1
Reliability Assessment of a Microgrid
Distribution System with PV and Storage
Taiseer Tuffaha and Mohammad AlMuhaini
Electrical Engineering Department
King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals
Dhahran, Saudi Arabia
g201309090@kfupm.edu.sa, muhaini@kfupm.edu.sa
Abstract — While microgrid distribution system technology is
rapidly increasing, the importance of finding a way to evaluate
the effect of adding renewable DGs on the overall grid reliability
has become essential. Renewable energies resources are effective
because they reduce environmental pollution and improve energy
utilization efficiency and reliability, which makes them widely
used in the network. In this paper, the impact of adding solar
energy sources and energy storage to a microgrid distribution
system will be investigated. Markov modeling is used to model
the energy source and energy storage as well as to evaluate the
overall reliability of the system. Roy Billinton Test System
(RBTS) is used to evaluate different load and system indices,
including System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI),
System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI),
Customer Average Interruption Duration Index (CADI),
Average System Unavailability Index (ASUI) and Energy Not
Supplied (ENS).
Keywords — Microgrids, Markov Model, Reliability, Photovoltaic,
Energy Storage.
I. INTRODUCTION
T HE penetration of microgrids has been on the rise in
recent years. A microgrid is defined as an aggregation of
loads and distributed generations (DGs) operating as a single
system providing both power and heat. The majority of the
DGs as microsources must be power electronic based to
provide the flexibility required to ensure operation as a single
aggregated system. This control flexibility allows the
microgrid to present itself to the bulk power system as a single
controlled unit that meets local needs for reliability and
security [1]. This microgrid phenomenon has been driven by
many factors, such as the deployment of small-scale energy
sources, including renewables, and the avoidance of
transmission and distribution expansion. The most compelling
consideration, however, has been the enhancement of
reliability indices. The reliability study of such systems
becomes essential, and the improvement of the reliability
indices, such as SAIDI, SAIFI and ASUI [2], becomes the
main research objective.
Many researchers have evaluated reliability for distribution
systems in many different schemes. Reference [1] proposed a
method to evaluate the reliability for distribution systems with
microgrids. In this, the goal was to use the failure-effect-
traversing algorithm to generate an influence matrix and then
calculate the reliability index. It was concluded that the
allocation of microgrids in a distribution system could
improve the reliability to customers. A new method for
978-1-4799-7736-9/15/$31.00 ©2015 IEEE
reliability evaluation has been produced by reference [7], in
which the bootstrap method in the performance storage
reliability assessment of equipment components was
introduced. However, the assessment was based on the test
sample only, without any subjective hypothesis or additional
information. Reference [8] made an observable contribution
by introducing the concept of the virtual power plant to model
microgrids connected with intermittent sources by using the
non-sequential Monte Carlo method to evaluate the reliability.
On the topic of the reliability evaluation of microgrids with
renewable resources such as solar or wind, references [9, 10,
11 and 12] have similarly evaluated the reliability of
microgrids with PV and wind. Reference [10] built a separate
reliability model for each source then, based on the conditions
of microgrid component failure, the external power failure, the
microsource fault and the cases of lack of a microsource, the
reliability index was calculated using a minimal path method.
References [9 and 12] have used the Monte Carlo simulation
technique to evaluate the reliability of microgrids including
renewable energy DGs and storage systems. Reference [9]
concluded that the microgrids have helped in improving the
reliability. Reference [12], however, claimed that Wind
Turbine Generator (WTG) and Photovoltaic (PV) systems
were more unreliable than the other kinds of local-distributed
resources because they depended on weather conditions. Yet,
using a storage system can increase the stand-alone microgrid
system reliability. Based on a high-frequency AC system,
reference [11] performed the reliability calculation on the
basis of two major approaches, namely the Coffin-Manson
formula and the stress technique. Finally, the reliability of
each IGBT switching device had been evaluated to find the
overall reliability. The online reliability evaluation of the
switching devices was suggested to prepare for advance
repairing or replacement.
Reference [13] proposed a new optimal dispatching strategy
of microgrids containing a battery switch station (BSS) or
energy storage station (ESS) for the wind generator,
photovoltaic system, fuel cell, microturbine and diesel
generators. Minimizing the cost and maximizing the profit of
the microgrid determined the optimal economic dispatching.
Mixed integer linear programming (MILP) solved the
optimization. Their results showed that a BSS can bring more
profits and reserves for microgrids than an ESS can bring.
References [14 and 15] have used Markov with Weibul
distribution modeling to solve the general power system
reliability application. References [3 and 16] built a power
195
 2

system operational reliability-analyzing model based on the be unstable and cannot feed the load, as shown in Table I [9].
Markov chain, assuming that the equipment failure rate The PV modeling and storage will be discussed in detail in the
follows exponential distribution. Reference [16] evaluated the upcoming sections.
reliability of a PV microgrid, using Markov modeling, and it
was indicated that further work is needed to explore the
reliability for microgrids with a greater variety of stochastic-
and dispatchable-distributed energy resources.
This paper will evaluate and analyze the reliability indices
of the PV-microgrid distribution system by using Markov
modeling. The Roy Billinton Test System (RBTS) [6] will be
used to evaluate the reliability. Many reliability studies and
evaluation techniques in the literature have used the RBTS as
a reference. One advantage of the RBTS is the availability of Fig. 1. Renewable Energy System (RES) model
practical reliability data for all components. Another
advantage is the manageable size of this system, which makes TABLE I. ANALYSIS OF STATE OF A MICROGRID
it easier to perform hand calculations to verify any reliability
model or technique used to evaluate the reliability indices. State of PV State of storage Energy in the State of microgrid
system device storage
energy not power is supplied
exhausted by PV
II. RELIABILITY EVALUATION USING MARKOV MODELING success success
energy
outage
To evaluate the reliability on the customer side, there are exhausted
success failure ---- outage
two main approaches: analytical methods and quantitative or energy not power is supplied
simulation methods (e.g., Monte Carlo). Analytical methods exhausted by PV
failure success
such as the Markov model may use the probability theory to energy
outage
exhausted
model and realize such systems.
failure failure --- outage
The Markov modeling approach is a useful and powerful
analytical technique, with applications involving time-based The generation capacity of the PV system total is 1.2 MW at
reliability analyses [3]. The reliability characteristics and 1000 W/m^2 irradiation. When the PV is in working state,
behavior of a system are represented using a state transition then it is capable of supplying the load and charging. The
diagram that consists of a set of discrete possible system states failure rate of the converter and the inverter and the storage
and defines the rate at which transitions between those states system are merged into a single failure rate. After that, the
occur [4]. As such, Markov models consist of possible chains study will evaluate, at certain load points, the reliability
of events that are comprehensive representations of the indices (SAIFI SAIDI, etc.) by using Markov modeling by
sequences of failures and, in some cases, repairs that are used MATLAB. We will then analyze and compare the results of
to approximate the reliability, dependability and availability of the two systems (systems with and without a PV source).
the system.
To evaluate the system reliability using the Markov model,
each component of the system shown in Fig. 1 should be III. PV AND STORAGE SYSTEM MODELING
modeled by its failure rate (λ) and repair time (r). The lines In this section, the PV output power and charging rate will
and transformer parameters were already given by RBTS data be modeled respectively.
[5], making the solar energy from the PV system the only
thing left to model. The PV system, in general, consists of the A. PV Output Power
solar panel + power electronics + storage battery. The The PV is the technology that changes light energy directly
modeling problem can be divided into two parts. The first part into electrical energy based on the photovoltaic effect of a
consists of the mechanical or physical parts; this portion’s semiconductor interface. Due to the great influence of external
parameters (λps) and repair time (rps) are taken from the factors (temperature, sunlight intensity, etc.), the output of the
literature. The second part represents the environmental or the battery is obviously nonlinear (see Fig. 2). The PV output
solar irradiation behavior, which controls the PV output power power can be calculated as seen in Equation 1:
and the storage charging-discharging rate. For this part, the
historical data of one year of the solar profile was used. Then, 1 (1)
the Markov chain model was applied to find the mean time to
In which, is the maximum test power at the standard
fail (MTTF) and mean time to repair (MTTR) of PV power,
test conditions (STC; intensity of sunlight 1000W/m2, ambient
hence the parameters (λpv) and time to repair (rpv) were found
temperature 25 Co ); is light intensity; light intensity
accordingly. The final modeling is of the charging and
for the STC 1000W/m2; power-temperature coefficient of
discharging process. Charging and discharging is directly
0.0047 W/ Co; is the solar panels working temperature; and
related to the amount of irradiation and the load. However, if
was denoted as the reference temperature of 25 Co.
the storage system is not working, the PV output power will
196
 3

As discussed earlier, the solar profile and temperature first discharging rate of the battery y (5h/f) with transition
will be used to evaluate the PV output pow wer from (1). The probability of P = 0.7; this comes frrom the fact that for almost
resulted array power will be normalized thenn compared to the 80% to 70% of the time the batttery will not completely
normalized load curve. Then we define tw wo states: The up discharge to zero if its state was entered. Similarly, λy was
state in which the PV power has exceeded the load and the calculated but with 1-P multiplied by
b the discharging rate. The
down state for the other case. After that, by counting the times discharging rate and the charging rate
r between 50% and 0%
in which the system is staying or leaving the states, we will be are assumed to be equal, hence µx = λx.
able to use the Markov chain to find the MTTF and MTTR.
The expected time to fail (MTTFpv) is found too be 4.0621 h/fail C. PV and Storage Physical Parts ts Modeling.
and repair time (MTTRpv) to be 19.938 h/reppair. For example, The PV and storage physical sysstem in general consists of
the up-state is shown in Table II. solar panel + power electronics + storage battery. These
components’ parameters were merg ged into one parameter: λps
and rps. These values were taken from reference [10] to be 5f/y
and 50 hrs/repair, respectively.
D. RBTS BUS 2 Modeling, Using g Block Reduction
Technique.
In RBTS Bus 2, we have 22 load d points, 4 main feeders, 22
distribution transformers and 36 linesl [6]. This serves as a
complex system to model using Marrkov modeling since we will
have over 280 states. Since it is a rad
dial scheme, the best way to
model this is by using the block reduction
r technique (BRT).
Fig. 2. PV output power in July 21th The equivalent failure rate λLpi and d repair rate µLpi is given in
Table IV. Hourly load data for different
d load types in the
TABLE II. PV POWER STATE RBTS-Bus 2 are simulated using the t sequential Monte Carlo
(Ppv - PLoad) State MTTR MTTF λ pv µpv simulation [6]. The following equaation is used to simulate the
(MW) cond. (hrs/r) (hrs/f) (f/y) (r/y) load for different sectors, including residential, governmental
S1 positive UP 19.93 4.062 21156.52 439.362 and institutional, commercial and sm mall industrial [17]:
Load (t) = hour (h) day (d) week (w) (2)
B. Storage Model In which Load (t) is the load vaalue at hour t, and hour (h),
The storage system component model willl consist of three day (d) and week (w) are the load facctors for hour t in the year.
modes of operation: 100%, 50% and 0%, ass in Table III and
Fig. 3. TABLE IV. SUMMARY OF RBTS BU
US 2 REDUCED SYSTEM
Load λLpi µLpi Looad λLpi µLpi
TABLE III. CHARGING STATES MATTRIX points (f/y) (repair/y) po
oints (f/y) (repair/y)
S1 (100%) S2 (50%) S3 (0%) LP1 0.10275 261.7491 LPP12 0.16775 390.43
S1 0 λ1 λy LP2 0.11575 289.395 LPP13 0.1515 360.39
S2 µ1 0 λx LP3 0.15475 366.5049 LPP14 0.20675 457.5
S3 µy µx 0 LP4 0.1515 360.39 LPP15 0.2425 513.42
LP5 0.19375 435.89 LPP16 0.11575 289.39
LP6 0.147 351.836 LPP17 0.106 268.75
LP7 0.2425 513.4259 LPP18 0.15475 366.509
LP8 0.091 1752 LPP19 0.16775 390.42
LP9 0.13975 1752 LPP20 0.2165 473.24
LP10 0.10275 261.74 LPP21 0.25225 527.84
LP11 0.1645 384.52 LPP22 0.2555 532.58

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Fig. 3. State diagram of storage system
In which, λ1 = 12264 f/y, µ1 = 1752 r/y, λx = 1752 f/y, µx =
1752 r/y, λy = 525.6 f/y, µy = 876 r//y. For a deeper
understanding, λ1 was calculated from multiplying the
The Markov process technique was used to evaluate the
overall system failure frequency an nd availability before and
after adding the solar sources. We W are dealing with four
components, each has two operation n modes, except the storage
system, which has three. The resulltant states are 24. We are
expecting to have a 24x24 transition n matrix for the state flow
shown in Fig. 4. The working statees are considered to be the
states from 1 to 16 and one partially
y working state 17, and the
rest represent the failure or not worrking states. The complete
transition matrix is shown in Fig. 5, In which, L1=λ1, L2=λpv,

197
 4

L3=λps, L4=λLpi, LX=λx, LY =λy, U1=µ1, U2=µpv, U3=µps,

U4=µLPi, UX=µx, UY=µy.

Fig. 4. Complete state diagram

Fig. 7. Failure frequency comparison

Fig. 8. SAIFI values comparaison

Fig. 5. State transition matrix

The improvement in the availability aloong the 22 load

points was noticeable, except at load pointss 8 and 9 where
there was no significant change. However, duue to the nature of
PV output power (except load points 8 annd 9), the failure
frequency dramatically increased, (see Figss. 6 and 7) after
adding the DG. This yields to an increase inn the SAIFI and a
decrease in the SAIDI (see Figs. 8 and 9).
Fig. 9. SAIDI values comparison

Tables V and VI show the other reliability indices

comparison before and after addiing the DG sources. For
example, ENS was about 14 MWh for f load points 1 through 9,
then it became almost the half that at 7.21 MWh. The
reliability indices of the system generally
g have improved,
especially the ENS, to almost half.

TABLE V. RELIABILITY INDIC

CES WITHOUT DG

Without DG LP1
1-LP9
SAIFI (f/y)/customer 0.1267
SAIDI (hrs) /customer 3.5494
CAIDI (hrs/customer) 28.017
ASUI 0.0004
ASAI 0.9995
Fig. 6. Failure frequency comparison ENS (MWh) 14.779

198
 5

AENS (MWh/customer) 0.0225 [6] R. Allan, R. Billinton, I. Sjariej, L. Goel, K. So, "Reliability Test System
Without DG LP10-LP22 for Education Purposes - Basic Distribution System Dates and Results,"
SAIFI (f/y) /customer 0.07619 IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 6, n. 2, May 1991.
SAIDI (hrs) /customer 1.90646 [7] Y. Li, Z. Silong, and J. Huixia. "Research on reliability assessment
CAIDI (hrs/customer) 25.0201 method based on Bootstrap method." IEEE International Conference on.
ASUI 0.00021 Quality, Reliability, Risk, Maintenance, and Safety Engineering
ASAI 0.99978 (ICQR2MSE), 2012.
ENS (MWh) 24.7908 [8] Z. Bie, et al. "Reliability evaluation of active distribution systems
including microgrids." IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 27.4, Pp.
AENS (MWh/customer) 0.01976
2342-2350, 2012.
[9] L. Huishi, J. Su, and S. Liu. "Reliability evaluation of distribution
TABLE VI. RELIABILITY INDICES WITH DG system containing microgrid." IEEE 2010 China International
Conference on Electricity Distribution (CICED), 2010.
With DG LP1-LP9
[10] H. Wei, et al. "Reliability evaluation of microgrid with PV-WG hybrid
SAIFI (f/y)/customer 0.31477 system." IEEE4th International Conference on Electric Utility
SAIDI (hrs) /customer 1.73209 Deregulation and Restructuring and Power Technologies (DRPT), 2011.
CAIDI (hrs/customer) 5.50269 [11] A. Alam, et al. "Reliability evaluation of solar photovoltaic microgrid."
ASUI 0.00019 IEEE International Conference on Environment and Electrical
ASAI 0.99980 Engineering (EEEIC), 2012.
ENS (MWh) 7.21224 [12] Ghahderijani, M. Moradi, S. M. Barakati, and S. Tavakoli. "Reliability
AENS (MWh/customer) 0.01102 evaluation of stand-alone hybrid microgrid using Sequential Monte
With DG LP10-LP22 Carlo Simulation." IEEE 2012 Second Iranian Conference on
SAIFI (f/y) /customer 0.27459 Renewable Energy and Distributed Generation (ICREDG), 2012.
SAIDI (hrs) /customer 1.48662 [13] Y. Miao, J. Quanyuan, and C. Yijia. "Battery switch station modeling
CAIDI (hrs/customer) 5.41387 and its economic evaluation in microgrid." IEEE Power and Energy
ASUI 0.00016 Society General Meeting, 2012.
ASAI 0.99983 [14] Y. Wang, H. Xueshan, and Y. Ding. "Power system operational
ENS (MWh) 12.1113 reliability equivalent modeling and analysis based on the Markov chain."
AENS (MWh/customer) 0.00965 2012 IEEE International Conference on Power System Technology
(POWERCON), 2012.
[15] A. Jackson, "Reliability modeling that combines Markov analysis and
Weibull distributions." 2013 IEEE Proceedings on Reliability and
V. CONCLUSION Maintainability Symposium (RAMS), 2013.
[16] S. Kennedy, and M. Milosevic Marden. "Reliability of islanded
This paper implemented the concept of Markov modeling microgrids with stochastic generation and prioritized load." IEEE
for reliability analysis. Each component of the system was PowerTech, Bucharest., 2009.
[17] A. Sankarakrishnan, R. Billinton, “Sequential Monte Carlo simulation
properly modeled by its failure rate and repair time. The for composite power system reliability analysis with time varying
reliability indices were calculated before and after interfacing loads,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, v. 10, no. 3, August
the DG solar source. The overall system reliability has 1995, pp. 1540-1545.
increased. The failure frequency increased; however, the fault
duration decreased, and the highest availability improvement
was recorded at load point 19. The increase in failure
frequency is due to the possibility of the solar system to
restore the service during the interruption and then fails due to
either the unavailability of the energy storage or the
unavailability of the solar power due to internal failures or
lack of solar radiation. In future work, the effect of different
types of DG sources (wind turbines, hydro turbines, etc.) on
the system reliability will be tested.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors acknowledge the support of King Fahd University
of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia.

REFERENCES
[1] X. Chen, L. Bosi, and L. Chunyan. "A reliability evaluation method for
distribution system with microgrids." Power and Energy Engineering
Conference (APPEEC), 2012 Asia-Pacific. IEEE, 2012.
[2] IEEE Full-Use Guide for Electric Power Distribution Reliability Indices,
IEEE Std. 1366–2001, 2001.
[3] V. Casteren, J. FL, M. HJ Bollen, and M. Schmieg. "Reliability
assessment in electrical power systems: the Weibull-Markov stochastic
model." IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, Pp. 911–915.
[4] N. Fugua, "The applicability of Markov analysis methods to reliability,
maintainability, and safety." Reliability Anal. Center START Sheet
10.2, 2003.
[5] Billinton, R. and R. Allan, Reliability Evaluation of Power Systems,
Plenum Press, New York, 1996.

199

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)