D.-W. Gong, Y. Zhang, C.-L. Qi, Environmental/economic
power dispatch using a hybrid multi-objective optimization
algorithm. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 32(6), 607–614
(2010)
9. A. Arabali, M. Ghofrani, M. Etezadi-Amoli, M.S. Fadali, M.
Moeini-Aghtaie, A multi-objective transmission expansion plan-
ning framework in deregulated power systems with wind gener-
ation. Power Syst. IEEE Trans. 29(6), 3003–3011 (2014)
 Author's personal copy
J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. B
10. D.S. Sanches, A.L. João Bosco Jr, B.D. Alexandre Cláudio,
Multi-objective evolutionary algorithm for single and multiple
fault service restoration in large-scale distribution systems.
Electr. Power Syst. Res. 110, 144–153 (2014)
11. Y. Kumar, B. Das, J. Sharma, Multiobjective, multiconstraint
service restoration of electric power distribution system with
priority customers. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 23(1), 261–270
(2008)
12. C.-O. Kim, H.-S. Min, Y. Yih, Integration of inductive learning
and neural networks for multi-objective FMS scheduling. Int.
J. Prod. Res. 36(9), 2497–2509 (1998)
13. R.V. Rao, V. Patel, Multi-objective optimization of heat
exchangers using a modified teaching-learning-based optimiza-
tion algorithm. Appl. Math. Model. 37(3), 1147–1162 (2013)
14. T. Niknam et al., Improved particle swarm optimisation for multi-
objective optimal power flow considering the cost, loss, emission
and voltage stability index. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 6(6),
515–527 (2012)
15. D.S. Popovic, R.M. Ciric, A multi-objective algorithm for dis-
tribution networks restoration. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 14(3),
1134–1141 (1999)
16. R.T. Marler, J.S. Arora, Survey of multi-objective optimization
methods for engineering. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 26(6),
369–395 (2004)
17. P.G. Krishna, T.G. Manohar, Assessment of secured voltage
stability power margin of indian southern power grid using
integrated and intelligent methods. Int. J. Recent Trends Eng.
Technol. 7(2), 43–50 (2012)
18. V. Ajjarapu, C. Christy, The continuation power flow: a tool for
steady state voltage stability analysis. IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
7(1), 416–423 (1992)
19. W.F. Tinney, C.E. Hart, Power flow solution by Newton’s
method. IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst. 86(11), 1449–1460
(1967)
20. H.W. Dommel, W.F. Tinney, Optimal power flow solutions.
IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst. 10, 1866–1876 (1968)
21. S. Haykin, Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation
(Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1994)
22. S.-I. Horikawa, T. Furuhashi, Y. Uchikawa, On fuzzy modeling
using fuzzy neural networks with the back-propagation algo-
rithm. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 3(5), 801–806 (1992)
23. J.-S.R. Jang, ANFIS: adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference
system. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet. 23(3), 665–685 (1993)
24. Y. Ou, C. Singh, Assessment of available transfer capability and
margins. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 17(2), 463–468 (2002)
25. Matpower package www.pserc.cornell.edu/matpower4.0
26. www.mathworks.com/help/toolbox/nnet (or, fuzzy)
123