Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 22 (2019) 67–77

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Science and Technology,

an International Journal
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jestch

Full Length Article

Optimal economic-driven planning of multiple DG and capacitor in

distribution network considering different compensation coefficients in
feeder’s failure rate evaluation
R. Arulraj ⇑, N. Kumarappan
Department of Electrical Engineering, FEAT, Annamalai University, Annamalai Nagar 608 002, Tamil Nadu, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The main aim of Distribution Companies (DISCOs) is to satisfy end user demand with quality and reliable
Received 6 April 2017 supply of power at all possible locations in the distribution network. Since majority of loads connected to
Revised 5 July 2018 the distribution network are inductive in nature, there exists possibility of higher energy loss and lower
Accepted 16 August 2018
reliability in the distribution feeder sections. In this study optimal planning of Distributed Generation
Available online 25 August 2018
(DG) and capacitor is investigated considering maximization of total cost benefit as main objective.
Here, the cost benefit due to DG and capacitor installation is attained by minimizing energy purchased
Keywords:
from the substation including energy loss and by reducing Expected Interruption Cost (ECOST) of the sys-
Distributed Generation (DG)
Capacitor
tem. Moreover, a detailed analysis is carried out in the DG and capacitor planning problem considering
Optimal Planning different compensation coefficients in feeder’s failure rate evaluation so that the compensation coeffi-
Feeder’s failure rate modeling cient resulting in enhanced net cost benefit is identified. Furthermore, a hybrid combination of Weight
Energy loss reduction Improved Particle Swarm Optimization (WIPSO) and Gravitational Search Algorithm (GSA) called hybrid
Reliability enhancement WIPSO-GSA algorithm is proposed to solve the optimal DG and capacitor planning problem in the distri-
Hybrid WIPSO-GSA algorithm bution network. The proposed methodology is tested on standard 33-bus and Indian 85-bus distribution
systems. The superiority of the proposed hybrid algorithm is also illustrated by comparing the results
with other optimization techniques.
Ó 2018 Karabuk University. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC
BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction In literature, majority of work addressed so far utilized mini-

The restructure and deregulation in electric power sector
unbundles the vertically integrated utilities into generation, trans-
mission and distribution systems. Even though some consumers
are connected directly to the transmission system, majority of con-
sumers are connected to the distribution system. Since majority of
loads connected to the distribution side are inductive loads, there
exists possibility of higher energy loss and lower reliability in the
distribution feeder sections. Therefore, any outages in the part of
distribution system will heavily affect the continuous and reliable
supply of power to the end consumers. Therefore it is essential for
distribution system planners to design, operate, and maintain dis-
tribution system with higher reliability and lower energy loss. For
this purpose compensation devices are installed in the distribution
network so as to achieve higher technical and economic benefits.
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: arulrajcdm88@gmail.com (R. Arulraj).
Peer review under responsibility of Karabuk University.
mization of total active power loss (Ploss) as main objective for opti-
mal allocation of compensation devices in the distribution
network. In [1] shunt capacitor was optimally installed to mini-
mize total Ploss of the system. The deregulation in electric power
sector and advancement in electrical technology result in evolution
of DG in the distribution network. The overview of various studies
involving optimal DG planning so as to minimize system total Ploss
was presented in [2,3]. The installation of compensation devices in
the distribution system is an optimization problem and in litera-
ture several approaches were employed for optimal location and
sizing of compensation devices in distribution system. In [1,4] opti-
mal capacitor installation problem was solved using analytical
method and in [5,6] analytical methods were also used for optimal
installation of DG in the distribution network. Even though analyt-
ical methods were used to solve capacitor and DG allocation prob-
lem, they require complex calculations and formulation of
impedance matrix. To overcome this problem artificial intelligent
techniques are generally used. In recent years, there has been sig-
nificant interest among researchers in using artificial intelligent
techniques for optimally allocating compensation devices in the

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2018.08.009
2215-0986/Ó 2018 Karabuk University. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
68 R. Arulraj, N. Kumarappan / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 22 (2019) 67–77
distribution network. In literature, solution techniques such as
Fuzzy-Real Coded Genetic Algorithm (FRCGA) [7], PSO [8], Teach-
ing Learning Based Optimization (TLBO) [9] and Gravitational
Search Algorithm (GSA) [10] were employed for optimal allocation
of capacitor in the distribution network. Likewise, for optimal DG
installation, several artificial intelligent techniques such as Genetic
Algorithm (GA) [11], Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) algorithm [12],
Backtracking Search Optimization Algorithm (BSOA) [13], Intelli-
gent Water Drop Algorithm (IWDA) [14], Quasi-Oppositional
Teaching Learning Based Optimization (QOTLBO) [15] and also
hybrid techniques such as hybrid GA-PSO [16], combination of Loss
Sensitivity Factor and Simulated Annealing (LSF-SA) [17] and
hybrid Harmony Search Algorithm and Particle ABC (HSA-PABC)
[18] were used to solve power engineering problems. Apart from
individual DG and capacitor installation problem, simultaneous
installation of DG and capacitor were also incorporated in litera-
ture using techniques such as Intersect Mutation Differential Evo-
lution (IMDE) [19], Fuzzy Genetic Algorithm (FGA) [20], BFOA [21],
and Gbest-Guided ABC (GABC) [22].
Apart from minimizing power loss, enhancement of network
reliability plays a vital role in distribution system planning. The
basic reliability models, reliability evaluation techniques, and data
required to perform basic reliability analysis in distribution system
were discussed in [23]. In [24] shunt capacitors were used to
improve system reliability level and state-space method was
applied to calculate the reliability indices for compensated and
uncompensated systems with different success criteria. In [25]
optimal allocation of capacitors were determined using PSO algo-
rithm and two new objective functions involving system reliability
were defined. Apart from capacitors, in [26–30], the DG placement
problem was investigated from maximum reliability viewpoint. In
[26] capacity-constrained DG and protection devices allocation
problem were investigated by employing custom-tailored GA. In
[27] the impact of optimal DG installation on system reliability
was studied using a value based method involving GA. In [28]
ant colony optimization algorithm was used to solve optimal reclo-
ser and DG placement problem and a composite reliability index
was used to perform the optimization process. An analytical
methodology for reliability evaluation was proposed in [29], while
considering standby mode of operation of DG in distribution net-
work. In [30] a new composite index was developed compiling
the impact of DG on overall reliability of power supply.
Nevertheless, in [26–30], the feeder’s failure rate has not been
modeled in the compensation devices planning problem and also
in the assessment of system reliability. In other words, system reli-
ability and feeder’s failure rate dependency on current magnitude
flowing through the distribution feeder sections have been
ignored, which makes the earlier studies incomplete. Moreover,
in feeder’s failure rate evaluation, the impact of different compen-
sation coefficients on DG and capacitor planning problem and cost
of system reliability (i.e. ECOST) have not been addressed in any
studies. Therefore, the main contribution of this study is listed as
follows:
h The optimal DG and capacitor planning problem is investigated
considering maximization of total cost benefit objective func-
tion. Here, the cost benefit is achieved through reduction in
energy purchased from the substation including energy loss
and also through reduction in ECOST of the system.
h The feeder’s failure rate is modeled considering magnitude of
current through the distribution feeder sections for realistic
evaluation of ECOST and optimal planning of DG and capacitor
in the distribution network.
h A detailed analysis is carried out in the DG and capacitor plan-
ning problem considering different compensation coefficients
in feeder’s failure rate evaluation so that the compensation
coefficient resulting in enhanced net cost benefit is identified.
h Also, a hybrid WIPSO-GSA algorithm is proposed to solve the
optimal DG and capacitor planning problem. In this proposed
algorithm, hybridization is done by merging the strength of
local search capability in GSA with the strength of social think-
ing in WIPSO and its superiority is demonstrated by comparing
the results with other optimization techniques.
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: Section 2
presents evaluation of DG and capacitor costs and corresponding
benefits and also total cost benefit objective function with neces-
sary technical constraints. Section 3 describes the background
and fundamentals of WIPSO and GSA algorithms and finally imple-
mentation and step by step computational procedure of the pro-
posed hybrid WIPSO-GSA algorithm. Section 4 contains
simulation results followed by conclusions.
2. Mathematical model formulation
In this section, the various DG and capacitor cost terminologies
and the cost benefits are modeled and submitted. In this modeling,
DISCOs are mainly responsible for satisfying customer power
demand, operation of DG and capacitor and management of distri-
bution system. Cost reduction and quality and reliable supply of
power to end consumers form the basis for handling any responsi-
bilities assigned to DISCOs. Therefore the various DG and capacitor
costs and cost benefits due to optimal allocation of DG and capac-
itor in the distribution system are formulated as follows:
2.1. Evaluation of DG and capacitor costs
2.1.1. DG and capacitor investment cost
Here, the investment cost includes DG unit cost, site for instal-
ling DG, equipment, monitoring, construction, etc. The investment
cost of DG (CIDG) is evaluated by:
X
ndg
C IDG ¼ PDG;a  IC DG ð1Þ
a¼1
where PDG,a is the size of ath DG unit in MW; ICDG is the investment
cost of DG in $/MW; ndg is the total number of DG units installed in
the distribution network.
The investment cost of capacitor (CICap) is evaluated by:
X
ncap
C ICap ¼ Q Cap;b  IC Cap ð2Þ
b¼1
where QCap,b is the size of bth capacitor in MVAr; ICCap is the invest-
ment cost of capacitor in $/MVAr; ncap is the total number of capac-
itors installed in the distribution network.
2.1.2. Operational and maintenance cost of DG and capacitor
Here the operational and maintenance cost includes fuel cost,
renovation cost and electrical and mechanical annual inquiry.
The expression for DG operational and maintenance cost (COMDG)
is given by:
X
ndg
C OMDG ¼ PDG;a  OMC DG  T ð3Þ
a¼1
where OMCDG is the operational and maintenance cost of DG in $/
MWh; T is the total number of operating hours in a year (T = 8760).
For capacitor there is no operational cost and it involves only
annual maintenance cost (CMCap) given by:
C MCap ¼ MC Cap ð4Þ
 R. Arulraj, N. Kumarappan / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 22 (2019) 67–77 69

pp 
X y
where MCCap is the maintenance cost of capacitor in a year. 1 þ InfR
The present worth factor (PWF) of annual COMDG of DG and CMCap PWFðCB1 Þ ¼ CB1  ð13Þ
y¼1
1 þ IntR
of capacitor while considering interest rate (IntR) and inflation rate
(InfR) for the total planning period pp (in years) is formulated as:
2.2.2. Cost benefit due to reduction in ECOST of the system
pp 
X y
1 þ InfR Majority of the distribution systems are functioned as radial
PWFðC OMDG Þ ¼ C OMDG  ð5Þ networks and hence the principles of series networks are applied
y¼1
1 þ IntR
to them [32]. Average failure rate (kRDS), average outage time (gRDS)
and annual outage time (uRDS) are the three main basic reliability
pp 
X y
parameters of the distribution system and they are given by:
1 þ InfR
PWFðC MCap Þ ¼ C MCap  ð6Þ
y¼1
1 þ IntR
X
N sec
kRDS ¼ kj ð14Þ
j¼1
2.2. Evaluation of DG and capacitor benefits

In any DG and capacitor placement problem, distribution load X

N sec

flow (DLF) analysis plays a vital role in the solution process. Back- uRDS ¼ kj  g j ð15Þ
j¼1
ward sweep and forward sweep method of DLF [31] is used in this
study. This solution methodology in radial distribution network is
based on the direct application of Kirchoff’s Voltage Law (KVL) and P
N sec
kj  g j
Kirchoff’s Current Law (KCL). uRDS j¼1
g RDS ¼ ¼ ð16Þ
kRDS P
N sec

2.2.1. Cost benefit due to reduction in cost of energy purchased from kj

j¼1
the substation including energy loss
In restructured electric power system, the DISCOs purchases its where kj and gj are the average failure rate and average outage time
power from transmission grid in order to satisfy distribution sys- of jth feeder section, respectively; Nsec is the total number of feeder
tem customer’s power demand, however, a portion of its power sections in the distribution network.
is spent as losses in distribution feeder lines. The purchased cost The current through the distribution feeder sections has two
of energy from the substation including energy loss without DG components namely active (IA) and reactive (IR). The optimal instal-
and capacitor (CPwithoutDG,Cap
SS ) is given by: lation of DG and capacitor in the distribution network can support
a portion of system power demand and as a result there is reduc-
CPwithoutDG;Cap
SS ¼ K SS  ðPwithoutDG;Cap
SS þ PwithoutDG;Cap
loss ÞT ð7Þ tion in current magnitude flowing through the distribution feeder
where KSS is the grid electricity price in $/MWh; PwithoutDG,Cap is the sections. The reduction in current magnitude minimizes the power
SS
total injected active power (in MW) at bus 1 from the substation losses, thereby improves the reliability of the distribution feeder
without DG and capacitor; PwithoutDG,Cap is the total active power loss sections. Also, allocation of DG and capacitor in the distribution
loss
without DG and capacitor. system improves reliability in one more way. It expands the load-
By optimally installing DG and capacitor, the DISCOs can supply a ing carrying capacity of the distribution feeder sections and in that
portion of system power demand and also compensates system Ploss. way it enhances the reliability of the distribution system under
Therefore, the purchased cost of energy from the substation includ- abnormal loading conditions. Before optimal DG and capacitor
ing energy loss with DG and capacitor (CPwithDG,Cap ) is given by: allocation, any feeder section j has an uncompensated failure rate
SS
of kuncomp
j . After optimal DG and capacitor allocation, if the current
withDG;Cap component of feeder section j is fully compensated, then its failure
CPSS ¼ K SS  ðPwithDG;Cap þ P withDG;Cap ÞT ð8Þ
SS loss
rate reduces to 75% of its kuncomp
j [25] and it is represented as kcomp
j .
If the current component of section j is not fully compensated, then
where PwithDG,Cap
SS is the total injected active power (in MW) at bus 1
its failure rate is defined with linear relationship to the percentage
from the substation with DG and capacitor installed in the distribu-
of compensation. Therefore the new failure rate (knew j ) of feeder
tion network; PwithtDG,Cap
loss is the total active power loss with DG and
section j is evaluated as follows [25]:
capacitor installed in the distribution network.
Therefore, after optimal DG and capacitor installation, the
knew
j ¼ bj  ðkuncomp
j  kcomp
j Þ þ kcomp
j ð17Þ
annual cost benefit (CB1) due to reduction in cost of energy pur-
chased from the substation including energy loss is given by:
where bj is the compensation coefficient of jth feeder section. Here,
CB1 ¼ CPwithoutDG;Cap
SS  CPwithDG;Cap
SS ð9Þ for optimal installation of particular DG and capacitor installation
case, three different cases of compensation coefficient are consid-
Substituting (7) and (8) in (9), then
ered in feeder’s failure rate evaluation expressed in (17), so that
CB1 ¼ K SS  ððPwithoutDG;Cap
SS  PwithDG;Cap
SS Þ the appropriate compensation coefficient that results in enhanced
technical and economic benefits is identified. For jth feeder section,
þðPwithoutDG;Cap
loss  PwithDG;Cap
loss ÞÞ  T ð10Þ
the different cases of compensation coefficient considered in (17)
The PWF of (7), (8) and (10) is evaluated as: are listed as follows:
 A;new 
pp 
X y I 
1 þ InfR j 
PWFðCP withoutDG;Cap Þ ¼ CPwithoutDG;Cap  ð11Þ bjA ¼  A;old  ð18Þ
SS SS
y¼1
1 þ IntR I 
j

pp  y  R;new 
X 1 þ InfR I 
PWFðCP withDG;Cap Þ ¼ CPwithDG;Cap  ð12Þ j 
bRj ¼  R;old  ð19Þ
SS SS
y¼1
1 þ IntR I 
j
70 R. Arulraj, N. Kumarappan / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 22 (2019) 67–77

 new  qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
duration of Lavg connected at bus i with respect to outage of each
I  ðI A;new 2
Þ þ ðI R;new 2
Þ i
j  j j
feeder section is evaluated using (15) with kj = kuncomp
bAR ¼  old  ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð20Þ j for without
j
I  2 R;old 2 DG and capacitor installation case and kj = knew
j ðIA;old
j Þ þ ðI j Þ j for with DG case.
Therefore, the cost benefit due to reduction in ECOST after optimal
where bAj is the compensation coefficient of jth feeder section con- DG and capacitor installation is given by:
sidering IAj alone; bRj is the compensation coefficient of jth feeder sec-
tion considering IRj alone; bAR j is the compensation coefficient of jth CB2 ¼ ECOST withoutDG;Cap
total  ECOST withDG;Cap
total ð23Þ
feeder section considering both IAj and IRj (i.e. Ij); IA,old
j and IR,old
j are The PWF of (21), (22) and (23) is given by
the active and reactive current components through jth feeder sec-
tion before DG and capacitor placement, respectively; IA,new j and PWFðECOST withoutDG;Cap
total Þ ¼ ECOST withoutDG;Cap
total
IR,new
j are the active and reactive current components through Xpp  y
1 þ InfR
jth feeder section after DG and capacitor placement, respectively.  ð24Þ
In (18), (19) and (20), absolute value of section current is used for y¼1
1 þ IntR
evaluating bAj , bRj and bARj respectively, owing to the fact that feeder
pp 
X y
section failure rate is proportional only to magnitude of current 1 þ InfR
through the distribution feeder section and therefore the direction PWFðECOST withDG;Cap Þ ¼ ECOST withDG;Cap  ð25Þ
total total
y¼1
1 þ IntR
of current is nullified by taking its absolute value.
pp  y
In this study, ECOST is evaluated [25,33] for the radial distribu-
X 1 þ InfR
tion system. Evaluating ECOST empowers the system planners to PWFðCB2 Þ ¼ CB2  ð26Þ
identify acceptable customer reliability level and also to identify y¼1
1 þ IntR
weak areas in a system. ECOST is therefore an influential tool for
system planning. The total ECOST without installing any DG and
capacitor (ECOSTwithoutDG,Cap
total ) is evaluated as follows: 2.3. Objective function and constraints

X
Nbus
In final, various DG and capacitor costs and benefits mentioned
ECOST withoutDG;Cap ¼ Lai v g  C int uncomp
i  kj
total
ð21Þ in the previous section are deliberated in one unique objective
i ¼ 2; function expressed as follows:
j¼i1
MaxðTotalbenefit Þ ¼ ðPWFðCB1 Þ þ PWFðCB2 ÞÞ  ðC IDG þ C ICap
and the total ECOST with DG and capacitor (ECOSTwithDG,Cap
total ) is eval- þ PWFðC OMDG Þ þ PWFðC MCap ÞÞ ð27Þ
uated as follows:
where Totalbenefit is the total cost benefit achieved for the pp through
X
Nbus
ECOST withDG;Cap
total ¼ Lai v g  C int new
i  kj
optimal DG and capacitor installation. The objective function
i ¼ 2; ð22Þ expressed in (27) is optimized subject to the following technical
constraints:
j¼i¼1

where Nbus is the total number of buses in the distribution network; 2.3.1. Power limits of DG and capacitor
Lavg
i is the average load in kW connected at bus i; Cint
i is the interrup-
tion cost in $/kW for load connected at bus i and it is evaluated
X
ndg
using composite customer damage function (CCDF) [25,33] as Pmin
DG 6 PDG;a 6 P max
DG ð28Þ
shown in Fig. 1. In CCDF, the cost of interruption is taken as the a¼1
function of interruption duration which involves either duration
of fault locating and switching or duration of fault repairing based X
ncap

on location of section fault. Here the total expected interruption Q min

Cap 6 Q Cap;b 6 Q max
Cap ð29Þ
b¼1

X
Nbus
Pmin
DG ¼ 0:1  Pload;i ð30Þ
i¼2

X
N bus
Q min
Cap ¼ 0:1  Q load;i ð31Þ
i¼2

X
Nbus
Pmax
DG ¼ 0:6  Pload;i ð32Þ
i¼2

X
N bus
Q max
Cap ¼ 0:6  Q load;i ð33Þ
i¼2

where Pmin max

DG and PDG are the lower and upper active power genera-
tion limits of total installed DG units, respectively; Qmin max
Cap and QCap are
the lower and upper reactive power generation limits of total
installed capacitors, respectively; Pload,i and Qload,i are the active
and reactive power load at bus i, respectively. In order to maintain
quality and reliable supply of power to end consumers and also to
Fig. 1. Typical CCDF. achieve enhanced total economic benefit, 10% and 60% of system
 R. Arulraj, N. Kumarappan / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 22 (2019) 67–77 71

total active power load is taken as lower limit and upper limit for
active power generation of total installed DG units respectively
and likewise, 10% and 60% of system total reactive power load is
taken as lower limit and upper limit for reactive power generation
of total installed capacitors respectively [12].
2.3.2. Bus voltage limits
between exploration and exploitation ability, hybridization is done
between WIPSO and GSA by merging the strength of exploration in
GSA with the strength of exploitation in WIPSO. In other words, the
strength of local search capability in GSA is merged with the
strength of social thinking in WIPSO so as to achieve better global
optimum and greater convergence speed. Therefore, in hybrid
WIPSO-GSA algorithm, the velocity update (vdl (k + 1)) and position
update (xdl (k + 1)) expressions of particle l is given by:

V min 6 V i 6 V max ð34Þ v dl ðk þ 1Þ ¼ rand1  v dl ðkÞ þ cnew

1  rand2  accdl ðkÞ þ cnew
2

 rand3  ðxdgbest  xdl ðkÞÞ ð35Þ

i ¼ 1; 2; . . . Nbus

where Vmin and Vmax are the lower and upper limits of bus voltage xdl ðk þ 1Þ ¼ xdl ðkÞ þ v dl ðk þ 1Þ ð36Þ
magnitude, respectively; Vi is the voltage at bus i. Here, the lower
and upper limits of bus voltage magnitude are taken as 0.90p.u. l ¼ 1; 2; 3; . . . Np
and 1.05p.u., respectively [6]. k ¼ 1; 2; 3; . . . Iter max

where
3. Solution technique  
xdl ¼ x1l ; x2l ; . . . ; xDl ð37Þ
In recent years there has been several heuristic evolutionary
 
optimization techniques developed and the main aim of all these v dl ¼ v 1l ; v 2l ; . . . ; v Dl ð38Þ
techniques was to achieve best solution (global optimum) amid
!
all possible inputs. In order to achieve global optimum a heuristic
cfinal  cinitial
technique should have two main features such as exploration and cnew
1 ¼ cfinal
1  1 1
k ð39Þ
Iter max
exploitation. For any heuristic technique, the ability to search the
whole problem space is termed as exploration and the convergence !
ability to achieve global optimum near a good solution is termed as cfinal  cinitial
cnew
2 ¼ cfinal
2 þ 2 2
k ð40Þ
exploitation. In order to achieve global optimum, the ultimate aim Iter max
of any heuristic optimization technique is to find the fine balance
between the ability of exploration and exploitation. According to
F dl ðkÞ
[34], the strengthening of either one ability would weaken the accdl ðkÞ ¼ ð41Þ
M l ðkÞ
other and vice-versa. Thus, the previously mentioned features
make the existing heuristic optimization techniques capable of where xdl is the current position vector of particle l in a D-
solving only finite set of problems. Merging the strength of opti- dimensional search space; vdl is the velocity vector of particle l in
mization techniques is one of the best possible ways to find fine a D-dimensional search space; Np is the total number of particles;
balance between overall exploration and exploitation abilities. k is the current iteration number; Itermax is the total number of iter-
Therefore, hybrid combination of WIPSO and GSA have been ations; rand1, rand2, and rand3 are the random numbers between 0
selected in this study, in order to maintain good balance between and 1; xdgbest is the gbest of particle group until iteration k; accdl (k) is
exploration and exploitation abilities. the acceleration of particle l and it is evaluated using expression
given in (41); Fdl (k) is the resultant force acting on particle l acquired
3.1. Proposed hybrid WIPSO-GSA algorithm from every other particles in the search space; Ml(k) is the inertia
mass proportional to the fitness of particle l. The expressions to
PSO proposed by Kennedy and Eberhart [35] has attracted many evaluate Fdl (k) and Ml(k) are given in [40].
researchers owing to its simplicity thereby making it one of the In classical PSO and also in hybrid methods involving PSO
most widely used optimization techniques in hybrid methods [16,36,37], a fixed value (usually fixed to 2) is assigned for acceler-
[16,36,37]. However classical PSO has certain drawbacks such as ation coefficients c1 (cognitive component) and c2 (social compo-
it suffers from premature convergence while solving complex nent). The fixed value of c1 and c2 will result in less accurate
problems and also it relies on users to alter control parameters results and occurrence of premature convergence [38]. Therefore,
[38,39]. Therefore, the classical PSO is enhanced to WIPSO [38] quality solution is achieved using proposed hybrid WIPSO-GSA
by modifying PSO parameters adaptively without changing the algorithm by modifying c1 and c2 in an adaptive way such that c1
inherent structure of the algorithm. GSA proposed by Rashedi is decreased and c2 is increased as the iteration proceeds [38].
et al. is a heuristic optimization technique and it is inspired from Therefore, the new modified c1 and c2 is represented as cnew 1 and
Newton’s theory of law of gravity [40]. In GSA, agents contain cnew
2 and are formulated as shown in (39) and (40), respectively.
the candidate solutions and they have masses proportional to their Where, cinitial
1 and cfinal
1 are initial and final values of cognitive com-
fitness value. In terms of exploration ability, the involvement of ponent, respectively; cinitial
2 and cfinal
2 are initial and final values of
pbest (local best solution) alone in exploration will result in prema- social component, respectively.
ture local optimum in WIPSO [36]. However in GSA, the involve-
ment of agent’s mass and the resultant force attained from every 3.2. Computational steps and parameters of proposed hybrid WIPSO-
other agent’s masses [40] will result in better exploration when GSA algorithm
compared to WIPSO. Meanwhile, in terms of exploitation ability,
the ‘‘memory-less” nature of GSA [41] will result in increased con- The flowchart describing the computational steps of proposed
vergence time when nearing global optimum, thereby affecting its hybrid WIPSO-GSA algorithm which determines optimal allocation
exploitation ability, whereas in WIPSO, the influence of gbest (glo- of DG and capacitor by maximizing total cost benefit objective
bal best solution) will result in better exploitation when compared function expressed in (27) is shown in Fig. 2. The values of various
to GSA. Therefore, in this study, in order to achieve fine balance parameters involved in hybrid WIPSO-GSA algorithm are taken as
72 R. Arulraj, N. Kumarappan / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 22 (2019) 67–77

In order to evaluate ECOST and to solve optimal DG and capac-

itor installation problem the following assumptions are taken into
account.

1. The root bus is taken as reference bus.

2. It is known that load shifting takes place between peak hours/
off-peak hours and between feeders in the distribution net-
work. However, in this study, the optimal DG and capacitor
installation problem is solved considering peak demand only.
3. The feeder section with the highest impedance is assumed to
have the biggest failure rate of 0.5 f/year and the feeder section
with the lowest impedance is assumed to have the least failure
rate of 0.1 f/year [25]. The failure rate of remaining feeder sec-
tions is evaluated by considering the linear proportionality of
these two impedance values as follows,

0:1 þ ð0:5  0:1Þ

kj ¼ ð42Þ
ððzmax  zmin Þ=ðzj  zmin ÞÞ
Where, kj is the failure rate of jth feeder section; zmax and zmin are the
maximum and minimum impedance value respectively among all
feeder sections; zj is the impedance of jth feeder section. The reason
behind this assumption is that failure rate is proportional to length
of the feeder section and more impedance corresponds to longer
sections.

4. After optimal DG and capacitor installation, if the current com-

ponent of feeder section j is fully compensated then its failure
rate reduces to 75% of its kuncomp
j and it is represented as kcomp
j
[25], whereas, for partial compensation the failure rate knew
j is
evaluated using (17).
5. The time required for identifying fault location and performing
switching action is considered as 0.5 h. The fault repairing time
of each feeder section is considered as 4 h [32].
6. Since optimal DG and capacitor installation does not have any
influence on reliability of other distribution components
Fig. 2. Flowchart for optimal DG and capacitor planning using hybrid WIPSO-GSA
excluding feeder sections, all other distribution components
algorithm.
such as breakers, transformers, busbars are assumed to be com-
follows: Np = 50; Itermax = 150; G0 (gravitational constant) = 1; a pletely reliable.
(descending coefficient) = 23; cinitial
1 = 0.6; cfinal
1 = 0.4; cinitial
2 = 1.4;
final
c2 = 1.6. The optimization process using the proposed hybrid WIPSO-
GSA algorithm is carried out in MATLAB environment. Here, gas
combustion turbine that integrated to the main grid through con-
4. Numerical results and discussion verters/inverters is considered as the DG source and it is made to
operate at unity power factor (UPF) using suitable control tech-
In this study, a standard 33-bus radial distribution system with niques [44,45]. The system commercial information and various
32 feeder sections [42] and an Indian 85-bus radial distribution cost parameters associated with DG and capacitor are taken from
system with 84 feeder sections [43] are considered. For 33-bus sys- [46,47]. The cost specifications are shown in Table 1. The different
tem, the total active and reactive power load is 3.72 MW and 2.3 DG and capacitor installation cases so as to maximize total cost
MVAr respectively and for Indian 85-bus system, the total active benefit objective function mentioned in (27) are given as follows:
and reactive power load is 2.55 MW and 2.60 MVAr respectively.
The base kVs for standard 33-bus and Indian 85-bus system is Case-1: System without DG and capacitor.
12.66 kV and 11.00 kV, respectively. In both 33-bus and 85-bus Case-2: Multiple installation of DG operating at UPF.
systems, there is a main breaker at the beginning of the feeder Case-3: Multiple installation of capacitor.
and a sectionaliser at the beginning of each feeder section. The
main breaker at the beginning of the feeder will automatically
Table 1
open once a permanent fault occurs and it will remain open until Cost specifications.
the fault is repaired or isolated. The main breaker is closed only
Parameter Value
after identifying the fault location and performs one of the follow-
ing actions: ICDG ($/MW) 318000
OMCDG ($/MWh) 36
ICCap ($/MVAr) 4000
h Operating the respective sectionalisers for isolating the defec- MCCap ($/year) 10% of ICCap
tive feeder section. InfR (%) 9
h Repairing the defective feeder section if the sectionalisers oper- IntR (%) 12.5
ation is not efficient for isolating the respective defective feeder pp (in years) 10
KSS ($/MWh) 49
section.
 R. Arulraj, N. Kumarappan / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 22 (2019) 67–77 73

Case-4: Simultaneous installation of multiple DGs operating at 4.2. Case-2

UPF and multiple capacitors. Here, for a particular DG and
capacitor installation case, three different cases of compensa-
tion coefficient given in (18), (19) and (20) are considered in
feeder’s failure rate evaluation so that the compensation coeffi-
cient that results in enhanced cost benefit is identified. The
optimal values of different DG and capacitor installation cases
attained by optimizing total cost benefit objective function con-
sidering different compensation coefficients in feeder’s failure
rate evaluation are shown in Table 2 and Table 3 for 33-bus sys-
tem and Table 4 and Table 5 for Indian 85-bus system.
4.1. Case-1
The values of PWF(CPSS) and PWF(ECOST) without installing any
DG and capacitor are 14221498 ($/pp) and 637048.8 ($/pp) respec-
tively for 33-bus system and the values are 10363654 ($/pp) and
2001420 ($/pp) respectively for Indian 85-bus system.
After two number of DG installations, the final cost benefit con-
sidering bA, bR and bAR as compensation coefficients are 2057911
($/pp), 1914329 ($/pp), and 1990346 ($/pp) respectively for 33-
bus system and the values are 2146943 ($/pp), 1697749 ($/pp)
and 1877167 ($/pp) respectively for Indian 85-bus system. Like-
wise after three number of DG installations, the final cost benefit
considering bA, bR and bAR as compensation coefficients are
2118958 ($/pp), 1953429 ($/pp), and 2014563 ($/pp) respectively
for 33-bus system and the values are 2226882.6 ($/pp),
1710181.1 ($/pp) and 1907726.8 ($/pp) respectively for Indian
85-bus system. From Tables 2–5, in the case of both 33-bus and
Indian 85-bus systems, it is evident that, multiple installations of
DG operating at UPF supply portion of system active power
demand, thereby resulting in reduced flow of IA through the distri-
bution feeder sections. Therefore, for multiple installations of DG
operating at UPF, considering bA as compensation coefficient

Table 2
Optimal results for two numbers of DG and capacitor installations in standard 33-bus distribution system.

Cases Case-1 Case-2 (2 DG) Case-3 (2 Cap) Case-4 (2 DG & 2 Cap)

Compensation coefficient Without bA bR bAR bA bR bAR bA bR bAR
DG
PDG in MW (bus) – 1.1139 1.1131 1.1098, – – – 1.1143 1.1114 1.1135
(10), (9), 1.1114 (12), (10), (10),
1.1139 1.1115 (29) 1.1143 1.1139 1.1115
(30) (29) (30) (29) (29)
QCap in MVAr (bus) – – – – 0.5693 (8), 0.5606 0.5615 0.5158 0.5057 0.5649
0.6898 (14), (10), (12), (11), (9),
(30) 0.6900 0.6900 0.6686 0.4748 0.5963
(30) (30) (30) (30) (30)
CIDG ($/pp)  105 – 7.0844 7.0742 7.0634 – – – 7.0869 7.0764 7.0755
PWF(COMDG) ($/pp)  106 – 5.9289 5.9204 5.9113 – – – 5.9310 5.9222 5.9214
CICap ($/pp)  103 – – – – 5.0364 5.0024 5.0060 4.7376 3.9220 4.6448
PWF(CMCap) ($/pp)  103 – – – – 4.2503 4.2216 4.2246 3.9980 3.3098 3.9197
PWF(CPSS) ($/pp)  107 1.4221 0.5706 0.5733 0.5726 1.3984 1.3984 1.3984 0.5508 0.5541 0.5526
PWF(ECOST) ($/pp)  105 6.3704 4.5653 5.8248 5.2384 6.2108 4.5868 5.9405 4.3317 4.5541 4.5311
PWF(CB1) ($/pp)  106 – 8.5147 8.4876 8.4948 0.2380 0.2380 0.2380 8.7132 8.6811 8.6948
PWF(CB2) ($/pp)  105 – 1.8051 0.5456 1.1321 0.1595 1.7836 0.4301 2.0387 1.8164 1.8393
Totalbenefit ($/pp)  106 – 2.0579 1.9143 1.9903 0.2446 0.4071 0.2717 2.2686 2.2255 2.2411
Vmin(p.u.)@bus 0.9038@18 0.9639@33 0.9495@33 0.9526@18 0.9257@18 0.9287@18 0.9264@18 0.9731@33 0.9701@18 0.9707@18

Table 3
Optimal results for three numbers of DG and capacitor installations in standard 33-bus distribution system.

Cases Case-1 Case-2 (3 DG) Case-3 (3 Cap) Case-4 (3 DG & 3 Cap)

Compensation coefficient Without bA bR bAR bA bR bAR bA bR bAR
DG
PDG in MW (bus) – 0.7407 0.7418 0.7419 – – – 0.7417 0.7404 0.7407
(14), (6), (4), (13), (13), (12),
0.7382 0.7397 0.7411 0.7403 0.7389 0.7394
(25), (11), (11), (24), (24), (24),
0.7418 0.7409 0.7403 0.7419 0.7410 0.7417
(31) (30) (31) (30) (30) (30)
QCap in MVAr (bus) – – – – 0.4496 0.4384 0.4448 0.3980 0.2434 0.3545
(12), (11), (12), (12), (10), (12),
0.4480 0.4557 0.4506 0.3800 0.2426 0.2605
(26), (29), (27), (25) (25), (25),
0.4573 0.4600 0.4592 0.4365 0.4389 0.4418
(29) (30) (30) (31) (30) (30)
CIDG ($/pp) x 105 – 7.0618 7.0672 7.0702 – – – 7.0720 7.0605 7.0653
PWF (COMDG) ($/pp) x 106 – 5.9101 5.9145 5.9169 – – – 5.9185 5.9089 5.9129
CICap ($/pp)  103 – – – – 5.4196 5.4164 5.4184 4.8580 3.6996 4.2272
PWF(CMCap) ($/pp)  103 – – – – 4.5736 4.5709 4.5726 4.0997 3.1221 3.5673
PWF(CPSS) ($/pp)  107 1.4221 0.5696 0.5706 0.5713 1.3975 1.3974 1.3975 0.5504 0.5536 0.5521
PWF(ECOST) ($/pp)  105 6.3704 4.2714 5.7746 5.0604 6.2083 4.3063 5.9282 3.9956 4.2584 4.1805
PWF(CB1) ($/pp)  106 – 8.5252 8.5151 8.5075 0.2471 0.2472 0.2471 8.7169 8.6852 8.6995
PWF(CB2) ($/pp)  105 – 2.0991 0.5958 1.3102 0.1621 2.0641 0.4422 2.3748 2.1121 2.1899
Totalbenefit ($/pp)  106 – 2.1189 1.9534 2.0145 0.2532 0.4436 0.2812 2.3196 2.2743 2.2913
Vmin(p.u.)@bus 0.9038@18 0.9670@18 0.9584@18 0.9667@18 0.9282@18 0.9292@18 0.9286@18 0.9807@25 0.9802@25 0.9806@25
74 R. Arulraj, N. Kumarappan / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 22 (2019) 67–77

Table 4
Optimal results for two numbers of DG and capacitor installations in Indian 85-bus distribution system.

Cases Case-1 Case-2 (2 DG) Case-3 (2 Cap) Case-4 (2 DG & 2 Cap)

A R
Compensation coefficient Without b b R
b AR
b A
b b AR
bA bR bAR
DG
PDG in MW (bus) – 0.7648 0.7637 0.7644 – – – 0.7633 0.7614 0.7623
(33), (30), (34), (33), (30), (33),
0.7640 0.7636 0.7626 0.7646 0.7632 0.7638
(63) (60) (67) (63) (72) (58)
QCap in MVAr (bus) – – – – 0.7798 0.7799 0.7756 0.6677 0.5027 0.6978
(32), (34), (33), (33), (35), (34),
0.7793 0.7786 0.7801 0.6255 0.5409 0.3914
(63) (64) (64) (67) (64) (64)
CIDG ($/pp)  105 – 4.8615 4.8568 4.8559 – – – 4.8587 4.8482 4.8529
PWF (COMDG) ($/pp)  106 – 4.0686 4.0646 4.0638 – – – 4.0663 4.0575 4.0615
CICap ($/pp)  103 – – – – 6.2364 6.2344 6.2228 5.1728 4.1744 4.3568
PWF(CMCap) ($/pp)  103 – – – – 5.2629 5.2609 5.2514 4.3654 3.5228 3.6767
PWF(CPSS) ($/pp)  107 1.0363 0.4288 0.4301 0.4292 0.9826 0.9826 0.9826 0.3867 0.3926 0.3906
PWF(ECOST) ($/pp)  106 2.0014 1.3758 1.8164 1.6462 1.8461 1.4124 1.6711 1.3063 1.3585 1.3564
PWF(CB1) ($/pp)  106 – 6.0762 6.0632 6.0715 0.5372 0.5372 0.5372 6.4968 6.4381 6.4573
PWF(CB2) ($/pp)  105 – 6.2557 1.8495 3.5514 1.5533 5.8901 3.3039 6.9507 6.4291 6.4501
Totalbenefit ($/pp)  106 – 2.1469 1.6977 1.8771 0.6811 1.1147 0.8561 2.6301 2.5309 2.5475
Vmin(p.u.)@bus 0.8707@54 0.9325@54 0.9299@54 0.9312@54 0.9106@54 0.9110@54 0.9110@54 0.9577@76 0.9547@54 0.9576@76

Table 5
Optimal results for three numbers of DG and capacitor installations in Indian 85-bus distribution system.

Cases Case-1 Case-2 (3 DG) Case-3 (3 Cap) Case-4 (3 DG & 3 Cap)

Compensation coefficient Without bA bR bAR bA bR bAR bA bR bAR
DG
PDG in MW (bus) – 0.5093 0.5083 0.5097 – – – 0.5055 0.5098 0.5026
(26), (28), (28), (27), (27), (28),
0.5098 0.5090 0.5050 0.5044 0.5070 0.5095
(35), (34), (35), (35), (48), (48),
0.5086 0.5075 0.5099 0.5074 0.5042 0.5066
(67) (63) (64) (67) (61) (65)
QCap in MVAr (bus) – – – – 0.5188 0.5137 0.5044 0.4379 0.3777 0.4526
(28), (27), (27), (29), (29), (30),
0.5149 0.5186 0.5130 0.4581, 0.4208 0.3870
(34), (35), (36), 0.5127 (48), (35),
0.5199 0.5188 0.5174 (67) 0.3634 0.4343
(65) (67) (65) (68) (67)
CIDG ($/pp)  105 – 4.8581 4.8488 4.8482 – – – 4.8251 4.8368 4.8295
PWF (COMDG) ($/pp)  106 – 4.0657 4.0581 4.0575 – – – 4.0381 4.0479 4.0418
CICap ($/pp)  103 – – – – 6.2144 6.2044 6.1392 5.6348 4.6476 5.0956
PWF(CMCap) ($/pp)  103 – – – – 5.2443 5.2359 5.1809 4.7552 3.9221 4.3002
PWF(CPSS) ($/pp)  107 1.0364 0.4279 0.4296 0.4291 0.9814 0.9814 0.9814 0.3861 0.3897 0.3879
PWF(ECOST) ($/pp)  106 2.0014 1.3079 1.8162 1.6247 1.8443 1.3411 1.6439 1.2309 1.2972 1.2952
PWF(CB1) ($/pp)  106 – 6.0848 6.0679 6.0733 0.5495 0.5495 0.5495 6.5029 6.4663 6.4837
PWF(CB2) ($/pp)  105 – 6.9354 1.8522 3.7674 1.5715 6.6039 3.5749 7.7044 7.0421 7.0626
Totalbenefit ($/pp)  106 – 2.2269 1.7102 1.9077 0.6952 1.1984 0.8957 2.7424 2.6304 2.6558
Vmin(p.u.)@bus 0.8707@54 0.9387@54 0.9360@54 0.9369@47 0.9111@54 0.9112@54 0.9112@54 0.9643@84 0.9600@76 0.9622@84

provides greater cost benefit over the other compensation coeffi-
cients for both PWF(CB1) and PWF(CB2).
4.3. Case-3
The final cost benefit considering bA, bR and bAR as compensation
coefficient for two number of capacitor installations are 244663.48
($/pp), 407132.01($/pp) and 271756.63($/pp) respectively for
33-bus system and the values are 681029.96 ($/pp), 1114713.32
($/pp) and 856124.12 ($/pp) respectively for Indian 85-bus system.
Likewise, the final cost benefit considering bA, bR and bAR as com-
pensation coefficient for three number of capacitor installations
are 253263.59 ($/pp), 443615.70 ($/pp) and 281284.35 ($/pp)
respectively for 33-bus system and the values are 695204.83
($/pp), 1198468.61 ($/pp) and 895681.71 ($/pp) respectively for
Indian 85-bus system. From Tables 2–5, for multiple capacitor
installation case, it is evident that, considering bR as compensation
coefficient provides greater net cost benefit when compared to the
other compensation coefficient owing to much reduced flow of IR
through distribution feeder sections. Since, capacitors supply only
portion of system reactive power demand they have lesser effect
on PWF(CB1). Hence, for PWF(CB1), it is observed that all compensa-
tion coefficients produce almost similar cost benefit results for
respective number of capacitor installation cases in both 33-bus
and Indian 85-bus systems. However, in the case of PWF(CB2), it
is observed that bR produces vastly enhanced cost benefit results
over the other compensation coefficients due to the reduced flow
of IR through the distribution feeder sections in both 33-bus and
Indian 85-bus systems.
4.4. Case-4
For 33-bus system, the final cost benefit results for simultane-
ous installation of DG and capacitor in two and three numbers
 R. Arulraj, N. Kumarappan / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 22 (2019) 67–77 75

are 2268665 ($/pp) and 2319671 ($/pp) respectively for bA,

2225524 ($/pp) and 2274379 ($/pp) respectively for bR, 2241142
($/pp) and 2291215 ($/pp) respectively for bAR. Likewise, for Indian
85-bus system, the final cost benefit results for simultaneous
installation of DG and capacitor in two and three numbers are
2630145 ($/pp) and 2742398.9 ($/pp) respectively for bA,
2530970 ($/pp) and 2630373 ($/pp) respectively for bR, 2547457
($/pp) and 2655843.8 ($/pp) respectively for bAR. Here, simultane-
ous installation of DG and capacitor supplies portion of system
active and reactive power demand thereby resulting in reduced
flow of IA and IR through the distribution feeder sections, respec-
tively. However, from Tables 2–5, it is observed that considering
bA as compensation coefficient provides greater net cost benefit
when compared to bR and bAR for both 33-bus and Indian 85-bus
systems. This is due to the fact that, failure rate of distribution fee-
der sections is evaluated based on section impedance as shown in
(42) and hence for simultaneous installation of DG and capacitor
which supplies portion of system active and reactive power
demand, the average R/X (i.e. resistance/reactance) ratio of total
feeder sections defines the compensation coefficient that produce
enhanced net cost benefit for a particular distribution system. Fig. 3. Convergence curve for simultaneous installation of DG and capacitor in
The average R/X ratio of total feeder sections in 33-bus system standard 33-bus distribution system.
and Indian 85-bus system is 1.39 and 2.26 respectively, which
means feeder sections of both 33-bus and Indian 85-bus system
have larger proportion of R when compared to X. Since IA 1 (1/R)
and IR 1 (1/X), considering bA as compensation coefficient provides
greater cost benefit when compared to the other compensation
coefficients by efficiently optimizing PWF(CPSS) and PWF(ECOST).
Therefore, identifying suitable compensation coefficient that
results in enhanced PWF(CB1) and PWF(CB2) for simultaneous
installation of DG and capacitor is system dependent.
From the overall results of different DG and capacitor installa-
tion cases in Tables 2–5, it is understood that the optimization
voltage constraints are within the desired range. Moreover, among
different DG and capacitor installation cases, simultaneous instal-
lation of DG and capacitor provides greater cost benefit when com-
pared to separate installation of DG and capacitor. Furthermore,
three number of installations result in better technical and eco-
nomic benefits than two numbers of installations for both 33-bus
and Indian 85-bus systems.
In order to show the efficiency of proposed hybrid WIPSO-GSA
technique over WIPSO and GSA techniques separately, the results
are compared as shown in Table 6 for simultaneous installation
of DG and capacitor in three numbers which have higher problem
Fig. 4. Convergence curve for simultaneous installation of DG and capacitor in
dimension when compared to other DG and capacitor installation Indian 85-bus distribution system.

Table 6
Comparative study of results between WIPSO, GSA and proposed WIPSO-GSA techniques.

System 33-bus system 85-bus system

Technique Without WIPSO GSA WIPSO-GSA Without WIPSO GSA WIPSO-GSA
DG DG
PDG in MW (bus) – 0.7324(18), 0.7297(5), 0.7417(13), – 0.4977(28), 0.5057(30), 0.5055(27),
0.7376(28), 0.7270(7), 0.7403(24), 0.5082(34), 0.5050(35), 0.5044(35),
0.7414(29) 0.7411(12) 0.7419(30) 0.4959(67) 0.4937(67) 0.5074(67)
QCap in MVAr (bus) – 0.1745(11), 0.2512(6), 0.3980(12), – 0.4243(28), 0.3442(27), 0.4379(29),
0.3163(15), 0.2533(7), 0.3800(25), 0.3820(34), 0.2491(30), 0.4581(36),
0.2822(28) 0.3810(12) 0.4365(31) 0.3645(46) 0.2882(68) 0.5127(67)
CIDG ($/pp)  105 – 7.0323 6.9891 7.072 – 4.7757 4.7839 4.8251
PWF(COMDG) ($/pp)  106 – 5.8853 5.8491 5.9185 – 3.9968 4.0037 4.0381
CICap ($/pp)  103 – 3.092 3.542 4.858 – 4.6832 3.526 5.6348
PWF(CMCap) ($/pp)  103 – 2.6093 2.9891 4.0997 – 3.9521 2.9756 4.7552
PWF(CPSS) ($/pp)  107 1.4221 0.5646 0.5718 0.5504 1.0364 0.4002 0.4035 0.3861
PWF(ECOST) ($/pp)  106 0.6371 0.4733 0.4822 0.3996 2.0014 1.2535 1.2748 1.2309
PWF(CB1) ($/pp)  106 – 8.5761 8.5039 8.7169 – 6.3616 6.3283 6.5029
PWF(CB2) ($/pp)  105 – 1.6379 1.5485 2.3748 – 7.4789 7.2658 7.7044
Totalbenefit ($/pp)  106 – 2.1456 2.1042 2.3196 – 2.6265 2.5663 2.7424
Vmin(p.u.)@bus 0.9038@18 0.9779@33 0.9538@33 0.9807@25 0.8707@54 0.9597@84 0.9555@84 0.9643@84
76 R. Arulraj, N. Kumarappan / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 22 (2019) 67–77

Table 7
Comparative study for standard 33-bus radial distribution system.

Case Technique DG in MW (bus) Cap in MVAr (bus) Ploss (kW) Ploss reduction in percentage (%)
Without DG – – – 211 –
2DG LSF [6] 0.72(18), 0.9(33) – 100.69 52.32
IA [6] 1.8(6), 0.72(14) – 91.63 56.57
GA [11] 1.72(6), 0.84(8) – 96.58 54.23
BSOA [13] 0.88(13), 0.92(31) – 89.34 57.65
PSO [16] 1.11(22), 0.83(27) – 91.24 56.75
WIPSO-GSA 0.88(13), 1.18(30) – 86.58 58.97
3DG LSF [6] 0.72(18), 0.9(25), 0.81(33) – 85.07 59.72
IA [6] 0.9(6), 0.9(12), 0.72(31) – 81.05 61.59
GA [11] 1.54(6), 0.85(8), 0.95(20) – 85.75 59.36
BSOA [13] 1.03(3), 0.81(13), 1.11(29) – 80.03 62.07
IWDA [14] 0.60(9), 0.30(16), 1.01(30) – 85.78 59.34
TLBO [15] 0.83(10), 1.03(24), 0.89(31) – 75.54 64.19
QOTLBO [15] 0.88(12), 1.06(24), 1.07(29) – 74.1 64.88
PSO [16] 1.17(8), 0.83(13), 0.98(32) – 105.35 50.06
GA-PSO [16] 0.93(11), 0.86(16), 1.2(32) – 103.4 50.99
LSF-SA [17] 1.11(6), 0.49(18), 0.87(30) – 82.03 61.12
HSA-PABC [18] 0.76(14), 1.07(24), 1.07(30) – 72.81 65.49
BFOA [21] 0.63(17), 0.09(18), 0.95(33) – 98.3 53.41
WIPSO-GSA 0.9(13), 1.11(24), 1.04(30) – 72.12 65.82
2Cap Analytical [1] – 0.85(7), 0.86(29) 146.64 30.5
WIPSO-GSA – 0.47(12), 1.06(30) 141.84 32.78
3Cap Analytical [1] – 0.85(7), 0.25(29), 0.9(30) 144.042 30.29
FRCGA [7] – 0.48(6), 0.16(8), 0.35(9), 0.25(28), 0.3(29), 0.4(30) 141.24 31.66
GSA [10] – 0.45(13), 0.8(15), 0.35(26) 134.5 36.25
BFOA [21] – 0.35(18), 0.82(30), 0.28(33) 144.04 31.74
WIPSO-GSA – 0.69(6), 0.31(14), 0.77(30) 134.01 36.49
2DG & 2Cap IMDE [19] 1.08(10), 0.90(31) 0.26(16), 0.93(30) 32.08 84.79
FGA [20] 0.6(7), 1.1(32) 0.8(33), 0.65(16) 59.5 71.8
WIPSO-GSA 0.95(12), 1.09(30) 0.45(12), 1.04(30) 28.62 86.44
3DG & 3Cap BFOA [21] 0.54(17), 0.16(18), 0.90(33) 0.16(18), 0.54(30), 0.34(33) 41.41 80.37
GABC [22] 1.10(28), 0.13(29), 0.61(30) 0.30(16), 0.15(17), 0.15(18) 93.72 55.58
WIPSO-GSA 0.80(13), 1.07(24), 1.02(30) 0.51(10), 0.55(24), 0.77(30) 13.25 93.72

cases. Here, results are compared for compensation coefficient that
has greater net cost benefit. The value of various parameters
involved in WIPSO and GSA techniques are taken from [38] and
[40] respectively. From Table 6, for both 33-bus and Indian 85-
bus system, it is evident that the proposed hybrid WIPSO-GSA
algorithm provides superior net cost benefit by efficiently identify-
ing suitable DG and capacitor location and enhancing PWF(CB1)
and PWF(CB2) of the system. Thus, the proposed hybrid WIPSO-
GSA algorithm is found to be effective in providing high quality
solutions when compared with WIPSO and GSA techniques sepa-
rately. The convergence characteristics of WIPSO, GSA and the pro-
posed hybrid WIPSO-GSA algorithm for simultaneous installation
of DG and capacitor in three numbers are shown in Fig. 3 and
Fig. 4 for standard 33-bus system and Indian 85-bus system,
respectively. In the convergence curve the results are shown for
150 iterations. From Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, it is observed that, the con-
vergence of the proposed hybrid WIPSO-GSA algorithm is very fast
when compared to WIPSO and GSA techniques and it provides
effective optimal solution within 40–50 iterations.
Finally, in order to show the computational supremacy of pro-
posed hybrid WIPSO-GSA algorithm over other existing techniques
in literature, comparison is made with papers [4–22] that use same
case study. However, the studies in [4–22] have employed different
concept and objectives for optimal DG and capacitor planning
problem. Moreover, in [4–22], the assessment of system reliability
and its benefits through minimization of ECOST have not been
studied and furthermore the cost data used in those papers have
certain dissimilarities with respect to this study. Therefore, com-
parison can be made only based on total Ploss reduction viewpoint
as shown in Table 7. From Table 7, it is evident that the proposed
hybrid WIPSO-GSA algorithm provides enhanced Ploss reduction
percentage for different DG and capacitor installation cases when
compared to other existing optimization techniques.
5. Conclusion
In this study, economic driven optimal planning of DG and
capacitor in multiple numbers is examined considering cost benefit
through reduction in energy purchased from the substation includ-
ing energy loss and also through reduction in ECOST of the system.
From the simulation results of 33-bus and Indian 85-bus systems,
it is concluded that, in feeder’s failure rate evaluation, considering
bA as compensation coefficient provides greater net cost benefit for
installations of DG operating at UPF alone, whereas, considering bR
as compensation coefficient provides superior net cost benefit for
installations of capacitors alone. However, for simultaneous DG
and capacitor installation case, the compensation coefficient that
provides enhanced cost benefit is determined based on average
R/X ratio of total distribution feeder sections and therefore it is
system dependent. In this study, both 33-bus system and Indian
85-bus system feeder sections have larger proportion of R when
compared to X and therefore, considering bA as compensation coef-
ficient provides superior net cost benefit results for simultaneous
installation of DG and capacitor case.
Also, from the overall results it is observed that considering dif-
ferent compensation coefficients in feeder’s failure rate evaluation
not only influences total cost benefit, but also optimal bus location
and size of DG and capacitor, thereby marking its importance in
the planning problem. A comparative study has been carried out
and it is evident that the proposed hybrid WIPSO-GSA algorithm
provides superior technical and economic benefit results over the
 R. Arulraj, N. Kumarappan / Engineering Science and Technology, an International Journal 22 (2019) 67–77
other techniques and also shows greater convergence speed by
providing optimal solutions within 40 to 50 iterations, thereby
making it highly appropriate for optimal planning of DG and capac-
itor in the distribution network.
In future, this work can be extended by installing DGs with
reactive control capabilities which operates at both leading and
lagging power factor, by maintaining the same objectives and
constraints.
Acknowledgement
The work of R. Arulraj was supported by Rajiv Gandhi National
Fellowship of University Grants Commission (India) under the
grant number RGNF-2014-15-SC-TAM-60538.
References
[1] Ahmed R. Abul’Wafa, Optimal capacitor allocation in radial distribution
systems for loss reduction: a two stage method, Electr. Power Syst. Res. 95
(2013) 168–174.
[2] P.S. Georgilakis, N.D. Hatziargyriou, Optimal distributed generation placement
in power distribution networks: models, methods, and future research, IEEE
Trans. Power Syst. 28 (3) (2013) 3420–3428.
[3] R. Viral, D.K. Khatod, Optimal planning of distributed generation systems in
distribution system: a review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (7) (2012) 5146–
5165.
[4] S. Nojavan, M. Jalali, K. Zare, Optimal allocation of capacitors in radial/mesh
distribution systems using mixed integer nonlinear programming approach,
Electr. Power Syst. Res. 107 (2014) 119–124.
[5] S.N.G. Naik, D.K. Khatod, M.P. Sharma, Analytical approach for optimal siting
and sizing of distributed generation in radial distribution networks, IET Gen.
Transm. Distrib. 9 (3) (2015) 209–220.
[6] D.Q. Hung, N. Mithulananthan, Multiple distributed generator placement in
primary distribution networks for loss reduction, IEEE Trans. Indust. Electro. 60
(4) (2013) 1700–1708.
[7] R. Ahmed, Abul’Wafa., Optimal capacitor placement for enhancing voltage
stability in distribution systems using analytical algorithm and Fuzzy-Real
Coded GA, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst. 55 (2014) 246–252.
[8] S.P. Singh, A.R. Rao, Optimal allocation of capacitors in distribution systems
using particle swarm optimization, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst. 43 (1)
(2012) 1267–1275.
[9] S. Sultana, P.K. Roy, Optimal capacitor placement in radial distribution systems
using teaching learning based optimization, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst. 54
(2014) 387–398.
[10] Y.M. Shuaib, M.S. Kalavathi, C.C.A. Rajan, Optimal capacitor placement in radial
distribution system using Gravitational Search Algorithm, Int. J. Elect. Power
Energy Syst. 64 (2015) 384–397.
[11] T.N. Shukla, S.P. Singh, V. Srinivasarao, K.B. Naik, Optimal sizing of distributed
generation placed on radial distribution systems, Elect. Power Comp. Syst. 38
(3) (2010) 260–274.
[12] F.S. Abu-Mouti, M.E. El-Hawary, Optimal distributed generation allocation and
sizing in distribution systems via artificial bee colony algorithm, IEEE Trans.
Power Del. 26 (4) (2011) 2090–2101.
[13] A. El-Fergany, Optimal allocation of multi-type distributed generators using
backtracking search optimization algorithm, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst. 64
(2015) 1197–1205.
[14] D.R. Prabha, T. Jayabarathi, R. Umamageswari, S. Saranya, Optimal location and
sizing of distributed generation unit using intelligent water drop algorithm,
Sustain Energy Technol. Assess. 11 (2015) 106–113.
[15] S. Sultana, P.K. Roy, Multi-objective quasi-oppositional teaching learning
based optimization for optimal location of distributed generator in radial
distribution systems, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst. 63 (2014) 534–545.
[16] M.H. Moradi, M. Abedini, A combination of genetic algorithm and particle
swarm optimization for optimal DG location and sizing in distribution
systems, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst. 34 (1) (2012) 66–74.
[17] S.K. Injeti, N.P. Kumar, A novel approach to identify optimal access point and
capacity of multiple DGs in a small, medium and large scale radial distribution
systems, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst. 45 (1) (2013) 142–151.
[18] K. Muthukumar, S. Jayalalitha, Optimal placement and sizing of distributed
generators and shunt capacitors for power loss minimization in radial
distribution networks using hybrid heuristic search optimization technique,
Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst. 78 (2016) 299–319.
[19] A. Khodabakhshian, M.H. Andishgar, Simultaneous placement and sizing of
DGs and shunt capacitors in distribution systems by using IMDE algorithm, Int.
J. Elect. Power Energy Syst. 82 (2016) 599–607.
77
[20] S.C. Reddy, P.V.N. Prasad, A.J. Laxmi, Placement of distributed generator,
capacitor and DG and capacitor in distribution system for loss reduction and
reliability improvement. J. Electr. Eng.
[21] A.M. Imran, M. Kowsalya, Optimal Distributed Generation and capacitor
placement in power distribution networks for power loss minimization, Proc.
IEEE (2014) 1–6.
[22] M. Dixit, P. Kundu, Jariwala HR. Incorporation of distributed generation and
shunt capacitor in radial distribution system for techno-economic benefits,
Eng. Sci. Technol. Int. J. 20 (2) (2017) 482–493.
[23] R.N. Allan, R. Billinton, I. Sjarief, L. Goel, K.S. So, A reliability test system for
educational purposes: basic distribution system data and results, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst. 6 (2) (1991) 813–820.
[24] A.A. Sallam, M. Desouky, H. Desouky, Shunt capacitor effect on electrical
distribution system reliability, IEEE Trans. Reli. 43 (1) (1994) 170–176.
[25] A.H. Etemadi, M.F. Firuzabad, Distribution system reliability enhancement
using optimal capacitor placement, IET Gener. Trans. Distrib. 2 (5) (2008) 621–
631.
[26] A. Pregelj, M. Begovic, A. Rohatgi, Recloser allocation for improved reliability of
DG-enhanced distribution networks, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 21 (3) (2006)
1442–1449.
[27] J.H. Teng, Y.H. Liu, C.Y. Chen, C.F. Chen, Value-based distributed generator
placements for service quality improvements, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst.
29 (2007) 268–274.
[28] L. Wang, C. Singh, Reliability-constrained optimum placement of reclosers and
distributed generators in distribution networks using an ant colony system
algorithm, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cyber. Part C: Appl. Rev. 38 (6) (2008) 757–
764.
[29] R. Arya, S.C. Choube, L.D. Arya, Reliability evaluation and enhancement of
distribution systems in the presence of distributed generation based on
standby mode, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst. 43 (2012) 607–616.
[30] R.M. Ciric, N.L.J. Rajakovic, A new composite index of reliability of supply in the
industrial systems with distributed generation, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst.
44 (2013) 824–831.
[31] D. Shirmohammadi, H.W. Hong, A. Semlyen, G.X. Luo, A compensation-based
power flow method for weakly meshed distribution and transmission
networks, IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 3 (2) (1988) 753–762.
[32] R. Billinton, R.N. Allan, Reliability Evaluation of Power Systems, second ed.,
Plenum press, New York, 1994.
[33] L. Goel, R. Billinton, Evaluation of interrupted energy assessment rates in
distribution systems, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 6 (4) (1991) 1876–1882.
[34] A.E. Eiben, C.A. Schippers, On evolutionary exploration and exploitation,
Fundam. Informaticate 35 (1) (1998) 35–50.
[35] J. Kennedy, R. Eberhart, Particle swarm optimization, Proc IEEE (1995) 1942–
1948.
[36] S. Mirjalili, S.Z.M. Hashim, A new hybrid PSOGSA algorithm for function
optimization, Proc. IEEE (2010) 374–377.
[37] N. Holden, A.A. Freitas, A hybrid PSO/ACO algorithm for discovering
classification rules in data mining, J. Artific. Evol. Appl. (JAEA) (2008).
[38] P.T. Vu, D.L. Le, N.D. Vo, J. Tlusty, A novel weight-improved particle swarm
optimization algorithm for optimal power flow and economic load dispatch
problems, Proc. IEEE (2010) 1–7.
[39] R. Arulraj, N. Kumarappan, T. Vigneysh, Optimal location and sizing of DG and
capacitor in distribution network using weight-improved particle swarm
optimization algorithm (WIPSO), Proc. IEEE (2013) 759–764.
[40] E. Rashedi, H. Nezamabadi-pour, S. Saryazdi, GSA: a gravitational search
algorithm, Inf. Sci. 179 (13) (2009) 2232–2248.
[41] A. Singh, K. Deep, A. Nagar, A new improved gravitational search algorithm for
function optimization using a novel ‘‘best-so-far” update mechanism, Proc.
IEEE (2015) 35–39.
[42] M.M. Aman, G.B. Jasmon, A.H.A. Bakar, H. Mokhlis, A new approach for
optimum simultaneous multi-DG distributed generation units placement and
sizing based on maximization of system loadability using HPSO (hybrid
particle swarm optimization) algorithm, Energy 66 (2014) 202–215.
[43] D. Das, D.P. Kothari, A. Kalam, Simple and efficient method for load flow
solution of radial distribution networks, Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst. 17 (5)
(1995) 335–346.
[44] A. Ghazanfari, M. Hamzeh, H. Mokhtari, H.R. Karimi, Active power
management of multihybrid fuel cell/supercapacitor power conversion
system in a medium voltage microgrid, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 3 (4) (2012)
1903–1910.
[45] T. Vigneysh, N. Kumarappan, Autonomous operation and control of
photovoltaic/solid oxide fuel cell/battery energy storage based microgrid
using fuzzy logic controller, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 41 (3) (2016) 1877–1891.
[46] N. Khalesi, N. Rezaei, M.R. Haghifam, DG allocation with application of
dynamic programming for loss reduction and reliability improvement, Int. J.
Elect. Power Energy Syst. 33 (2) (2011) 288–295.
[47] M. Rahmani-andebili, Reliability and economic-driven switchable capacitor
placement in distribution network, IET Gener. Trans. Distrib. 9 (13) (2015)
1572–1579.