A Stochastic Modeling of Aggregated Vehicle-to-

Grid for Reliability Assessment of Distribution

Network
Mojtaba Sepehry, Mohammad Heidari-Kapourchali and Visvakumar Aravinthan
Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
Wichita State University
Wichita, Kansas, 67260
Visvakumar.Aravinthan@wichita.edu

Abstract— This paper proposes a stochastic modeling of
aggregated vehicle-to-grid (V2G) based on sequential Monte
Carlo simulation for reliability evaluation of distribution
network. Uncertainties of electric vehicle (EV) travel information
including parking lot arrival time, travelled distance and parking
lot departure time are incorporated into reliability evaluation
using appropriate probability distribution functions. This model
aids decision maker during planning phase to better estimate the
impact of V2G on system reliability. The proposed model is used
for optimal placement of a parking lot in an official center
distribution network with the objective of reducing the expected
energy not served.
Keywords— Electric vehicle; Vehicle-to-grid; Distribution
network; Reliability
I. INTRODUCTION
With ever increasing penetration of battery-powered electric
vehicles (EVs) and their undeniable role as a portable source
of energy, grid operators may look for their potential benefits
in smart grid era. Electrical vehicles as a controllable source
of energy may benefit the grid by smoothening the
consumption curve, reducing growing concerns over CO2
emissions, and relieving the burden on power appliances [1,
2]. Advancements in bi-directional communication and
control infrastructure in smart grid seem to make electrical
vehicles an always available spinning reserve and ancillary
service to better manage the grid. Smart charging during off-
peak and discharging during peak times give the flexibility to
balance loads and improve power asset lifetime. Investigation
on the potential benefits of electrical vehicle has gained
momentum over the recent years. A huge body of literature is
available on the benefits of electrical vehicles in power
system. Reactive power support [3], load balancing by valley
filling [4], frequency control and ancillary service [5],
operation cost reduction [6], loss improvement [7] are a few
published works among uncountable investigations on the
benefits of electrical vehicles.
EVs can also come to utilities’ advantage during emergency
conditions to improve system reliability. Impact of vehicle to
grid on the reliability of power distribution system is a yet
new topic which needs further investigation. Occurrence of
fault in the power distribution system is a random
phenomenon and has an unpredictable pattern. During
This work was supported in part by the Power Systems Engineering
Research Center (PSerc), Project No: T-53.
interruption time electrical vehicle due to its mobility is an
appropriate option to assist utility to restore more loads.
Neyestani et al [8] considered reliability as an objective for
optimal sitting of EVs parking lots. Expected energy not
served is considered as a reliability index to be improved
without detailed explanation of the V2G reliability model.
Impact of vehicle-to-home and vehicle-to-grid on the
improvement of distribution system reliability has been
studied in [9]. In this work arrival and departure time of EVs
are assumed to be known. However, in real world scenario
these parameters are uncertain and have stochastic nature. The
uncertainty of EVs travel information plays a pivotal role in
system reliability improvement. The effectiveness of parking
lot as a source of energy is determined by precisely modeling
these stochastic behaviors. During planning stage a
comprehensive model is required to get the most out of this
portable source of energy.
In this work a stochastic model of aggregated V2G is
incorporated into sequential Monte Carlo simulation to
evaluate the system reliability. EVs travel information is
represented using appropriate probability distribution
functions to better estimate the reliability impact of a V2G.
According to the arrival time, departure time and travelled
distance of EVs and random occurrence of faults different
scenarios for the amount of available energy are discussed.
The proposed model is used to find the optimal location of
parking lot in an official center distribution network. EENS
value shows a significant improvement in system reliability
after installing the parking lot.
II. EVS TRAVEL INFORMATION
In [10] the required data for EVs have been collected
through questionnaires randomly distributed among owners of
light-duty internal combustion engine vehicles. They were
asked about their commuting data including parking lot arrival
time, the travelled distance before arrival and parking lot
departure time. Non-Gaussian probability density functions
are used to give the close fit to the gathered data. Weibull
distribution (1) is selected to represent probability distribution
of arrival times.

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDAD POLITECNICA SALESIANA. Downloaded on August 18,2021 at 04:37:53 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 b ⎛ ta ⎞
b −1 ⎛ ⎛ t ⎞b ⎞ whenever the owner of such an EV arrives at the parking lot in
f (t a ; a , b ) = ⎜ ⎟ exp ⎜ − ⎜ a ⎟ ⎟ (1) the time of contingency he/she prefers to go to another parking
a⎝ a ⎠ ⎜ ⎝ a ⎠ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ lot or park his/her vehicle outside of the parking lot temporarily
and charges the vehicle at a later time when the failure is
where ta , a and b denote the arrival time and shape and cleared. There is no obligation for the owner to plug in his/her
scale parameters of the distribution, respectively. vehicle during a contingency. The operator can only inject the
power to the grid from EVs which are already plugged in at the
The selected probability distribution for travelled distance parking lot.
and parking lot departure time is type III generalized extreme
value distribution as shown in (2) and (3). Referring to Fig. 1, in scenarios 1 and 5 the time interval of
the failure is outside the time interval of the presence of the EV
1
−1− in parking lot. So there is no contribution by the EV to reduce
⎛ ⎛ d t − μ dt ⎞⎞ kd
(
f d t ; k dt , μ dt , σ dt ) = ⎜1 + k dt ⎜
⎜ ⎜ σd
⎟⎟
⎟⎟
t the impact of the contingency. In scenario 2 the EV arrives to
the parking lot during the time of failure. So, considering the
⎝ ⎝ t ⎠⎠
aforementioned assumption, there will be again no contribution
by the EV. In scenario 3 the time interval of the failure is inside
⎛ −
1 ⎞
the time interval of the presence of the EV in parking lot and in
⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎛ ⎛ d − μ dt ⎞ ⎞ kd t ⎟
+⎜ ⎟ exp⎜ − ⎜1 + k ⎜ t ⎟⎟ ⎟ (2) scenario 4 the two intervals have overlap with each other. In
d
⎜σd ⎟ ⎜ ⎜ t ⎜ σd ⎟⎟ ⎟ the two latter scenarios the EV has already been plugged in at
⎝ t ⎠ ⎜ ⎝ ⎝ t ⎠⎠ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ the parking lot and the parking lot operator can make use of the
excess amount of energy at the time of a contingency.
where d t , k d t , μ d t and σ d t denote travelled distance in
terms of Km, shape, location and scale parameters of the The amount of energy that can be contributed by an EV is
distribution, respectively. determined by its state of charge (SOC) at the beginning of a
contingency. SOC shows the amount of energy stored in a
−1−
1 battery pack. Considering the constant power approach [11] for
⎛ ⎛ t d − μ td ⎞⎞ kt
(
f t d ; k td , μ td , σ td ) = ⎜ 1 + k td
⎜
⎜
⎜ σt
⎟⎟
⎟⎟
d charging, the SOC of an EV at the time of an outage is
calculated by (4).
⎝ ⎝ d ⎠⎠
⎧SOCi + η.Pr .tav tav < tr
(4)
SOC = ⎨
⎛ 1 ⎞ tav ≥ tr
⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎜ ⎛ ⎛ t d − μ td ⎞⎞
−
ktd ⎟ ⎩100%
+ ⎜ ⎟ exp⎜ − ⎜1 + k td ⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎟ (3)
⎜σt ⎟ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ σt ⎟⎟ ⎟ where SOCi , η , Pr , tav and tr are initial SOC,
⎝ d ⎠ ⎜ ⎝ ⎝ d ⎠⎠ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ efficiency of the charger, rated power of the charger, available
where td , k t , μt and σ t d denote departure time, shape, time for the charging and the required time to fully charge the
d d
battery. Available time for the charging is the difference
location and scale parameters of the distribution, respectively. between the outage occurrence time and the arrival time of the
EV. Initial SOC is the amount of energy remained in the
III. STOCHASTIC MODELING OF AGGREGATED VEHICLE-TO- battery pack when an EV arrives at the parking lot. It can be
GRID estimated using the travelled distance and the all-electric range
In this section the model of an EV during an outage is (AER) [11]. AER is the range (x) which is driven solely using
analyzed. Based on the arrival and departure time of an EV to the electric power of the battery pack. The plug-in hybrid EV’s
the parking lot and the time of failure occurrence (of) and the AER is designated by PHEV-(miles). If the battery pack
time of clearing the failure (cf), different scenarios can be considered fully charged at the beginning of the commuting,
described as shown in Fig. 1. The parking lot is assumed to be initial SOC is calculated using (5).
used by the commuters to park and charge their vehicles during
work hours (uncontrolled public charging).
⎧⎛ x − d t ⎞
⎪⎜ ⎟ 100% dt ≤ x
SOCi = ⎨⎝ x ⎠
⎪0 dt > x
⎩
(5)
It is assumed that the EV owners have charging equipment
at home. So, it is expected for EVs to leave home fully
charged. The typical range and capacity of some EVs are
Fig. 1. Different possible scenarios resulted by different time of failure
occurance and its clearing time and the arrival and departure time of an EV. presented in table I. Finally, the available capacity (SOCav) at
the time of a contingency is calculated using (6).
The parking lot operator can make a contract with the
owner of an EV to use the pre-specified excess amount of its ⎧η (SOC − SOCmin ) SOC > SOCmin
(6)
SOCav = ⎨
battery pack energy in a contingency to reduce the interruption ⎩0 SOC ≤ SOCmin
duration experienced by the load points [8]. It is assumed that

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDAD POLITECNICA SALESIANA. Downloaded on August 18,2021 at 04:37:53 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 where SOC min denotes the pre-specified minimum
amount of energy that should be remained in the battery.
TABLE I. AER AND BATTERY CAPACITY OF TYPICAL EVS
AER Total KWh KWh/mile
PHEV-40 12 0.30
PHEV-40 16.5 0.4125
0.3
PHEV-80 24
PHEV-80 36 0.45
The available SOC of an EV will be accessible by
distribution system operator (DSO) until its departure time.
Calculating the available SOC and considering departure time
of all EVs, the aggregated V2G model is obtained. Fig. 2.
shows a typical contribution of three EVs and their departure
time. At the beginning of the contingency DSO will be
informed of the existing capacity of EV1, EV2 and EV3 and
there will be uncertain departure time of the EVs based on the
given probability distribution. DSO will be notified of the
reduced capacity at the departure time of EVs. It should
minimize the interruption duration experienced by the load
points considering the uncertainty of the departure time of the
EVs.
Fig. 2. A typical contribution of EVs during an outage
In cases where the time of failure clearance is extended to
the next day, the time interval is divided to two time intervals
each of which is limited to one day. For example if the time
interval of the failure is [22-3], it is separated to two time
intervals [22-24] and [0-3]. Subsequently, the analysis of the
effect of the contingency is done for the two intervals.
A. Basic reliability parameters calculation using Sequential
Monte Carlo simulation
Sequential Monte Carlo simulation is used in the following
steps to evaluate failure rate (λ) and unavailability of the load
points.
Step 1. Generate a random time to failure (TTF) for each
component based on its failure probability distribution.
Step 2. Find the component with minimum TTF and
convert the TTF to the time of the day (Of).
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDAD POLITECNICA SALESIANA. Downloaded on August 18,2021 at 04:37:53 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Step 3. Generate a random time to repair (TTR) for the
selected component based on its repair time probability
distribution. Then, Cf = Of +TTR.
Step 4. If Cf < 24, then run step 5 to step 10 for the outage
time interval. Otherwise, split the outage time interval into two
time intervals each of which is limited to one day. Then Run
step 5 to step 10 for both outage time intervals.
Step 5. Generate a random arrival time using the
aforementioned weibull probability distribution for an EV
whose owner signed the contract with the parking lot operator.
Step 6. If ta < Of and td > Of , then generate a random
travelled distance using the aforementioned GEV probability
distribution. Subsequently, calculate the available SOC using
(4), (5) and (6).
Step 7. If the available SOC is nonzero, generate a random
departure time using the aforementioned GEV probability
distribution. If td < Cf , the interval during which the EV can
contribute to reduce the impact of the contingency is [Of, td ];
Otherwise, this interval is [Of, Cf].
Step 8. Run step 5 to step 7 for all the EVs with the
contract. In this step the aggregated status of the V2G is
obtained. This includes the level of the available capacity and
the accessible time intervals as shown in Fig. 2.
Step 9. Restore the maximum load as long as possible in
each accessible time intervals. The straightforward algorithm
proposed in [12] could be used to determine the load point
affected by the outage and the duration of the interruption. The
amount of load which can be restored is subjected to the
following constraint. The drawn power from the parking lot
should not violate the maximum rating of the chargers.
Step 10. Update each load point number of interruption (Ni)
and the duration of outage (Tdi). Ni and Tdi denote the number
of interruption and the total down time of ith load point.
Step 11. Update TTF of the selected component as the
previous TTF plus TTR plus the newly randomly generated
TTF.
Step 12. If the convergence criterion is reached go to next
step otherwise go to step 2.
Step 13. Tui = Simulation time - Tdi, where Tui denote the
total up time of ith load point. Then calculate λi and ui of each
load point using (7) and (8).
Ni (7)
λi =
Tui
Tdi
ui = (8)
Tui + Tdi
Obtaining the load point reliability parameters, EENS is
calculated using (9).
n
EENS = ∑ Li . u i (9)
i =1
 where Li is the average load of ith load point. TABLE III. EENS FOR DIFFERENT PARKING LOT LOCATIONS

No. EENS
IV. NUMERICAL STUDY Pll=3 Pll=5 Pll=16
EVs (KWh/y)
In this section the proposed stochastic modeling of the Mean 529.0331 508.3294 509.4193
aggregated V2G is used for optimal placement of a parking lot
10 Sd. 0.8874 0.8967 1.0709
in an official center area. The 20 KV distribution network of
the area is shown in Fig. 3. Due to some geographical Impv. 41.942 62.6457 61.5558
limitations the candidate places to connect the parking lot to Mean 529.0331 492.1643 493.9947
the grid are nodes 3, 5 and 16. PV modules with the aggregated
20 Sd. 0.9372 0.8905 0.9329
power of 250 KW have already been installed in the network.
The excess amount of produced energy of these modules is Impv. 55.7302 78.8108 76.9804
stored in battery banks to be fed to the network during a Mean 509.7408 486.2332 488.4150
contingency. The average load of the office buildings are 50
30 Sd 0.9576 0.8804 0.9489
KW. The required parameters of the aforementioned
probability distributions for EV’s travel information are Impv. 61.2343 84.7419 82.5601
presented in table II. Mean 507.6790 483.4288 485.4556
40 Sd. 0.7103 0.9947 0.9979
TABLE II. PARAMETERS OF THE PROBIBILITY DISTRIBUTIONS Impv. 63.2961 87.5463 85.5195
Parameter Value Mean 506.0764 481.9004 484.1842
a 8.6851 50 Sd. 0.8213 0.8632 0.8274
b 25.7705 Impv. 64.8987 89.0747 86.7909
k dt -0.062626
μd t 17.9875
σ dt 7.2669
k td -0.06884
μt d 15.3057
σ td 0.8542

The base case is the EENS of the area without the parking
lot. The proposed Monte Carlo simulation has been run
multiple times to check the variation of the result. The mean
and standard deviation of the results are 570.9751 and 1.0339
KWh/year, respectively. Table III shows the change of the
EENS of the network by placement of a parking lot in different
candidate places. The number of EV’s owners who are willing
to sign a contract with the parking lot operator considered as
10, 20, 30, 40 and 50. The results show a significant reduction
in EENS of the network. Connecting the parking lot to nodes 5
and 16 has higher impact on EENS than that of to node 3. The
reason is the limited deployment of switching devices. If the
parking lot is connected to load point 3 it only feeds the
network whenever the fault happens in branches 1 and 2. If the
fault happens in branches 3 and 4, the parking lot is isolated
from downstream network. But, if the parking lot is connected
to nodes 3 or 5 in case of a failure in branches 3 or 4, it can
serve a part of downstream network which results in more
reduced interruption time. There is not a significant difference
in improvement of EENS of the network when the parking lot
is connected to nodes 3 or 5. The reason is the nearly
equivalent distribution of the PV generation and loads around
these areas when they get isolated from the upstream network.
The variation of the EENS during a typical running of the Fig. 3. Official center network
proposed Monte Carlo simulation is shown in Fig. 4.

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDAD POLITECNICA SALESIANA. Downloaded on August 18,2021 at 04:37:53 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

Fig. 4. Variation of EENS during sequential Monte Carlo simulation
V. CONCLUSION
In this work a stochastic model based on Monte Carlo
simulation was developed to assess the impact of V2G on the
reliability of power distribution system. Parking lot arrival
time, travelled distance and departure time as three stochastic
parameters of the EVs along with parking lot and network
constraints determine the amount of energy that can be
injected to the grid during emergency conditions. EENS was
calculated for three candidate locations to determine the best
place to connect the parking lot to the grid.
REFERENCES
[1] Murat Yilmaz, Philip T. krein, “ Review of the Impact of Vehicle-to-
Grid Technologies on Distribution Systems and Utility Interfaces”,
IEEE Transaction on Power Electronics, Vol. 28, No. 12, pp. 5673-
5689, 2013.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDAD POLITECNICA SALESIANA. Downloaded on August 18,2021 at 04:37:53 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[2] Sachin Argade, Visvakumar Aravinthan, “Probabilistic Modeling of EV
Charging and Its Impact on Distribution Transformer Loss of Life”,
IEEE International Electric Vehicle Conference (IEVC), Greenville, SC,
2012.
[3] S. D. Breucker, P. Jacqmaer, D. Brabandere, J. Driesen, and R.
Belmans, ‘‘Grid power quality improvements using grid-coupled hybrid
electric vehicles,’’ in Proc. Power Electron., Mach. Drives Conf., 2006,
pp. 505---509.
[4] W. Shireen and S. Patel, ‘‘Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in the smart
grid environment,’’ in Proc. Rec. IEEE Power Energy Syst. Transm.
Distrib. Conf. Expo., 2010, pp. 1---4.
[5] W. Kempton and J. Tomi´c, ‘‘Vehicle-to-grid power fundamentals:
“Calculating capacity and net revenue,’’ J. Power Sources, vol. 144, no.
1, pp. 268---279, 2005.
[6] A. Y. Saber and G. K. Venayagamoorthy, ‘‘Intelligent unit commitment
with vehicle-to-grid-----A cost-emission optimization,’’ J. Power Sources,
vol. 195, no. 3, pp. 898---911, 2010.
[7] K. Clement-Nyns, E. Haesen, and J. Driesen, ‘‘The impact of charging
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles on a residential distribution grid,’’ IEEE
Trans. Power Syst, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 371---380, Feb. 2010.
[8] N. Neyestani, M. Yazdani Damavandi, M. Shafie-khah, Javier
Contreras, Joao P. S. Catalao, “ Aloocation of Plug-in Vehicles’
Parking Lots in Distribution Systems Considering Network-Constrained
Objetives”, IEEE Transaction on Power System, IEEE Early Access
Articles, 2015.
[9] N. Z. Xu, C. Y. Chung, “ Reliability Evaluation of Distribution Systems
Including Vehicle-to-Home and Vehicle-to-Grid”, IEEE Transaction on
Power System, IEEE Early Access Articles, 2015.
[10] E. Pashajavid, M. Aliakbar Golkar, “Placing Parking Lot of Plug-in
Electric Vehicles Within a Distribution grid Considering High
Peneteration level of Photovoltaic Generation”, CIRED Workshop,
Libon, 2012.
[11] Zahra Darabi, Mehdi Ferdowsi, “Aggregated Impact of Plug-in Hybrid
Electric Vehicles on Electricity Demand Profile”, IEEE Transaction on
Sustainable Energy, Vol. 2, No. 4, 2011.
[12] M. Sepehry, M. Heidari-Kapourchali, A. Banajiger and V. Aravinthan, “
A New Algorithm for Reliability Evaluation of Radial Distribution
Networks” North American Power Symposium (NAPS), Pullman, WA,
September 2014.