Energies 16 00653 v2

energies
Article
Bus Voltage Violations under Different Solar Radiation Profiles
and Load Changes with Optimally Placed and Sized
PV Systems
Anju Yadav 1 , Nand Kishor 2, * and Richa Negi 1
1 Department of Electrical Engineering, Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology Allahabad,

Prayagraj 211004, India; anjupyadav1994@gmail.com (A.Y.); richa@mnnit.ac.in (R.N.)
2 Fredrikstad Campus, Østfold University College, 1671 Fredrikstad, Norway
* Correspondence: nand_research@yahoo.co.in or nand.kishor@hiof.no
Abstract: This study mainly discusses the implications of solar radiation profiles and changes in load
with respect to base load conditions on the PV placement, size, voltage violations, and curtailment
cost of PV generation in the network. The PV installation is optimized using yearly solar radiation
profiles, low, medium, and high, corresponding to three different locations. The network in the
study is represented as a multiphase, with provision for the installation of both single- and three-
phase PV systems. For the different load changes in either one of the phases or all three phases, the
optimal placement and size of PV inverters are discussed. It is indicated that with load increase
in all three phases, for low solar radiation profiles, the placement and size of PVs remain non-
uniform, while for medium and high solar radiation, the distribution becomes comparatively uniform
throughout the network. However, with a load increase in one of the phases, for low solar radiation,
optimal placement compensates with three-phase PV installation, while for medium/high solar, the
corresponding load increase phase contributes to greater PV installation. The voltage rise is observed
at both load-connected and non-load-connected buses. Such buses in the network are those that form
the common junction with the branches connected to another set of buses having optimally placed
PVs. The voltage violations are experienced at the feeder end buses with single-phase PV installation,
not only in the phase having a connected load but also in one of the other phases.
Citation: Yadav, A.; Kishor, N.; Negi,
R. Bus Voltage Violations under
Keywords: renewable resources integration; solar photovoltaic; placement and sizing; voltage
Different Solar Radiation Profiles and violation; voltage index; microgrid
Load Changes with Optimally Placed
and Sized PV Systems. Energies 2023,
16, 653. https://doi.org/10.3390/
en16020653 1. Introduction
Academic Editor: Frede Blaabjerg Several research studies encourage small-scale distributed generation resources inte-
gration due to savings on fuel costs, deferral on infrastructure upgrades, etc. [1,2]. On the
Received: 25 November 2022 other hand, their inappropriate planning in terms of site location and sizing [3] may result
Revised: 24 December 2022
in negative economic, voltage violation, high thermal loss, etc.
Accepted: 30 December 2022
Several factors: penetration level, concentration, network parameters, load character-
Published: 5 January 2023
istics, and passive/active operation of distributed generators (DGs), govern positive or
negative impacts on economics [4]. Studies [5–7] indicate that a high penetration level of
distributed PVs can lead to the increased lifespan of the transformer, while high penetration
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
level motivates for reinforcement of the network, causing over-voltages and increased
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. losses. A review based on the classification of DG units, challenges of placement, and
This article is an open access article push factors in the growth of DGs with the advantages of PV integration into the grid is
distributed under the terms and presented in [8].
conditions of the Creative Commons Studies on DG placement and size have been extensively reported in recent years.
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// These fall in the category of planning and operational, distribution network and DG mod-
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ els, the inclusion of uncertainty in renewable generation/load, and a solution approach.
4.0/). The authors [9] presented the placement and sizing of one or two DGs while minimizing
Energies 2023, 16, 653. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16020653 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2023, 16, 653 2 of 23
the power losses, having considered aggregated real power balance equations of unbal-
anced distribution networks. An exhaustive reported work having wind power forecast,
placement, and sizing of DG with loss minimization and voltage stability assessment is
discussed in [10]. The studies on placement, sizing taking into account stochastic DG with
capacitor banks [11], and coordination of DGs along with reactive power allocation based
on probabilistic load flow analysis [12] are also proposed.
The above studies [9–12] have been limited to single-phase, aggregate power balance
formulation without any assessment of multiphase power flow constraints. The low voltage
distribution network is usually unbalanced and has both single- and three-phase loads con-
nected. Due to unevenly distributed single-phase loads and asymmetrical line impedances,
the prevailing voltage unbalance may lead to increased network losses and even instability
in the system [13]. Researchers [14] presented approaches to mitigate voltage unbalance in
multi-folds: dynamic switching of residential loads, charging and discharging of electric
vehicles, control of inverters, energy storage units, and many more. Their study proposed
a two-stage framework to quantify the impact of variable output power from distributed
generation resources on voltage unbalance and its remedial measures. The first stage
involves quantifying the impact of generation resources and whether critical resources
significantly impact voltage unbalance. This follows the second stage with allocating energy
storage units against voltage deviations. This means that once critical generation resources
have been identified against voltage unbalance, energy storage units are responsible for
mitigating voltage unbalance. The said situation further deteriorates with the integration
of single- and three-phase inverter interfaced PV resources.
Recently, the authors [15] proposed the placement and sizing of DGs in a multiphase
distribution network. Both single- and three-phase inverters are modeled as nodal admit-
tances, taking into account uncertainty in power injection into the distribution network.
In a two-stage stochastic formulation, the first stage results in the placement and sizing
of DGs, while the second stage makes the decision about real power curtailment, reactive
power support, and voltage changes along the network.
A high level of PV penetration changes the direction of the power flow and significantly
affects the voltage deviation along the network. With uncertainties in PV output power
and load demand in the distribution network, probabilistic approaches in studying voltage
unbalance have been in focus. The probabilistic load flow and sensitivity analysis to
understand the influence of variable loads on voltage unbalance is discussed in [16].
An optimization-based approach applying individual phase regulation via coordina-
tion of the on-load-tap-changer (OLTC), switched capacitor bank, and volt-var characteristic
of the PV inverter is discussed in [17]. The authors [18] presented an integrated approach
towards voltage regulation, with PV re-phasing through switches combined with the dy-
namic line rating of the overhead conductors. The coordination between OLTC and PV
inverter for reactive power injection is performed to enhance the current carrying capacity
of overhead lines. The optimization function for the optimal placement and size of DGs
with a loss minimization objective in an unbalanced network cannot prove the optimality
of solutions mathematically due to the non-convexity of the problem. Researchers [19,20]
discussed the optimal tap control to regulate OLTCs along with capacitor banks in the
network having multiple distributed energy resources.
Although the placement and size of DGs in distribution networks have been exten-
sively discussed in several forms, including a reduction in losses [21], stochastic
modeling [22,23], aided with storage [24,25], there is still a knowledge gap of the eco-
nomic and technical (voltage unbalance) impacts against the concentration of PV inverters
placed and its size associated with different solar radiation profiles. A brief review of
the present retail electricity market, power requirements, challenges, and next-generation
electricity market is presented in [26].
Many studies [9–12] limit their scope to the placement and size of DGs and do not
assess other impacts on the network. For instance, in [9], only one or two DGs are placed.
On the other hand, Ref. [10] includes forecasting the DGs’ placement and size. Further,
Energies 2023, 16, 653 3 of 23
the study [14] assumed that size and placement of generation resources as three-phase
in the network have been pre-determined, with voltage unbalance mitigation achieved
via optimal allocation of energy storage units [27–31]. As such, the role of generation
resources and uncertainty in output power cannot be ascertained in mitigating issues of
voltage unbalance.
The distribution system resilience can be enhanced with the increased penetration
of distributed forms of energy resources [32]. However, Refs. [32,33] makes assumptions
about the even placement and penetration being high enough to meet the nearby load in
the form of the number of microgrids. Multiple sets of self-supplied microgrids cannot be
established if a given section of the distribution network is heavily loaded but placed with
low or moderate levels of energy resources.
With high PV penetration levels, their placement can be planned upstream of the net-
work to effectively reduce the voltage deviation problem caused by the distributed location
of PVs [34]. A two-stage stochastic programming approach, with the first stage involving
apparent power capability and the second stage involving reactive power support for
optimal placement and size of PV inverters, is found in [35]. The potential of enhancement
in PV hosting capacity [36] is evaluated using a two-stage transmission and generation
expansion planning model, while [37] reviews hosting capacity. The hosting capacity is
changeable based on its placement and applied strategy on reactive power compensation
towards voltage violations [38]. The uniformity in this distribution across the complete
power network can further improve the ability to recover from power outages due to acci-
dents or natural disasters. Additionally, the distribution network’s being associated with a
low impedance path, and the presence of unbalance energy resources affects more voltage
unbalance levels in the branch than between the buses [39]. The hosting capacity of the
PV based on a mixture of deterministic methods using time series data is reported in [40],
and they suggest using year-wise data to analyze the seasonal effect in future studies. The
authors [41] have examined the impact of different generation profiles in large-scale PVs
integrated into a weak grid.
Past studies do not evaluate more realistic situations. With the assessment of the
distribution of DGs across the network for different solar radiation profiles, uncertainty in
load/generation is considered. One can observe that most efforts have been directed to
optimal placement and sizing, including the assessment of voltage unbalance. The relation
between the variation in solar radiation profiles and the distribution of optimally placed
DGs across the network has not been explored in the context of voltage unbalance.
1.1. Problem Statement

Generally, transmission networks consist of non-radial topologies, such as loop net-
works, and thus do not change often. In contrast, medium voltage and low voltage
distribution networks, such as radial topology, can change much more frequently.
Although the problem of placement and size of PV resources adopts optimal objectives,
with uncertainties in generation and load taken into account, a high concentration or non-
uniformity may lead to node voltage variations not aligned with the output power variation
of energy resources. In other words, the consistency of voltage drop can become more
complicated. This study on voltage violations is motivated by findings reported in [29]. The
changes in optimal placement, size of PV (single-phase or three-phase) distribution among
three phases throughout the network, and resulting voltage profile against connected load
and solar radiation profiles provide follow-up for further investigation.
The study uses the method to explore the placement and sizing of PV inverters in the IEEE
37-bus distribution network [15]. The PVs are integrated as three- and single-phase inverters.
The solar radiation data from three sites, corresponding to 13 h × 365 days, are accessed
from NREL’s PVWatts (National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s power calculator). The
total load connected in the bus network [15] is considered the base case in the analysis.
Subsequently, with changes in load applied in each phase or all three phases, this study
investigates changes in the calculated inverter size, their placement, and finally, the voltage
Energies 2023, 16, 653 4 of 23
profile along the network. In other words, the overall network hosting capacity is analyzed
in terms of PV inverter location and size against the randomness in load changes and
solar radiation profiles. The study is emphasized to investigate the voltage profile, being
a function of optimal PV placement and location as a consequence of randomness in
connected load changes and solar radiation profiles.
1.2. Contribution and Paper Organization

As mentioned above, this study aims to analyze voltage violations, particularly at
feeder-end buses, with optimized PV placement and size, curtailment cost against different
solar radiation profiles, and randomness in connected load. This paper presents an assess-
ment of the distribution of optimally placed and sized PV inverters across the network and
its impact on voltage unbalance. The primary objective is to achieve the maximum capacity
of PV placement without violation of operational constraints. This criterion is specified on
the basis of an index such as voltage deviation referred to throughout the network. Some
examples of load imbalance are considered to analyze the voltage profile due to different
PV output generations corresponding to solar radiation profiles.
The main contributions of the paper include the followings:
• Discussion on the distribution of single-phase and three-phase PV installation and
size across the distribution network.
• Discussion on the maximum/minimum voltage and the voltage index (per phase)
calculated for optimized solutions obtained using average yearly, monthly, daily, and
hourly solar radiation data.
• Discussion on the voltage profile distribution and curtailment cost with respect to the
PV installation.
2. Distribution Network and PV Inverter Output Modeling

2.1. Distribution Network
A given distribution network with n bus is connected to either single- or three-phase
given as Ωn = {(1Φ A,B,C ), (3Φ)}.
Load change introduced in the individual phase from the base load at bus n in phase
A, B, C is written as
B
S L,Ωn = k Ωn S L,Ω n
(1)
B
where, S L,Ωn is the load (kVA) at the bus, k Ωn is the load scale factor, S L,Ω is the base value
n
of load power (kVA) (connected load) drawn at each bus.
The vector of nodal current injections in terms of the vector of nodal voltages is
written as
IΩn = diag(VΩn )−1 (∆SΩn )∗ (2)
where, ∆SΩn = SG,Ωn − S L,Ωn , SG,Ωn is the apparent power (kVA) injection at bus n in phase
Ωn , S L,Ωn is the AC load (kVA) at bus n in phase Ωn .
Following nodal current injections at bus n, according to Ohm’s Law, written in nodal
admittance models, we can write power imbalance as [15]:
∗
∆SΩn ≈ M V − V
e +Ψ V−V
e +v (3)
∗
where, M = diag Y V e + diag(YNS VS )∗ , Ψ = diag V e Y∗ , V e = diag V e Y∗ Ve∗

+ diag Ve Y ∗ V ∗ , VS is slack bus voltage (p.u.), YNS is the node admittance between
NS S
non-slack buses and slack buses, V
e is the voltage profile (p.u.) in the absence of PV resource
at the base load value.
The real power injection from the slack bus is given as
h i
PS = Re (VS )T (YSN V + YSS VS )T (4)
Energies 2023, 16, 653 5 of 23

Assuming voltage deviation ∆Vn,Φ = Vn,Φ − V
en,Φ V
en,Φ for solving linear power
en,Φ − |∆Vn,Φ |, where Vn,Φ is
flow Equation (4), a lower bound on |Vn,Φ | is now given as V
voltage (p.u.) in the presence of PV at bus n in phase Φ.
Energies 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of be
In the study, either a single-phase inverter or three-phase inverter or both may 23
installed at the potential bus, i.e., Ωn .
2.2. System
2.4. PV Inverter
Loss
2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 23
With PV output be
Line loss cannot being a function
avoided but (h)be
can ofreduced
solar radiation
to an optimum m−2 ·while
< (kWh·level day−1achieving
) for rated
(R) real power P R (kW) through inverter AC power rating S R the real power injection,
optimal placement, Ωn size, and number of PVs. The active power G,Ωn loss of the distribution
corresponding to the base (B) load value, can be given as
2.4. System Lossnetwork between bus 𝑛 and 𝑚 with the addition of PV unit is computed and limited to
Energies 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW B 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 RB𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠,𝑚𝑎𝑥 B
𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 6 of 23
Line loss cannot be avoided but can be reduced 𝑃𝑛,𝑚
PG,Ω to=≤an P𝑃Ωoptimum
𝑛,𝑚 h(<) − ∈ℰ level
Ωn while achieving (12)
(5)
n n
optimal placement, size, and number of PVs. The active power loss of the distribution
Next, a new PV unit is added RBofto the Bnetwork Bin every iteration, and total system
network between bus 𝑛 and 𝑚 with the addition SG,Ω PV
= Punit
G,Ωn is +computed
jQ n and limited to (6)
power
2.4. Systemloss Lossis computed again. When nincreasing the G,Ωnumber of PVs, the total power loss
𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠,𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 than the previous loss, then
is checked
The PV output𝑃𝑛,𝑚
regularly. If it≤has
curtailment𝑃𝑛,𝑚 a lower
term ∈ℰ value is taken into account to keep (12) thelimit
the PV number
on over-
Line loss cannot be avoided but canΩbe n
reduced to an optimum level while achieving
increases.
voltage caused This by procedure
excess PV is generation.
repeated until a higher value than the preceding one is
Next, a new PV unit
optimal is addedsize,
placement, to the
andnetwork
numberinofevery PVs. The iteration,
activeand power totalloss systemof the distribution
achieved.Similarly, real and inverter AC power is written for changes in connected load condi-
power loss is computed
network between again. When bus 𝑛increasing
and 𝑚 with the number
the addition of PVs, of PV theunittotalispowercomputed loss and limited to
tion, i.e., S n is given as
is checked regularly. If it L,Ω has a lower value thanLthe previous𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠,𝑚𝑎𝑥 loss, then
L the PV number
2.5. Objectives Function 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠
𝑃𝑛,𝑚 ≤value
P𝑃ΩRL ∈ the
ℰΩ 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 (12)
increases. This procedure is repeated until a P higher
G,Ω n
= 𝑛,𝑚 n than−
h(<) n preceding one is
(7)
achieved. The objective function towards optimal placement and size is formulated to minimize
Next, constraints
satisfying a new PV unit is added to the network in every iteration, and total system
the PV systems installation, grid LWhen electricityRL,maximport, andRcurtailed power costs, and it is
Lthe number
power loss is computed again. PG,Ω = Pincreasing
Ωn ; SG,Ω ≤ SG,Ω of PVs, the total power loss (8)
written
2.5. Objectives Function as: n n n
is checked regularly. If it has a lower value than the previous loss, then the PV number
Now, the change in PV inverter size at bus n is given as
The objectiveincreases.
function This procedure
towards optimal is placement
repeated 𝑚𝑖𝑛untiland
=∑ a ℂhigher
size is formulatedvalue than the preceding one is
to minimize
Ω 𝑛 + ℂ𝑠 (13)
the PV systemsachieved.
installation, grid electricity import, and curtailed B𝑛 Lpower costs, and it is
∆PΩn = PG,Ωn − PG,Ωn (9)
written as:
The cost
2.5. Objectives Function𝑛 term ℂ Ω takes into account the cost of PV (including the inverter) installa-
tion as In single-phase
this study, theand placement
𝑚𝑖𝑛 = ∑ ℂand
three-phase +size
at of both single-phase
ℂ𝑠candidate buses for optimal and three-phaselocation PV in theinverter
net-
The objective function Ω𝑛 optimal (13) to minimize
is optimized
work. The costaccording ℂ𝑠 is scenario to towards
changes
𝑛dependent, in the placement load
connected
which includes
and size
the
is formulated
condition.
grid As
electricity such
import real and
cost
the PV systems
reactive installation,
power injection from grid electricity
thecurtailed
installed power. PV import,
inverter and curtailed
is given as power costs, and it is
and the economic loss due to PV
The cost termwritten ℂΩ𝑛as:takes into account the cost of PV (including the inverter) installa-
Equation (13) becomes ha mixed i integer second-order cone program due to the sec-
tion as single-phase and three-phase at candidate L buses for optimal location L in the net-
ond-order cone constraintRdefined e SG,Ω for: = PL L
+ PG,n,3Φ = PG,Ω (10)
work. The cost ℂ𝑠 is scenario dependent, whichnincludes 𝑚𝑖𝑛 G,n,1Φ
=∑ theℂgridΩ𝑛 +electricity
ℂ𝑠 n
import cost (13)
and the economic • loss Thedue upper to PVlimit on voltage
curtailed power. hmagnitude, i 𝑛|𝑉𝑛,Φ | ≤ 𝑣
𝑚𝑎𝑥
;
L L L
•
Equation (13) becomesOperational
The cost term region
a mixed of
ℂΩ𝑛integer Im
takes into S
single-phase
second-order
G,Ωn
account = Q
inverter
the cone or +
costprogram
G,n,1Φ Q
three-phase
of PV G,n,3Φ due inverter,
(including to thethesec-
𝐿
𝑃𝐺,Ω
inverter)𝑛
+ 𝑗𝑄 𝐿 (11)
𝐺,Ω𝑛
installa-≤
𝐿
ond-order conetion 𝑆
constraint
as . defined for:
single-phase andsweepthree-phase
𝐺,Ω
The 𝑛 back-forward power at flowcandidate
algorithm buses is aforbetteroptimaloption location in the net-
for analyzing un-
• The upperwork. limit on
balanced Thevoltagecost ℂdistribution
radial is scenariosystems
𝑠magnitude, dependent,
|𝑉 𝑛,Φ | ≤ 𝑣
since 𝑚𝑎𝑥 which
it; includes
considers the
factors grid
such electricity
as mutual import
impedance cost
3. Methodology
• Operational and
among the economic
region of single-phase
phase loss due
conductors to PVdifferent
inverter
and curtailed
or three-phase power.
types ofinverter,
loads. The 𝑃𝐺,Ω𝐿
+ 𝑗𝑄𝐺,Ω
complete
𝑛
𝐿
𝑛
≤
process includes:
𝐿
𝑆𝐺,Ω𝑛 . Figure
Equation 1a presents
(13) becomes the layout
a mixed of the
integerIEEE
(i) assignment of initial nominal three-phase voltage at buses, (ii) calculation ofthe 37-bus
second-order distribution
cone network,
program due showing
to the
sec-
branch
connected
ond-order load
cone and provision
constraint defined for installation
for:
current (backward sweep) starting from the most faraway bus and moving towards the of the PV system. For instance, bus #1 is
3. Methodology shown
•grid The to have
connection a connected
(source) load6 in
of
end, according all
23 three
magnitude,to |𝑉 phases,
the and also,
𝑚𝑎𝑥
type of loads both single-phase
modeled in the network, and three-
upper limit on voltage 𝑛,Φ | ≤ 𝑣 ;
phase
•(iii) PVs can be
calculation of optimally
bus voltages placed.
in eachOnphase,the other hand,
starting bus #12
from grid has a connected
connection 𝐿 bus load
𝑃𝐺,Ω +to𝑗𝑄the𝐿 only
last
Operational region of single-phase
Figure 1a presents the layout of the IEEE 37-bus distribution network, showing inverter or three-phase inverter, the 𝑛 𝐺,Ω𝑛 ≤
in phase
bus, 𝐿 C,
(iv) and
calculation a single-phase
of voltage PV
error, can be
till itsplaced
value in
is either
less thanof the
the three phases.
predefined bus It may
voltagebe
connected load and𝑆𝐺,Ω .
provision
𝑛 for installation of the PV system. For instance, bus #1 is
understood
error, (v) new that
powerthree-phase,
flow being balanced,
calculation with the results in lower
integration of PV. voltage peaks. A single-
shown to have a connected load in all three phases, and also, both single-phase and three-
phase
3. connection may lead to a voltage rise in one of the phases, which can counter-effect
Methodology
annot be avoided but can phase PVs can to
be reduced be optimally
an
2.3. PVoptimum
Power placed.
level while
Curtailment On the other hand, bus #12 has a connected load only
achieving
due to the three-phase presence at the bus. Bus #1, 14, 17, 21, and 34 have three-phase PV
ment, size, and numberinofphase C, and
PVs. The a single-phase
active Figure
power
installation 1a PV
presents
loss of canthe
the be layout
placed of
distribution in theeitherIEEE of the37-bus three phases. It network,
distribution may be showing the
Each phase voltage Vn,Φ at every for
in addition to the option bussingle-phase
is monitored.installation. During the situation Out of these buses, #1
of overvoltage
en bus 𝑛 and 𝑚 with understood
the additionthat PV
and
three-phase,
ofconnected
unit
21 have is load being
computedand
a loadvoltage
balanced,
provision
and
connected limited results
for
inthe to
all PVthree
in lower
installation phases. of voltage
the PV
Other buses
peaks. AFor
system. single-
instance,
in the network bus #1 is
towards the upper limits, power is sequentially (partially) curtailed have con-
by a factor
phase connection
𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠,𝑚𝑎𝑥 shown
may
𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 to
lead to
haveeither a voltage
a connected rise in
load one
in of the phases, which can counter-effect
𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠
𝑃𝑛,𝑚 ≤ 𝑃to ℰΩ
L
∈ nected loads
to bring downatthe in phases A, B,all
(12) orthree
C. The phases,chosen and IEEEalso,37both bussingle-phase
feeder has base andpower
three-
due 𝑛,𝑚the three-phase
phasen PVs presence
can be thevoltage
optimally bus.placed.
Busuntil#1,anOn14,optimal
17, 21,
the other
solution
and 34 have
hand,
of the
bus
objective
three-phase
#12 has a
function
PV
connected
is achieved.
load only
and line voltage of 2.5 MVA and 4.8 kV, respectively. The total load in the network is 1.009
ew PV unit is added toinstallation
the network in addition
in phase
every to
C, the
and
iteration, option
a and for
single-phase single-phase
total PV
system can installation.
be placed
+ j0.4998 p.u. distributed among phases A, B, and C with values of 0.3582 + j0.2263, 0.2736 in Out
either of of these
the buses,
three #1
phases. It may be
omputed again. When and 21 have
increasing thea understood
load connected
number of that
PVs, in
the all three
three-phase,
total power
+ j0.1557 and 0.3770 + j0.1177 p.u., respectively.
phases.
being
loss Other
balanced, busesresultsin the in network
lower have con-
voltage peaks. A single-
ularly. If it has a lower nected loadsthe
value than either
phase inconnection
previous
The
phasesloss, A,
optimizationthen B, the
may orlead
C.PVThe achosen
tonumber
objective voltage IEEE
rise in
[15] is introduced
37one busoffeeder
the phases,
in two
has base
stages; the whichpower
firstcan counter-effect
is on installation
and line voltage
procedure is repeated until a higher dueof 2.5
to
value MVA
thethan and
three-phase 4.8 kV,
the preceding respectively.
presence one at is
thefor The
bus. total
Bus inputload in
#1, 14,cost the
17, andnetwork
21, and is 1.009
34 have three-phase PV
cost, while the second stage accounts power economic loss due to excess
+ j0.4998 p.u. distributed
installation among
in phasestoA,the
addition B, option
and C with for values of 0.3582
single-phase + j0.2263,Out
installation. 0.2736of these buses, #1
power curtailment. The first stage determines the location of the PV installation and its
+ j0.1557 and 0.3770
and 21 + j0.1177
have a p.u.,
load respectively.
connected in all three phases. Other buses in the network have con-
initial capacity, and the second stage involves maximizing the investment benefits, keep-
unction The optimization
nected objective [15] inisphases
introduced B, inor two stages; the first is37 onbus installation
ing theloads voltage either
within limits,A, and C. The
minimizing chosen
the line IEEE losses. Thefeeder
objectivehas base power
function is
cost, while
ive function towards optimal placement the second
and andline stage
size voltage
is accounts
of
formulated2.5 for
MVAtopowerand
minimize input
4.8 kV, cost and
respectively. economic The loss
total due
load toinexcess
the network is 1.009
solved as a mixed integer second-order cone program. The exact version of the flowchart
power curtailment. + j0.4998Thep.u. firstdistributed
stage determines among phases the location A, B, of and theC PVwithinstallation
values of 0.3582 and its+ j0.2263, 0.2736
Energies
Energies 16,x 653
2023,16,
2023, FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of
6 of 2323
2.4.System
2.4. SystemLoss
Loss
Lineloss
Line losscannot
cannotbebeavoided
avoidedbut
butcan
canbebereduced
reducedtotoananoptimum
optimumlevel
levelwhile
whileachieving
achieving
optimal placement, size, and number of PVs. The active power loss of the
optimal placement, size, and number of PVs. The active power loss of the distribution distribution
network between bus n and m with the addition of PV unit is computed and limited to
network between bus 𝑛 and 𝑚 with the addition of PV unit is computed and limited to
𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠,𝑚𝑎𝑥 loss
loss
𝑃P𝑛,𝑚
n,m ≤ 𝑃
loss,max
P𝑛,𝑚
n,m ∈ ℰ 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 (12)
(12)
Next,
Next,aanew
new PV unit isisadded
PV unit addedtotothe
the network
network in every
in every iteration,
iteration, and and
total total
systemsystem
power
power loss is computed again. When increasing the number of PVs, the total
loss is computed again. When increasing the number of PVs, the total power loss is checked power loss
isregularly.
checked regularly. If it has a lower value than the previous loss, then the PV
If it has a lower value than the previous loss, then the PV number increases. This number
increases.
procedureThis procedure
is repeated untilisarepeated untilthan
higher value a higher value than
the preceding the
one is preceding one is
achieved.
achieved.
2.5. Objectives Function
2.5. Objectives Function
The objective function towards optimal placement and size is formulated to minimize
the The
PV objective function towards
systems installation, optimal placement
grid electricity and curtailed
import, and size is formulated to minimize
power costs, and it is
the PV systems
written as: installation, grid electricity import, and curtailed power costs, and it is
written as: min = ∑ CΩn + Cs (13)
n
The cost term CΩn takes into account 𝑚𝑖𝑛 =the ∑cost
ℂΩ𝑛 of+ PV
ℂ𝑠 (including the inverter) installation (13)
𝑛
as single-phase and three-phase at candidate buses for optimal location in the network.
TheThe
costcost
Cs is term ℂΩ𝑛 takes
scenario dependent, which the
into account includes
cost ofthe
PVgrid electricity
(including theimport
inverter) cost and the
installa-
economic
tion loss due to
as single-phase PVthree-phase
and curtailed power.at candidate buses for optimal location in the net-
work. Equation
The cost (13) ℂ𝑠 isbecomes
scenarioa dependent,
mixed integer second-order
which includes the conegridprogram due to
electricity the second-
import cost
order cone constraint defined for:
and the economic loss due to PV curtailed power.
• Equation
The upper (13) becomes
limit a mixed
on voltage magnitude, |Vn,Φ | ≤ vmaxcone
integer second-order ; program due to the sec-
ond-order
• cone constraint defined for:
Operational region of single-phase inverter or three-phase inverter, PG,Ω L + jQG,ΩL
n n
• The L
G,Ωn . limit on voltage magnitude, |𝑉𝑛,Φ | ≤ 𝑣
≤ Supper 𝑚𝑎𝑥
;
• Operational region of single-phase inverter or three-phase inverter, 𝑃𝐺,Ω 𝐿
𝑛
+ 𝑗𝑄𝐺,Ω𝐿
𝑛
≤
𝐿
3. Methodology
𝑆𝐺,Ω𝑛 .
Figure 1a presents the layout of the IEEE 37-bus distribution network, showing the
3.connected
Methodology load and provision for installation of the PV system. For instance, bus #1 is
shown
Figureto have a connected
1a presents load inofall
the layout thethree
IEEE phases,
37-busand also, bothnetwork,
distribution single-phaseshowingand three-
the
phase PVsload
connected can and
be optimally
provisionplaced. On the other
for installation hand,
of the PVbus #12 has
system. Fora instance,
connectedbus load #1only
is
shown to have a connected load in all three phases, and also, both single-phase and three-be
in phase C, and a single-phase PV can be placed in either of the three phases. It may
understood
phase PVs canthat be three-phase, being On
optimally placed. balanced,
the otherresults
hand,in bus
lower #12voltage peaks. A single-phase
has a connected load only
connection may lead to a voltage rise in one of the phases,
in phase C, and a single-phase PV can be placed in either of the three phases. which can counter-effect
It may due be
to the three-phase
understood presence being
that three-phase, at the balanced,
bus. Bus #1, 14, 17,
results 21, and
in lower 34 have
voltage three-phase
peaks. A single- PV
installation in addition to the option for single-phase installation.
phase connection may lead to a voltage rise in one of the phases, which can counter-effect Out of these buses,
#1 to
due andthe21three-phase
have a load connected
presence in bus.
at the all three
Bus #1,phases.
14, 17,Other
21, and buses in the
34 have network have
three-phase PV
installation in addition to the option for single-phase installation. Out of these base
connected loads either in phases A, B, or C. The chosen IEEE 37 bus feeder has buses, power
#1
and21line
and have voltage
a loadofconnected
2.5 MVA in andall 4.8
three kV,phases.
respectively. The total
Other buses load
in the in the have
network network con-is
1.009 + j0.4998 p.u. distributed among phases A, B, and C with values of 0.3582 + j0.2263,
nected loads either in phases A, B, or C. The chosen IEEE 37 bus feeder has base power
0.2736 + j0.1557 and 0.3770 + j0.1177 p.u., respectively.
and line voltage of 2.5 MVA and 4.8 kV, respectively. The total load in the network is 1.009
The optimization objective [15] is introduced in two stages; the first is on installation
+ j0.4998 p.u. distributed among phases A, B, and C with values of 0.3582 + j0.2263, 0.2736
cost, while the second stage accounts for power input cost and economic loss due to excess
+ j0.1557 and 0.3770 + j0.1177 p.u., respectively.
The optimization objective [15] is introduced in two stages; the first is on installation
initial capacity, and the second stage involves maximizing the investment benefits, keeping
cost, while the second stage accounts for power input cost and economic loss due to excess
the voltage within limits, and minimizing the line losses. The objective function is solved as
a mixed integer second-order cone program. The exact version of the flowchart [15] is not
initial capacity, and the second stage involves maximizing the investment benefits, keep-
reproduced here, but it is represented in Figure 2 to align with the study. The optimization
ing the voltage within limits, and minimizing the line losses. The objective function is
step begins with the placement and sizing of the PV inverter. The network and solar
solved as a mixed integer second-order cone program. The exact version of the flowchart
radiation data of three different locations are uploaded. The optimal placement and sizing
[15] is not reproduced
objective function defined here,inbut it isof
terms represented
cost is solvedin Figure
based on 2 to
thealign
Z-bus with the study.
method The
to compute
optimization step begins
the voltage at every bus Vn,Φ . with the placement and sizing of the PV inverter. The network
and solar radiation data of three different locations are uploaded. The optimal placement
Energies 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 23
Energies 2023, 16, 653 7 of 23

and sizing objective function defined in terms of cost is solved based on the Z-bus method
to compute the voltage at every bus 𝑉 , .
38
Bus 37
L-2
DG 1Ø
18
L-2,3
L-3 L-1,2,3 DG 3Ø
DG 1Ø DG 3Ø
12 1 17 7
L-1,2 L-3 L-3

DG 3Ø DG 1Ø DG 1Ø
34 5 2 13 4 16
L-1,2
DG 3Ø
Region 1
14 6
L-1 L-1 L-3
L-1 L-2
DG 1Ø DG 1Ø
22 35 20 3
15 19
L-1,2,3
DG 3Ø
L-3
21 DG 1Ø
23
L-3
DG 1Ø L-2
DG 1Ø
25 8 9 24
L-2 L-1
DG 1Ø DG 1Ø
29 26
L-3 L-3
Region 2 DG 1Ø DG 1Ø
36
10 27 32
L-1 L-1 L-3
L-3
DG 1Ø
28 30 31 11 33
(a)
Solar radiation data from Change (%) in

different locations connected load
condition
Scenario reduction
PLG,Ωn
PV placement and sizing
(Single-phase and Three-phase
inverter)
Network model with base load condition

SLG,Ωn
Power flow equation as nodal current injections
Line thermal loss limits
Voltage limits
Vn,Φ
Optimization formulation
PV and inverter installation cost
CΩn
Voltage limits Cs
(b)
Figure 1. Overview of framework for the presented study on optimally placed and sized PVs in the
distribution network. (a) IEEE 37 bus network showing the connected load and feasibility of PV
installation. (b) Framework of the presented study.
Energies 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Figure 1. Overview of framework for the presented study on optimally placed and sized P
Energies 2023, 16, 653 distribution network. (a) IEEE 37 bus network showing the connected load 8and
of 23 feasibili
installation. (b) Framework of the presented study.
Figure2.2.Monthly
Figure Monthlysolarsolar radiation
radiation for different
for different locations. locations.
Data Preparation
Data Preparation
The uncertainty in system parameters is modeled via stochastic programming meth-
ods byThe randomuncertainty
scenarios,inaccording
system parameters
to probabilityis modeled on
distribution viameasured
stochastic programmin
data. On
the one hand, the use of a few numbers of scenarios will
ods by random scenarios, according to probability distribution on measured degrade the accuracy and re- data
liability of the optimal solution, while a large number of scenarios will incur a heavy
one hand, the use of a few numbers of scenarios will degrade the accuracy and re
computational burden.
of theTheoptimal solution,
solar radiation data forwhile
the yeara 2019
largefrom number of scenarios
three locations, will incur
Fishers Island a heavy co
(zip code—
tional burden.
06390), San Antonio (zip code—78249), and Compton, California (zip code—90224), is
The solar
downloaded fromradiation
[42] havingdata for the year
4745 samples. 2019 from
The monthly solar three
radiationlocations,
profile forFishers
the Isla
year 2019 is illustrated in Figure 2, wherein, during the discussion,
code—06390), San Antonio (zip code—78249), and Compton, California (zip these profiles are referred
to as low (Fishers Island), medium (San Antonio), and high (Compton California). The
90224), is downloaded from [42] having 4745 samples. The monthly solar radiation
categorization of solar radiation profiles as low, medium, and high is considered on the
for the
basis yeardistribution
of their 2019 is illustrated
throughout in theFigure
year. 2, wherein, during the discussion, these
are referred
An uncertainty to as analysis
low (Fishers Island),
is performed to medium
consider the (San Antonio),
stochastic and in
variation high
solar(Compt
radiation/PV output power and the variability of load demand.
fornia). The categorization of solar radiation profiles as low, medium, and Monte Carlo sampling is high is
applied to generate 5 random scenarios of PV output and load demand based on a Gaussian
ered on the basis of their distribution throughout the year.
distribution function (with the standard deviations equal to 5% and 2%, respectively, of the
Anvalues).
expected uncertainty analysis
Next, the reductionis of
performed
the data set to consider
using the stochastic
Kantorovich variation in s
distance is applied
diation/PV
so that its valueoutput
is 0.2231,power
0.1339, and
0.0674,the variability
0.0527, and 0.0427 offor
load demand.
Fishers Monte
Island, 0.2331, Carlo sam
0.1393,
applied
0.0691, to generate
0.0563, and 0.04485 forrandom scenarios
San Antonio, of PV0.1601,
and 0.2588, output and0.0559,
0.0711, load demand
and 0.0465based
for on a
Compton California respectively so as to fit the best approximations
ian distribution function (with the standard deviations equal to 5% and 2%, respe of variable uncertainty.
With the connected load change k Ωn introduced in the phase at a time, the given algorithm
of the expected values). Next, the reduction of the data set using Kantorovich dis
is run for solar radiation from three different locations.
applied so that its value is 0.2231, 0.1339, 0.0674, 0.0527, and 0.0427 for Fishers
4. Results0.1393,
0.2331, and Discussion
0.0691, 0.0563, and 0.0448 for San Antonio, and 0.2588, 0.1601,
The and
0.0559, algorithm is run
0.0465 for for the placement
Compton and sizing
California of the PV inverter
respectively so as toatfit
every
thebus
bestforapproxi
the base load conditions. Equation (8) computes the change in PV inverter size on every
of variable uncertainty. With the connected load change 𝑘 introduced in the p
bus for load change conditions against those at the base load. The load flow is run during
a time,
the the given
optimization andalgorithm is run
validation steps for solarthe
to compute radiation
corrected from three different
and validated location
voltages at
every bus. The voltage violation in the set vmin , vmax corresponding to the corrected and

4. Results
validated and Discussion
voltages is computed at the base load condition in the network. Next, the voltage
violation set is determined at load change conditions. In order to understand the impact of
The levels
unbalance algorithm is run
on different for in
buses thetheplacement
same branch, and
PVsizing ofare
inverters theoptimally
PV inverter
placedat every
the sized
and basefor
load conditions.
different changes Equation (8) computes
(in percentage) the from
in loads applied change in PV
the base inverter size o
value.
bus The
for load change
maximum conditions
(max) against
and minimum those
(min) at thelimit
voltage baseatload.
everyThe
busload
is setflow
as is run
min = 0.9 p.u., vmax = 1.1 p.u. Now, the voltage change at every bus is determined
vthe optimization and validation steps to compute the corrected and validated vol
as the difference of voltages for the load change conditions against the base load. The
every bus. The voltage violation in the set 𝑣 , 𝑣 corresponding to the co
and validated voltages is computed at the base load condition in the network. N
voltage violation set is determined at load change conditions. In order to underst
impact of unbalance levels on different buses in the same branch, PV inverters a
mally placed and sized for different changes (in percentage) in loads applied f
base value.
The maximum (max) and minimum (min) voltage limit at every bus is set as
existing base load conditions in the IEEE 37 bus network. The three-phase PV system is
selected to be optimally placed at buses #1, 14, 17, 21, and 34. The optimal placement of
the single-phase PV across the network for three different solar radiation profiles can be
observed in Figure 3. The inverter size of optimally placed PV resources can also be noted
in said figure. As suggested in Figure 3a, for a low solar radiation profile, a single-phase
Energies 2023, 16, 653 9 of 23
inverter accounts for just 15.08% of the total PV generation. Single-phase PVs are not lo-
cated on buses lying in region 1. With a medium solar radiation profile, in Figure 3b, bus
#1 has the largest size of the inverter, placed in all three phases. As can be observed in
index to
statistical value of the voltage index, Vn,Φ quantify the voltage variation throughout
Figure 3c, most of the buses have placement of the PV system in at least two of the phases
the network at every bus is used, given as:
and single-phase PV installation accounts for 70.52% of the total PV size. The high solar
n
radiation profile results in comparatively greater index
Vn,Φ ∑i=1 (1 − |across
PV=installation Vn,Φ |)2the network. Bus (14)
#1, 14, and 34 have PVs installed as both three-phase and single-phase in all three phases.
The analysis is further and
4.1. Placement extended, withSize
PV Inverter the connected load increasing by 10% in all
phases. The change in inverter size for the said condition with respect to the base load
The discussion of the results begins with an investigation as a reference presented for
condition is computed and shown
existing base in Figure in
load conditions 4. the
There is an
IEEE 37 addition of three-phase
bus network. PV in- PV system is
The three-phase
stallation at buses #17 and 34. Moreover, changes are applied for single-phase
selected to be optimally placed at buses #1, 14, 17, 21, and 34. The optimal PVs but not placement of
uniformly throughout
the single-phase PV across the network for three different solar radiation2)profiles can be
the network. With a low solar radiation profile, buses (in region
that are far away from the
observed grid connection
in Figure have larger
3. The inverter size ofinverters
optimally placed
placed than
PV nearby
resources buses
can also be noted
(in region 1). Altogether, phase A and phase B share 21.64% and 12.92% of the total
in said figure. As suggested in Figure 3a, for a low solar radiation profile, a single-phase PV
installed. inverter accounts for just 15.08% of the total PV generation. Single-phase PVs are not
On the other hand,
located onwith
busesa medium
lying in solar
region radiation
1. Withprofile,
a medium the change in inverter
solar radiation size in Figure 3b,
profile,
in regions 1 and 2 is 63.51% and 36.49%, respectively. Similarly, with high solar radiation
bus #1 has the largest size of the inverter, placed in all three phases. As can be observed in
profiles, this percentage margin
Figure 3c, most between
of the busesregions 1 and 2 becomes
have placement of the PVcloser
systemandinamounts to of the phases
at least two
55.81% and 44.19%, respectively,PV
and single-phase outinstallation
of the totalaccounts
PV capacityfor installed.
70.52% ofNote a larger
the total shareThe high solar
PV size.
of installation radiation
is at buses in region
profile results2. in
Additionally,
comparatively no greater
PVs arePV located on buses
installation where
across the network. Bus
there does not#1,exist any connected load.
14, and 34 have PVs installed as both three-phase and single-phase in all three phases.
(a) Low
(b) Medium
(c) High
Figure 3. PV inverter placement

Figure and sizeplacement
3. PV inverter at the baseand
load condition.
size at the base load condition.
The analysis is further extended, with the connected load increasing by 10% in all
phases. The change in inverter size for the said condition with respect to the base load
Energies 2023, 16, 653 10 of 23
condition is computed and shown in Figure 4. There is an addition of three-phase PV

installation at buses #17 and 34. Moreover, changes are applied for single-phase PVs but
not uniformly throughout the network. With a low solar radiation profile, buses (in region
2) that are far away from(c) the grid connection have larger inverters placed than nearby
High
buses (in region 1). Altogether, phase A and phase B share 21.64% and 12.92% of the total
Figure 3. PV inverter placement and size at the base load condition.
PV installed.
(a) Low
(b) Medium
(c) High
Figure 4. PV inverter
Figureplacement and size
4. PV inverter with a load
placement and change of a+10%
size with load in all phases.
change of +10% in all phases.
It is quite obvious
On the to expect an increase
other hand, in PV installation
with a medium for increased
solar radiation connected
profile, the change in inverter size
load, as illustrated
in regions 1 and 2 is 63.51% and 36.49%, respectively. Similarly, withmajor
in Figure 5. Having a load increase by 40% in all phases leads to high solar radiation
changes in inverter sizethis
profiles, at buses locatedmargin
percentage in region 2, withregions
between 60.68%1ofandthe2total PV capacity.
becomes closer and amounts to
This is shown in Figure
55.81% and5a 44.19%,
for the low solar radiation
respectively, profile.
out of the totalThe largest three-phase
PV capacity in- a larger share
installed. Note
verter size change takes placeison
of installation bus #17.
at buses Similarly,
in region as discussedno
2. Additionally, above, for located
PVs are medium onand
buses where there
high solar radiation
does notprofiles,
exist anythe connected
share of PV installation in region 2 of the network re-
load.
mains higher, as indicated in Figure
It is quite obvious5b,c.
toFurther,
expect an it isincrease
indicatedinthat
PV the change infor
installation inverter
increased connected
size for medium load,
andashigh
illustrated in Figureis5. 44.66%
solar radiation Havingand a load increase
34.62% by total
of the 40% in allchange
size phases leads to major
reported for the changes
low solar in inverter
radiationsize at buses
profile. located ininstallation
Three-phase region 2, with 60.68%
takes placeof the on
only total PV capacity.
bus #17. This is shown in Figure 5a for the low solar radiation profile. The largest three-phase
inverter size change takes place on bus #17. Similarly, as discussed above, for medium and
high solar radiation profiles, the share of PV installation in region 2 of the network remains
higher, as indicated in Figure 5b,c. Further, it is indicated that the change in inverter size
for medium and high solar radiation is 44.66% and 34.62% of the total size change reported
for the low solar radiation profile. Three-phase installation takes place only on bus #17.
similar for most of the buses in region 2 for medium and high solar radiation, as suggested
in Figure 6a(ii, iii). Phase A accounts for 36.96%, 55.76%, and 62.27% of the total PV instal-
lation for low, medium, and high solar radiation profiles, respectively. In other words,
with a low solar radiation profile, the reduced PV installation in phase A is compensated
Energies 2023, 16, 653with a three-phase installation. Further, to note for medium and high solar radiation pro- 11 of 23
files, there is a negative change in the inverter size, i.e., at these buses, the size of the PV
installation with respect to the base load is reduced.
(a) Low
Change in Inverter DC Size
(kW)
(b) Medium
(c) High
Figure 5. PV inverter
Figure placement andplacement
5. PV inverter size with load
and change byload
size with +40% in all phases.
change by +40% in all phases.
Similarly, as shown in Figure

Considering 6b(i),
a load with a of
increase low solar
40% in radiation profile,
phase A only, thephase A and
changes in inverter size
obtained
the three-phase for threeshare
PV installation solararadiation
maximumprofiles are shown
contribution in Figure
towards 6a. Theload
the increased single-phase PV
installation,
(+40%) in phase mostly
C. Moreover, theon buses in region
distribution remains2, can be observed
uniform at mostin ofFigure 6a(i).
the buses in The increase
in the connected
region 2 for medium and high load
solar in phase Aasissuggested
radiation, also shared by the 6b(ii,
in Figure three-phase installation
iii). Phase C of an
amount40.21%,
accounts for 26.31%, of 27.01%
andwith a low
54.81% of solar radiation
the total profile. On
PV installation forthe
theother
low, hand, this distribution
medium,
remains
and high solar similar
radiation for most of the buses in region 2 for medium and high solar radiation,
profiles.
as suggested in Figure 6a(ii,iii). Phase A accounts for 36.96%, 55.76%, and 62.27% of the
total PV installation for low, medium, and high solar radiation profiles, respectively. In
other words, with a low solar radiation profile, the reduced PV installation in phase A is
compensated with a three-phase installation. Further, to note for medium and high solar
radiation profiles, there is a negative change in the inverter size, i.e., at these buses, the size
of the PV installation with respect to the base load is reduced.
Similarly, as shown in Figure 6b(i), with a low solar radiation profile, phase A and
the three-phase PV installation share a maximum contribution towards the increased load
(+40%) in phase C. Moreover, the distribution remains uniform at most of the buses in
region 2 for medium and high solar radiation, as suggested in Figure 6b(ii,iii). Phase C
accounts for 26.31%, 40.21%, and 54.81% of the total PV installation for the low, medium,
and high solar radiation profiles.
16, x FOREnergies
PEER REVIEW
2023, 16, 653 12 of 23 12 of 23
0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
(kW)
0.04
0.02
0
-0.02
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
N1Ø U N3Ø
(i) Low (i) Low

0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
-0.02
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
N 1Ø U N3Ø
(ii) Medium (ii) Medium
(iii) High (iii) High

(a) Load change by +40% in phase A (b) Load change by +40% in phase C
Figure 6. PV inverter placement

Figure and size
6. PV inverter with load
placement and change
size withinload
onechange
of thein
phases.
one of the phases.
Now, the studyNow, the study

is extended toisthe
extended
assignment to the on
assignment
optimal on optimal placement
placement and size of andPVsize of PV
installation
installation against changesagainst changes in
in connected connected
load in the twoloadregions.
in the two regions.
Figure 7a Figure
shows7a shows that
that
bus #17 and 34 (in region 1) includes three-phase PV installation. The remaining buses in buses in
bus #17 and 34 (in region 1) includes three-phase PV installation. The remaining
region 1 have single-phase PVs installed only in two phases. There are no PVs located on
region 1 have single-phase PVs installed only in two phases. There are no PVs located on
the buses, which do not have any connected load. On the other hand, it is also indicated
the buses, whichthat
doPV notintegration
have anyisconnected
more uniformly load.distributed
On the other hand,
at buses it is also
located indicated
in region 2, as compared
that PV integration is more uniformly distributed at buses located in region
to region 1. This is expected since only a single-phase load (Figure 1) distribution 2, as com- exists
pared to region across
1. Thisthe is buses
expected since2. only
in region With a single-phase
a medium load (Figure
solar radiation profile,1) the
distribution
changes in inverter
exists across thesize
buses in region 2. With a medium solar radiation profile,
are insignificant, as depicted in Figure 7b. In other words, for the amount the changes in of solar
inverter size areradiation available,
insignificant, there cannot
as depicted be further
in Figure 7b. Inaddition of PV for
other words, systems in the network
the amount of for
increased load demand. None of the buses have the addition
solar radiation available, there cannot be further addition of PV systems in the network of single-phase PV in all three
phases.
for increased load demand. Similarly,
Noneasofshown in Figure
the buses have7c, theadding a PVofinverter
addition accounts
single-phase PVfor
in5.18%
all of the
total amount at the base load condition.
three phases. Similarly, as shown in Figure 7c, adding a PV inverter accounts for 5.18% of
With the connected load reversed between the regions, the results are shown in
the total amountFigure
at the 8.
baseNoload
changecondition.
was observed in placement (mainly in region 2) and size of the
PV inverter for the low solar radiation profile, as shown in Figure 8a against the above-
discussed case. One exception has a comparatively increased three-phase inverter at bus
#17. The increase in the inverter size noted for medium solar radiation is just 12.58% of
the total PVs installed at the base load. From Figure 8b, regions 1 and 2 shares 76.38% and
(kW)
23.62% of the total PV installed for this load distribution. Bus #14 and #34 have single-phase
PV installation in all three phases. Similarly, with a high solar radiation profile, regions 1
and 2 shares 72.64% and 27.36% of the total PV installed, as depicted in Figure 8c. Even
with the increased 40% connected load in region 1, some buses (#12, 13, 14, 20, 23) with
single-phase loads do not have any PV installed. Additionally, bus #16 indicates a negative
change in PV installation. (a) Low
ange in Inverter DC Size
(kW)
EER REVIEW
Energies 2023, 16, 653 13 of 23 13
(a) Low
(b) Medium
(c) High
Figure 7. PV inverter placement and size with load change of +10% in region 1 and +40% in region 2.
Figure 7. PV inverter placement and size with load change of +10% in region 1 and +40% in re
2. 4.2. Discussion on Voltage Index
The assignment on optimal placement and size of PV is based on the available solar
radiation and the connected load demand in the network. The algorithm should compute
With the connected
the numberloadof PVsreversed between
integrated into thenetwork
the distribution regions,
whilethe results
maintaining theare shown in
allowable
ure 8. No change voltage
was observed
limits. When ain PVplacement
system installed(mainly
at a given in
busregion 2)toand
is subjected activesize of the PV
(reactive
power) generation (injection), the corresponding active/reactive power injections at bus n
verter for the lowwillsolar radiation
also change. profile,
The buses, which doasnotshown
have anyinPVFigure 8aenforce
installation, against the above
zero power
cussed case. One exception
injections. has a comparatively increased three-phase inverter at bus
The calculated value of the voltage index throughout the network, using yearly and
The increase in the inverter
daily sizedata,
solar radiation noted forinmedium
is shown Figure 9. Thesolar radiation
daily calculated isliejust
values 12.58% o
far lower
total PVs installedthroughout
at the base365 daysload. From
than the Figure
average 8b, regions
yearly value. The scatter1ofand 2 shares
the voltage index in76.38%
phase A is sparsely placed.
23.62% of the total PV installed for this load distribution. Bus #14 and #34 have sin
phase PV installation in all three phases. Similarly, with a high solar radiation pro
regions 1 and 2 shares 72.64% and 27.36% of the total PV installed, as depicted in Fi
8c. Even with the increased 40% connected load in region 1, some buses (#12, 13, 14
23) with single-phase loads do not have any PV installed. Additionally, bus #16 indic
phase PV installation in all three phases. Similarly, with a high solar radiation profile
regions 1 and 2 shares 72.64% and 27.36% of the total PV installed, as depicted in Figure
8c. Even with the increased 40% connected load in region 1, some buses (#12, 13, 14, 20
23)2023,
Energies with single-phase loads do not have any PV installed. Additionally, bus #16
16, 653 indicates
14 of 23
a negative change in PV installation.

(kW)
(a) Low
(kW)
(b) Medium
(c) High
8. PV inverter placement and size with a load change of +40% in region 1 and +10% in region 2.
Figure 8. PV inverter Figure
placement and size with a load change of +40% in region 1 and +10% in region
2. Figure 10 indicates the maximum and minimum voltage index maintained throughout
the network in a month. With placement and size of the PV installation obtained for the
base load condition, it is possible to achieve a minimum value of voltage index close to
zero. Additionally, its value remains in the same range as those calculated using daily
solar radiation data. This analysis makes it difficult to say anything about the voltage limit
violations. The maximum value of the voltage index for these three phases is found for the
month of March, which does not coincide with maximum PV generation in accordance with
available solar radiation (Figure 1). On the other hand, during the summer months (May,
June, and July), the variation in the maximum voltage index follows the solar radiation
pattern. Furthermore, for Phase B, during the month of December, the maximum-minimum
voltage index is at par with those of the summer months. The difference between the
maximum and minimum values is found to be the least for several months in phase A.
The calculated value of the voltage index throughout the networ
daily solar radiation data, is shown in Figure 9. The daily calculated
throughout 365 days than the average yearly value. The scatter of t
Energies 2023, 16, 653 15 of 23
phase A is sparsely placed.
Figure 9. Computed voltage index at base load condition with low solar radiation profile.
Figure 9. Computed voltage index at base load condition with low solar radia
Figure 10 indicates the maximum and minimum voltage index m

out the network in a month. With placement and size of the PV insta
the base load condition, it is possible to achieve a minimum value of
to zero. Additionally, its value remains in the same range as those ca
solar15radiation
10 -5
data.Phase
This
B analysis makes it difficult to say anything ab
12.5
violations.
10 The maximum value of the voltage index for these three
7.5
the month
5 of March, which does not coincide with maximum PV gener
2.5
with 0available solar radiation (Figure 1). On the other hand, during t
-2.5
(May, JanJune, and July), the variation in the maximum voltage index fo
Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Months
ation15 pattern.
10 -5 Furthermore,
Phase C for Phase B, during the month of Decem
minimum
12.5
10
voltage index is at par with those of the summer months
7.5
tween 5 the maximum and minimum values is found to be the least fo
2.5
phase0 A.
-2.5
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Months
Figure
Figure 10. Maximum 10. Maximum
and minimum and
voltage minimum
index voltage
at the base loadindex at the
condition base
with loadsolar
a low condition
radi- with a low solar
ation profile. radiation profile.
The calculated busThe calculated

voltage bus phase
of each voltageisofshown
each phase is shown
in Figure 11a.in Figure
The 11a. The minimum/maximum
minimum/max-
value of voltage in the network beyond the acceptable
imum value of voltage in the network beyond the acceptable range corresponds range corresponds
to the to the voltage
voltage collapse condition. As can be seen, phases A and C result in a higher number
(worst) of violations compared to phase B. Furthermore, phase A includes voltage viola-
tions on both sides, higher and lower, while phase C has violations only on the higher
side. In fact, phases A and C experience upper voltage limit violations every day, while
phase A also undergoes lower limit violations on 42 days in a year. The algorithm running
The calculated bus voltage of each phase is shown in Figure 11a. The minimum/max-
imum value of voltage in the network beyond the acceptable range corresponds to the
voltage
Energies 2023,collapse
16, 653 condition. As can be seen, phases A and C result in a higher number 16 of 23
(worst) of violations compared to phase B. Furthermore, phase A includes voltage viola-
tions on both sides, higher and lower, while phase C has violations only on the higher
collapse condition. As can be seen, phases A and C result in a higher number (worst)
side. In fact, phases A and C experience upper voltage limit violations every day, while
of violations compared to phase B. Furthermore, phase A includes voltage violations on
phase A also undergoesboth lower limit
sides, violations
higher on 42phase
and lower, while daysC inhasaviolations
year. The algorithm
only running
on the higher side. In fact,
phases A and C experience upper voltage limit violations
on average daily solar radiation data reveals voltage violation on several days, which every day, while phase A also
undergoes lower limit violations on 42 days in a year. The algorithm running on average
could not be observed with the solution obtained using yearly data (Figure 9). Figure 11b
daily solar radiation data reveals voltage violation on several days, which could not be
shows the total numberobserved of buses that
with violateobtained
the solution the voltage limits,data
using yearly which is9).significantly
(Figure in- the
Figure 11b shows
dicated in phase A. Thistotal number
voltage of buses that
violation violate the voltage
is suggested for anlimits, which is40%
additional significantly
load inindicated
phase in
phase A. This voltage violation is suggested for an additional 40% load in phase C and all
C and all three phases. three phases.
OR PEER REVIEW 16 of 23
(a)
40
Phase A Phase B Phase C
No. of Buses
30
20
10
0
Base All Phase +10% Phase A +40% Phase C +40% All Phase +40%
Cases
(b)
Figure 11. Bus voltage

Figureassessment
11. Bus voltageon violation
assessment on of limits.
violation (a) Maximum
of limits. (a) Maximum and
andminimum voltage
minimum voltage of theof
network at base load condition with low solar radiation profile. (b) Violation
the network at base load condition with low solar radiation profile. (b) Violation of bus voltage. of bus voltage.
Next, the solution of the algorithm to satisfy the voltage constraint at the feeder end
Next, the solution
node for of the data
hourly algorithm to satisfy
is discussed. It wouldthe voltage constraint
be interesting to investigateatthe
the feederof end
duration
overvoltage violations throughout the day. The variation in voltage
node for hourly data is discussed. It would be interesting to investigate the duration profile at feeder end of
buses throughout the 24 h for a day during summer and winter months, with low solar
overvoltage violations throughout
radiation, the day.
is shown in Figure The
12. Two variation
feeder-end in#18
buses, voltage profile
and 34, are locatedatatfeeder
extreme end
buses throughout thetoward
points 24 h for a day
the grid, during
while the othersummer andbuses,
two feeder-end winter #28 months, with
and 33, are at low solar
the opposite
end of the grid connection. Only bus #34 has a connected load in
radiation, is shown in Figure 12. Two feeder-end buses, #18 and 34, are located at extreme phases A and B, with
optimal PV placement as single- and three-phase. The remaining feeder end buses, #18, 28,
points toward the grid, while the other two feeder-end buses, #28 and 33, are at the oppo-
site end of the grid connection. Only bus #34 has a connected load in phases A and B, with
optimal PV placement as single- and three-phase. The remaining feeder end buses, #18,
28, and 33, have a load connected in phases B, C, and C, respectively, and can have single-
Energies 2023, 16, 653 17 of 23

and 33, have a load connected in phases B, C, and C, respectively, and can have single-phase
PV installation.
Phase A Phase A
1.2 1.2
Bus 18 Bus 18
Bus Voltage (p.u.)
Bus Voltage (p.u.)

Bus 28 Bus 28
1.1 1.1
Bus 33 Bus 33
Bus 34 Bus 34
1 1
0.9 0.9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hours Hours
Phase B Phase B
1.15 1.15
Bus Voltage (p.u.)
Bus Voltage (p.u.)

Bus 18 Bus 18
1.1 Bus 28 1.1 Bus 28
Bus 33 Bus 33
1.05 Bus 34 1.05 Bus 34
1 1
0.95 0.95
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hours Hours
Phase C Phase C
1.15 1.15
Bus Voltage (p.u.)
Bus 18
Bus Voltage (p.u.)

Bus18
1.1 Bus 28 1.1 Bus 28
Bus 33 Bus 33
1.05 Bus 34 1.05 Bus 34
1 1
0.95 0.95
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hours Hours
(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 12.12. Variation of feeder
Variation of feeder end
endbus
busvoltage
voltageatatbase
baseload
loadconditions
conditionswith
withlow
low solar
solar radiation
radiation pro-
profile.
file. (a) Summer
(a) Summer day—4day—4th July.
July. (b) (b) Winter
Winter day—31 day—31st
December. December.
In summary,
During with thehour,
the sunshine discussion
at bus #18,given in theB above
phase keeps paragraph,
its voltage atit maximum
can be saidviolation
that the
pattern of voltage
limits (middle profileOn
subplot). throughout
the other the hand,network
phase remains
C of saidthe bussame withthe
violates changes
limits.inPhase
con-
nected
C, at busload
#28for anda given solar radiation
33, experience voltageprofile.
violationThere is only
(sudden a seasonal
rises) during shift in terms
a certain periodof
voltage magnitude.
of sunshine However,
(lower subplot), for the
while phasesame connected
A reaches load, on
maximum different
voltage solar
limits. radiation
This means
the integration
profiles, seasonal ofshifts
a single-phase
accompanied PV influences
by a pattern not
of only
voltage an increase
distributionin thecanvoltage of the
be observed.
phase
At lowhaving a connected
solar radiation loadfor
profile butwinter
also one of the
days, other
buses phases
#12, as 15,
13, 14, well.16,This
17, is
18,attributed
19, 21, and to
non-uniformity
22 (region 1) located in thenearer
amount toofthePVutility
installed
gridamong the phases.
have more voltage magnitude sensitivity
Important
against reactivetopower note that bus #34 (load
as compared in phases
to the A and B),
ones located having
in the middlethree-phase PV instal-
and downstream
lation, keeps
(region 2) of thethe network.
least variation in voltage
The complete profile remains
network without reaching the voltagesensitive
voltage magnitude violations.to
Such an installation performs satisfactorily in keeping the voltages
active power injection for summer days, thus resulting in constant voltage magnitude within the set limits, as
constrained by the optimization algorithm. In other words, the
(with upper limit) throughout the network. On the other hand, voltage distribution is also sensitivity of the voltage
magnitude
almost is lessthroughout
constant for the bus,the which has three
network phase PV
for winter days,installation,
suggestingtowards the injected
high sensitivity to
active power
active power at or areactive
high solarpower as compared
radiation profile.toThis
the means
ones that thehave
voltagea single-phase
magnitude PV. remains
Having
sensitive PVs installed
to either active orinreactive
the network
powerfor summeraccording
injection and winter to days, the variation
the seasons in bus
and prevail-
voltage is shown in Figure 13. This study is carried out for different
ing solar radiation profile. At noon, the inverter capability of reactive power support is connected loads. The
at
variation
a minimum. in bus voltages reaches a maximum violation limit for summer days, while for
winter days,
Next, theatresults
most of arethe buses, it for
discussed remains
changes lower, as shown
in voltage in Figure
index, 13a. Important
calculated for different to
note that the pattern of variations in bus voltage of phases A and
connected loads and solar radiation against PV installation in the network. At a low solar C are similar. For winter
days, busprofile,
radiation #10 connected
with thethrough
additionfeeders to #27, 28,load
of a connected andabove
29, allthe
having
base acase,
single-phase
a larger size PV
installation
of DC inverters and is experiencing
installed, mostlythe maximum
in phase A, voltage violationinlimit.
as suggested Figure This
14acan also subplot).
(upper be found
Three-phase DC inverter installation if any, has not been shown in said figure. TheB,least
for bus #11, connected through feeders to #30, 31, 32, and 33. Similarly, for phase bus
#7, connected through feeders to #17 and 18, reaches a maximum
size of the inverter is installed in phase B. An unbalance in the DC inverter (PV installa- voltage close to that of
a summer day. Note that bus #17 involves both single- and three-phase
tion) among the three phases is revealed for the low solar radiation profile, mainly with a PV installation,
while #18 is a feeder end bus. Figure 13c presents the bus voltage variation for a high solar
+40% load in all phases. Improved solar radiation leads to having a larger size, indicated
radiation profile obtained at an additional 40% load connected. In this case, the bus voltage
in the middle and lower subplots in said figure. It is obvious that with good solar radia-
variation for winter days remains above the summer days for most of the buses in the
tion, PV installation size will increase. However, with an increase in connected load (dif-
network. The voltage of the above-identified buses corresponding to summer days crosses
ferent cases), the addition of PVs (single phase) is marginal and remains uniform among
the limit of winter days. Additionally, in phase B, bus #29, a feeder end bus, also reaches
the three phases. This can be noted not only for the base load but also for additional load
the limit of the winter day.
cases in the network, as shown in Figure 14a.
Energies 2023, 16, 653 18 of 23
Phase A Phase A
1.15 1.15
1.1 1.1
Voltage (p.u.)
Voltage (p.u.)
1.05 1.05
1 1
4 July 4 July
0.95 0.95
31 December 31 December
0.9 0.9
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
Buses Buses
Phase B Phase B
1.15 1.15
1.1 1.1
Voltage (p.u.)
Voltage (p.u.)
1.05 1.05
1 1
0.95 4 July 0.95 4 July
0.9 0.9
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
Buses Buses
Phase C Phase C
1.15 1.15
1.1
Voltage (p.u.)
1.1
Voltage (p.u.)
1.05 1.05
1 1
0.95 4 July 4 July
0.95
0.9 0.9
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
Buses Buses
(a) (b)
Phase A
1.15
1.1
Voltage (p.u.)
1.05
1
4 July
0.95
31 December
0.9
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
Buses
Phase B
1.15
1.1
Voltage (p.u.)
1.05
1
4 July
0.95
31 December
0.9
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
Buses
Phase C
1.15
1.1
Voltage (p.u.)
1.05
1
0.95 4 July
31 December
0.9
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
Buses
(c)
Figure 13.
Figure 13. Voltage
Voltageatat12
12hhfor
forsummer
summerand
and winter
winter days.
days. (a)(a)
LowLow solar
solar profile
profile at the
at the basebase
loadload con-
condition.
dition. (b) Low solar profile at an additional 40% load in all phases. (c) High solar profile at an
(b) Low solar profile at an additional 40% load in all phases. (c) High solar profile at an additional
additional 40% load in all phases.
40% load in all phases.
In summary,
In accordancewith withthe
thediscussion
DC inverter's size,
given in asthediscussed in the above
above paragraph, paragraph,
it can Fig-
be said that
ure 14b indicates the total number of buses with a PV installation. At
the pattern of voltage profile throughout the network remains the same with changes in base load conditions,
the smallest
connected sizefor
load of athe DC inverter
given is found,
solar radiation and soThere
profile. is theisnumber of PVs installed
only a seasonal shift in with
termsa
low
of solar radiation
voltage magnitude. profile. Withfor
However, a 10% increased
the same connected
connected load, load in all phases,
on different a higher
solar radiation
number of PVs are installed in phase C, while its inverter size is at par
profiles, seasonal shifts accompanied by a pattern of voltage distribution can be observed. with that of phase
A (Figure 14a upper subplot)). This suggests that a smaller size of the inverter
At low solar radiation profile for winter days, buses #12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, and but a large
22
number of PVs are installed in phase C with a low solar radiation profile.
(region 1) located nearer to the utility grid have more voltage magnitude sensitivity against On the other
hand, with
reactive power medium and high
as compared to thesolar
onesradiation
located inprofiles (middle
the middle and lower subplot),
and downstream (region 2)the
of
number
the of PVs
network. Theinstalled
complete is network
in accordance
remainswith the size
voltage of the inverter
magnitude sensitiveplaced among
to active the
power
three phases
injection (Figure days,
for summer 14a). thus resulting in constant voltage magnitude (with upper limit)
Similarly,
throughout theat 40% increased
network. On theload
otherinhand,
phasevoltage
A, for all three solarisradiation
distribution also almost profiles, the
constant
size of the inverter located in phases B and C is the same (Figure 14a).
throughout the network for winter days, suggesting high sensitivity to active power at a Still, their respective
number (nodes) is different (more in Phase C), as indicated in Figure 14b. Furthermore,
phases lies in the same range. In other words, improved solar radiation leads to increased
size and number of PVs across the network, but the voltage index is not significantly af-
fected.
The voltage index of phase C is the largest, though its inverter size is equal to phase
Energies 2023, 16, 653
B (Figure 14a), with a 40% increased load in phase A for all three solar radiation profiles. 19 of 23
In other words, a greater number of PVs but a small size in phase C does not bring down
the value of the voltage index, the same as phase B.
On the other hand, a 40% additional load in phase C only, with an optimal PV size
high solar radiation
so obtained (least placedprofile. This means
in phase the voltage magnitude
B), a comparatively higher voltageremains sensitive
index in phase toBeither
is
active or reactive power injection according to the seasons and
noted. However, for the 40% load change in phase C, with a low solar profile, close obser- prevailing solar radiation
profile. At noon,phases
vation indicates the inverter
A and capability
C share anof reactive power
additional increase support
of 43.14%is atand
a minimum.
26.31% of the
total PV installed in the network. Consequently, the voltage index of phase A isfor
Next, the results are discussed for changes in voltage index, calculated thedifferent
least,
connected loads
followed by phase C. and solar radiation against PV installation in the network. At a low solar
radiation
On the profile,
other with
hand,the foraddition of a connected
a 40% additional load inload above the
all phases, base case,
increased a larger
PV size leads size
to of
aDC inverters
reduced value is of
installed, mostly in
the three-phase phaseindex
voltage A, as(upper
suggested in Figure
subplot). 14a (upper
Similarly, subplot).
with medium
Three-phase
and high solar DC inverterprofiles,
radiation installation if any, has of
the placement notPVs
been is shown
uniforminthroughout
said figure.the The least
net-
size of and
work, the inverter is installed
the difference in PVinsize
phase B. Anthe
among unbalance
three phases in theremains
DC inverter (PV installation)
marginal. Thus, as
among thetheir
expected, threevoltage
phasesindex is revealed for the low lowest
is comparatively solar radiation
with respectprofile, mainly
to other with
load a +40%
condi-
load
tions. in all phases. Improved solar radiation leads to having a larger size, indicated in
the middle and lower subplots in said figure. It is obvious that
For the different load conditions, with these solar radiation profiles, medium and with good solar radiation,
PV installation
high, the increase sizein will increase.
inverter However,
(PV) size amongwith an increase
the three phasesin connected
remains load In
uniform. (different
con-
cases),changes
trast, the addition of PVs
in voltage (single
index phase)
do not followis marginal
accordingly.and In remains uniformthe
other words, among
voltagethedis-
three
phases.
tributionThis can be noted
characteristics not only the
throughout for the base among
network load butthe also for phases
three additional loadsimilar
are not cases in
the network,
under as shown
these solar radiationin Figure 14a.
profiles.
Fishers Island
2
0
Cases
San Antonio
2
1.5
0.5
0
Cases
Compton California
2.5
2
1.5
0.5
6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 0 20 of 23
Cases
(a) (b)
x 10
-3
Fishers Island
4
Voltage index
0
Base All Phase +10%Phase A +40% Phase C +40% All Phase +40%
Cases
x 10
-3
San Antonio
4
Voltage index
0
Base All Phase +10%Phase A +40% Phase c +40% All Phase +40%
Cases
x 10
-3
Compton California
4
Voltage index
0
Base All Phase +10%Phase A +40% Phase C +40% All Phase +40%
Cases
(c)
Figure 14. Optimal solution for the

Figure 14. inverter
Optimalsize and itsfor
solution corresponding voltage
the inverter size andindex. (a) Inverter voltage index. (a) Inverter
its corresponding
size. (b) Total number ofsize.
PVs (b)
installed at nodes. (c) Voltage index.
Total number of PVs installed at nodes. (c) Voltage index.
4.3. Electricity and Curtailment Cost

In this study, the electricity price corresponding to the solar radiation value for low
(5.263 MWh·year−1), medium (5.976 MWh·year−1), and high (6.634 MWh·year−1) is $0.29
/kWh, $0.08/kWh and $0.19/kWh [42] respectively. The electricity price is lowest for San
Antonio and remains dominant for Fisher Island, as indicated in Figure 15a. Moreover,
Energies 2023, 16, 653 20 of 23
In accordance with the DC inverter’s size, as discussed in the above paragraph,

Figure 14b indicates the total number of buses with a PV installation. At base load condi-
tions, the smallest size of the DC inverter is found, and so is the number of PVs installed
with a low solar radiation profile. With a 10% increased connected load in all phases, a
higher number of PVs are installed in phase C, while its inverter size is at par with that of
phase A (Figure 14a upper subplot)). This suggests that a smaller size of the inverter but
a large number of PVs are installed in phase C with a low solar radiation profile. On the
other hand, with medium and high solar radiation profiles (middle and lower subplot), the
number of PVs installed is in accordance with the size of the inverter placed among the
three phases (Figure 14a).
Similarly, at 40% increased load in phase A, for all three solar radiation profiles, the
size of the inverter located in phases B and C is the same (Figure 14a). Still, their respective
number (nodes) is different (more in Phase C), as indicated in Figure 14b. Furthermore, for
the remaining connected load: the base case, +10% increase in all phases, +40% increase
in both phase C and all phases, at different solar profile conditions, the number of PVs
installed coincides with the size of the inverter placed in three phases.
As discussed above, with the addition of a connected load, the size of the PVs installed
has also increased, influencing the voltage index. With a low solar radiation profile, at the
base load condition, the smallest size and number of PV is placed in the network. However,
the voltage index is not significantly affected with respect to additional load conditions, as
observed in Figure 14c (upper subplot). With a 10% increased connected load in all phases
(low solar radiation profile), the voltage index of phase C is close enough to phase B, having
both the smallest size and number of PVs installed. This means a higher number and size
(at par with phase A) does not influence the reduction of the voltage index. Observing
medium and high solar radiation profiles, the voltage index of the three phases lies in the
same range. In other words, improved solar radiation leads to increased size and number
of PVs across the network, but the voltage index is not significantly affected.
The voltage index of phase C is the largest, though its inverter size is equal to phase B
(Figure 14a), with a 40% increased load in phase A for all three solar radiation profiles. In
other words, a greater number of PVs but a small size in phase C does not bring down the
value of the voltage index, the same as phase B.
On the other hand, a 40% additional load in phase C only, with an optimal PV size so
obtained (least placed in phase B), a comparatively higher voltage index in phase B is noted.
However, for the 40% load change in phase C, with a low solar profile, close observation
indicates phases A and C share an additional increase of 43.14% and 26.31% of the total PV
installed in the network. Consequently, the voltage index of phase A is the least, followed
by phase C.
On the other hand, for a 40% additional load in all phases, increased PV size leads to a
reduced value of the three-phase voltage index (upper subplot). Similarly, with medium
and high solar radiation profiles, the placement of PVs is uniform throughout the network,
and the difference in PV size among the three phases remains marginal. Thus, as expected,
their voltage index is comparatively lowest with respect to other load conditions.
For the different load conditions, with these solar radiation profiles, medium and high,
the increase in inverter (PV) size among the three phases remains uniform. In contrast,
changes in voltage index do not follow accordingly. In other words, the voltage distribution
characteristics throughout the network among the three phases are not similar under these
solar radiation profiles.
4.3. Electricity and Curtailment Cost

In this study, the electricity price corresponding to the solar radiation value for
low (5.263 MWh·year−1 ), medium (5.976 MWh·year−1 ), and high (6.634 MWh·year−1 )
is $0.29/kWh, $0.08/kWh and $0.19/kWh [42] respectively. The electricity price is low-
est for San Antonio and remains dominant for Fisher Island, as indicated in Figure 15a.
Moreover, the price is consistent for different cases of connected loads, except for a +40%
Antonio and remains dominant for Fisher Island, as indicated in Figure 15a. Moreo
the price is consistent for different cases of connected loads, except for a +40% increas
all phases. The PV resources are to be optimally placed and sized to mitigate against o
Energies 2023, 16, 653 21 of 23
voltage (Figure 11a) with the least amount of cost of PV-curtailed energy. The discus
in the above section suggested a maximum number of voltage violations in phase A,
ing the largest increase
size ofininverter
all phases. placed. It canare
The PV resources betoobserved
be optimallyin Figure
placed 15btofor
and sized all three s
mitigate
against
radiation profiles, theover-voltage
curtailment(Figure cost
11a) with
forthe
PV least amount of
energy cost of PV-curtailed
remains highestenergy. The follo
for low,
discussion in the above section suggested a maximum number of voltage violations in
by high and medium
phase A, solar
having radiation profiles.
the largest size of inverterThis trend
placed. remains
It can be observedconsistent forallall the
in Figure 15b for
nected load cases. In other
three solar radiationwords,
profiles,voltage violations
the curtailment cost for PVare restricted,
energy withforthe
remains highest low, burde
followed by high and medium solar radiation profiles. This trend remains consistent for all
curtailment relative to theload
the connected size of In
cases. the PVwords,
other installed.
voltage violations are restricted, with the burden
of curtailment relative to the size of the PV installed.
Electricity Cost (USD)
8
x 10
2
Fishers Island San Antonio Compton California
0
Base All Phase +10% Phase A +40% Phase C +40% All phase +40%
Cases
(a) Electricity cost

Curtailment Cost (USD)
7
x 10
4 Fishers Island San Antonio Compton California
0
Cases
(b) Curtailment cost
of Economics
Figure 15.
Figure 15. Economics optimizedof optimized PV installation.
PV installation.
5. Conclusions
5. Conclusions The voltage magnitude sensitivity to an active or reactive power (negative) injection
was suggested to be dependent on seasonal and available solar radiation profiles. This
calls for more proper voltage regulation management according to the inverter size, active
power produced according to available solar radiation, and connected load, including their
daily and seasonal variations.
Clearly, bus voltage violations depend on the placement and size of PVs and changes
in connected load among the three phases and the solar radiation profiles. There appears
to be a strong relationship between the placement, size, and solar radiation profile. Hence
a more generalized approach, possibly involving a reformulation of the objective function,
along with a new level of defining constraints, may be an attractive option.
In future work, a more generalized methodology needs to be examined and formu-
lated through a detailed analysis of renewable integration and its distribution throughout
the network. An objective function formulation in terms of minimizing the voltage in-
dex/voltage improvement, minimizing loss (active power/reactive power), improvement
in the sensitivity factor, economic criteria (profit-maximizing, system cost minimizing),
taking into account uncertainty in variations, not only in yearly but also monthly and daily
solar radiation data could help decrease the disparity. Furthermore, appropriate control
strategies can be applied to achieve a fair level of dispatch so as to prevent a large number
of over-voltage violations while distributing the burden of curtailment relative to the size
of the PV inverter.
Energies 2023, 16, 653 22 of 23
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, N.K. and R.N.; Methodology, N.K.; Software, A.Y.; Formal
analysis, A.Y. and N.K.; Investigation, R.N.; Data curation, A.Y.; Writing—original draft, N.K.;
Writing—review & editing, R.N.; Visualization, A.Y. and R.N.; Supervision, R.N. All authors have
read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The APC was funded by Institutional Open Access Program (IOAP): Østfold University College.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Keane, A.; Ochoa, L.F.; Borges, C.L.T.; Ault, G.W.; Alarcon-Rodriguez, A.D.; Currie, R.A.F.; Pilo, F.; Dent, C.; Harrison, G.P.
State-of-the-Art Techniques and Challenges Ahead for Distributed Generation Planning and Optimization. IEEE Trans. Power
Syst. 2013, 28, 1493–1502. [CrossRef]
2. Georgilakis, P.S.; Hatziargyriou, N.D. Optimal distributed generation placement in power distribution networks: Mod-els,
methods, and future research. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2013, 28, 3420–3428. [CrossRef]
3. Valdberg, A.J.; Dwyer, M. Distribution Resources Plan Rulemaking (R.14-08-013) Locational Net Benefit Analysis Work-ing Group
Final Report. Available online: http://drpwg.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/R1408013-et-al-SCE-LNBA-Working-Group-
Final-Report.pdf (accessed on 8 March 2021).
4. Picciariello, A.; Alvehag, K.; Soder, L. Impact of network regulation on the incentive for dg integration for the dso: Op-portunities
for a transition toward a smart grid. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2015, 6, 1730–1739. [CrossRef]
5. Cohen, M.A.; Callaway, D.S. Effects of distributed pv generation on California’s distribution system, part 1: Engineer-ing
simulations. Sol. Energy 2016, 128, 126–138. [CrossRef]
6. Agah, S.M.M.; Abyaneh, H.A. Quantification of the Distribution Transformer Life Extension Value of Distributed Generation.
IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2011, 26, 1820–1828. [CrossRef]
7. Agah, S.M.; Abyaneh, H.A. Distribution transformer loss-of-life reduction by increasing penetration of distributed gen-eration.
IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2016, 26, 1128–1136. [CrossRef]
8. Iweh, C.D.; Gyamfi, S.; Tanyi, E.; Effah-Donyina, E. Distributed Generation and Renewable Energy Integration into the Grid:
Prerequisites, Push Factors, Practical Options, Issues and Merits. Energies 2021, 14, 5375. [CrossRef]
9. Othman, M.M.; El-Khattam, W.; Hegazy, Y.G.; Abdelaziz, A.Y. Optimal Placement and Sizing of Distributed Generators in
Unbalanced Distribution Systems Using Supervised Big Bang-Big Crunch Method. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2014, 30, 911–919.
[CrossRef]
10. Sheng, W.; Liu, K.; Liu, Y.; Meng, X.; Li, Y. Optimal placement and sizing of distributed generation via an improved non-dominated
sorting genetic algorithm II. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2015, 30, 569–578. [CrossRef]
11. Pereira, B.R.; da Costa, G.R.M.M.; Contreras, J.; Mantovani, J.R.S. Optimal distributed generation and reactive power allocation in
electrical distribution systems. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2016, 7, 975–984. [CrossRef]
12. Masaud, T.M.; Nannapaneni, G.; Challoo, R. Optimal placement and sizing of distributed generation-based wind energy
considering optimal self VAR control. IET Renew. Power Gener. 2016, 11, 281–288. [CrossRef]
13. Wang, Y.; Tsinghua University; Zhang, N.; Li, H.; Yang, J.; Kang, C. Linear three-phase power flow for unbalanced active
distribution networks with PV nodes. CSEE J. Power Energy Syst. 2017, 3, 321–324. [CrossRef]
14. Wang, H.; Yan, Z.; Shahidehpour, M.; Zhou, Q.; Xu, X. Optimal Energy Storage Allocation for Mitigating the Unbalance in Active
Distribution Network via Uncertainty Quantification. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2020, 12, 303–313. [CrossRef]
15. Bazrafshan, M.; Gatsis, N.; Dall’Anese, E. Placement and sizing of inverter-based renewable systems in multi-phase distribution
networks. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2019, 34, 918–930. [CrossRef]
16. Gruosso, G.; Netto, R.S.; Daniel, L.; Maffezzoni, P. Joined Probabilistic Load Flow and Sensitivity Analysis of Distribution
Networks Based on Polynomial Chaos Method. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2019, 35, 618–627. [CrossRef]
17. Lee, Y.D.; Lin, W.C.; Jiang, J.L.; Cai, J.H.; Huang, W.T.; Yao, K.C. Optimal individual phase voltage regulation strategies in active
distribution networks with high PV penetration using the sparrow search algorithm. Energies 2021, 14, 8370. [CrossRef]
18. Dissanayake, R.; Wijethunge, A.; Wijayakulasooriya, J.; Ekanayake, J. Optimizing PV-Hosting Capacity with the Integrated
Employment of Dynamic Line Rating and Voltage Regulation. Energies 2022, 15, 8537. [CrossRef]
19. Li, C.; Disfani, V.R.; Pecenak, Z.K.; Mohajeryami, S.; Kleissl, J. Optimal OLTC voltage control scheme to enable high solar
penetrations. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2018, 160, 318–326. [CrossRef]
20. Mehmood, K.K.; Khan, S.U.; Lee, S.-J.; Haider, Z.M.; Rafique, M.K.; Kim, C.-H. A real-time optimal coordination scheme for the
voltage regulation of a distribution network including an OLTC, capacitor banks, and multiple distributed energy resources.
Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2018, 94, 1–14. [CrossRef]
21. Iqbal, F.; Khan, M.T.; Siddiqui, A.S. Optimal placement of DG and DSTATCOM for loss reduction and voltage profile improvement.
Alex. Eng. J. 2017, 57, 755–765. [CrossRef]
22. Montoya-Bueno, S.; Munoz, J.I.; Contreras, J. A Stochastic Investment Model for Renewable Generation in Distribution Systems.
IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2015, 6, 1466–1474. [CrossRef]
23. Lee, D.; Han, C.; Jang, G. Stochastic Analysis-Based Volt–Var Curve of Smart Inverters for Combined Voltage Regulation in
Distribution Networks. Energies 2021, 14, 2785. [CrossRef]
Energies 2023, 16, 653 23 of 23
24. Bucciarelli, M.; Paoletti, S.; Vicino, A. Optimal sizing of energy storage systems under uncertain demand and generation.
Appl. Energy 2018, 225, 611–621. [CrossRef]
25. El-Ela, A.A.A.; El-Seheimy, R.A.; Shaheen, A.M.; Wahbi, W.A.; Mouwafi, M.T. PV and battery energy storage integration in
distribution networks using equilibrium algorithm. J. Energy Storage 2021, 42, 103041. [CrossRef]
26. Prado, J.C.D.; Qiao, W.; Qu, L.; Agüero, J.R. The Next-Generation Retail Electricity Market in the Context of Distributed Energy
Resources: Vision and Integrating Framework. Energies 2019, 12, 491. [CrossRef]
27. Saboori, H.; Hemmati, R.; Jirdehi, M.A. Reliability improvement in radial electrical distribution network by optimal planning of
energy storage systems. Energy 2015, 93, 2299–2312. [CrossRef]
28. Chowdhury, N.; Pilo, F.; Pisano, G. Optimal Energy Storage System Positioning and Sizing with Robust Optimization. Energies
2020, 13, 512. [CrossRef]
29. Mohamad, F.; Teh, J.; Lai, C.-M. Optimum allocation of battery energy storage systems for power grid enhanced with solar energy.
Energy 2021, 223, 120105. [CrossRef]
30. Bawazir, R.O.; Cetin, N.S. Comprehensive overview of optimizing PV-DG allocation in power system and solar energy resource
potential assessments. Energy Rep. 2020, 6, 173–208. [CrossRef]
31. Arasteh, A.; Alemi, P.; Beiraghi, M. Optimal allocation of photovoltaic/wind energy system in distribution network using
meta-heuristic algorithm. Appl. Soft Comput. 2021, 109, 107594. [CrossRef]
32. Farzin, H.; Fotuhi-Firuzabad, M.; Moeini-Aghtaie, M. Enhancing Power System Resilience Through Hierarchical Outage
Management in Multi-Microgrids. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2016, 7, 2869–2879. [CrossRef]
33. Wang, Y.; Xu, Y.; He, J.; Liu, C.C.; Schneider, K.P.; Hong, M.; Ton, D.T. Coordinating multiple sources for service restoration to
enhance resilience of distribution systems. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2019, 10, 5781–5793. [CrossRef]
34. Luo, C.; Wu, H.; Zhou, Y.; Qiao, Y.; Cai, M. Network partition-based hierarchical decentralised voltage control for distribution
networks with distributed PV systems. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2021, 130, 106929. [CrossRef]
35. Bazrafshan, M.; Yalamanchili, L.; Gatsis, N.; Gomez, J. Stochastic Planning of Distributed PV Generation. Energies 2019, 12, 459.
[CrossRef]
36. Saad, S.N.M.; van der Weijde, A.H. Evaluating the potential of hosting capacity enhancement using integrated grid planning
modeling methods. Energies 2019, 12, 3610. [CrossRef]
37. Fatima, S.; Püvi, V.; Lehtonen, M. Review on the PV Hosting Capacity in Distribution Networks. Energies 2020, 13, 4756. [CrossRef]
38. Ali, A.; Mahmoud, K.; Lehtonen, M. Maximizing hosting capacity of uncertain photovoltaics by coordinated manage-ment of
OLTC, VAr sources and stochastic EVs. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2021, 127, 106627. [CrossRef]
39. Suppioni, V.P.; Grilo, A.P. Unbalance compensation control in microgrids based on the unbalance profile. Electr. Power Syst. Res.
2021, 196, 107199. [CrossRef]
40. Fernández, G.; Galan, N.; Marquina, D.; Martínez, D.; Sanchez, A.; López, P.; Bludszuweit, H.; Rueda, J. Photovoltaic genera-tion
impact analysis in low voltage distribution grids. Energies 2020, 13, 4347. [CrossRef]
41. Saranchimeg, S.; Nair, N.K. A novel framework for integration analysis of large-scale photovoltaic plants into weak grids.
Appl. Energy 2020, 282, 116141. [CrossRef]
42. PVWatts Documentation. National Renewable Energy Lab. Available online: https://pvwatts.nrel.gov (accessed on
16 November 2020).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Energies 16 00653 v2

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

Energies 16 00653 v2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

energies

1 Department of Electrical Engineering, Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology Allahabad,

Energies 2023, 16, 653. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16020653 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

1.1. Problem Statement

1.2. Contribution and Paper Organization

2. Distribution Network and PV Inverter Output Modeling

installed at the potential bus, i.e., Ωn .

Energies 2023, 16, 653 7 of 23

L-1,2 L-3 L-3

Solar radiation data from Change (%) in

Network model with base load condition

installation. (b) Framework of the presented study.

023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 23

Figure 3. PV inverter placement

condition is computed and shown in Figure 4. There is an addition of three-phase PV

Similarly, as shown in Figure

Change in Inverter DC Size

(i) Low (i) Low

(ii) Medium (ii) Medium

(iii) High (iii) High

Figure 6. PV inverter placement

Now, the studyNow, the study

a negative change in PV installation.

Change in Inverter DC Size

23, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 23

Figure 10 indicates the maximum and minimum voltage index m

The calculated busThe calculated

Figure 11. Bus voltage

Energies 2023, 16, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 23

Bus Voltage (p.u.)

Bus Voltage (p.u.)

Bus Voltage (p.u.)

Bus Voltage (p.u.)

Figure 14. Optimal solution for the

4.3. Electricity and Curtailment Cost

In accordance with the DC inverter’s size, as discussed in the above paragraph,

4.3. Electricity and Curtailment Cost

(a) Electricity cost

4 Fishers Island San Antonio Compton California

You might also like