Gopiya Naik 2015 - Analytical Approach For Optimal Siting and Sizing of Distributed

17518695, 2015, 3, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603 by Wroclaw University Of Science, Wiley Online Library on [11/10/2022].
See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
www.ietdl.org
Published in IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution
Received on 22nd December 2013
Accepted on 15th July 2014
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603
ISSN 1751-8687
Analytical approach for optimal siting and sizing of

distributed generation in radial distribution networks
Sevya Naik Gopiya Naik, Dheeraj Kumar Khatod, Mahendra Pal Sharma
Alternate Hydro Energy Centre, IIT Roorkee, Roorkee 247667, Uttarkhand, India
E-mail: gopiya_s@yahoo.co.in
Abstract: This study presents an analytical approach for optimal siting and sizing of distributed generation (DG) in radial power
distribution networks to minimise real and reactive power losses. For this purpose, suitable analytical expressions have been
derived which are based on change in active and reactive components of branch currents cause by the DG placement. This
method first determines the DG capacity causing maximum benefit at different buses, and then selects the bus as the best
location for DG placement which corresponds to highest benefit. The proposed method is applicable for sizing and siting of
single as well as multiple DG units. Moreover, the proposed method requires only the results of base case load flow to
determine the optimal size of DG unit(s). The proposed method is tested on 33-bus and 69-bus radial distribution test
systems. The results obtained by this proposed method validate the suitability and importance of proposed analytical method
to determine the size and site of DG unit(s).
1 Introduction technologies used in distribution system planning with their

merits and demerits, the various aspects of DG planning for
Electrical power systems are observing rapid changes from power loss minimisation, and different techniques employed
large centralised generation plants connected to the bulk in achieving the goal along with their feasibility has been
transmission network into decentralised systems with small reported in [32].
generating systems connected directly to the distribution A methodology for optimal allocation of DG in distribution
networks near demand centre. The later type of generation networks based on analytical approach (sensitivity analysis
system is known as distributed generation (DG) [1, 2]. DG based on equivalent current injection) for loss reduction has
can be powered by renewable energy sources (e.g. solar, been suggested by Gozel and Hocaoglu [10]. Wang and
wind, small hydro, biomass, geothermal etc.) or Nehir [13] proposed an analytical method based on phasor
non-renewable energy sources (e.g. gas turbine, current injection method to optimally place DG assuming
microturbine, fuel cell, reciprocating engine etc.). The uniformly, increasingly and centrally distributed load
benefits of DG include reduction of power losses, pattern with in radial distribution network to minimise
improvement in the voltage profile, deferred network power loss. These assumptions may cause erroneous results.
expansion cost, network reliability improvement and so on In [14–16], analytical approach based on exact loss formula
[3–6]. Appropriate size and location of DG offers technical, for optimally allocating DGs was presented. This is
economical and environmental benefits to distribution followed by the work of Khan and Choudhary [21] who
networks. For optimal allocation of DG in distribution presented an analytic-based algorithm to site and size DG
networks, different objectives such as power loss in distribution network for reducing the power loss and
minimisation [7–28], improvement of voltage profile [7, 11, improving the voltage profile. An approach based on exact
21, 23, 25–28], network investment cost minimisation [5, loss formula and GA for power loss minimisation of
29, 30], reduction of environmental impact [7] and so on distribution feeder was proposed by Shukla et al. [22]. The
were touched by the researchers using single or multi loss sensitivity method is used to identify the strategic
objective problem formulation. Different optimisation candidate locations for DG. A technique based on loss
techniques such as index-based approach [7, 25], heuristic sensitivity method for sizing and siting of DG optimally to
method [29], mixed integer non-linear programming [12], minimise the power losses in the distribution system was
analytical approaches [10, 13–16, 21–23, 28, 31], genetic proposed by Kashem et al. [28].
algorithm (GA) [17, 22, 30], artificial bee colony [18], Most of the above methodologies considered the DG type,
particle swarm optimisation (PSO) [19], evolutionary which is capable of supplying real power only to the network.
programming [20], hybrid GA and Tabu search (GA–TS) However, there are other types of DG which can supply real
[24], hybrid GA and PSO [26] and Pareto Frontier and/or reactive power into the network and improve the
differential evolution algorithm [27] have been applied to performance to still better extent. Further, the majority of
solve the above DG allocation issues. Different DG the general analytical approaches for DG siting and sizing
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 209–220 209
doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015
17518695, 2015, 3, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603 by Wroclaw University Of Science, Wiley Online Library on [11/10/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
www.ietdl.org
are based on exact loss formula and require the determination remaining branches are unaffected by the DG placed at bus
of the bus impedance matrix (Zbus) or Jacobian matrix which k. The injected current by DG placed at bus k can be
are computationally demanding. Therefore, because of the written as
size, the complexity and the specific characteristics of the
distribution network, the above methods are not suitable.

I DG = IaDG + jIrDG = IaDG 1 + j tan f (1)
Therefore, the optimal allocation of DG of any type using
suitable solution technique needs further attention. where IaDG and IrDG are the real and reactive components,
In this paper, a methodology based on analytical approach respectively, of IDG and f is the phase angle of IDG.
is presented for optimal sizing and siting of DG in distribution Now, the modified current in branch i because of DG
system so as to minimise real as well as reactive power losses. placed at bus k can be given as
This paper is the extension of that proposed in [23]. The
developed analytical method is based on change in active I new

= I i − Di I DG = Iai − Di IaDG + j Iri − Di IaDG tan f

i
and reactive components of branch currents cause by the
DG placement. The proposed method has been tested on (2)
33-bus and 69-bus test radial distribution systems and the
results are found to support the suitability and benefits of where Ii is the phasor current in branch I before DG
proper DG allocation in power distribution system for placement and I new
i is the modified phasor current in branch
network performance improvement. This paper is organised i after DG placement. The value of Di is given by the
as follows: Section 2 discusses the problem formulation of following relation
proposed method, Section 3 presents the solution algorithm
and Section 4 presents the results and discussion of the 1, if branch i is between bus 1 and bus k
proposed work. Finally, in Section 5, conclusions are Di =
0, otherwise.
summarised.
Extending the above concept for placement of m DGs
simultaneously in an N-bus radial distribution network, the
2 Problem formulation modified current through branch I can be given as
In this section, the mathematical formulation of the proposed m

m

analytical approach is presented. The proposed analytical I new = Ii −

Dik I kDG = Iai −
k
Dik IaDG
i
approach aims to determine the optimal size and location of k=1 k=1
DG in a given radial distribution network so as to minimise
m
both real power loss and voltage drop. The proposed k k
+ j Iri − Dik IaDG tan f (3)
approach begins with the following assumptions:
k=1
1. The radial distribution network under consideration is

where I new
i is the modified phasor current in branch i; I kDG is
balanced. k
the phasor current injected current by kth DG; IaDG and fk
2. The power factor of DG is known.
are the active component and phase angle, respectively, of
I kDG and the value of Dik is given by the following relation
Consider a typical N-bus radial distribution system as
shown in Fig. 1. In this figure, Ik is the phasor current in ⎧
branch k while ILk is the load phasor current of load ⎨ 1, if branch i is between bus 1 and bus at which
connected at node k. Dik = kth DG is placed
0, otherwise
⎩
When a DG is placed at a bus (say bus k) as shown in
Fig. 2, it injects current IDG into the network and there by
alters the currents in all the branches connected between 2.1 Real power loss saving
sub-station (bus 1) to bus k. However, the currents in the
The total active power loss [33], that is, PL in a typical N-bus
radial distribution system as shown in Fig. 1, can be given as
N
−1 N
−1
Ii2 Ri = Iai2 + Iri2 Ri

PL = (4)
i=1 i=1
where Ii is the current through branch i with Iai and Iri being
Fig. 1 Typical N-bus radial distribution system its real and imaginary components, respectively, and Ri is the
resistance of the branch.
Now, using (3), the total real power loss after placement of
m DGs is given by
N
−1 2
PLnew = Iinew Ri
i=1
2 2
N
−1 m m
k k k
= Iai − Dik IaDG + Iri − Dik IaDG tan f Ri
i=1 k=1 k=1
Fig. 2 Typical N-bus radial distribution system with DG placed at
bus k (5)
210 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2015, Vol. 9, Iss. 3, pp. 209–220
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2015 doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603
www.ietdl.org
Using (4) and (5), the normalised loss saving PS associated saving, respectively and should meet the following condition
with multiple DG placement can be given as (see (6)).
w1 + w2 = 1 (11)
2.2 Reactive power loss saving
The total reactive power loss, that is, QL in a typical N-bus The DG currents for the maximum benefit can be achieved by
radial distribution system as shown in Fig. 1, can be given as solving the following equation
N
−1 N
−1
Ii2 Xi = Iai2 + Iri2 Xi
⎫
∂f ∂PS ∂QS

QL = (7) = w1 1 + w2 1 = 0 ⎪ ⎪
i=1 i=1 1
∂IaDG ∂IaDG ∂IaDG
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
∂f ∂PS ∂QS ⎪
⎪
Now, using (3), the total reactive power loss after placement 2
= w 1 2
+ w 2 2
= 0 ⎪
⎬
of m DGs is given by ∂IaDG ∂IaDG ∂IaDG (12)
.. .. .. ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎡ 2 . . . ⎪
⎪
N −1 N −1 m ∂f ∂PS ∂QS ⎪
⎪
new 2 = w1 m + w2 m = 0 ⎪

Qnew k
⎪
L = Ii Xi = ⎣ Iai − Dik IaDG m
∂IaDG ∂IaDG ∂IaDG
⎭
i=1 i=1 k=1
2 ⎤ (8)

m p
k
The partial derivative of f with respect to IaDG can be given as
+ Iri − Dik IaDG tan fk ⎦Xi (see (13)).
k=1
Corresponding to (12), there will be m linear algebraic
Using (7) and (8), the normalised reactive power loss saving equations each similar to (13). These equations can be
QS associated with multiple DG placement can be given as arranged in matrix form and expressed as
(see (9)).

[A]m×m I aDG m×1 = [B]m×1 (14)
2.3 Net benefit
The ( p, q)th elements of matrix A are calculated by the
Now, using (6) and (9), the net benefit associated with following expression
multiple DG placement can be combined as
f = w1 PS + w2 QS (10) N −1
p q
Ri Xi
A pq = Dip Diq 1 + tan f tan f w1 + w2
i=1
PL QL
where w1 and w2 are the constants representing weights
assigned to real power loss saving and reactive power loss (15)
N −1 2
k 2
Iai − m
k m k
PLnew i=1 k=1 Dik IaDG + Iri − k=1 Dik IaDG tan f Ri
PS = 1 − =1− N −1 2
PL 2
i=1 Iai + Iri Ri
2 m
N −1 m k 2
k
k
m k k
i=1 2 k=1 Dik IaDG Iai + Iri tan f − k=1 Dik IaDG − k=1 Dik IaDG tan f Ri
= N −1 2 2

i=1 Iai + Iri Ri
N −1 m k k m k 2 m k k 2

i=1 2 D I
k=1 ik aDG ai I + I ri tan f − D I
k=1 ik aDG − D I
k=1 ik aDG tan f Ri
= (6)
PL
N −1 2 2
Iai − m k
+ Iri − m k
tan fk Xi

Qnew i=1 k=1 Dik IaDG k=1 Dik IaDG
QS = 1 − L = 1 − N −1 2
QL i=1 Iai + Iri Xi
2
N −1 m k
k
m k
2 m k

k 2
i=1 2 k=1 D ik I aDG I ai + I ri tan f − k=1 D ik I aDG − k=1 D ik I aDG tan f Xi
= N −1 2 2

i=1 Iai + Iri Xi
N −1 m k
k
m k
2 m k

k 2
i=1 2 D I
k=1 ik aDG ai I + I ri tan f − D
k=1 ik aDGI − D I
k=1 ik aDG tan f Xi
= (9)
QL

N −1 m
∂f p
k
p k
Ri Xi
p = 2 D I
ip ai + I ri tan f − D ip D I
ik aDG 1 + tan f tan f w1 + w2 =0 (13)
∂IaDG i=1 k=1
PL QL
www.ietdl.org
while the pth element of IaDG and B can be given as 2. Run the base case load flow using backward and forward
sweep method [34] and obtain real power loss (PL), reactive
p power loss (QL) and voltage profile of the network.
IaDGp = IaDG (16)
3. Select the number of DGs to be placed (say m) and their
N −1 power factors (DGs may have different power factors). Also,
R X
Dip Iai + Iri tan fp w1 i + w2 i

Bp = (17) select the suitable values of the weights w1 and w2
i=1
PL QL considering (11).
4. Initialise DG counter, k = 1 and bus counter, i = 2.
Using (14), the active components of DG injected currents 5. Calculate the required capacity of kth DG at bus I using
can be computed by solving (19)–(21) and then compute and store the benefit (say fik)
associated using (10) along with the capacity of kth DG.

I aDG = [A]−1 [B]

(18) 6. Check whether i < N, if yes, increment bus counter,
i = i + 1 and go to step 5, otherwise go to next step.
7. Identify the bus (say bus j) that provides the highest
Then, the required capacity of kth DG can be calculated as benefit ( fjk > fik, for i = 2 to N and i ≠ j) for kth DG.
Connect kth DG at bus j with the capacity as calculated
S kDG = V k · IaDG
k
(1 − j tan fk ) (19) from step 5.
8. Run the load flow with kth DG located at bus j and obtain
with real power loss (PL), total reactive power loss (QL) and
voltage profile of the network.
fk = uk − cos−1 (PFDG
k
) (20) 9. Check whether k < m, if yes, increment DG counter,
k = k + 1, initialise bus counter, i = 2 and go to step 5,
where θk is the angle of Vk, phasor voltage of kth DG and otherwise go to next step.
PFkDG is the power factor of kth DG. 10. At this step, a sequence of m buses is known, which are
suitable for DG connection. Now, calculate the required
capacities of all m DGs at m buses using (18)–(20).
3 Solution algorithm
A flowchart for the proposed algorithm to determine the
The developed formulation as discussed in the previous optimal sizes and locations of DGs in a given radial
section can be used to determine the optimal sizes and distribution network is given in Fig. 3.
locations of DGs in a given radial distribution network. For
placement of m DGs in an N-bus radial distribution system,
there are NCm possible combinations of different buses. If
m ≪ N , the number of combinations becomes very high
and thus it is computationally tedious to analyse all the
combinations. Hence, the computational procedure of
proposed algorithm can be divided into the following two
broad steps:
I. Firstly, a sequence of m buses suitable for DG connection is

identified. For this, first the optimal size of a DG (say kth DG)
is calculated at a bus using the following equation which is
obtained from (18) by substituting m = 1
N −1
Di Iai + Iri tan fk w1 (Ri /PL ) + w2 (Xi /QL )

k i=1
IaDG = N −1 k 2

i=1 Di sec f w1 (Ri /PL ) + w2 (Xi /QL )
(21)
At the same time, the benefit associated kth DG is also

computed using (10) and this procedure is repeated for all
other buses. The bus which gives the highest benefit is
selected as the candidate bus and kth DG is connected with
this bus. Then the above procedure is repeated to identify
next and subsequent candidate buses.
II. The optimal sizes of all the DGs at m buses, identified
during previous step, are then determined simultaneously by
using (18)–(20).
Various steps involved in the proposed method are as

follows:
1. Read the data regarding number of buses (N ),

configuration/connectivity, resistances and reactances of
different branches, real and reactive power demand at Fig. 3 Flowchart for the proposed algorithm for the optimal sizing
different buses of distribution network under consideration. and siting of DGs
www.ietdl.org
Fig. 4 Single line diagram of 12.66 kV, 33-bus radial distribution system
4 Results and discussion factor; and (b) all DGs are operating at a power factor equal
to the power factor of total load of the system [15].
The developed algorithm has been implemented under The following test systems have been considered for the
MATLAB environment and applied on two test systems to optimal placement and sizing of DGs by the developed
determine the optimal sizing and siting of DGs. For each algorithm.
test system, different values of w1 and w2 have been
considered as (a) w1 = 1 and w2 = 0; (b) w1 = 0.5 and w2 = 4.1 33-Bus radial distribution system
0.5; and (c) w1 = 0 and w2 = 1. Apart from this, two
different values of DG power factors have also been The single line diagram of a 12.66 kV, 33-bus radial
considered as: (a) all DGs are operating at unity power distribution system is illustrated in Fig. 4. The relevant data
Fig. 5 Optimal DG size of unity power factor at different buses for maximum real power loss saving
Table 1 Results for UPF DG installation in 33-bus test system with w1 = 1 and w2 = 0
Initial system condition Result with DG installation
System description Active power No. of DG Bus for DG DG size, Active loss
loss, kW placed placement MVA saving, kW
original base case 202.68 1 6 2.48 91.80

2.48 MVA, UPF DG connected to bus 6 104.08 1 16 0.41 10.26
2.48 and 0.41 MVA, UPF DG connected to buses 6 92.48 1 25 0.65 7.81
and 16, respectively
2.48, 0.41 and 0.65 MVA, UPF DG connected to 84.16 – – – –
buses 6, 16 and 25, respectively
original base case 202.68 3 6, 16, 25 1.73, 116.75
0.53, 0.77
www.ietdl.org
Table 2 Results for LPF DG installation in 33-bus test system with w1 = 1 and w2 = 0

3.01 MVA, LPF DG connected to bus 6 61.72 1 32 0.60 14.82
3.01 and 0.60 MVA, LPF DG connected to buses 6 46.07 1 25 0.68 8.47
3.01, 0.60 and 0.68 MVA, LPF DG connected to 37.38 – – – –
0.90, 0.85
for this test system are acquired from [35]. This test system power factor (UPF) in 33-bus test system for benefit
has the total demand of (3715 + j2300) kVA with the power maximisation with w1 = 1 and w2 = 0, first the optimal size
factor of total load as 0.85 lagging. of a single DG and the corresponding benefit are
The number of DG to be placed is taken as 3. In order to determined using (21) and (10), respectively. For this case,
determine 3 suitable buses for DG installation at unity Fig. 5 shows the DG size for all the buses in the system
Table 3 Results for UPF DG installation in 33-bus test system with w1 = 0.5 and w2 = 0.5
System description Active Reactive No. of DG Bus for DG DG size, Active loss Reactive loss
power loss, power loss, placed placement MVA saving, kW saving, kVAr
kW kVAr
original base case 202.68 135.14 1 6 2.44 91.78 55.41

2.44 MVA, UPF DG connected to 104.20 74.78 1 15 0.44 10.72 8.67
bus 6
2.44 and 0.44 MVA, UPF DG 92.04 65.09 1 25 0.66 7.83 5.68
connected to buses 6 and 15,
respectively
2.44, 0.44 and 0.66 MVA, UPF DG 83.71 59.07 – – – – –
connected to buses 6, 15 and 25,
respectively
original base case 202.68 135.14 3 6, 15, 25 1.66, 117.11 75.00
0.58,
0.76
1.66, 0.58 and 0.76 MVA, UPF DG 79.20 55.60 – – – – –
respectively
Table 4 Results for LPF DG installation in 33-bus test system with w1 = 0.5 and w2 = 0.5
kW kVAr

2.97 MVA, LPF DG connected to 61.83 48.54 1 31 0.62 15.58 11.51
bus 6
2.97 and 0.62 MVA, LPF DG 45.39 36.33 1 25 0.69 8.54 6.37
respectively
1.78, 0.62 and 0.69 MVA, LPF DG 36.64 29.78 – – – – –
respectively
0.93,
0.84
1.81, 0.93 and 0.84 MVA, LPF DG 26.07 22.43 – – – – –
respectively
www.ietdl.org
System description Reactive power No. of DG Bus for DG DG size, Reactive loss
loss, kVAr placed placement MVA saving, kVAr

2.00 and 0.58 MVA, UPF DG connected to 63.57 1 25 0.70 6.50
buses 7 and 31, respectively
0.71, 0.77
except the sub-station bus and corresponding benefit (active for this case are summarised in Table 2. For this case, the
power loss saving). The active power loss saving obtained optimal sizes of DGs are 1.85, 0.90 and 0.85 MVA at buses
by running load flow is also plotted in this figure for the 6, 32 and 25, respectively. This alternative of DG sizes
sake of comparison. The loss saving computed by proposed results in a total real power loss of 26.63 kW or 86.86%
method is close to that computed by running load flow and real power loss reduction as compared with base case system.
both are following similar trends. Further, optimal locations and sizes of 3 DGs are also
It is evident from Fig. 5 that the highest active power loss computed for different values of w1 and w2. Tables 3 and 4
saving of 91.8 kW can be achieved by placing a 2.48 MVA, present the optimal locations and sizes of 3 DGs operated at
UPF DG at bus 6. However, the actual active power loss UPF and LPF, respectively, with w1 = 0.5 and w2 = 0.5. At
saving calculated by running load flow is 98.6 kW. This is UPF operation of DGs, their optimal sizes are 1.66, 0.58
because, in the developed analytical method, the expression and 0.76 MVA at buses 6, 15 and 25, respectively, resulting
for active power loss saving has been derived because of in (79.20 + j55.60) kVA loss in the network. On the other
change in branch currents only caused by DG placement. hand, 1.81, 0.93 and 0.84 MVA LPF DGs connected at
When branch currents are reduced by DG placement, the buses 6, 31 and 25, respectively, result in (26.07 + j22.43)
voltage drops in different branches are also reduced which kVA loss in the network.
in turn improves the voltage profile of the system. Thus, an Tables 5 and 6 summarises the results of optimal locations
extra saving of 6.8 kW can also be achieved by placing a and sizes of 3 DGs operated at UPF and LPF, respectively,
2.48 MVA, UPF DG at bus 6 because of voltage profile with w1 = 0 and w2 = 1.0. In this case, at UPF operation of
improvement. DGs, their optimal sizes are 1.38, 0.71 and 0.77 MVA at
After placing a 2.48 MVA, UPF DG at bus 6, the above buses 7, 31 and 25, respectively, causing 53.36 kVAr
procedure is repeated to identify next and subsequent reactive power loss. While at LPF operation of DGs, their
candidate buses. The results for this case are summarised in
Table 1. From this table, it is clear that buses 6, 16 and 25
are the suitable location for DG installation at UPF. Now,
the optimal sizes of DGs determined simultaneously by Table 7 Comparison of results for 33-bus test system
using (18)–(20) are 1.73, 0.53 and 0.77 MVA at buses 6, 16 Particulars Acharya Murthy and Proposed
and 25, respectively. This alternative of DG sizes results in et al. [14] Kumar [36] method
a total real power loss of 79.51 kW against 202.68 kW
power loss of base case system. DG size, MVA 2.49 2.5 3.01 2.48 3.01
This approach is extended to size and site 3 DGs, operating DG power factor UPF UPF 0.9 lag UPF 0.85 lag
location 6 6 6 6 6
at load power factor (LPF) in 33-bus test system for benefit loss saving, % 47.33 47.32 66.39 48.65 69.55
maximisation with w1 = 1 and w2 = 0. The obtained results

1.80 and 0.77 MVA, UPF DG connected to buses 24.28 1 24 1.06 9.44
30 and 14, respectively
0.81, 1.14
www.ietdl.org
Fig. 6 Voltage profile of 33-bus test system for different cases
optimal sizes are 1.39, 0.81 and 1.14 MVA at buses 30, 14 and and power factor of DG. For a considered objective, LPF
24, respectively, resulting in 11.76 kVAr reactive power loss. operation of DGs improves the system performance in a
Summarising different cases presented in Tables 1–6, it is better way compared with UPF operation.
evident that the optimal locations and sizes of DGs vary Finally, to validate the proposed method, the results
depending upon the objective considered (values of w1 and w2) obtained by it are compared with those obtained by the
Fig. 7 Single line diagram of 12.66 kV, 69-bus distribution system

0.52, 0.72
www.ietdl.org

2.22 MVA, LPF DG connected to bus 50 23.88 1 17 0.61 15.60
2.22 and 0.61 MVA, LPF DG connected to buses 50 8.19 1 39 0.88 2.27
0.62, 0.88
methods reported in the literature for 33-bus test system and The voltage profiles of 33-bus test system for different
presented in Table 7. The results presented in this table are cases considered are given in Fig. 6. These voltage profiles
for siting and sizing of single DG to minimise the real are obtained after placing 3 DGs as given in the last row of
power loss only. From this table, it is evident that more Tables 1–6. It is evident from Fig. 6 that the installation of
active power loss saving is possible by the proposed method DG units in 33-bus test system by proposed method
compared with the other methods reported in the literature. significantly improves the voltage profile of the network.
Table 10 Results for UPF DG installation in 69-bus test system with w1 = 0.5 and w2 = 0.5
kW kVAr

bus 50
1.83 and 0.52 MVA, UPF DG 71.76 35.95 1 39 0.72 1.51 3.70
respectively
1.83, 0.52 and 0.72 MVA, UPF DG 70.25 32.24 – – – – –
connected to buses 50, 17 and
39, respectively
0.53,
0.72
1.73, 0.53 and 0.72 MVA, UPF DG 70.24 32.30 – – – – –
39, respectively
Table 11 Results for LPF DG installation in 69-bus test system with w1 = 0.5 and w2 = 0.5
kW kVAr

bus 50
2.25 and 0.62 MVA, UPF DG 8.38 8.45 1 39 0.88 2.27 5.55
respectively
2.25, 0.62 and 0.88 MVA, UPF DG 6.11 2.89 – – – – –
39, respectively
0.64,
0.88
2.13, 0.64 and 0.88 MVA, UPF DG 5.66 2.79 – – – – –
39, respectively
www.ietdl.org

0.55, 0.72
However, the degree of improvement is different depending 69-bus distribution test system are obtained from [37]. This
upon the objective considered (values of w1 and w2) and test system has the total demand of (3802.19 + j2694.6)
power factor of DG. Among different cases considered, the kVA with the power factor of total load as 0.82 lagging.
best voltage profile is observed when DGs are operated at For this test system also, the number of DG to be placed is
LPF with w1 = 0 and w2 = 1.0. taken as 3. To determine 3 suitable buses for DG installation
at UPF in 69-bus test system for benefit maximisation with
4.2 69-Bus radial distribution system w1 = 1 and w2 = 0, similar procedure is employed as
discussed for 33-bus test system. The results for this case
The single line diagram of a 12.66 kV, 69-bus distribution test are summarised in Table 8. The installation of 1.72, 0.52
system is shown in Fig. 7. The necessary data for 12.66 kV, and 0.72 MVA UPF DGs at buses 50, 17 and 39,

0.66, 0.88
Fig. 8 Voltage profile of 69-bus test system for different cases
www.ietdl.org
Table 14 Comparison of results of 69-bus test system location of single as well as multiple DGs. The developed
methodology has been tested on 33-bus and 69-bus test
Particulars Acharya et al. Murthy and Proposed
[14] Kumar [36] method distribution networks with different values of DG power
factor. Results obtained by this proposed method show
DG size, MW 1.81 1.85 2.20 1.81 2.22 better loss reduction as well as voltage profile improvement
power factor UPF UPF 0.9 UPF 0.82 in the given distribution networks. Further, comparison of
lag lag results for loss reduction with other reported methods
location 50 50 50 50 50 shows the effectiveness of the proposed method.
loss saving, % 62.86 63.02 87.59 62.95 89.39
6 References
respectively, results in a total real power loss of 70.29 kW
against 225 kW power loss of base case system. 1 Energy white paper: meeting the energy challenge: Department of trade
To size and site 3 DGs, operating at LPF in 69-bus test and industry, UK (DTI), 2007
2 Ackermann, T., Andersson, G., Soder, L.: ‘Distributed generation: a
system for benefit maximisation with w1 = 1 and w2 = 0, the definition’, Electr. Power Syst. Res., 2001, 57, (3), pp. 195–204
obtained results are summarised in Table 9. From this table, 3 Frias, P., Gomez, T., Cossent, R., Rivier, J.: ‘Improvement in current
it is clear that buses 50, 17 and 39 are the suitable locations European network regulation to facilitate the integration of distributed
for DG installation at LPF. The optimal sizes of DGs are generation’, Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2009, 31, pp. 445–451
2.12, 0.62 and 0.88 MVA at buses 50, 17 and 39, 4 Jenkins, N., Allan, R., Crossley, P., Kirschen, D., Strbac, G.: ‘Embedded
generation’, Institution of Electrical Engineers, London, 2000
respectively, and results in a total real power loss of 5.66 kW 5 Mendez, V.H., Rivier, J., De la Fuente, J.I., et al.: ‘Impact of distributed
or 97.78% real power loss reduction compared with base generation on distribution investment deferral’, Int. J. Electr. Power
case system. Energy Syst., 2006, 28, (4), pp. 244–252
Further, optimal locations and sizes of 3 DGs are also 6 Federico, J., Gonzalez, V., Lyra, C.: ‘Learning classifiers shape reactive
power to decrease losses in power distribution networks’. Proc. of IEEE
computed for different values of w1 and w2. Tables 10 and Power Eng. Soc. General Meet., June 2005, vol. 1, pp. 557–562
11 present the optimal locations and sizes of 3 DGs 7 Chiradeja, P., Ramkumar, R.: ‘An approach to quantify the technical
operated at UPF and LPF, respectively, with w1 = 0.5 and benefits of distributed generation’, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers.,
w2 = 0.5. Tables 12 and 13 summarise the results of optimal 2004, 19, (4), pp. 764–773
locations and sizes of 3 DGs operated at UPF and LPF, 8 Mendez Quezeda, V.H., Abbad, J.-R., Gomez, T.: ‘Assessment of
energy distribution losses for increasing penetration of DG’, IEEE
respectively, with w1 = 0 and w2 = 1.0. Trans. Power Syst., 2006, 21, (2), pp. 533–540
Summarising different cases presented in Tables 8–12, it is 9 Ochoa, L.F., Harrison, G.P.: ‘Minimizing energy losses: optimal
evident that the optimal locations for DGs are the same accommodation and smart operation of renewable DG’, IEEE Trans.
irrespective of the objective considered and power factor of Power Syst., 2011, 26, (1), pp. 198–205
10 Gozel, T., Hocaoglu, M.H.: ‘An analytical method for the sizing and
DG. Also, the optimal sizes of DGs are approximately siting of distributed generators in radial system’, Int. J. Electr. Power
similar for a given power factor irrespective of the objective Syst. Res., 2009, 79, (6), pp. 912–918
considered. Among different power factor, LPF operation of 11 Hedayati, H., Nabaviniaki, S.A., Akbarimazd, A.: ‘A method for
DGs improves the system performance in a better way as placement of DG units in distribution network’, IEEE Trans. Power
compared with UPF operation. Deliv., 2008, 23, (3), pp. 1620–1628
12 Atwa, Y.M., EI-Saadany, E.F., Salama, M.M.A., Seethapathy, R.:
A comparison of results obtained by different methods for ‘Optimal renewable resource mix for distribution system energy loss
single DG allocation to minimise real power loss in 69-bus minimization’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2010, 25, (1), pp. 360–370
systems is given in Table 14. From this table, it is evident 13 Wang, C., Nehir, M.H.: ‘Analytical approaches for optimal placement of
that more active power loss saving by the proposed method distributed generation sources in power system’, IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., 2004, 19, (4), pp. 2068–2076
is in good agreement with the other methods reported in the 14 Acharya, N., Mahat, P., Mithulananthan, N.: ‘An analytical approach for
literature. DG allocation in primary distribution network’, Int. J. Electr. Power
The voltage profiles of 69-bus test system for different Energy Syst., 2006, 28, pp. 669–678
cases considered are given in Fig. 8. These voltage profiles 15 Hung, D.Q., Mithulananthan, N., Bansal, R.C.: ‘Analytical expressions
are obtained after placing 3 DGs as given in the last row of for DG allocation in primary distribution networks’, IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers., 2010, 25, (3), pp. 814–820
Tables 8–12. It is evident from Fig. 8 that the installation of 16 Hung, D.Q., Mithulanathan, N., Bansal, R.C.: ‘Multiple distributed
DG units in 69-bus test system by proposed method generators placement in primary distribution networks for loss
significantly improves the voltage profile of the network. reduction’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2010, 60, (4), pp. 1700–1708
Since it is seen from Tables 8–12 that the optimal sizes of 17 Mithulanathan, N., Oo, T., Phu, L.V.: ‘Distributed generator placement
in power distribution system using genetic algorithm to reduce losses’,
DGs are approximately similar despite of the objective Thammasat Int. J. Sci. Tech., 2004, 9, (3), pp. 55–62
considered and mainly depends on the power factor of DG, 18 Abu-Mouti, F.S., El-Hawary, M.E.: ‘Optimal distributed generation
the same can be observed in Fig. 8 also. The best voltage allocation and sizing in distribution systems using artificial bee colony
profile is observed when DGs are operated at LPF, algorithm’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2011, 26, (4), pp. 2090–2101
irrespective of the objective considered. 19 AlRashidi, M., AlHajri, M.F.: ‘Optimal planning of multiple distributed
generation sources in distribution networks: a new approach’, Energy
Convers. Manage., 2011, 52, pp. 3301–3308
5 Conclusions 20 Khatod, D.K., Pant, V., Sharma, J.: ‘Evolutionary programming based
optimal placement of renewable distributed generators’, IEEE Trans.
This paper presents an analytical approach-based Power Syst., 2013, 28, (2), pp. 683–695
21 Khan, H., Choudhary, M.A.: ‘Implementation of distributed generation
methodology for optimal sizing and siting of DGs in the (IDG) algorithm for performance enhancement of distribution feeder
radial distribution networks. Both real as well as reactive under extreme load growth’, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2010,
power loss minimisation are the objectives for DG 32, (9), pp. 985–997
placement. Suitable analytical expressions have been 22 Shukla, T.N., Singh, S.P., Srinivas Rao, V., Naik, K.B.: ‘Optimal sizing
of distributed generation placed on radial distribution systems’, Electr.
derived to compute the real as well as reactive power loss Power Compon. Syst., 2010, 38, (3), pp. 260–274
saving because of change in branch current caused by DG. 23 Gopiya Naik, S., Khatod, D.K., Sharma, M.P.: ‘Sizing and siting of DG
The developed method is able to optimise the size and in distribution networks for real power loss minimization using
www.ietdl.org
analytical approach’. Int. Conf. on Power, Energy, and Control (ICPEC), 30 Celli, G., Ghiani, E., Mocci, S., Pilo, F.: ‘A multi-objective evolutionary
Dindigul (TN), India, February 2013, pp. 740–745 algorithm for siting and sizing of distributed generation’, IEEE Trans.
24 Gandomkar, M., Vakilian, M., Ehsan, M.: ‘A genetic based tabu search Power Syst., 2005, 20, (2), pp. 750–757
algorithm for optimal DG allocation in distribution networks’, Electr. 31 Willis, H.L.: ‘Analytical methods and rules of thumb for modeling
Power Compon. Syst., 2007, 33, (12), pp. 1351–1362 DG-distribution interaction’. Proc. IEEE Power Engineering Society
25 Gopiya Naik, S., Khatod, D.K., Sharma, M.P.: ‘Optimal allocation of Summer Meeting, 2000, vol. 3, pp. 1643–1644
distributed generation in distribution system for loss reduction’. Int. 32 Gopiya Naik, S., Khatod, D.K., Sharma, M.P.: ‘Planning and operation
Conf. on Product Development and Renewable Energy Resources of distributed generation in distribution networks’, Int. J. Emerg.
(ICPDRE), Coimbatore, India, 2012, pp. 42–46 Technol. Adv. Eng., 2012, 2, (9), pp. 381–388
26 Moradi, M.H., Abedini, M.: ‘A combination of genetic algorithm and 33 Haque, M.H.: ‘Capacitor placement in radial distribution systems for
particle swarm optimization for optimal DG location and sizing in loss reduction’, IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrb., 1996, 146, (5),
distribution systems’, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2012, 34, (1), pp. 501–505
pp. 66–74
34 Haque, M.H.: ‘Efficient load flow method for distribution systems with
27 Moradi, M.H., Tousi, M.R., Abedini, M.: ‘Multi-objective PFDE
radial or mesh configuration’, IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrb., 1996,
algorithm for solving the optimal sitting and sizing problem of
143, (1), pp. 33–38
multiple DG sources’, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2014, 56,
pp. 117–126 35 Baran, M.E., Wu, F.F.: ‘Network reconfiguration in distribution systems
28 Kashem, M.A., Le, A.D.T., Negnevitsky, M., Ledwitch, G.: ‘Distributed for loss reduction and load balancing’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1989,
generation for minimization of power losses in distribution systems’. 4, (2), pp. 1401–1407
Power Engineering Society General Meeting, Montreal, Quebec, 2006, 36 Murthy, V.V.S.N., Kumar, A.: ‘Comparison of optimal DG allocation
pp. 1–8 methods in radial distribution systems based on sensitivity
29 EI-Khattam, W., Bhattacharya, K., Hagazy, Y.G., Salama, M.M.A.: approaches’, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2013, 53, pp. 450–467
‘Optimal investment planning for distributed generation in a 37 Chiang, H.D., Jean-Jumeau, R.: ‘Optimal network reconfigurations in
competitive electricity market’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2004, 19, distribution systems: Part 2: solution algorithms and numerical
(3), pp. 1674–1684 results’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1990, 5, (3), pp. 1568–1574

Gopiya Naik 2015 - Analytical Approach For Optimal Siting and Sizing of Distributed

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gopiya Naik 2015 - Analytical Approach For Optimal Siting and Sizing of Distributed

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

17518695, 2015, 3, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-gtd.2014.0603 by Wroclaw University Of Science, Wiley Online Library on [11/10/2022].

Analytical approach for optimal siting and sizing of

1 Introduction technologies used in distribution system planning with their

1. The radial distribution network under consideration is

I. Firstly, a sequence of m buses suitable for DG connection is

At the same time, the beneﬁt associated kth DG is also

Various steps involved in the proposed method are as

1. Read the data regarding number of buses (N ),

original base case 202.68 1 6 2.48 91.80

original base case 202.68 1 6 3.01 135.19

original base case 202.68 135.14 1 6 2.44 91.78 55.41

original base case 202.68 135.14 1 6 2.97 135.17 82.03

original base case 135.14 1 7 2.00 55.78

original base case 135.14 1 30 1.80 83.55

Fig. 6 Voltage proﬁle of 33-bus test system for different cases

Fig. 7 Single line diagram of 12.66 kV, 69-bus distribution system

original base case 225.00 1 50 1.81 133.03

original base case 225.00 1 50 2.22 200.11

original base case 225.00 102.17 1 50 1.83 133.01 57.88

original base case 202.68 102.17 1 50 2.25 200.08 87.08

original base case 102.17 1 50 1.86 57.89

original base case 102.17 1 50 2.28 87.10

Fig. 8 Voltage proﬁle of 69-bus test system for different cases

You might also like