sustainability
Article
Optimal Phase Balancing in Electricity Distribution Feeders
Using Mixed-Integer Linear Programming
Chia-Hung Lin 1 , Te-Tien Ku 1, *, Chung-Sheng Li 1 and Chao-Shun Chen 2
Citation: Lin, C.-H.; Ku, T.-T.; Li,
C.-S.; Chen, C.-S. Optimal Phase
Balancing in Electricity Distribution
Feeders Using Mixed-Integer Linear
Programming. Sustainability 2023, 15,
4473. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su15054473
Academic Editor: Thanikanti
Sudhakar Babu
Received: 14 February 2023
Revised: 27 February 2023
Accepted: 1 March 2023
Published: 2 March 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054473
1 Department of Electrical Engineering, National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology,
Kaohsiung 807, Taiwan
2 Department of Electrical Engineering, National Sun Yat-sen University, Kaohsiung 804, Taiwan
* Correspondence: ttku@nkust.edu.tw
Abstract: A mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) model that includes reductions in neutral
current, feeder energy-loss cost, customer interruption cost, and labor cost is developed to derive the
optimal phase-swapping strategy to enhance the phase balancing of distribution feeders. The neutral
current of the distribution feeder is reduced by the phase-swapping strategy so that the tripping of
the low-energy overcurrent relay can be prevented and customer-service interruption costs and the
labor cost to execute the phase-swapping works can be justified by the energy-loss reduction obtained.
The novelty of the study is its derivation of the phase-swapping strategy using mixed-integer
linear programming to solve the problem of the unbalance of the distribution feeders. A Taipower
distribution feeder is used to derive the phase-swapping strategy to demonstrate the proposed
MILP model for phase balancing. The comparison of the phase currents and neutral current before
phase-swapping reveals that the three-phase balance was not only significantly improved, but that
the voltage unbalance was also decreased dramatically using the proposed phase-swapping strategy.
Keywords: mixed-integer linear programming; outage management system; phasing unbalance
index; voltage unbalance factor
1. Introduction
Unbalanced distribution systems increase energy losses and the risk of distribution-
feeder outage because of the unexpected tripping of the low-energy overcurrent (LCO) relay.
In the Taiwan Power Company’s (Taipower’s) distribution systems, the causes of phase
unbalance are: (1) the asymmetrical structure of feeder networks, (2) the uneven distribution
of single-phase loads, (3) variations in customer load behaviors, (4) the connectivity of
open-wye, open-delta (OYD) transformers, (5) the failure of one or more capacitor units in
a bank, and (6) feeder load transfer.
Figures 1 and 2 show the number of occurrences during which the neutral currents
of all feeders in the Kaohsiung District were >70 A for the summer and winter seasons,
respectively, in 2018. One can see that the frequencies of the neutral currents that are >70 A
are 30,680 and 10,812 and >100 A are 3561 and 472 for the summer and winter seasons,
respectively. It is found that neutral currents increase with feeder loadings.
The main reason for the phase unbalance in Taipower’s distribution systems is the
unconventional OYD transformer connection. Due to the space limitation of a sidewalk
or a distribution room in a building, OYD transformers are used to serve one-phase loads
as well as three-phase loads [1,2]. Figure 3 shows the connectivity of an OYD transformer
with two different capacity 1-ϕ transformers. The load distribution between the two 1-ϕ
transformers is very unbalanced on the primary sides of the OYD transformer, even if
a 3-ϕ balanced load is served. With the dramatic growth in the number of single-phase
residential and commercial customers served by OYD transformers, the phase unbalance
problem has become more severe in Taipower’s distribution systems.
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 18

Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 18

residential and commercial customers served by OYD transformers, the phase unbalance
Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473 problem has become more severe in Taipower’s distribution systems. 2 of 16
residential and commercial customers served by OYD transformers, the phase unbalance
frequency problem has become more severe in Taipower’s distribution systems.
35,000
frequency
35,000
30,000

30,000
25,000
25,000

20,000
20,000

15,000
15,000

10,000
10,000

5,000
5,000

0
0 >70 >80 >90 >100 >110 >120 >130 >140
>70 >80 >90 >100 In(A) >110 >120 >130 >140
In(A)

Figure 1. Frequency of neutral currents of >70 A in all Kaohsiung District feeders in the summer
Figure 1. Frequency of neutral currents of >70 A in all Kaohsiung District feeders in the summer
season.
Figure 1. Frequency of neutral currents of >70 A in all Kaohsiung District feeders in the summer season.
season.

frequency
frequency
12,000
12,000

10,000
10,000

8,000
8,000

6,000
6,000

4,000
4,000

2,000
2,000

0
0 >70 >80 >90 >100 >110 >120 >130
>70 >80 >90 >100
In(A) >110 >120 >130
In(A)
Figure 2. Frequency of neutral currents of >70 A in all Kaohsiung District feeders in the winter sea-
Figure
Figure2.2.Frequency
son. Frequency of
of neutral currentsofof>70
neutral currents >70AA
inin
allall Kaohsiung
Kaohsiung District
District feeders
feeders in theinwinter
the winter
season.sea-
son.

Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473
In addition to excessive neutral currents, an unbalanced distribution system leads to
voltage unbalance. The operation of three-phase induction motors under unbalanced volt-
ages can have serious negative effects on their performance, including overheating, 3 ofde-
16
creased efficiency, and reduced output torque.

1- φ load

3- φ load

Figure3.
Figure 3. Connectivity
Connectivity of
of an
an OYD
OYD transformer
transformer (A,
(A, B
B and
and a,
a, b,
b, c.
c. are
are represented
represented as
as the
the primary
primary and
and
secondary phases; n is represented as the neutral phase)
secondary phases; n is represented as the neutral phase).

Considerable
In addition toefforts haveneutral
excessive been devoted
currents, to solving the phase
an unbalanced unbalance problems
distribution system leads that
afflict distribution systems. Some research works [3,4] incorporated
to voltage unbalance. The operation of three-phase induction motors under unbalanced phase balancing into
feeder reconfiguration
voltages can have serious methods
negativebased on unbalanced
effects distributionincluding
on their performance, systems. Peng et al. [4]
overheating,
proposed efficiency,
decreased a multi-objective
and reduceddynamic
output reconfiguration
torque. method of minimizing the three-
phase unbalance factor
Considerable effortsand
have number of switching
been devoted times.
to solving theAphase
phase-commitment
unbalance problems algorithm
that
was applied
afflict to solve
distribution the unbalance
systems. issue for
Some research distributed
works single-phasephase
[3,4] incorporated devices. Marchesan
balancing into
Jr. [5] proposes
feeder a design
reconfiguration technique
methods basedto decrease
on unbalancedvoltagedistribution
unbalance by choosing
systems. Peng theetcorrect
al. [4]
spacing between the three phase-two wire-system overhead conductors
proposed a multi-objective dynamic reconfiguration method of minimizing the three-phase to minimize volt-
age unbalance
unbalance and
factor andeliminate
numberthe of use of series
switching equalization
times. reactors or capacitors.
A phase-commitment algorithm Thiswaspa-
per proposes
applied a distributed
to solve the unbalanceoptimal voltage-control
issue for distributed andsingle-phase
berth-allocation strategy
devices. based on
Marchesan
Jr. [5] proposes linear
mixed-integer a design technique to(MILP)
programming decrease voltage unbalance
to mitigate by choosing
voltage violations whilethe correct
balancing
spacing between
the benefits the three
between phase-two
microgrids andwire-system
all-electricoverhead
ships [6].conductors
Zhou et al. to develop
minimizetractable
voltage
unbalance
and scalable and eliminate
solution the usetooftackle
methods seriesthe
equalization reactors or
expected objective capacitors.
function This paper
and chance con-
proposes a distributed optimal voltage-control and berth-allocation
straints, which are reduced to a MILP problem [7]. To eliminate the potential uncertainty strategy based on
mixed-integer
of recorded data, linear programming
a MILP method (MILP)
is proposedto mitigate voltagea violations
to construct while model
fault diagnosis balancing [8].
the
MILP benefits
models between microgrids
have been proposed andforall-electric ships [6]. Zhou
distribution-network et al. develop
expansion planningtractable and
consider-
scalable solution
ing reliability [9].methods to tacklealgorithm
The water-cycle the expected hasobjective function and
been implemented in achance constraints,
case study to find
which are reduced
the optimal phasetoallocation
a MILP problem [7]. To eliminate
arrangement [10]. Lin et theal.
potential
proposeuncertainty of recorded
a metaheuristic algo-
data, a MILP method is proposed to construct a fault diagnosis model
rithm to achieve energy-loss reduction through phase balancing in unbalance distribution [8]. MILP models
have been proposed
networks [11]. The for distribution-network
effective expansiondynamic-voltage
power electronics-based planning considering reliability
restorer has been[9].
The water-cycle algorithm has been implemented in a case study
proposed to mitigate the power quality disturbance in secondary distribution networks to find the optimal phase
allocation arrangement
[12]. Malekshah et al. [10]. Lin et
propose anal.optimal
proposeprobabilistic
a metaheuristic algorithm
spinning to achieve
reserve energy-
quantification
loss
schemereduction through
for future phasefrequency
smart-grid balancingenhancement
in unbalanceconsidering
distribution windnetworks
generation,[11]. ESSs,
The
effective power electronics-based dynamic-voltage restorer has
thermal generating units, shiftable loads, and power-system frequency response charac-been proposed to mitigate
the power
teristics quality
[13]. disturbance
In [14], in secondary
the short-time least square distribution networks
prony’s (STLSP) [12]. Malekshah
method is based onetcal- al.
propose an optimal probabilistic spinning reserve quantification
culating and monitoring a pertinent severity factor to prevent failure breakdowns and scheme for future smart-
grid frequency
increase enhancement
the reliability considering
and safety wind facilities
of industrial generation, ESSs,
under thermal generating
unbalanced supply voltageunits,
shiftable loads, and power-system frequency response characteristics
and load variations. This paper reports the voltage-unbalance compensation performance [13]. In [14], the
short-time least square prony’s (STLSP) method is based on calculating and monitoring
of a three-phase inverter for a voltage unbalance compensator controlled by using the
a pertinent severity factor to prevent failure breakdowns and increase the reliability and
method of symmetrical components for an induction motor [15]. Some references [16–20]
safety of industrial facilities under unbalanced supply voltage and load variations. This
paper reports the voltage-unbalance compensation performance of a three-phase inverter
for a voltage unbalance compensator controlled by using the method of symmetrical
components for an induction motor [15]. Some references [16–20] show the importance of
machine learning and artificial intelligence in different engineering applications.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473 4 of 16

As feeder reconfiguration is primarily performed for load transfer and load balancing
between two feeders, it cannot solve the phase unbalanced problems for distribution
feeders. Phase-swapping of laterals or distribution transformers is a direct and effective
method to balance a feeder. Taipower’s distribution-planning engineers already use phase
swapping to balance distribution systems based on their experience and a trial-and-error
approach, which is both labor-intensive and time-consuming. In this study, we propose
a multi-objective mixed-integer optimization method to determine the phase-swapping
strategy for the candidate laterals or distribution transformers in a distribution feeder. The
objective function serves to minimize the weighted sum of the phasing unbalance index,
where different normalized weights are composed of the energy-loss reduction, labor cost,
and interruption cost, while executing the phase swapping of a candidate node. The novelty
of the study is the development of an OYD transformer model and embedding it in the
analysis of three-phase load flow. By performing the field measurement of distribution
transformers for the test feeder with the developed phase identification system (PIS) [21],
the lateral or transformer phasing error is identified and the corresponding attributes in the
outage management system (OMS) database are corrected. The phase-swapping strategy
of the unbalanced distribution feeders is derived using mixed-integer linear programming
to reduce the neutral current to prevent the further tripping of supporting feeders after
the non-interruptible load transfer is executed between feeders for scheduled outage or
service restoration after fault contingency. The proposed method also improves the effect
of voltage unbalance, to reduce electricity cost and prevent machinery damage.
In this study, the phase balancing problem is modeled as a MILP problem. Each
candidate node is associated with a set of decision variables to represent its phase-swapping
scheme. Kirchoff’s current law (KCL) at each node is set as linear operational constraints.
The major contributions of this study are summarized as follows:
(1) The derived phase-swapping strategy not only reduces the feeder’s neutral current,
unbalanced voltage, and system energy loss but also balances each service zone of
a primary trunk for executing the load transfer between two feeders.
(2) A multi-objective mixed-integer optimization method is then developed to optimally
determine the phase-swapping strategy for laterals and distribution transformers.
(3) The proposed optimal phase-swapping strategy is performed to improve the effect of
voltage unbalance to reduce electricity cost and prevent machinery damage.
In this study, we develop a methodology to identify phase-swapping schemes based on
the three-phase currents and the original tapping scheme at the candidate lateral for an over-
head feeder or the candidate distribution transformer for an underground feeder. Section 2
presents an analysis of the three-phase currents and neutral current of an unbalanced
distribution feeder. Section 3 introduces the improvements made to one of Taipower’s
unbalanced feeders. A MILP model of the phase unbalance problem is proposed to derive
the phase-swapping strategy in Section 4. Section 5 provides simulation results. Finally,
Section 6 gives the conclusions.

2. Analysis of the Unbalanced Distribution Feeder

The collected data, including the hourly three-phase currents and neutral current from
the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System (SCADA) of Taipower’s Distribution
Dispatch Control System (DDCS), were used for the analysis of the unbalanced distribution
feeder LY37. Figures 4 and 5 show the daily average current profiles of the summer
and winter seasons in 2018 for the test feeder LY37. Feeder LY37 serves residential and
industrial customers as well as high-voltage customers in the Yong-An Industrial Park. The
distributed photovoltaic generation reduces non-solar electricity demand to extremely low
levels at midday because photovoltaic farms with a total capacity of 4.6 MWp are installed
in the test feeder. One can see that the neutral current In increases during the summer
peak-load periods. With phase current Ib being much less than Ia and Ic, the neutral current
In becomes greater than the LCO setting of 70 A during the time period of 4–8 PM in the
summer, and it reaches a peak value of 93.5 A at 6 PM. The hourly neutral current is even
 Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5
Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5

extremely low levels at midday because photovoltaic farms with a total capacity o
extremely low levels at midday because photovoltaic farms with a total capacity o
MWp are installed in the test feeder. One can see that the neutral current In incr
Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473 MWp are installed in the test feeder. One can see that the neutral current 5 of 16 In incr
during the summer peak-load periods. With phase current Ib being much less than Ia
during the summer peak-load periods. With phase current Ib being much less than Ia
Ic, the neutral current In becomes greater than the LCO setting of 70 A during the
Ic, the neutral current In becomes greater than the LCO setting of 70 A during the
period of 4–8 PM in the summer, and it reaches a peak value of 93.5 A at 6 PM. The ho
period of 4–8 PM in the summer, and it reaches a peak value of 93.5 A at 6 PM. The h
greater than theneutral
phase current
currentisIbeven
at 9 AM. During
greater thephase
than the wintercurrent
season,Ibthe
at 9neutral current
AM. During the winter
neutral current is even greater than the phase current Ib at 9 AM. During the winte
In exceeds 70 Ason,
during the timecurrent
the neutral periodIn
ofexceeds
6–9 PM 70
and A itduring
reaches
thea time
peakperiod
value of
of 73.2 A atand it rea
6–9 PM
son, the neutral current In exceeds 70 A during the time period of 6–9 PM and it rea
8 PM. a peak value of 73.2 A at 8 PM.
a peak value of 73.2 A at 8 PM.

(A) Ia Ib Ic In
(A) Ia Ib Ic In
350.00
350.00

300.00
300.00

250.00
250.00

200.00
200.00

150.00
150.00

100.00
100.00

50.00
50.00

0.00
0.00 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
(Hrs)
(Hrs)

Figure 4.
Figure 4. Daily average Daily average of
current profiles
feederof the test feeder LY37season
in the summer
of 2018. season of 2018.
Figure current
4. Daily profiles the test
average current profiles LY37
of in the
the test summer
feeder LY37 in the summer season of 2018.

(A) Ia Ib Ic In
(A) Ia Ib Ic In
250
250

200
200

150
150

100
100

50
50

0
0 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
(Hrs)
(Hrs)

Figure 5. Daily average current profiles of the test feeder LY37 in the winter season of 2018.
Figure current
Figure 5. Daily average 5. Daily profiles
averageofcurrent profiles
the test feederof the test
LY37 feeder
in the LY37
winter in the
season ofwinter
2018. season of 2018.

3. Improvement of the Unbalanced Feeder in the Taipower System

To solve the phase unbalancing problem of distribution feeders, the following pro-
cedures are applied to Taipower’s distribution systems and the flowchart of the phase-
swapping work is illustrated in Figure 6.
Sustainability 2023,15,
Sustainability 2023, 15,4473
x FOR PEER REVIEW 76 of
of 16
18

OMS AM/FM
DDCS FDCS CIS
database

Feeder Service zone

loading loading

Feeder topology Load

model pattern

customer
loading

Service
Three phase load flow analysis Labor cost
interruption cost

Three phase currents

and neutral current

Rephasing strategy

Swap the phases of the

candidate laterals or
distribution transformers

Verify the neutral currents of

the SCADA system

Figure 6.
Figure 6. Flowchart
Flowchart of
of phase-swapping
phase-swapping work.
work.

1. Feeders
Using a with neutral currents
conventional of >70 Amethod
trial-and-error were selected to execute
to derive the rephrasing strategy
the phase-swapping process.
2. The facility
for laterals data for the selected
and distribution distribution
transformers to improvefeeders were retrieved
three-phase from the
unbalance OMS to
problem is
identify the network configuration of distribution feeders.
time-consuming and labor-intensive. In the research, the hourly three-phase currents and
3. Distribution
neutral current werecrews measured
collected the SCADA
by the three-phase current
of the of each Dispatching
Distribution candidate lateral or
Control
Centerdistribution transformer
(DDCC). During to derive
an outage, thethe rephrasing
feeder strategy.
load transfer is executed and the neutral
4. Thecan
current planned
increaseoutage was thenTherefore,
dramatically. scheduledthe to swap thecurrent
neutral phaseswasof the candidate
defined as anlaterals
outlier
or distribution
and was removed, as transformers.
the current value was greater than three standard deviations from
5. The reduction
the mean. in the
The facility dataneutral current
from the feederof was
the rephased feederconverted
automatically was verifiedfromusing data
the OMS
collected by the SCADA system.
database to identify the feeder topology for the three-phase load flow analysis. The results
of the phase
Using currents and trial-and-error
a conventional neutral currentsmethod
of all feeder branches
to derive and distribution
the phase-swapping trans-
strategy
formers
for were
laterals and used for the phase-swapping
distribution transformers tostrategy.
improve three-phase unbalance problem is
A MILP model
time-consuming andwas constructed to
labor-intensive. In derive the phase-swapping
the research, strategy for
the hourly three-phase the candi-
currents and
date laterals
neutral andwere
current distribution
collectedtransformers.
by the SCADA The normalization of multi-objective
of the Distribution Dispatchingfunctions
Control
Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473 7 of 16

Center (DDCC). During an outage, the feeder load transfer is executed and the neutral
current can increase dramatically. Therefore, the neutral current was defined as an outlier
and was removed, as the current value was greater than three standard deviations from the
mean. The facility data from the feeder was automatically converted from the OMS database
to identify the feeder topology for the three-phase load flow analysis. The results of the
phase currents and neutral currents of all feeder branches and distribution transformers
were used for the phase-swapping strategy.
A MILP model was constructed to derive the phase-swapping strategy for the candi-
date laterals and distribution transformers. The normalization of multi-objective functions
involves comparing and making decisions about the unbalance index of the feeder, en-
ergy loss, interruption cost, and labor cost. To represent the phase-swapping scheme for
laterals or distribution transformers in the MILP model, the notation (X,Y,Z) was used to
illustrate the phasing arrangement of feeder branches and transformers. Table 1 lists the
valid connections in positive- and negative-sequence sets for the three-phase, two-phase,
and single-phase laterals and distribution transformers. As the phase sequence is very
important in the operations of a three-phase motor, maintaining the sequence after phase
swapping is executed is essential. For example, a three-phase lateral with an original tap
(A,B,C) can be rephased either as (B,C,A) or (C,A,B) only in a positive sequence. An OYD
transformer which is connected to A and B phases (A,B,*) on the primary side can only be
rephased as either C and A phases (B,*,A) or B and C phases (*,A,B) in a positive sequence.

Table 1. Valid connections in positive- and negative-sequence sets (* is represented as no connection

in the phase).

Positive Sequence Negative Sequence

Phase
Original Phase Valid Rephasing Schemes Original Phase Valid Rephasing Schemes
3-φ (A, B, C) (B, C, A) (C, A, B) (A, C, B) (C, B, A) (B, A, C)
(A, B, *) (B, *, A) (*, A, B) (A, *, B) (*, B, A) (B, A, *)
2-φ (*, B, C) (B, C, *) (C, *, B) (*, C, B) (C, B, *) (B, *, C)
(C, A, *) (A, *, C) (*, C, A) (A, C, *) (C, *, A) (*, A, C)
(A, *, *) (*, A, *) (*, *, A)
1-φ (B, *, *) (*, B, *) (*, *, B)
(C, *, *) (*, C, *) (*, *, C)

To effectively execute the phase-swapping strategy for distribution feeders, the follow-
ing operational rules for the phase swapping of distribution feeders were considered in
the study:
Rule 1: The LCO relay of any distribution feeder that is activated >10 times a month is
considered to execute the phase-swapping strategy.
Rule 2: For overhead feeders, only radial lateral taps connected to primary trunk sections
are considered as the candidate phase-swapping objectives.
Rule 3: For underground feeders, only distribution transformers are considered as the
candidate phase-swapping objectives because it is difficult to keep the same
sequence for open-loop laterals.
Rule 4: In addition to the reduction in the neutral current, the phase balancing of the
service sections of a primary feeder must be achieved after performing the
phase-swapping strategy.
Rule 5: The phase sequence should be maintained to prevent the reverse rotation of
three-phase motors.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473 8 of 16

4. Mathematical Formulation of the Phase Unbalance

The objective of MILP is to find the optimal phase-swapping strategy to reduce the
neutral current and to maintain the phase balancing of the service sections of the primary
feeder. The phasing unbalance index (PUI) at branch i, PUIi , is defined as the maximum
deviation of any phase current from the average current:
Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 18
Max ( Iai − Iavg
i , Ibi − Iavg
i , Ici − Iavg
i )
PUIi = i
∗ 100% (1)
Iavg
I aii + iIbi + I ci
where
i
where I Ii ,a ,I i ,Iand
i
, and I c phase
Ici are
i
are phase
A, B,A,and
B, and C currents
C currents at branch
at branch i, and
i, and i
Iavg I avg I=
= a + Ib + Ic
i i
a b b 3 3is the
average phase current.
is the average phase current.
KCL
KCL is is modeled
modeledby by(2)
(2)before
before performing
performing thethe phase-swapping
phase-swapping strategy.
strategy. For the Fordis-
the
distribution feeder shown in Figure 7, each phase
tribution feeder shown in Figure 7, each phase of the lateral of the lateral
is is tapped to the
tapped to the primary feeder primary
feeder at a node. For example, KCL at node1 1 is2 I p1 = 2 3
3 I p + l p . In general,
at a node. For example, KCL at node 1 is I p = I p + l p . In general,

+
0
I piI pi == IIpipi′ + ∑llpkkp p =p =a,ab,, bc, c (2)
(2)
kk

i i′
where I and 0 I p are the phase p current at the upstream branch i and at the down-
where I pi pand I pi are the phase p current at the upstream branch i and at the downstream
stream ibranch
branch i ′ of thefeeder,
0 of the primary primary feeder, respectively;
respectively; l pk is
l kp is the phase the phase
p current p current
at the at the
downstream
downstream
lateral k is thek;total
k; andlateral and knumber
is the total number of downstream
of downstream laterals
laterals at node at node
j, which is j,connected
which is
connected
with brancheswithi and i0 .
branches i and i ′ .

Branch=1 2 5
1 j=1 2 2 5
I c C I c C I c5
1
I b B I b2 B I b5
Substation
I a1 A I a2 A I a5

I a3 I b3 I c3 I a4 I b4 I c4
1A 1C 2A 2C

φa3,a φb3,a φc3,a φa3,c φb3,c φc3,c φa4,a φb4,a φc4,a φa4,c φb4,c φc4,c
1B 2B
3 4
*a *a' φ3
a ,b
*a *a' *a *a'
φ 4
a ,b
*a *a'

φb3,b φc3,b φb4,b φc4,b

*a' *a *a' *a

a = 1∠120°
3A 3B 3C 4A 4B 4C
a ′ = 1∠ − 120° I 3
I 3
I 3
I 4
I 4
I c4
a b c a b

Figure 7. Example of a distribution feeder.

Figure 7. Example of a distribution feeder.

4.1. MILP Formulation

To model
To model the
the MILP
MILP for the phase balancing problem,
problem, thethe integer
integer decision
decision variable
variable
indicates whether or not phase
phase pp of
of the
the lateral
lateral branch
branch ll is
is swapped
swapped with
withphase
phasew wofofthe
the
primary feeder.
primary feeder.The
Thebinary
binaryinteger
integervariables
variablesmust
mustsatisfy
satisfy some
some constraints
constraints to to ensure
ensure thatthat
the
the same phase sequence is maintained and one and only one phase of the laterals
same phase sequence is maintained and one and only one phase of the laterals is assigned is as-
signed to the phase line of the primary feeder. The phase-swapping problem can be for-
mulated into the following MILP model:
m

Minimize  C ⋅ PUI
i =1
i i (3)

subject to
Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473 9 of 16

to the phase line of the primary feeder. The phase-swapping problem can be formulated
into the following MILP model:
m
Minimize ∑ Ci · PUIi (3)
i =1

subject to

k
0
Iai = Iai + ∑ (φa,a
l
Ial +φb,a
l
· 1∠120◦ · Ibl + φc,a
l
· 1∠ − 120◦ · Icl ), p = a, b, c (4)
l =1

k
0
Ibi = Ibi + ∑ (φa,b
l
· 1∠ − 120◦ · Ial +φb,a
l
Ibl + φc,a
l
· 1∠120◦ · Icl ), p = a, b, c (5)
l =1
k
0
Ici = Ici + ∑ (φa,c
l
· 1∠120◦ · Ial +φb,c
l
· 1∠ − 120◦ · Ibl + φc,c
l l
Ic ), p = a, b, c (6)
l =1
l l l
φa,p + φb,p + φc,p = 1, p = a, b, c (7)

φlp,a + φlp,b + φlp,c ≤ 1, p = a, b, c (8)

l l l
φa,a + φc,b + φb,c ≤1 (9)
l l l
φc,a + φb,b + φa,c ≤1 (10)
l l l
φb,a + φa,b + φc,c ≤1 (11)

φlp,w ∈ {0, 1} (12)

where i is any monitored branch; m is the total number of branches of the primary feeder; l
is lateral l connected to branch i; k is the total number of laterals connected to branch i; PUIi
is the phasing unbalance index at the monitored branch i; Ci is the summation of the energy
loss cost, interruption cost, and labor cost for phase-swapping the downstream laterals that
are connected to branch i; I pi is the phase p current on branch i; and φlp,w is a binary decision
variable for phase w of lateral l connected to phase p of the primary feeder.

4.2. MILP Formulation Constraints

In this MILP formulation, Equations (4)–(6) represent the KCL constraints at the node
that is connected with branches i and i0 , and lateral l. The branch current must have its
phase angle shifted by ±120◦ when phase swapping is performed from the original phase
to the different phase. For instance, the phase-B current is shifted by 120◦ and the phase-C
current is shifted by −120◦ in (4) when the phase-B line or the phase-C line is connected
to the phase-A line (φb,al = 1 or φl = 1). Equations (8) and (9) ensure that each phase
c,a
line of a lateral is only assigned to one phase line of a primary feeder. Equations (9)–(11)
ensure that the same phase sequence (positive sequence) is maintained. Equation (12)
represents whether or not phase p of the lateral branch l is swapped with phase w of the
primary feeder.

4.3. Feeder Phase-Swapping Cost

The total feeder phase-swapping cost can be formulated as the summation of the
energy-loss cost, the customer-interruption cost, and the labor cost:

Ci = ELCi + CICi + LCi (13)

where Ci is the total cost of the phase-swapping strategy for the downstream laterals that
are connected to the monitored branch i; ELCi is the energy loss cost of the phase-swapping
strategy for the downstream laterals that are connected to the monitored branch i; CICi is
Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473 10 of 16

the customer-interruption cost of the phase-swapping strategy for the downstream laterals
that are connected to the monitored branch i; and LCi is labor cost of the phase-swapping
strategy for the downstream laterals that are connected to the monitored branch i. To
avoid different physical meanings or magnitudes of these costs, the cost space needs to be
normalized using the standardization of dispersion.

4.3.1. Energy-Loss Cost (ELC)

After implementing the phase-swapping strategy derived by the MILP phase-swapping
model, parts of the lateral configuration are updated. A three-phase load flow analysis is
then executed to solve for the hourly system loss. In the study, the energy loss ELC can be
formulated as
ELC = Ke · Eloss (14)
where Ke is the unit energy loss cost ($0.08/kWh) and Eloss is the total energy loss.

4.3.2. Customer-Interruption Cost (CIC) [22,23]

The CIC represents the cost of an interruption in electricity service to customers as
a result of performing the phase-swapping of laterals and distribution transformers, and is
defined as
n
CICi = ∑ ICj
j =1
n (15)
= ∑ C j ( ti ) L j
j =1

where n is total number of nodes affected by the phase-swapping work for the downstream
laterals that are connected to branch i; ICj is the total interruption cost at node j resulting
from the phase-swapping work for the downstream laterals that are connected to branch i;
Cj is the unit interruption cost of node j (USD/kW); ti is the outage duration time of the
phase-swapping work for the downstream laterals that are connected to branch i; and Lj is
the total load demand of node j.
The planned power-outage durations for Taipower during phase-swapping works for
a lateral, an OYD transformer, and a single-phase transformer are given in Table 2. The
unit interruption costs Cj of the residential, commercial, and industrial customers can be
formulated as follows:

Cj (ti ) = ( Lres com
j · IC f R ( ti ) + L j · IC f C (ti ) + Lind
j · IC f I ( ti (16)

where Lres com

j , L j , and L j
ind are the load percentages for residential, commercial, and in-

dustrial customers, respectively, at downstream node j, which is connected with branch i;

IC f R , IC f C , and IC f I are the interruption-cost functions for residential, commercial, and
industrial customers, respectively.

Table 2. Outage durations of phase-swapping work.

Rephasing Facility Outage Duration (h)

lateral 3
OYD transformer 1.5
single-phase transformer 1

4.3.3. Labor Cost

The labor cost based on the man power required and the time duration for Taipower to
complete the phase-swapping of laterals and distribution transformers is listed in Table 3.
 OYD transformer 1.5
single-phase transformer 1

4.3.3. Labor Cost

Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473 The labor cost based on the man power required and the time duration for Taipower
11 of 16
to complete the phase-swapping of laterals and distribution transformers is listed in Table
3.
Table 3. Labor cost of phase-swapping work.
Table 3. Labor cost of phase-swapping work.
Rephasing Facility Labor Cost ($)
Rephasing Facility Labor Cost ($)
lateral 220
lateral 220
OYD transformer 105
OYD transformer 105
single-phase transformer
single-phase transformer 52
52

Case Study
5. Case
Taipower’s overhead
overheadfeeder
feederLY37,
LY37,shown
shownin Figure 8, was
in Figure 8, used
was for a computer
used simula-
for a computer
tion of lateral
simulation of phase
lateral swapping in this section
phase swapping in this to balance
section to the primary
balance the feeder,
primarytofeeder,
illustrate
to
the proposed
illustrate MILP-based
the proposed phase-swapping
MILP-based strategy. The
phase-swapping total length
strategy. The totalof the 11 kV
length of feeder
the 11
is 5.7
kV km to
feeder is serve
5.7 kmtheto mixed loadings
serve the mixed of industrial
loadings and residential
of industrial customers.
and residential It consists
customers. It
of three service zones (T1, T2, and T3) on the primary trunk and nine service
consists of three service zones (T1, T2, and T3) on the primary trunk and nine service zones zones on
thethe
on laterals with
laterals 103103
with units of OYD
units of OYDtransformers
transformersandand
58 units of 1-ϕ
58 units of transformers
1-φ transformers to pro-
to
vide power service to >1000 low-voltage customers and 2 high-voltage
provide power service to >1000 low-voltage customers and 2 high-voltage customers. The customers. The
three-phase unbalance
three-phase unbalance problem
problem diminishes
diminishes service
service reliability
reliability and
and increases
increases power
power loss
loss (as
(as
mentioned in
mentioned in Section
Section 2)2) because
because ofof the
the usage
usage ofof many
many single-phase
single-phase and and OYD
OYD transformers
transformers
in the feeders. The phase-swapping strategy for laterals and distribution
in the feeders. The phase-swapping strategy for laterals and distribution transformers was transformers was
derived using the MILP model to reduce the neutral current and
derived using the MILP model to reduce the neutral current and annual energy loss.annual energy loss.

1
T1 991 11 13 131 14
:distribution transformers
141
111 L1 :open-tie switch
9 10 12 133
2 101 121
132 :primary feeder
113
921 992 112
:lateral
922 923 L4
3 993 994 15 16
931
151 161
932 933 L5
T2 4
941
31
942 943 L6
17 18 20 22 23 24 241 30 312 33 34
5
301 311
951 181 201 242 331 341
953 L7 171 182 21 221 231 25
243
302 303
952 19
6 211 251 244
961 35 351 183 184
191 213
313 314
32 332 333 L2
962 963 353 L8 172 173 212 26
352 321
261
7
971 36 38 27 28 29
39 42
L9 381 421 271
262 263
281 291
972 973 361 391
8 273
981 272
362
L10
T3 40 401 41 411
37 L3
371 402 412

Figure 8. One-line diagram for Feeder LY37.

Figure 9 shows the results of the three-phase currents and neutral current of the
primary trunk and laterals based on three-phase load flow analysis. In Figure 9, for instance,
the three-phase currents and neutral current of the lateral section L2 were Ia = 131.8 A,
Ib = 85.8 A, Ic = 163.7 A, and In = 66.7 A at the peak time of 6 PM. The loading of phase
B was much lower than those of phases A and B. The results illustrate the severity of
three-phase unbalance for the lateral because the neutral current In is even greater than Ib.
 Figure 9 shows the results of the three-phase currents and neutral current of the
primary trunk and laterals based on three-phase load flow analysis. In Figure 9, for
instance, the three-phase currents and neutral current of the lateral section L2 were Ia =
131.8 A, Ib = 85.8 A, Ic = 163.7 A, and In = 66.7 A at the peak time of 6 PM. The loading of
phase B was much lower than those of phases A and B. The results illustrate the severity
Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473 12 of 16
of three-phase unbalance for the lateral because the neutral current In is even greater than
Ib.

(A) Ia Ib Ic In
180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
(Hrs)

Figure9.9.Hourly
Figure Hourlyphase
phasecurrents
currentsand
andneutral
neutralcurrent
currentofoflateral
lateralL2.
L2.

5.1. Phase-Swapping Strategy for Feeder LY37

To maintain the phase sequence and reduce labor costs, only radial taps connected to
a primary trunk section were considered as the candidate phase-swapping locations for the
overhead feeder LY37. Table 4 illustrates the phase-swapping strategy for the candidate
laterals identified by performing the MILP optimization algorithm. Figure 10 shows the
neutral currents of the test feeder before and after performing the MILP phase-swapping
methodology, based on solving for the feeder loading at 6 PM, in Figure 4, using three-phase
load flow analysis. The neutral current decreased from 93 A to 25 A after performing the
phase-swapping of laterals L1, L2, and L5 from (A,B,C) to (C,A,B) and (B,C,A), and (B,C,A),
respectively. In comparison to the phase currents in Figure 4, the phase current Ic decreased
while the phase currents Ia and Ib both increased after phase-swapping laterals L1, L2,
and L5.

Table 4. Proposed phase-swapping strategy for feeder LY37.

Lateral Original Phasing Proposed Rephasing Outage Duration (h)

L1 (A.B.C) (C.A.B) 3
L2 (A.B.C) (B.C.A.) 3
L5 (A.B.C) (B.C.A.) 3

The reduction in feeder power loss was solved by three-phase load flow analysis
for the test feeder before and after the phase swapping of the laterals. Figure 11 shows
the loss percentage of the test feeder before and after phase swapping. The peak power
loss decreased from 3.26% to 1.92% at 6 PM. The average daily power loss reduced from
2.8% to 1.8% by phase swapping three laterals.
Table 5 illustrates the cost versus benefits in terms of the reduction in annual energy-
loss cost, customer-interruption cost, and labor cost to perform the phase-swapping works
for the test feeder. The proposed phase-swapping strategy achieves the total energy loss
cost of USD 23,400 and the customer-service-interruption and labor costs are USD 6700 and
USD 660.
 Table 4. Proposed phase-swapping strategy for feeder LY37.

Lateral Original Phasing Proposed Rephasing Outage Duration (h)

L1 (A.B.C) (C.A.B) 3
Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473 13 of 16
L2 (A.B.C) (B.C.A.) 3
L5 (A.B.C) (B.C.A.) 3

(A)
In(before rephasing)
300 In(after rephasing)
Ia(after rephasing)
Ib(after rephasing)
250 Ic(after rephasing)

200

150

100

50

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
(Hrs)
Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 18
Figure10.
Figure 10.Three-phase
Three-phasecurrents
currentsand
andneutral
neutralcurrent
currentbefore
beforeand
andafter
afterphase
phaseswapping.
swapping.

The reduction in feeder power loss was solved by three-phase load flow analysis for
Ploss(%) before rephasing after rephasing
the
3.5
test feeder before and after the phase swapping of the laterals. Figure 11 shows the
loss percentage of the test feeder before and after phase swapping. The peak power loss
decreased from 3.26% to 1.92% at 6 PM. The average daily power loss reduced from 2.8%
3
to 1.8% by phase swapping three laterals.

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
(Hrs)

Figure11.
Figure 11.Power
Powerloss
losspercentage
percentageof
ofthe
thetest
testfeeder
feederbefore
beforeand
andafter
afterphase
phaseswapping.
swapping.

Table Table 5 illustrates

5. Cost–benefit the for
analysis costthe
versus benefits infeeder.
phase-swapping terms of the reduction in annual energy-
loss cost, customer-interruption cost, and labor cost to perform the phase-swapping works
for the test feeder.Category
The proposed phase-swapping strategy achieves Cost the total energy loss
cost of USD 23,400∆ELCand the customer-service-interruption and$23,400
labor costs are USD 6700
and USD 660. CIC $6700
LC $660
Table 5. Cost–benefit analysis for the phase-swapping feeder.

CategoryInduction Motor in the Unbalanced Case Cost

5.2. Effects on a Three-Phase
Induction motors ΔELC
are widely used by industrial customers $23,400
of the test feeder. The
CIC
supplied voltage can cause ill effects in induction motors because $6700of the unbalanced
LC $660

5.2. Effects on a Three-Phase Induction Motor in the Unbalanced Case

Induction motors are widely used by industrial customers of the test feeder. The sup-
Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473 14 of 16

distribution feeder. To study how the unbalanced scenario affects an induction motor, we
discuss the results of voltage unbalance before and after phase swapping the test feeder.
The voltage unbalance factor (VUF) is defined as the ratio of the negative-sequence voltage
component to the positive-sequence voltage component [24]:
negative−sequence voltage component
VUF (%) = positive−sequence voltage component × 100%
(17)
V2
= V1 × 100%

where V 1 and V 2 are obtained using symmetrical component transformation.

The industrial customer with a three-phase 7.5 hp induction motor connected to
an OYD transformer at Bus 332 in Figure 8 was selected for computer simulation to
investigate the effects of an unbalanced voltage supply before and after implementing the
phase-swapping strategy. The positive- and negative-sequence voltages were solved using
symmetrical component transformation after executing a three-phase load flow analysis
based on the proposed phase-swapping strategy. Table 6 lists the VUFs at the primary and
secondary sides of the OYD transformer at Bus 332.

Table 6. VUF at Bus 332 before and after phase swapping.

Voltage Before Rephasing After Rephasing

VAN 6.15∠−5.4◦ 6.44∠−3◦
Primary voltage (kV) VBN 6.72∠−121.7◦ 6.45∠−122.2◦
VCN 6.46∠118.6◦ 6.5∠117.1◦
VUF (primary side) 2.42% 0.75%
Van 201.1∠−6.5◦ 211.4∠−123.3◦
Secondary voltage (kV) Vbn 226∠−123.3◦ 218.9∠115.6◦
Vcn 224.8∠−109.7◦ 211.7∠−5.6◦
VUF (secondary side) 7.33% 2.31%

The NEMA standard [25] states that, once unbalance reaches 5%, the temperature
begins to rise so quickly that protection from damage becomes impractical. From this
analysis, the VUF of the secondary side of the OYD transformer reaches 7.33% before
phase-swapping. As per the NEMA guidelines, operating a motor for any length of time at
a voltage unbalance of >5% is not recommended because the temperature begins to rise
too quickly and the loss increases when the VUF reaches 5% based on the derating curve.
By implmenting the MILP methodology, the over-neutral-current problem was solved
successfully and VUF decreases significantly after the phase-swapping of three laterals.

6. Discussion
The phasing arrangement project with the proposed phase-swapping strategy has
been implemented in the feeders of Taipower distribution systems and the field work for
the phase-swapping of laterals and distribution transformers have been completed. The
input data, including feeder topology and the feeder and customer loadings, were created
automatically to support the phase-swapping strategy. In comparison with the traditional
trial-and-error method used by Taiopower, the proposed phase-swapping algorithm can
reduce labor-intensive and time-consuming work for distribution engineers.

7. Conclusions
The three-phase unbalance problem for feeders is becoming more and more important
in Taipower’s distribution systems because solving it can improve power quality and
reduce energy loss with minimal costs. The three-phase currents and neutral current were
collected from the SCADA of Taipower’s DDCC and the attributes of distribution facilities
Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473 15 of 16

were retrieved from the OMS database to develop the distribution system topology model
and to automatically create the input data file for the three-phase load flow.
A MILP formulation which includes reductions in the phasing unbalance index, feeder
energy-loss cost, customer-interruption cost, and labor cost was proposed to derive the
optimal phase-swapping strategy for laterals and distribution transformers to balance
distribution feeders. A Taipower distribution feeder was used to demonstrate the proposed
MILP model for phase balancing. The neutral current decreased from 93 A to 25 A and
the average daily power loss was improved from 2.8% to 1.8%. The phase unbalance of
the Taipower’s feeder was improved significantly in comparison with the phase currents
and neutral current before phase-swapping. In addition to solving the over-neutral-current
problem, VUF decreased dramatically, from 7.33% to 2.31%, after the phase-swapping of
three laterals to reduce electricity cost and prevent machinery damage.
Most photovoltaic systems which are connected directly to the distribution systems in
Taiwan are small- or medium-sized. The power that is generated by PV systems exceeds
the load, which has caused the problem of reverse power flow to the distribution substation.
Reverse power flow as well as the controls of the smart inverters usually present in power
distribution systems were not considered. Further work will consider these aspects as well
as the theoretical and practical consequences of the phase-swapping strategy.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, C.-H.L. and C.-S.C.; methodology, C.-S.L.; software,

C.-H.L. and T.-T.K.; validation, C.-H.L. and T.-T.K.; writing—original draft preparation, C.-H.L.;
writing—review and editing, T.-T.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Science and Technology Council under the
Contract MOST 111-2221-E-992-035.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: Authors of this research express a gratitude to Taiwan Power Company for
materials used for experiments.
Conflicts of Interest: Authors declare that they do not have any competing financial, professional or
personal interests from other parties.

References
1. Huang, J.; Tai, Y.; Liu, Z.; Su, F.; Gu, H. Application of Bird-Mating Optimization to Phase Adjustment of Open-wye/Open-delta
Transformers in a Power Grid. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT), Seville,
Spain, 17–19 March 2015.
2. Santoso, S.; Dugan, C. Experiences with the New Open-wye/Open-delta Transformer Test Cases for Distribution System Analysis.
In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, San Francisco, CA, USA, 12–16 June 2005.
3. Peng, C.; Xu, L.; Gong, X.; Sun, H.; Pan, L. Molecular Evolution Based Dynamic Reconfiguration of Distribution Networks with
DGs Considering Three-Phase Balance and Switching Times. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2019, 15, 1866–1876. [CrossRef]
4. Fahim, M.; Hassan, E.; Najjar, E. Single Phase Load Balancing in a Three Phase System at Distribution and Unit Level. In
Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT), Lyon, France, 20–22 February 2018.
5. Marchesan, G.; Oliveira, L.; Cardoso, G.; Ramos, B.; Kraulich, L.; Mazzorani, L.; Silveira, F. Three-Phase-Two-Wire Rural
Distribution Network: Influence of Design Characteristics on Voltage Unbalance. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2023, 38, 620–630.
[CrossRef]
6. Sun, X.; Qiu, J.; Tao, Y.; Yi, Y.; Zhao, J. Distributed Optimal Voltage Control and Berth Allocation of All-Electric Ships in Seaport
Microgrids. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2022, 13, 2664–2674. [CrossRef]
7. Zhou, A.; Zhai, H.; Yang, M.; Lin, Y. Three-Phase Unbalanced Distribution Network Dynamic Reconfiguration: A Distributionally
Robust Approach. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2022, 13, 2063–2074. [CrossRef]
8. Tang, Z.; Peng, Z.; Liang, R.; Peng, N.; Wang, C. Multi-Source Data-Cooperated Neutral Low-Resistance Grounding Cable Grid
Faulty Segment Identification. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2022, 37, 1413–1424. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2023, 15, 4473 16 of 16

9. Jooshaki, M.; Abbaspour, A.; Fotuhi-Firuzabad, M.; Muñoz-Delgado, G.; Contreras, J.; Lehtonen, M.; Arroyo, J. An Enhanced
MILP Model for Multistage Reliability-Constrained Distribution Network Expansion Planning. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2022, 37,
118–131. [CrossRef]
10. Eam, D.; Vai, V.; Eng, S.; You, L. Optimizing Phase Allocation Arrangement for a Rural LVAC Distribution System: A Case Study
in Cambodia. In Proceedings of the 2022 4th International Conference on Electrical, Control and Instrumentation Engineering
(ICECIE), KualaLumpur, Malaysia, 26–26 November 2022.
11. Lin, C.; Huang, T.; Chih, C.; Yao, C.; Li, T.; Ma, C. Comparisons of Energy Loss Reduction by Phase Balancing in Unbalance
Distribution Networks via Metaheuristic Algorithms. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Pervasive Artificial
Intelligence (ICPAI), Taipei, Taiwan, 3–5 December 2020.
12. Ogunboyo, T.; Tiako, R.; Davidson, E. Effectiveness of Dynamic Voltage Restorer for Unbalance Voltage Mitigation and Voltage
Profile Improvement in Secondary Distribution System. Can. J. Electr. Comput. Eng. 2018, 41, 105–115. [CrossRef]
13. Malekshah, S.; Alhelou, H.; Siano, P. An Optimal Probabilistic Spinning Reserve Quantification Scheme Considering Frequency
Dynamic Response in Smart Power Environment. Int. Trans. Electr. Energy Syst. 2021, 31, e13052. [CrossRef]
14. Alloui, A.; Laadjal, K.; Sahraoui, M.; Cardoso, M. Online Interturn Short-Circuit Fault Diagnosis in Induction Motors Operating
Under Unbalanced Supply Voltage and Load Variations, Using the STLSP Technique. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2022, 70,
3080–3089. [CrossRef]
15. Katsuki, T.; Yamakawa, I.; Imakiire, A.; Matsumoto, S. Voltage Compensation Performance of the Voltage Unbalance Compensator
Using the Method of Symmetrical Components. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Power Electronics Conference (IPEC-
Himeji 2022-ECCE Asia), Himeji, Japan, 15–19 May 2022.
16. Moustafa, B.; Elsheikh, A. Predicting Characteristics of Dissimilar Laser Welded Polymeric Joints Using a Multi-Layer Perceptrons
Model Coupled with Archimedes Optimizer. Polymers 2023, 15, 233. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17. Elsheikh, H. Applications of Machine Learning in Friction Stir Welding: Prediction of Joint Properties, Real-time Control and Tool
Failure Diagnosis. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 2023, 121, 105961. [CrossRef]
18. Elsheikh, H. Bistable Morphing Composites for Energy-Harvesting Applications. Polymers 2022, 14, 1893. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19. Elsheikh, H.; El-Said, S.; Elaziz, A.; Fujii, M.; El-Tahan, R. Water Distillation Tower: Experimental Investigation, Economic
Assessment, and Performance Prediction Using Optimized Machine-learning Model. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 388, 135896. [CrossRef]
20. Khoshaim, B.; Moustafa, B.; Bafakeeh, T.; Elsheikh, H. An Optimized Multilayer Perceptrons Model Using Grey Wolf Optimizer
to Predict Mechanical and Microstructural Properties of Friction Stir Processed Aluminum Alloy Reinforced by Nanoparticles.
Coatings 2021, 11, 1476. [CrossRef]
21. Chen, S.; Ku, T.; Lin, C. Design of Phase Identification System to Support Three-Phase Loading Balance of Distribution Feeders.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2012, 48, 191–198. [CrossRef]
22. Chen, S.; Lin, H.; Chuang, J.; Li, S.; Huang, Y.; Huang, W. Optimal Placement of Line Switches for Distribution Automation
Systems Using Immune Algorithm. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2006, 21, 1209–1217. [CrossRef]
23. Liang, C.; Wang, P.; Han, X.; Qin, W.; Billinton, R.; Li, W. Operational Reliability and Economics of Power Systems with
Considering Frequency Control Processes. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2017, 32, 2570–2580. [CrossRef]
24. Dash, N.; Sahu, S.; Panigrahi, K. Effect and Analysis of Unbalanced Voltage on Induction Motor Torque. In Proceedings of
the 2018 International Conference on Recent Innovations in Electrical, Electronics & Communication Engineering (ICRIEECE),
Bhubaneswar, India, 27–28 July 2018.
25. Standard MG1-2003; ANSI/NEMA, Motors and Generators. Part 14 and 20. NEMA: Rosslyn, VA, USA, 2004.

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.