IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution

Research Article

Graph-theoretic based approach for the load- ISSN 1751-8687

Received on 29th July 2019

flow solution of three-phase distribution

Revised 9th December 2019
Accepted on 17th January 2020
E-First on 25th March 2020
network in the presence of distributed doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2019.1176
www.ietdl.org

generations
Krishna Murari1 , Narayana Prasad Padhy1
1Electrical Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee, India
E-mail: krishnamurari.thapar@gmail.com

Abstract: Matrix is one of the convenient means for depicting/illustrating a graph on the computer. In this study, the notion
graph-theory in conjunction with matrix algebraic operations has been adopted for solving the load-flow problem of three-phase
distribution systems (radial and meshed). Five significant matrices, path impedance (PI), loads beyond branch (LB), path drop
(PD), slack bus to other buses drop (SBOBD), load flow matrix (LFM), and straight-forward matrix operations have been utilised
to attain the load-flow solutions. The aforementioned matrices reveal the system's topology and pertinent information about the
operating characteristics of the distribution system during LF studies. This algorithm is formulated entirely on various matrices
formulation and computations, even at the stage of upgrading the voltage at every individual bus. Owing to the aforementioned
reasons, this LF methodology is computationally efficient for large-sized distribution systems. Moreover, the distributed
generations (DGs) modelled as PQ and PV buses are incorporated into the proposed load-flow algorithm. A generalised
breakpoint matrix has been derived to compute the mesh breakpoint and PV breakpoint injections simultaneously. The
effectiveness of the proposed methodology has been tested on several standard distribution systems. The test outcome shows
the viability and accuracy of the proposed method.

Nomenclature mb total number of mesh breakpoint

d loop breakpoint number (1, 2,…, mb)
H total number of extreme buses in the distribution MBd dth element of set MB
system
ΔPabc(MBd)t additional real power injection at bus MBd at the
S total number of paths connecting slack bus to end
buses beginning of iteration t
V voltage matrix ΔQabc(MBd)t additional reactive power injection at bus MBd at
Zabc(b) impedance of branch b the beginning of iteration t
n row number ΔSabc(MBd)t additional complex power injection at bus MBd at
m column number the beginning of iteration t
j total number of buses in the network r
ΔIabc (MBd)t additional real current injection at bus MBd at the
l total number of branches in the network beginning of iteration t
PVB set of all PV buses r
ΔIabc (MBd)
t additional reactive current injection at bus MBd at
pvb total number of PV buses the beginning of iteration t
t iteration count ΔIabc(MBd)t additional complex current injection at bus MBd
K PV type DG number (1, 2,..., pvb) at the beginning of iteration t
PVBK Kth element of set PVB ΔV abc(MBd)t voltage mismatch (real part) between bus MB′′d
ΔPabc(PVBK )t additional real power injection at bus PVBK at the and MBd at the beginning of iteration t
beginning of iteration t Δδabc(MBd)t voltage mismatch (imaginary part) between bus
ΔQabc(PVBK )t additional reactive power injection at bus PVBK at MB′′d and MBd at the beginning of iteration t
the beginning of iteration t V abc(MBd)t actual voltage at bus MBd obtained at the
ΔSabc(PVBK )t additional complex power injection at bus PVBK beginning of iteration t
at the beginning of iteration t V abc(MB′′)t specified voltage at bus MBd
d
r
ΔIabc (PVBK )
t additional real current injection at bus PVBK at
the beginning of iteration t
q additional reactive current injection at bus PVBK 1 Introduction
ΔIabc(PVBK )t
at the beginning of iteration t The load flow (LF) computation is required to acquire the
ΔIabc(PVBK )t additional complex current injection at bus PVBK magnitude and phase angle of voltage at each node or bus of the
at the beginning of iteration t power system network [1]. The real and reactive power flow
ΔV abc(PVBK )t voltage mismatch (real part) between bus PVB′′K through each feeder or line is also obtained by applying pertinent
and PVBK at the beginning of iteration t LF techniques. Applications, particularly in the area of power
voltage mismatch (imaginary part) between bus system automation and power system optimisation, repeatedly
Δδabc(PVBK )t
PVB′′K and PVBK at the beginning of iteration t require a fast converging power-flow solution. The complexity and
size of the modern power system are significantly increased due to
V abc(PVBK )t actual voltage at bus PVBK at the beginning of
a significant rise in interconnections and ever-growing power
iteration t demand. Hence, it is becoming increasingly tedious and time-
V abc(PVBK′′)t the specified voltage at bus PVBK consuming to obtain power-flow solutions.
MB set of all meshes or loops

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1627-1640 1627
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 In the literature, survey several conventional methodologies viz.
Gauss–Seidel-based LF method [1, 2], the Newton–Raphson (NR)-
based LF method [1, 3, 4], and the fast-decoupled-based LF
methods [1, 5–8], have been extensively adopted for solving the LF
problem of a purely AC transmission network. These conventional
LF solution methodologies, when applied to distribution systems,
can show poor convergence characteristics or may not be able to
provide LF solution in some critical cases [9]. The prominent
reasons are as follows [10]:
(a) The distribution networks are generally having a radial structure
or in some cases have weakly meshed structures, whereas,
transmission systems are having tightly meshed structures.
(b) In the case of the transmission system, the X/R ratio of
transmission lines is high, whereas, the X/R ratio of distribution
lines is low.
(c) The transmission systems are generally balanced, while,
distribution systems are mostly unbalanced.
(d) The mutual coupling effect is insignificant in the case of
transmission systems and can be ignored while performing LF. The
mutual coupling has a significant impact in the case of the
distribution system and needs to be included while solving the
distribution LF problem.
Owing to the aforementioned reasons, the LF problem of
distribution systems needs to be tackled in a different manner. As a
result of continuous research for many years on the LF problem of
distribution systems by the previous power system researchers,
abundant LF algorithms or methods are now available in the
literature. These methods can be, largely, categorised into
(i) Modified NR and fast decoupled-based LF methods.
(ii) Backward/forward sweep (BFS)-based LF methods.
(iii) Direct LF (DLF) methods.
As discussed above, conventional LF methods (NR and fast
decoupled LF method) generally fail to provide the LF solution of
distribution systems. Therefore, power system researchers have
suitably modified the conventional LF techniques for its
applicability to the distribution network [11–20]. However, these
algorithms are found to be computationally burdensome.
In the later phase, the most popular BFS approach has been
evolved. In [21], the authors have developed a LF technique for
solving the LF problem of a radial distribution network based on
the BFS method. Das et al. [22] introduced an algorithm that
involves the solution of a simple expression of voltage magnitudes.
Each node voltage is expressed in the form of an algebraic equation
and the LF equations do not involve any trigonometric identity.
Authors in [23] have introduced a novel matrix transformation
method for the evaluation of branch current in radial distribution
networks. They have made use of the BFS method for the LF
solution. This method is very simple to implement and is very
versatile in adapting to any kind of radial distribution network with
different types of load. In [24], the authors utilised load current
(LC) to bus voltage matrix to calculate the bus voltages in a single
stride out, whereas, the conventional BFS method requires two
strides. In [25, 26], the authors have developed a modified object-
oriented method for solving the LF problem of distribution systems
(radial and weakly meshed both). They have utilised
compensation-based LF technique, which is based on the BFS
method for solving the LF problem using designed objects.
Khushalani and Schulz [27] developed a fast converging LF
technique for three-phase distribution networks by utilising the
notion of the traditional BFS LF method. In their LF model, they
have incorporated various models of distributed generations (DGs).
A quadratic-based BFS LF algorithm for the multiphase radial
distribution network has been formulated in [28]. In [29], the
authors have developed an improved BFS LF algorithm for the
radial distribution network utilising the breadth-first search
algorithm for the creation of a modified incidence matrix. The
aforementioned LF technique exhibits good convergence ability. In
[30], the authors have developed a BFS LF algorithm for active
radial distribution networks based on current summation
1628
methodology. In [31], a hybrid LF algorithm has been developed
for three-phase distribution networks with DGs. The method is
called hybrid because it utilises the concept of the BFS algorithm
as well as Newton's method. Khushalani et al. [32] have developed
a modified BFS-based LF algorithm for an active three-phase
radial distribution network. PQ and PV models of DGs have been
incorporated in the aforementioned LF methodologies. A LF
algorithm for three-phase distribution, which is based on the BFS
approach, has been developed in [33]. This method is capable of
handling both radial and meshed distribution networks.
Several other methods of LF based on BFS-based methods are
formulated in [34–42].
All of these solution techniques are competent enough to
provide precise LF solutions. However, these LF techniques
display some general limitations. In the BFS method, the voltage of
the receiving end bus in a distribution system is computed as a
function of the voltage of its corresponding receiving end bus. This
sequential representation of sending end voltage limits the
convergence speed to a significant extent. Also, it requires time-
consuming branch numbering schemes (computationally
burdensome) to carry out both the sweeps in BFS-based methods.
The DLF method [9] has prevailed over the disadvantages
related to conventional LF methods and BFS-based LF methods. In
the DLF method, bus–injection to branch–current matrix (BIBC),
branch–current to bus–voltage matrix (BCBV) and DLF (DLF = 
BCBV × BIBC) matrices have been utilised to acquire the LF
solution of three-phase distribution systems. All these matrices
require a decent memory size for large distribution systems. For
acquiring the LF solution, two direct matrix multiplication is
required, (a) BCBV × BIBC, (b) DLF × current injection vector.
This operation requires considerably long processing time.
The LF methodology developed in [43] is also an advanced
DLF method utilising the network topology-based approach. In this
method, several matrices viz. incidence matrix, branch current to
bus current matrix, and diagonal impedance matrix have been
formulated for acquiring the LF solution of distribution network.
All these matrices require a decent memory size for large
distribution systems. This solution technique requires direct
multiplication between (a) transpose of branch current to bus
current matrix and impedance matrix (let us assume that the
resultant matrix is represented by NCNV), (b) NCNV and branch
current to bus current matrix. This multiplication operation requires
considerably large processing time.
With a vision to overcome the limitations of the existing LF
methods, a DLF algorithm based on the BFS approach has been
developed in this study for solving the LF problem of three-phase
distribution networks. The concept of the AC–DC LF algorithm
developed in [10] has been suitably modified as per three-phase
scenarios for solving three-phase LF problems in the presence of
DGs. Importantly, the notion graph theory in conjunction with
simple matrix algebraic operations has been adopted for solving the
unbalanced distribution system load-flow problem. When
compared with the conventional LF algorithm, the PM does not
require lower–upper triangular decomposition of any matrix. Five
significant matrices have been formulated in [10], which have been
transformed into three-phase matrices in this study. That means
elements of the path impedance (PI) matrix, path drop (PD)
matrix, loads beyond branch (LB) matrix, slack bus to other buses
drop (SBOBD) matrix and LF matrix (LFM) should be substituted
by their equivalent three-phase vector/matrix. In the case of a radial
distribution network with the DGs modelled as a PV bus, the PV
breakpoint matrix has been derived to compute the reactive power
injection/withdrawal by the DGs in order to maintain the specified
voltage at each PV bus. In the case of a weakly meshed distribution
network with PV type DGs, the loop breakpoint injections and PV
breakpoint injections have been calculated simultaneously. The test
outcome shows the viability and accuracy of the proposed method
(PM).
The rest of the paper is organised as follows: in Section 2, a
new LF algorithm for the three-phase radial distribution system has
been developed. The LF algorithm for the three-phase radial
distribution system with PV and PQ models of DGs has been
described in Section 3. In Section 4, the procedure of formulating a
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1627-1640
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
Fig. 1 Primitive circuit of a three-phase line segment

On applying Carson's equations, the 3-Φ line parameter of the

circuit shown in Fig. 1 can be obtained. For the system shown in
Fig. 1, the primitive impedance matrix can be displayed as

Zaa(x) Zab(x) Zac(x) Zan(x)

Zba(x) Zbb(x) Zbc(x) Zbn(x)
[Zprimitive(x)] = (1)
Zca(x) Zcb(x) Zcc(x) Zcn(x)
Zna(x) Znb(x) Znc(x) Znn(x)

The phase impedance matrix (PHIM) can be calculated by applying

Kron's reduction method on the obtained primitive impedance
matrix of the n-phase system. As is evident from (2), the effect of
ground wire or neutral is still included in the Phase impedance
matrix (PHIM):

Zaa − n(x) Zab − n(x) Zac − n(x)

[Zabc(x)] = Zba − n(x) Zbb − n(x) Zbc − n(x) (2)
Fig. 2 Four-bus three-phase radial distribution system Zca − n(x) Zcb − n(x) Zcc − n(x)

The voltage equation of the three-phase line shown in Fig. 1 can be

Fig. 3 Single line diagram of the three-phase distribution system
common breakpoint matrix to compute the PV breakpoint and
mesh breakpoint injections simultaneously is explicitly explained.
The effectiveness and precision of the PM have been analysed in
Section 5. Section 6 concludes the major contributions.
2 LF solution algorithm for three-phase radial
distribution system
A vital step in modelling unbalance three-phase distribution
network is line modelling. J.H. Teng [9] depicted a three-phase
model of overhead and underground line. The equivalent primitive
circuit of a 3-Φ line segment is shown in Fig. 1.
written as (see (3)) . Consider a situation in which one of the
phases says ‘ a’ is not present in the diagram shown in Fig. 1, then
the rows and columns corresponding to phase ‘a’ will store value
zero in (3).
To acquire the LF solution of the three-phase distribution
system using the method developed for the AC–DC distribution
system in [10], pertinent alteration is highly required in the
developed methodology [10]. Most importantly the developed
matrices for the AC–DC distribution system need to be altered in
accordance with three-phase unbalanced scenarios. For example, if
the line section between buses i and j is three-phase, the
corresponding bus power, bus current, feeder/branch current, and
bus voltage will be a 3 × 1 matrix/vector, whereas corresponding
branch impedance will be a 3 × 3 matrix and is termed as Phase
impedance matrix (PHIM).
Five significant matrices viz. PI, PD, LB, SBOBD, LFM, and
straightforward matrix operations are utilised to attain LF
solutions. The formulation and structure of these matrices have
been exemplified below using a four-bus distribution system
(Fig. 2). The distribution network shown in Fig. 2 is represented by
a directed graph as shown in Fig. 3.
The LB matrix identifies all loads beyond a branch in a
distribution network. The LB matrix for the distribution network in
Fig. 3 is given by
Sabc(2) × 1 Sabc(3) × 1 Sabc(4) × 1
[LB] = Sabc(2) × 0 Sabc(3) × 1 Sabc(4) × 0 (4)
Sabc(2) × 0 Sabc(3) × 0 Sabc(4) × 1

V a(k1) V a(k2) Zaa − n(x) Zab − n(x) Zac − n(x) Ia(x)

V b(k1) = V b(k2) + Zba − n(x) Zbb − n(x) Zbc − n(x) Ib(x) (3)
V c(k1) V c(k2) Zca − n(x) Zcb − n(x) Zcc − n(x) Ic(x)
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1627-1640 1629
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
In the LB matrix, each element is a sub-matrix of the order 3 × 1 The PD matrix evaluates the voltage drop in each branch existing
except scalars (i.e. except 1 and 0), where in the path connecting slack bus to end buses. Thus, the PD matrix
for the distribution network in Fig. 2 is given by
Sa(2) Sa(3) Sa(4)
(Zabc(1) × 1) (Zabc(2) × 1) (Zabc(3) × 0)
Sabc(2) = Sb(2) , Sabc(3) = Sb(3) , Sabc(4) = Sb(4) (5)
Sc(2) Sc(3) Sc(4) × FCabc(1) × FCabc(2) × FCabc(3)
PD = (11)
(Zabc(1) × 1) (Zabc(2) × 0) (Zabc(3) × 1)
Thus, the actual size of the LB matrix will be (3l × (j − 1)). × FCabc(1) × FCabc(2) × FCabc(3)
Subsequently, a careful inspection of Fig. 3 reveals that each
end bus is connected uphill to the substation through a unique In this matrix, rows represent path under consideration and
branch set called as path branch set (PBS; − yi).−Let, the PBS for the columns represent a drop in the respective branch connecting slack
end buses 3 and 4 are − and −
y1 − y2,−respectively, and these may be bus to end bus.
calculated using The SBOBD matrix evaluates the total voltage drop between
slack buses to other existing buses in each path of the distribution
−
y1 −
= Zabs 1 , Zabs 2 network. Thus, the SBOBD matrix for the distribution network in
Fig. 2 is given by (see (12)) . The LFM for the distribution
−
y2 −
= Zabs 1 , Zabs 3 network in Fig. 2 is given by

The PI matrix identifies all branch impedances in each path from LFM = U − SBOBD (13)
slack bus to end buses. The PI matrix for the distribution network
in Fig. 2 is given by where

Zabc(1) × 1 Zabc(2) × 1 Zabc(3) × 0 Vabc(slack bus) Vabc(slack bus) 0

PI = (6) U= (14)
Zabc(1) × 1 Zabc(2) × 0 Zabc(3) × 1 Vabc(slack bus) 0 Vabc(slack bus)

where U = matrix of the same order as SBOBD, U(n, m) = 0, if PI(n, m) is

0, U(n, m) =  Vabc(slackbus), else
Zaa − n(1) Zab − n(1) Zac − n(1) where
Zabc(1) = Zba − n(1) Zbb − n(1) Zbc − n(1) (7)
1∠0°
Zca − n(1) Zcb − n(1) Zcc − n(1)
Vabc(slack bus) = 1∠ − 120° (15)
Zaa − n(2) Zab − n(2) Zac − n(2) 1∠ + 120°
Zabc(2) = Zba − n(2) Zbb − n(2) Zbc − n(2) (8) A search operation is performed on the LFM for selecting the
Zca − n(2) Zcb − n(2) Zcc − n(2) three-phase non-null vector (any random vector) from each column
of matrix LFM leading to the formulation of a new voltage matrix
Zaa − n(3) Zab − n(3) Zac − n(3) Vnew.
The other relevant matrices that have been formulated for our
Zabc(3) = Zba − n(3) Zbb − n(3) Zbc − n(3) (9)
purpose are bus voltage (V) matrix and LC matrix. The V and LC
Zca − n(3) Zcb − n(3) Zcc − n(3) matrices for the distribution network in Fig. 2 are given by

As is evident from (7)–(9), that each element in PI matrix (except V = Vabc(2) Vabc(3) Vabc(4) (16)
scalars (i.e. except 1 and 0)) is a sub-matrix of the order 3 × 3.
Thus, the actual size of the PI matrix will be (3S × 3l). In this matrix, a three-phase vector located at the mth column
In the distribution network in Fig. 2, there is a specific voltage number stores the three-phase voltage value of (m + 1)th bus
drop in each branch depending upon the amount of current passing number (slack bus is not included),where
through it. Let, the path branch drop set for the end buses 3 and 4
are £1 and £2, respectively, and these may be calculated using: V a(2) V a(3) V a(4)

£1 = Zabs 1 × FCabc 1 , Zabs 2 × FCabc 2 Vabc(2) = V b(2) , Vabc(3) = V b(3) , Vabc(4) = V b(4) (17)
V c(2) V c(3) V c(4)
£2 = Zabs 1 × FCabc 1 , Zabs 3 × FCabc 3
In matrix V, each element is a sub-matrix of order 3 × 1. Thus, the
where actual size of the V matrix will be (3 × (j − 1)).

FCa(1) FCa(2) Iabc(2) × 1 Iabc(3) × 1 Iabc(4) × 1

FCabc(2) = FCb(1) , FCabc(2) = FCb(2) , FCabc(3) = [LC] = Iabc(2) × 0 Iabc(3) × 1 Iabc(4) × 0 (18)
FCc(1) FCc(2) Iabc(2) × 0 Iabc(3) × 0 Iabc(4) × 1
FCa(3) (10)
The LC matrix identifies all LC beyond a branch in a distribution
FCb(3)
network. In the LC matrix, each element is a sub-matrix of the
FCc(3)

[Zabc(1)] [Zabc(1)] × [FCabc(1)]

0
× [FCabc(1)] +[Zabc(2)] × [FCabc(2)]
SBOBD = (12)
[Zabc(1)] [Zabc(1)] × [FCabc(1)]
0
× [FCabc(1)] +[Zabc(3)] × [FCabc(3)]
1630 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1627-1640
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
Fig. 4 Flowchart depicting complete steps for solving the LF problem of three-phase radial distribution network
order 3 × 1 except scalars (i.e. except 1 and 0). Thus, the actual size
of the LC matrix will be (3l × (j − 1)), where
Ia(2) Ia(3) Ia(4)
Iabc(2) = Ib(2) , Iabc(3) = Ib(3) , Iabc(4) = Ib(4) (19)
Ic(2) Ic(3) Ic(4)
The feeder current (FC) matrix is derived using (18) by summing
all the elements of each row. The generalised algorithm for
carrying out the LF solution of the radial distribution system
(considering all the relevant derivations in this study) is shown in
Fig. 4.
3 LF solution algorithm for the three-phase
unbalanced distribution network in the presence of
DGs
In general, the mathematical model provides sufficient information
about original system behaviour. An appropriate DG model that
can sufficiently depict a DG type with a view of analysing its
impact on the system is of significant importance. Various
mathematical models of DGs have been derived by researchers for
power flow analysis [10, 27, 30–32, 34, 38, 42–44]. They have
modelled DGs as either a constant power factor model or a variable
reactive power output power model or constant voltage model.
Another kind of classification of buses with DG connections is
based on the amount of power delivered by the DG. The buses or
nodes with DG connection that produces small output power are
modelled as PQ nodes or buses whereas the buses or nodes with
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1627-1640
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
DG connection that produces large DG output power are modelled
as PV nodes.
3.1 PQ type DGs
This type of DG has real and reactive power as the specified value.
The power injected by the DG needs to be reflected in the LB
matrix of the distribution network by considering injection by the
DG as the negative load. For example, consider the distribution
network in Fig. 5, the modified loads beyond branch matrix will be
(20):
Sabc(2) Sabc(3) Sabc(4) − Sabc(4) DG
LB = 0 Sabc(3) 0 (20)
0 0 Sabc(4) − Sabc(4) DG
3.2 PV type DGs
Consider a three-phase radial distribution network (Fig. 6), where
PV nodes are present. PV type buses are generally classified as
generation buses. For the PV type buses or distributed generators,
the real power generations are constant and reactive power
generation is attuned between the minimum and maximum limits
so as to uphold the voltage of the PV bus. The net additional
injection/withdrawal of reactive power to/from PV buses has been
computed using the PV breakpoint sensitivity matrix.
For the distribution system shown in Fig. 7, the breakpoint
equation called as PV breakpoint sensitivity matrix can be written
as
1631
 Rabc(1) + Rabc(2) Rabc(1)
Rabc(1) Rabc(1) + Rabc(3)
Xabc(1) + Xabc(2) Xabc(1)
+j (21)
Xabc(1) Xabc(1) + Xabc(3)
ΔIabc(PVB1)t ΔV abc(PVB11)t + jΔδabc(PVB11)t
× =
ΔIabc(PVB12)t ΔV abc(PVB12)t + jΔδabc(PVB12)t

Equation (21) can also be written as (see (22)) . On further

simplifying the above (14) into real and imaginary parts, the
resulting equation will be:
q
X11 abc X12 abc R11 abc R12 abc
ΔIabc(PVB1)t
q
X21 abc X22 abc R21 abc R22 abc ΔIabc(PVB2)t
×
− R11 abc − R12 abc X11 abc X12 abc r
ΔIabc (PVB1)t
− R21 − R22 X21 X22
abc abc abc abc r
ΔIabc (PVB2)t
(23)
ΔV abc(PVB1)t
ΔV abc(PVB)t
= Fig. 5 Four-bus three-phase distribution system with DG modelled as PQ
Δδabc(PVB1)t bus

Δδabc(PVB2)t

With the assumption of all bus voltages being close to 1.0 p.u. and
the phase angles small, the following equation holds:
q
r
ΔIabc (PVB1)t − jΔIabc(PVB1)t = ΔPabc(PVB1)t
(24)
− jΔQabc(PVB1)t

q
r
ΔIabc (PVB2)t − jΔIabc(PVB2)t = ΔPabc(PVB2)t
(25)
− jΔQabc(PVB2)t

Using (24) and (25) in (23), the resulting equation will be

X11 abc X12 abc R11 abc R12 abc

ΔQabc(PVB1)t
X21 abc X22 abc R21 abc R22 abc ΔQabc(PVB2)t
×
− R11 abc − R12 abc X11 abc X12 abc ΔPabc(PVB1)t
− R21 abc − R22 abc X21 abc X22 abc ΔPabc(PVBK )t
(26) Fig. 6 Four-bus three-phase distribution system with DG modelled as PV
ΔV abc(PVB1)t bus
ΔV abc(PVB2)t
=
Δδabc(PVB1)t
Δδabc(PVB2)t

Equation (26) can also be represented as

X R ΔQ ΔV
= (27)
−R X ΔP Δδ

where

Xabc(1) + Xabc(2) Xabc(1)

X=
Xabc(1) Xabc(1) + Xabc(3)
(28)
X11 abc X12 abc
=
X21 abc X22 abc Fig. 7 Equivalent single line diagram of the system shown in Fig. 6 for PV
bus breakpoint injection calculations
Rabc(1) + Rabc(2) Rabc(1)
R= ΔQabc(PVB1)t
Rabc(1) Rabc(1) + Rabc(3)
(29) ΔQ = (30)
R11 abc R12 abc ΔQabc(PVB2)t
=
R21 abc R22 abc

1632 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1627-1640
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 R11 abc R12 abc X11 abc X12 abc
+j
R21 abc R22 abc X21 abc X22 abc
q (22)
r
ΔIabc (PVB1)t − jΔIabc(PVB1)t ΔV(PVB1)t + jΔδ(PVB1)t
× =
q
r
ΔIabc (PVB2)t − jΔIabc(PVB2)t ΔV(PVB2)t + jΔδ(PVB2)t

ΔPabc(PVB1)t node k. If two PV nodes k and l have completely different paths to

ΔP = (31) the slack bus then off diagonal elements Xkl abc = Xlk abc = 0.
ΔPabc(PVB2)t (ii) If PV nodes k and l share some common branches in their
respective path to the slack bus, then Xkl abc = Xlk abc  = modulus
ΔV abc(PVB1)t of the sum of positive sequence phase reactance matrices of all line
ΔV = (32)
ΔV abc(PVB2)t sections common to two paths. The sign of off-diagonal elements
depends upon the direction of the loop current chosen.
Δδabc(PVB1)t The element of breakpoint matrix for the radial distribution
Δδ = (33)
Δδabc(PVB2) t network with pvb number of PV buses is given by the following
equations:
where
X11 abc X12 abc ⋯ ⋯ X1PVb abc

0 X21 abc X22 abc ⋯ ⋯ X2PVb abc

Δδabc(PVB1)t = Δδabc(PVB2)t = 0 (34) X= ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ (40)
0 ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮
XPVb1 abc XPVb2 abc ⋯ ⋯ X(pvb)(pvb) abc
0
t t
ΔPabc(PVB1) = ΔPabc(PVB2) = 0 (35)
ΔQabc(PVB1)t
0
ΔQabc(PVB2)t
t
ΔV abc(PVB1) = V abc(PVB′′) t
− V abc(PVB1) t
(36) ΔQabc(PVB3)t
(41)
1
ΔQ =
⋮
t
ΔV abc(PVB2) = V abc(PVB′′)
2
t
− V abc(PVB2) t
(37)
⋮
Using (28)–(37) in (26), the reduced sensitivity matrix will be ΔQabc(PVBpvb)t
formulated
ΔV abc(PVB1)t
X11 abc X12 abc ΔQabc(PVB1)t ΔV abc(PVB1)t
= (38) ΔV abc(PVB2)t
X21 abc X22 abc ΔQabc(PVB2)t ΔV abc(PVB2)t
ΔV abc(PVB3)t
ΔV = (42)
The exact amount of injection/withdrawal of reactive power to/ ⋮
from the PV buses needs to be reflected in the LB matrix of the ⋮
network. If the computed reactive power infringes on the boundary
constraints, then reactive power generated/withdrawal will be ΔV abc(PVBpvb)t
positioned or fixed at the violated boundary limit and the DG will
behave as a PQ generator. Besides some modifications in the LB Δδ = 0 (43)
matrix, the rest of the procedure will be similar as discussed in
Section 2. Remaining matrices will reshape or reconfigure ΔP = 0 (44)
themselves in accordance with the changes in the LB matrix.
Therefore the proposed algorithm is capable of handling various Using (27), (40)–(44)
types of distribution generation efficiently.
Consider the network in Fig. 7, the modified LB matrix will be: XΔQ = ΔV (45)

4 LF solution algorithm for meshed three-phase

LB = unbalanced distribution network in the presence of
PV type DGs or buses
(39) Consider a scenario in which PV type buses/DGs exist in the three-
Sabc(2) Sabc(3) − Sabc(PVB1)t Sabc(4) − Sabc(PVB2)t
phase meshed distribution network. For such cases, loop
0 Sabc(3) − Sabc(PVB1)t 0 breakpoint injections and PV breakpoint injections need to be
calculated simultaneously. This requires the formulation of one
0 0 Sabc(4) − Sabc(PVB2)t common matrix called breakpoint matrix embedding the properties
of the loop breakpoint matrix and PV breakpoint matrix.
In general, for a distribution system with a pvb number of PV For example, consider the three-phase meshed distribution
buses, the sensitivity matrix or breakpoint matrix is formulated network in Fig. 8 in which there is existing a PV type bus/DG at
using the steps given below. bus number 3. Hence, loop breakpoint injections and PV
breakpoint injections need to be calculated simultaneously. For
(i) In sub-matrix X, the diagonal element Xkk abc is the sum of better understanding, the three-phase distribution network is
phase reactance (positive sequence) matrix of all the three phase represented by an undirected graph (single line representation, see
branches or lines between the root node (substation bus) and PV Fig. 9). Form a loop breakpoint say d by disconnecting the line 4

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1627-1640 1633
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
Fig. 8 Schematic diagram of a three-phase distribution system with DGs modelled as PV bus

Fig. 9 Equivalent single line diagram of the system shown in Fig. 8 for PV bus breakpoint injection and mesh breakpoint injection calculations

from bus MBd and the abovementioned disconnected line 4 should q

ΔIabc(MBd)t
X11 abc X12 abc R11 abc R12 abc
be connected to the artificially created dummy node say MB′′d. q
Also, create a PV breakpoint K by disconnecting the PV type DG X21 abc X22 abc R21 abc R22 abc ΔIabc(PVBK )t
×
from bus PVBK and the abovementioned disconnected DG should − R11 abc − R12 abc X11 abc X12 abc r
ΔIabc (MBd)t
be connected to the artificially created dummy bus say PVB′′K . − R21 − R22 X21 X22
Where d and K are loop breakpoint number and PV breakpoint
abc abc abc abc r
ΔIabc (PVBK )t
(48)
number, respectively. ΔV abc(MBd)t
For the system shown in Fig. 8, the loop breakpoint equation
and PV breakpoint equation can be written as ΔV abc(PVBK )t
=
Rabc(1) + Rabc(2) + Rabc(3) −Rabc(2) Δδabc(MBd)t
−Rabc(2) Rabc(1) + Rabc(2) Δδabc(PVBK )t
Xabc(1) + Xabc(2) + Xabc(3) −Xabc(2)
The above equation for calculating PV breakpoint current injection
+j (46)
−Xabc(2) Xabc(1) + Xabc(2) and mesh breakpoint current injections can be modified in terms of
PV breakpoint reactive power injection and loop breakpoint
ΔIabc(MBd)t ΔV(MBd)t + jΔδ(MBd)t
× = complex power injection. Assuming all bus voltages being close to
ΔIabc(PVBK )t ΔV(PVBK )t + jΔδ(PVBK )t 1.0 p.u. and the phase angles small, the following equation
prevails:
Equation (46) can also be written as (see (47)) . On further
simplifying (47) into real and imaginary parts, the resulting
q
r
ΔIabc(MBd)t − jΔIabc(MBd)t = ΔPabc(MBd)t
equation will be (49)
− jΔQabc(MBd)t

q
r
ΔIabc (PVBK )t − jΔIabc(PVBK )t = ΔPabc(PVBK )t
(50)
− jΔQabc(PVBK )t

Using (49) and (50) in (48), the resulting equation will be

R11 abc R12 abc X11 abc X12 abc

+j
R21 abc R22 abc X21 abc X22 abc
q (47)
r
ΔIabc (MBd)t − jΔIabc(MBd)t ΔV abc(MBd)t + jΔδabc(MBd)t
× =
q
r
ΔIabc(PVBK )t − jΔIabc(PVBK )t ΔV abc(PVBK )t + jΔδabc(PVBK )t

1634 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1627-1640
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 X11 abc X12 abc R11 abc R12 abc
ΔQabc(MBd)t X11 abc X12 abc R11 abc ΔQabc(MBd)t
X21 abc X22 abc R21 abc R22 abc ΔQabc(PVBK )t X21 abc X22 abc R21 abc ΔQabc(PVBK )t =
×
− R11 abc − R12 abc X11 abc X12 abc ΔPabc(MBd)t − R11 abc − R12 abc X11 abc ΔPabc(MBd)t
t (63)
− R21 abc − R22 abc X21 abc X22 abc ΔPabc(PVBK )t ΔV abc(MBd)
(51) ΔV abc(PVBK )t
ΔV abc(MBd)t
Δδabc(MBd)t
ΔV abc(PVBK )t
=
Δδabc(MBd)t Thus, utilising above equations, the loop breakpoint injections and
PV breakpoint injections are calculated simultaneously for any
Δδabc(PVBK )t three-phase distribution system. The net additional injection/
withdrawal of reactive power to/from the PV buses and the
Equation (51) can also be represented as additional loop breakpoint injections needs to be reflected in the
LB matrix of the network. The same approach could be extended
X R ΔQ ΔV for solving the LF problem of a single phase or a balanced
= (52)
−R X ΔP Δδ distribution network. Consider a situation in which one of the
phases say ‘p’ is not present in the diagram shown in Fig. 8, then
where, the rows and columns corresponding to phase ‘p’ will store value
zero.
Xabc(1) + Xabc(2) + Xabc(3) −Xabc(2) The problem-solving steps for acquiring the LF solution of a
X= three-phase distribution network with DGs considering all the
−Xabc(2) Xabc(1) + Xabc(2)
(53) relevant derivations in this study are detailed in Fig. 10.
X11 abc X12 abc
=
X21 abc X22 abc

Rabc(1) + Rabc(2) + Rabc(3) −Rabc(2)

R=
−Rabc(2) Rabc(1) + Rabc(2)
(54)
R11 abc R12 abc
=
R21 abc R22 abc

ΔQabc(MBd)t
ΔQ = (55)
ΔQabc(PVBK )t

ΔPabc(MBd)t
ΔP = (56)
ΔPabc(PVBK )t

ΔV abc(MBd)t
ΔV = (57)
ΔV abc(PVBK )t

Δδabc(MBd)t
Δδ = (58)
Δδabc(PVBK )t

where

0
Δδabc(PVBK )t = 0 (59)
0

0
ΔPabc(PVBK ) = 0 t
(60)
0

ΔV abc(PVBK )t = V abc(PVB′′)
K
t
− V abc(PVBK )t (61)

d − V abc(MBd ) (62)
t
ΔV abc(MBd)t + jΔδabc(MBd)t = V abc(MB′′) t

Using (53)–(62) in (51), the reduced sensitivity matrix will be

formulated

Fig. 10 Flowchart depicting complete LF steps for meshed AC network

with PV bus

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1627-1640 1635
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
Table 1 Voltage solution for the eight-bus unbalanced distribution system
Node no. Voltage magnitude, pu Phase angle, °
PM [38] [9] [43] [34] PM [38] [9] [43] [34]
1 (A) 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
1 (B) 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 −120.00 −120.00 −120.00 −120.00 −120.00
1 (C) 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00
2 (A) 0.9844 0.9843 0.9842 0.9842 0.9843 0.1833 0.1833 0.1833 0.1833 0.1833
2 (B) 0.9719 0.9718 0.9717 0.9718 0.9718 −119.75 −119.75 −119.75 −119.75 −119.75
2 (C) 0.9708 0.9707 0.9706 0.9707 0.9707 119.97 119.97 119.97 119.97 119.97
3 (A) 0.9844 0.9842 0.9842 0.9842 0.9843 0.1776 0.1776 0.1776 0.1776 0.1776
4 (B) 0.9659 0.9657 0.9656 0.9656 0.9658 −119.73 −119.73 −119.73 −119.73 −119.73
4 (C) 0.9679 0.9678 0.9677 0.9678 0.9678 119.93 119.93 119.93 119.93 119.93
5 (B) 0.9648 0.9647 0.9646 0.9647 0.9648 −119.74 −119.74 −119.74 −119.74 −119.74
6 (C) 0.9665 0.9664 0.9661 0.9662 0.9665 119.92 119.92 119.92 119.92 119.92
7 (C) 0.9697 0.9695 0.9692 0.9692 0.9696 119.96 119.96 119.96 119.96 119.96
8 (C) 0.9674 0.9672 0.9670 0.9671 0.9673 119.95 119.95 119.95 119.95 119.95

Table 2 Convergence speed comparison

Method Convergence speed, s
8-bus 33-bus 13-bus 37-bus 123-bus
PM 0.01101 0.01100 0.01120 0.011215 0.011218
[38] 0.03562 0.03498 0.05527 0.078224 0.089984
[34] 0.03012 0.03168 0.05231 0.06978 0.08496
[9] 0.02462 0.02398 0.02645 0.032468 0.035247
[43] 0.01921 0.02014 0.2268 0.03159 0.034256

5 Results and discussion require time-consuming branch numbering schemes

The efficacy and accuracy of the proposed algorithm have been
assessed using MATLAB software through a PC with CORE i3
processor, 4 GB RAM, and 2.66 GHz CPU. The developed
technique has been applied to various unbalanced and balanced
distribution networks incorporating PQ and PV models of DGs.
The precision, efficacy, and robustness of the PM have been
investigated on various standard test systems. The precision test of
the PM has been performed by comparing the test results obtained
by PM with several other algorithms existing in the literature,
whereas, efficacy analysis is carried out by comparing the
convergence speed of the PM with other existing methods. The
robustness of the algorithm has been analysed by varying the R/X
ratio of the distribution system line data to a very wide range.
Convergence tolerance is considered to be 0.000001 p.u.
(computationally burdensome) to carry out both the sweeps in
BFS-based methods. The PM is computationally advanced
compared to the BFS method. The reasons are as follows:
(i) This algorithm utilises simple matrix operations to solve the LF
problem of the distribution network.
(ii) The formulation of the PI matrix ensures a minimum number
of search operations to identify all paths connecting the slack bus
to end buses in the distribution network. Also, this matrix provides
information regarding the branches existing in each path in
minimum search time.
(iii) This algorithm is formulated entirely on various matrices
formulation and computations, even at the stage of upgrading the
voltage at every individual bus.

Therefore, the PM is computationally proficient when compared to

5.1 Case 1: LF solution results without DGs
In the current part of this section, the performance of the proposed
LF algorithm has been investigated on several standard test
systems without considering the injections by the various models
of DGs. The following distribution systems have been taken into
consideration for our purpose: (a) eight-bus test system [12], (b)
IEEE-13 bus test system [45], (c) IEEE-33 bus test system, [46] (d)
IEEE-37 bus test system [45], and (e) IEEE-123 bus test system
[45].
The LF results for the eight-bus distribution system using PM,
BFS sweep-based LF algorithm, and DLF approach is explicitly
presented in Table 1. The maximum difference between the voltage
solution obtained by the PM and those obtained by the methods
developed in [9, 38, 43, 44] are found to be 0.0002, 0.0005, 0.0005,
and 0.0001 p.u., respectively. In Table 2, the efficiency comparison
test of PM with the existing LF methods in the literature has been
detailed. It is evident from Table 2 that the PM is computationally
efficient when compared with the LF methods developed in the
prevailing literature [9, 34, 38, 43].
In the BFS-based methods developed in [34, 38], the voltage of
the receiving end bus in a distribution system is computed as a
function of the voltage of its corresponding receiving end bus. This
sequential representation of sending end voltage limits the
convergence speed to a significant extent. Also, both these methods
existing BFS-based methods [34, 38].
In the DLF method [9], BIBC, BCBV, and DLF (DLF = 
BCBV × BIBC) matrices have been utilised to acquire the LF
solution of the three-phase distribution system. All these matrices
require a decent memory size for large distribution systems. For
acquiring the LF solution, two direct matrix multiplications are
required: (a) BCBV × BIBC, (b) DLF × current injection vector.
This operation requires considerably large CPU time. The LF
methodology developed in [43] is also an advanced DLF method
utilising the network topology-based approach. In this method,
several matrices viz. incidence matrix, branch current to bus
current matrix, and diagonal impedance matrix have been
formulated for acquiring the LF solution of distribution network.
This solution technique requires direct multiplication between (a)
transpose of branch current to bus current matrix and impedance
matrix (let us assume that the resultant matrix is named NCNV),
(b) NCNV and branch current to bus current matrix. This
multiplication operation requires considerably large processing
time.
The PM is computationally advanced compared to DLF-based
methods. In the PM, no direct matrix multiplications are required
between the significant matrices (PI, PD, LB, SBOBD, LFM)
formulated in this study. The notion graph theory in conjunction
with simple matrix algebraic operations has been adopted for

1636 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1627-1640
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
Fig. 11 Variation of convergence speed with the change in system R/X ratio (IEEE-123 bus system)
Table 3 Characteristics of DGs with IEEE-33 bus meshed distribution systems
Generator number Bus location Voltage magn., pu Real power, kW
Max. Min.
1(PQ) 10 — 50
2(PV) 25 0.9652
3(PV) 33 0.9568
Fig. 12 LF solution results of IEEE-33 bus meshed distribution system with DGs
solving the unbalanced distribution system load-flow problem. The
straightforward and simple matrix algebraic operations and
proficient search algorithms enable the PM to be computationally
competent when compared with the existing LF methods.
In order to check the robustness of the PM, the R/X ratio of the
IEEE-123 bus test system is varied for a wide range and LF
convergence characteristics are investigated. The test results in
Fig. 11 justify the convergence capability and competence of PM.
5.2 Case 2: LF solution results with DGs
In this section, the performance of the proposed LF algorithm has
been investigated on several standard test systems considering the
injections by the various models of DGs. The following
distribution systems have been taken into account for our purpose:
(a) IEEE-33 bus test system [46], (b) IEEE-13 bus test system [45],
(c) IEEE-37 bus test system [45], and (d) IEEE-123 bus test system
[45]. The impact of DG is included in this section. The
characteristics of the DGs associated with the IEEE-33 bus system
are provided in Table 3. The DG nodes 633 (IEEE-13 bus system),
702 (IEEE-37 bus system), and 19 (IEEE-123 bus system) are
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1627-1640
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
Injected reactive power, kVAr
Max. Min.
50 20 20
100 100 90 50
60 60 50 10
modelled as PV nodes. The specified positive sequence voltages at
these nodes are 1.0 p.u. The regulator was disconnected in order to
see the clear impact of the DG on the system.
The voltage solution for the IEEE-33 bus distribution system
using the PM and several other existing LF algorithms [9, 34, 38,
43] is explicitly presented in Fig. 12. The LF solution for the DGs
associated with the IEEE-33 bus test system is provided in Table 4.
The voltage solution for the IEEE-13 bus distribution system using
the PM and several other existing LF algorithms [9, 34, 38, 43] is
explicitly presented in Table 5.
It is evident from Table 6 that PM outperforms existing LF
methods, especially for large-sized distribution systems. The
reasons are clearly elaborated in the previous part of this section.
Also, in the case of a weakly meshed distribution network with PV
type DGs, the loop breakpoint injections and PV breakpoint
injections have been calculated simultaneously. Thus, saving
decent computational time when compared with the existing LF
method as they are solving PV and loop breakpoint injections
separately.
In order to verify the robustness of the proposed LF method, the
R/X ratio of the IEEE-123 bus test system (with DGs) is varied for
1637
a wide range and LF convergence characteristics are investigated.
The test results in Fig. 13 justify the convergence capability and
competence of PM.

Table 4 LF result of DGs with IEEE-33 bus meshed distribution system
Generator number Bus location Real power, kW Injected reactive power, kVAr
PM [38] [9] [43] [34] PM [38] [9] [43] [34]
1(PQ) 10 50 50 50 50 50 10 10 10 10 10
2(PV) 25 100 100 100 100 100 60 59.99 59.98 59.98 59.99
3(PV) 33 60 60 60 60 60 20 19.99 19.98 19.98 19.99

Table 5 Voltage solution for the IEEE-13 bus radial distribution system with DG
Node no. Voltage magnitude, pu Phase angle, deg
PM [38] [9] [43] [34] PM [38] [9] [43] [34]
650 (A) 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
650 (B) 1 1 1 1 1 −120 −120 −120 −120 −120
650 (C) 1 1 1 1 1 120 120 120 120 120
632 (A) 0.9915 0.9914 0.9913 0.9913 0.9914 −3.65 −3.67 −3.61 −3.61 −3.61
632 (B) 0.9922 0.9920 0.9920 0.9921 0.9921 −123.58 −123.57 −123.50 −123.50 −123.50
632 (C) 0.9881 0.9880 0.9880 0.9880 0.9880 116.40 116.40 116.41 116.41 116.41
633 (A) 1.0000 1 1 1 1.0000 −3.91 −3.90 −3.92 −3.92 −3.92
633 (B) 1.0000 1 1 1 1.0000 −123.95 −123.94 123.97 123.97 123.97
633 (C) 1.0000 0.9999 0.9999 0.9999 1.0000 115.95 115.94 115.98 115.98 115.98
634 (A) 0.9503 0.9502 0.9500 0.9501 0.9501 −3.91 −3.91 −3.91 −3.91 −3.91
634 (B) 0.9498 0.9496 0.9496 0.9496 0.9497 −123.97 −123.97 −123.97 −123.97 −123.97
634 (C) 0.9498 0.9497 0.9497 0.9498 0.9498 115.95 115.95 115.95 115.95 115.95
645 (A) — — — — — — — — — —
645 (B) 0.9786 0.9785 0.9785 0.9786 0.9786 −123.92 −123.91 −123.93 −123.93 −123.93
645 (C) 0.9899 0.9897 0.9897 0.9897 0.9898 116.36 116.36 116.35 116.35 116.35
646 (A) — — — — — — — — — —
646 (B) 0.9733 0.9731 0.9731 0.9732 0.9732 −124.11 −124.11 −124.11 −124.11 −124.11
646 (C) 0.9906 0.9905 0.9905 0.9905 0.9906 116.36 116.36 116.36 116.36 116.36
671 (A) 0.9730 0.9729 0.9729 0.9729 0.9730 −7.01 −7.01 −7.01 −7.01 −7.01
671 (B) 0.9993 0.9992 0.9991 0.9991 0.9993 −123.58 −123.57 −123.56 −123.56 −123.56
671 (C) 0.9329 0.9328 0.9326 0.9327 0.9329 114.53 114.51 114.53 114.53 114.53
680 (A) 0.9730 0.9729 0.9728 0.9728 0.9730 −6.99 −6.99 −6.99 −6.99 −6.99
680 (B) 0.9993 0.9992 0.9991 0.9991 0.9993 −123.57 −123.57 −123.57 −123.57 −123.57
680 (C) 0.9329 0.9328 0.9326 0.9327 0.9329 114.53 114.53 114.53 114.53 114.53
684 (A) 0.9715 0.9714 0.9714 0.9715 0.9715 −7.02 −7.02 −7.02 −7.02 −7.02
684 (B) — — — — — — — — — —
684 (C) 0.9308 0.9307 0.9305 0.9306 0.9308 114.49 114.49 114.49 114.49 114.49
611 (A) — — — — — — — — — —
611 (B) — — — — — — — — — —
611 (C) 0.9298 0.9297 0.9295 0.9296 0.9298 114.46 114.46 114.46 114.46 114.46
652 (A) 0.9694 0.9692 0.9692 0.9692 0.9694 −6.99 −6.99 −6.99 −6.99 −6.99
652 (B) — — — — — — — — — —
652 (C) — — — — — — — — — —
692 (A) 0.9732 0.9732 0.9730 0.9731 0.9732 −6.99 −6.99 −6.99 −6.99 −6.99
692 (B) 0.9993 0.9991 0.9991 0.9992 0.9992 −123.57 −123.57 −123.57 −123.57 −123.57
692 (C) 0.9329 0.9327 0.9326 0.9327 0.9328 114.43 114.43 114.43 114.43 114.43
675 (A) 0.9667 0.9666 0.9664 0.9664 0.9666 −7.25 −7.25 −7.25 −7.25 −7.25
675 (B) 1.0016 1.0015 1.0014 1.0014 1.0015 −123.75 −123.75 −123.75 −123.75 −123.75
675 (C) 0.9306 0.9305 0.9304 0.9304 0.9305 114.57 114.57 114.57 114.57 114.57

Table 6 Convergence speed comparison

Method Convergence speed, s
8-bus 33-bus 13-bus 37-bus 123-bus
PM 0.01201 0.01200 0.01229 0.013204 0.025340
[38] 0.03702 0.03921 0.06728 0.085320 0.127659
[34] 0.03425 0.03614 0.06254 0.08156 0.11254
[9] 0.02562 0.02425 0.02836 0.036325 0.068287
[43] 0.02201 0.02318 0.02564 0.03245 0.06012

1638 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1627-1640
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020

Fig. 13 Variation of convergence speed with the change in system R/X
ratio (IEEE-123 bus system with DG)
6 Conclusion
The LF algorithm developed in [10] has been modified in a manner
such that it provides the LF solution of the three-phase unbalanced
or balanced AC distribution network (radial and meshed) in the
presence of DGs. Importantly, the PM applies only straightforward
matrix algebraic operations along with several search techniques to
acquire the LF solution of three-phase distribution systems (both
balanced and unbalanced). When compared with the conventional
LF algorithm, the PM does not require lower-upper triangular
decomposition of any matrix. In the case of a radial distribution
network with the DGs modelled as a PV bus, the PV breakpoint
matrix has been derived to compute the reactive power injection/
withdrawal by the DGs in order to maintain the specified voltage at
each PV bus. In the case of a weakly meshed distribution network
with PV type DGs, the loop breakpoint injections and PV
breakpoint injections have been calculated simultaneously. Thus,
saving decent computational time when compared with the existing
LF method as they are solving for PV and loop breakpoint
injections separately. The net injections are reflected in the LC or
LB matrix of the distribution network (depending upon the
breakpoint quantity being calculated viz. power or current). Apart
from some pertinent changes in the LB matrix, the rest of the
solution procedure will be similar as explained in Section 2.
Remaining matrices will reshape or reconfigure themselves
accordingly with the changes in the LB matrix. Therefore, PM is
capable of handling various types of DGs quite efficiently. The
performance of the PM has been investigated on several standard
test systems. The test results reveal that the PM is capable of
providing precise LF solution as well as offers speed and
flexibility. The PM is quite robust as it converges for a very wide
range of system R/X ratios. These features make it suitable for
online applications.
7 Acknowledgment
This work is supported by Department of Science and Technology
(DST), India smart grid research initiatives under the research
grants: US–India CollAborative for smart diStribution System wIth
STorage (UI-ASSIST: IUS-1132-EED), Indo–UK Collaboration for
Zero Peak Energy Building Design for India (ZED-I: DST-1161-
APD), Demonstration of MW-scale Solar Integration in weak grids
using Distributed Energy Storage architecture (DSIDES: DST-1237
EED) and Indo–Danish collaboration for data-driven control and
optimization for a highly Efficient Distribution Grid (ID-EDGe:
DST1390-EED).
8 References
[1] Saddat, H.: ‘Power system analysis’ (McGraw-Hill, New York, USA, 1999)
[2] Kesavan, H.K., Pai, M.A., Bhat, M.V.: ‘Piecewise solution of the load-flow
problem’, IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst., 1972, PAS-91, (4), pp. 1382–1386
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1627-1640
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
[3] Tinney, W.F., Hart, C.E.: ‘Power flow solution by Newton's method’, IEEE
Trans. Power Appar. Syst., 1967, PAS-86, (11), pp. 1449–1460
[4] Sauer, P.W., Pai, M.A.: ‘Power system steady-state stability and the load-flow
Jacobian’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 1990, 5, (4), pp. 1374–1383
[5] Stott, B., Alsac, O.: ‘Fast decoupled load flow’, IEEE Trans. Power Appar.
Syst., 1974, PAS-93, (3), pp. 859–869
[6] Nanda, I., Kothari, D.P., Srivastava, S.C.: ‘A novel second order fast
decoupled load flow method in polar coordinates’, Int. J. Electr. Mach. Power
Syst., 1988, 14, (5), pp. 339–351
[7] Nanda, I., Kothari, D.P., Srivastava, S.C.: ‘Some important observations on
fast decoupled load flow algorithm’, Proc. IEE, 1987, 75, pp. 732–733
[8] Srivastava, L., Srivastava, S.C., Singh, L.P.: ‘Fast decoupled load flow
methods in rectangular co-ordinates’, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 1991,
13, (3), pp. 160–166
[9] Teng, J.H.: ‘Modelling distributed generations in three-phase distribution load
flow’, IET Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2008, 2, (3), pp. 330–340
[10] Murari, K., Padhy, N.P.: ‘A network-topology based approach for the load
flow solution of AC-DC distribution system with distributed generations’,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf., 2019, 15, (3), pp. 1508–1520
[11] Iwamoto, S., Tamura, Y.: ‘A load flow calculation method for ill-conditioned
power systems’, IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst., 1981, PAS-100, (4), pp.
1736–1743
[12] Teng, J.H., Chang, C.-Y.: ‘A novel and fast three-phase load flow for
unbalanced radial distribution systems’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2002, 17,
(4), pp. 1238–1244
[13] Venkatesh, B., Dukpa, A., Chang, L.: ‘An accurate voltage solution method
for radial distribution systems’, Electr. Comput. Eng. Can. J., 2009, 34, (1/2),
pp. 69–74
[14] Zimmerman, R.D., Chiang, H.D.: ‘Fast decoupled power flow for unbalanced
radial distribution systems’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 1995, 10, (4), pp.
2045–2052
[15] Losi, A., Russo, M.: ‘Object-oriented load flow for radial and weakly meshed
distribution networks’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2003, 18, (4), pp. 1265–
1274
[16] Hatami, A.R., Moghaddam, M.P.: ‘Three phase fast decoupled load flow for
unbalanced distribution systems’, Iran. J. Electr. Comput. Eng., 2007, 6, (1),
pp. 31–35
[17] Aravindhababu, P., Ashok Kumar, R.: ‘A fast decoupled power flow for
distribution systems’, Electr. Power Compon. Syst., 2008, 36, (9), pp. 932–
940
[18] Tortelli, O.L., Lourenço, E.M., Garcia, A.V., et al.: ‘Fast decoupled power
flow to emerging distribution systems via complex pu normalization’, IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., 2015, 30, (3), pp. 1351–1358
[19] Khaniya, D., Srivastava, A.K., Schulz, N.N.: ‘Distribution power flow for
multiphase meshed or radial systems’. 2008 40th North American Power
Symp., Calgary, AB, 2008, pp. 1–5
[20] Aravindhababu, P.: ‘A new fast decoupled power flow method for distribution
systems’, Electr. Power Compon. Syst., 2003, 31, (9), pp. 869–878
[21] Ghosh, S., Das, D.: ‘Method for load-flow solution of radial distribution
networks’, IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib., 1996, 146, (6), pp. 641–648
[22] Das, D., Kothari, D.P., Kalam, A.: ‘Simple and efficient method for load flow
solution of radial distribution network’, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst.,
1995, 17, (5), pp. 335–346
[23] Singh, S., Ghose, T.: ‘Improved radial load flow method’, Int. J. Electr. Power
Energy Syst., 2013, 44, pp. 721–727
[24] Ghatak, U., Mukherjee, V.: ‘An improved load flow technique based on load
current injection for modern distribution system’, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy
Syst., 2017, 84, pp. 168–181
[25] Selvan, M.P., Shanti Swarup, K.: ‘Distribution system load flow using object
oriented methodology’. Int. Conf. on Power System Technology,
(POWERCON 2004), Singapore, 21–24 November 2004, pp. 1168–1173
[26] Selvan, M.P., Shanti Swarup, K.: ‘Modelling and analysis of unbalanced
distribution system using object oriented methodology’, Electr. Power Syst.
Res., 2006, 76, (11), pp. 968–979
[27] Khushalani, S., Schulz, N.: ‘Unbalanced distribution power flow with
distributed generation’. Proc. 2005/2006 IEEE/PES Transmission and
Distribution Conf. and Exposition, Dallas, TX, USA, 2006, vol. 1–3, pp. 301–
306
[28] Mahmoud, K., Yorino, N.: ‘Robust quadratic-based BFS power flow method
for multi-phase distribution systems’, IET Gener. Trans. Distrib., 2016, 10,
pp. 2240–2250
[29] Alinjak, T., Pavić, I., Stojkov, M.: ‘Improvement of backward/forward sweep
power flow method by using modified breadth-first search strategy’, IET
Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2017, 11, (1), pp. 102–109
[30] Maya, K., Jasmin, E.: ‘A three phase power flow algorithm for distribution
network incorporating the impact of distributed generation models’, Proc.
Technol., 2015, 21, pp. 326–331
[31] Ju, Y., Wu, W., Zhang, B., et al.: ‘An extension of FBS three-phase power
flow for handling PV nodes in active distribution networks’, IEEE Trans.
Smart Grid, 2014, 5, (4), pp. 1547–1555
[32] Khushalani, S., Solanki, J.M., Schulz, N.N.: ‘Development of three-phase
unbalanced power flow using PV and PQ models for distributed generation
and study of the impact of DG models’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2007, 22,
(3), pp. 1019–1025
[33] Ghatak, U., Mukherjee, V.: ‘A fast and efficient load flow technique for
unbalanced distribution system’, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2017, 84,
pp. 99–110
[34] Wang, X., Shahidehpour, M., Jiang, C., et al.: ‘Three-phase distribution power
flow calculation for loop-based microgrids’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2018,
33, (4), pp. 3955–3967
1639
[35] Li, H., Jin, Y., Zhang, A., et al.: ‘An improved hybrid power-flow calculation
algorithm for weakly-meshed power distribution system’, Int. J. Electr. Power
Energy Syst., 2016, 74, (1), pp. 437–445
[36] Verma, R., Sarkar, V: ‘Active distribution network load flow analysis through
non-repetitive FBS iterations with integrated DG and transformer modelling’,
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2019, 13, (4), pp. 478–484
[37] Ranjan, R., Das, D.: ‘Simple and efficient computer algorithm to solve radial
distribution networks’, Electr. Power Compon. Syst., 2003, 31, (1), pp. 95–
107
[38] Cheng, C.S., Shirmohammadi, D.: ‘A three-phase power flow method for
real-time distribution system analysis’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 1995, 10,
(2), pp. 671–679
[39] Mekhamer, S.F., Soliman, S.A., Moustafa, M.A., et al.: ‘Load flow solution of
radial distribution feeders: a new contribution’, Electr. Power Energy Syst.,
2002, 24, (9), pp. 701–707
[40] Thukaram, D., Banda, H.M.W., Jerome, J.: ‘A robust three phase power flow
algorithm for radial distribution systems’, Electr. Power Syst. Res., 1999, 50,
(3), pp. 227–236
1640
[41] Liu, J., Salama, M.M.A., Mansour, R.R.: ‘An efficient power flow algorithm
for distribution systems with polynomial load’, Int. J. Electr. Eng. Edu., 2012,
39, (4), pp. 371–386
[42] Shirmohammamdi, D., Hong, H.W., Semlyen, A., et al.: ‘A compensation-
based power flow method for weakly meshed distribution and transmission
network’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 1988, 3, (2), pp. 753–762
[43] Marini, A., Mortazavi, S., Piegari, L., et al.: ‘An efficient graph-based power
flow algorithm for electrical distribution systems with a comprehensive
modeling of distributed generations’, Electr. Power Syst. Res., 2019, 170, pp.
229–243
[44] Emmanuel, M., Rayudu, R.: ‘The impact of single-phase grid connected
distributed photovoltaic systems on the distribution network using P–Q and
P–V models’, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2017, 91, pp. 20–33
[45] IEEE Distribution Planning Working Group.: ‘Radial distribution test
feeders’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 1991, 6, (3), pp. 975–985
[46] Baran, M.E., Wu, F.F.: ‘Network reconfiguration in distribution systems for
loss reduction and load balancing’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1989, 4, (2),
pp. 1401–1407
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1627-1640
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020