Ain Shams Engineering Journal 14 (2023) 101835

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ain Shams Engineering Journal

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com

Optimal load shedding scheme using grasshopper optimization

algorithm for islanded power system with distributed energy resources
Masoud Ahmadipour a,⇑, Muhammad Murtadha Othman a,⇑, Zainal Salam b, Moath Alrifaey c,
Hussein Mohammed Ridha d, Veerapandiyan Veerasamy e
a
School of Electrical Engineering, College of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia
b
Centre of Electrical Energy Systems, School of Electrical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Johor Bahru, Malaysia
c
Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor 43400, Malaysia
d
Advanced Lightning, Power & Energy Research (ALPER), Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia
e
School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore

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

Article history: In this paper, a new optimal load shedding method using a grasshopper optimization algorithm (GOA) is
Received 26 October 2021 proposed for maintaining the stability of the islanded power system that comprises distributed energy
Revised 23 April 2022 resources (DER). The GOA is used in conjunction with the method of voltage stability margin (VSM) to
Accepted 14 May 2022
handle the multi-objective shedding constraints, namely the generation restrictions, allowable load cur-
Available online 28 May 2022
tailment, and load priority. To assess the effectiveness of the offered method, a comprehensive evaluation
study is applied to a system of IEEE 33-bus and four DG units in view of different scenarios. Furthermore,
Keywords:
the effectiveness of performance of the GOA-based load shedding is compared in terms of fitness value,
Optimal load shedding
Islanded power system
voltage stability margin, and percentage of load that should be curtailed with three well-known opti-
Voltage collapse mization approaches (i.e., the particle swarm optimization (PSO), grey wolf optimization (GW), and
Voltage stability margin genetic algorithm (GA)) under different islanded scenarios. The obtained results show that the perfor-
Grasshopper optimization algorithm mance of the proposed method is better than other methods with the less value of load curtailed for
totally islanded states (i.e., 45.67% for island A, 16.63% for island B, 38.05% for island C, and 27.98% for
island D in this study). In addition, the results of the simulation display the efficacy of the proposed
scheme to ensure voltage stability with the optimal load quantity to be shed for dissimilar islanding
scenarios.
Ó 2022 THE AUTHORS. Published by Elsevier BV on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams Uni-
versity. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction an islanded system is prone to collapse under large disturbances

With the rapid proliferation of renewable energy resources
(REs), distributed power generation is expected to be an integral
part of the future electric power system [1,2]. In certain conditions,
the system is expected to run under the autonomous mode, or
commonly known as islanding. However, due to the randomness
and uncertainty of the REs and their low-inertia characteristics,
⇑ Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: masoud@uitm.edu.my (M. Ahmadipour), mamat505my@
yahoo.com (M. Murtadha Othman).
Peer review under responsibility of Ain Shams University.
Production and hosting by Elsevier
[3,4]. Commonly, in an islanded power system with high penetra-
tion of REs (and distributed diesel generator), load shedding is
taken into account as the most effective approach to maintain
the power balance and stability in emergency conditions [5,6]. It
is a fast and reliable solution for supply–demand and can be vital
to avoiding whole system collapse or and power system outage
[7]. By selecting and disconnecting the non-critical loads, a full
blackout can be prevented, while at the same time providing assis-
tance in system restoration.
To date, many efforts are carried out to determine the appropri-
ate automatic load shedding technique for distributed or islanded
systems during abnormal disturbances. The two most common
types are under-voltage load shedding (UVLS) and under-
frequency load shedding (UFLS). The UFLS functions by rapidly
identifying the lack of generation and automatically shedding the
power to prevent frequency instability within the system [8,9].

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2022.101835
2090-4479/Ó 2022 THE AUTHORS. Published by Elsevier BV on behalf of Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams University.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
M. Ahmadipour, M. Murtadha Othman, Z. Salam et al.
Nomenclatures
VSM Voltage stability margin
DG Distributed generation
GA Genetic algorithm
PSO Particle swarm optimization
GW Grey Wolf
GOA Grasshopper optimization
DER Distributed energy resources
UFLS Under frequency load shedding
UVLS Under voltage load shedding
PV Photovoltaic
Pi The position of grasshoppers
SOi The force of the social interaction
GREi The gravity force
Wi Wind advection
N The number of grasshoppers
dij The Euclidean distance
For example, in [10], a step-wise UFLS is applied in a microgrid sys-
tem that utilizes solar photovoltaic to bring the system frequency
to normalcy. Despite its effectiveness, the UFLS exhibits several
drawbacks, namely the central control dependency, the high com-
putational cost, and ineffectiveness during the instability of voltage
collapse. In contrast, the UVLS is specifically made as a well-being
measure to prevent extensive voltage collapse in the event of a sev-
ere supply-load deficit in the local or system reactive power
reserves. As a matter of fact, the UVLS is used as a preferred strat-
egy of power utilities owing to providing a worthwhile solution to
solve the voltage stability problems [11]. Since the voltage instabil-
ity is mostly due to overloading and generator outage, the UVLS
shed the load to give back the reactive power that is related to
the request, thus, avoiding the collapse of voltage [12].
The availability of high computing power at low cost has shifted
the load shedding solutions toward more intelligent approaches.
For instance, a pre-emptive load shedding scheme using DER to
avoid unplanned blackouts in an islanded system is proposed in
[13]. In [14], a quick intelligent method is presented to mitigate
the deviations of frequency and voltage in a microgrid instanta-
neously. It is based on a bubble sort to realize the combination
optimization of the single-phase source-load-storage (SLS) and a
fast power regulation method based on implicit enumeration for
the SLS to reduce the tie-line transfer power, which could prevent
failure of the mode transition from power overload. Authors in [15]
proposed a load shedding method to rapidly remove the power
deficiency and restore the voltage and frequency stability using
an implicit enumeration method. Moreover, an under voltage-
frequency load shedding technique for determining an appropriate
load shedding amount in an islanded microgrid is taken into
account in [16]. A load shedding method using the sensitivity of
the lowest eigenvalue for a Jacobean matrix to analyze the voltage
stability and determine the suitable optimal load shedding value
was presented in [17]. The demerit of this method is easy to fail
to converge when the system is ill-conditioned. In [18], integration
of the Firefly Algorithm and Particle Swarm Optimization (FAPSO)
application for optimal load shedding planning and operation in an
islanded system is presented. In [19], A genetic algorithm (GA) in
combination with particle swarm optimization (PSO) is proposed
to discover the optimal load shedding for systems under stress in
smart grids [19]. The disadvantage of the proposed method [19]
is the low rate of convergence. To overcome this issue, a Chaotic
Slime Mould Algorithm (CSMA) as an optimal load shedding
scheme for islanded DG integrated systems was introduced in
2
Ain Shams Engineering Journal 14 (2023) 101835
c
d Single vector
ij
g The gravitational constant
c
eg Unity vector to the earth’s centre
u The drift constant
ecw The unity vector in the wind direction
ubd The upper limit
lbd The lower limit
cmax The maximum value of the coefficient c
cmin The minimum value of the coefficient c
t The current iteration
t max The maximum iteration
Vm The voltage at buses of m
Vn The voltage at buses of n
dnm The angle between buses of m, and n
[20]. To assess the algorithm efficacy, IEEE 33 bus, and IEEE 69
bus distribution systems were used. The combination of Genetic
Algorithm (GA) and Neural Network (NN) are presented for opti-
mal load shedding and improving voltage stability [21]. In [21],
GA needs less information about the problem, but designing an
objective function and getting the representation and operators
right can be difficult. In [22], an improved harmony search algo-
rithm (IHSA) is proposed to optimize the amount of load to be shed
to prevent excessive load shedding. The main drawback of the
algorithm is to make not an effective balance between global and
local search. To minimize load shedding, a glowworm swarm opti-
mization (GSO) algorithm is used in [23]. The optimal solution of
steady-state load shedding was implemented via squaring the dif-
ference between the connected and supplied power. A hybrid dis-
crete–continuous exchange market algorithm (HDCEMA) is used to
solve the optimal load shedding problem in [24]. In [25], a fuzzy
logic decentralized adaptive under-frequency load-shedding
(UFLS) scheme is proposed to adapt the amount of load to be shed
with the severity of each event to maintain the system stability and
frequency, and voltages within operating limits.
Despite the aforesaid studies, a more effective load shedding is
still needed to keep the stability of the islanded system. An intelli-
gent scheme that can predict the need for the shedding can be very
useful. In this study, a metaheuristic optimum load shedding
scheme based on a grasshopper optimization algorithm (GOA) is
proposed. The GOA is an algorithm that is used in solving multi-
objective optimization problems for power systems. It is known
to be computationally efficient and has a better pre-mature con-
vergence over the other optimization techniques [26-28]. The
GOA is used in conjunction with the static voltage stability margin
(VSM) [29] to assess the voltage stability in the offered load shed-
ding method. The VSM takes extra or smaller amount of linear
characteristics in the whole operational area and therefore could
be utilized to provide accurate results with changeable load levels
by extrapolation. The GOA-VSM shedding scheme is optimized to
handle the multi-objective constraints, namely the generation
restrictions, allowable load curtailment, and the load priority such
that the system will continuously provide the power to the criti-
cally selected loads. To assess the effectiveness of the suggested
load shedding method, a comprehensive evaluation is applied for
the IEEE 33-bus system and four DER units within different island-
ing situations. Furthermore, the effectiveness of performance of the
GOA-based load shedding is compared with three well-known
optimization approaches such as PSO, GW, and GA.
M. Ahmadipour, M. Murtadha Othman, Z. Salam et al. Ain Shams Engineering Journal 14 (2023) 101835

The significant features of the proposed method are as: the distance is precisely 2.079, which means that its area is in a
comfort zone with no force. Fig. 1 shows a conceptual framework

The proposed method is able to solve the non-linear optimiza- of the interaction between grasshoppers considering attraction,
tion formulation problem for the minimization of load repulsion, and comfort area. The suggested values of f and l are
shedding’ 0.5, and 1.5, respectively [33].

It is able to achieve a high-quality solution in terms of the The GREi (gravity force) of i
th
grasshoppers is defined as.
amount of load shedding.

It is adaptive to all islanded test power systems with distributed GREi ¼ g ebg ð7Þ
energy resources.
in which g and ebg are the gravitational constant and the unity
The rest of this paper is structured as follows. Section 2 defines vector in the direction of the earth’s center. The wind advection
the theoretical background. Section 3 exposes the proposed th
of i grasshoppers, W i , can be computed as follows:
methodology based on an optimum load shedding using the GOA
method. The case studied system is presented in Section 4 to vali-
W i ¼ u ec
w ð8Þ
date the effectiveness of the suggested methodology. Section 5
explains the results and discussion. Lastly, the conclusion is offered
where u and ec
w are the drift constant and the unity vector in the
in Section 6.
direction of wind respectively. By substituting the values of the
aforesaid components (i.e., SOi ; GREi ; W i ), Eq. (1) can be written
2. Background as [33]:

2.1. Grasshopper optimization algorithm (GOA)

 
XN
  P j  P i
Pi ¼  
s Pj  Pi    g ebg þ u ec
The GOA imitates the behavior of grasshoppers swarming in Pj  Pi 
w ð9Þ
j¼1
wildlife. Mathematically, this swarm behavior of grasshopper is j–i
formulated as follows [30-33].
It must be noted that Eq. (8) has no ability for solving the prob-
Pi ¼ SOi þ GREi þ W i ð1Þ
lem of optimization directly owing to the swarm of grasshoppers
in which Pi is the position, SOi denotes the force of the social does not converge to a specific point [32]. Hence, an improved ver-
interaction, GREi represents the gravity force, and W i is the wind sion of this equation is considered to obtain the optimal solution of
th
advection of i grasshoppers respectively. It should be mentioned the problems as given in eq. (10) [33].
that the entire of the metaheuristic algorithms are based on the 0 1
random distribution of the search agents in the search space. In     
BX
N
ubd  lbd  d  Pj  Pi  C
order to provide the random behavior of the GOA algorithm, the Pdi ¼ cB c s P j  Pdi   cd
C þT ð10Þ
@ 2 Pj  Pi  A
Equation (1) is rewritten as follows [33]: j¼1
j–i
Pi ¼ r 1 SOi þ r 2 GREi þ r 3 W i ð2Þ
th
in which r1 , r2 , and r 3 denote the random numbers within [0, 1]. where ubd and lbd are the bounds of upper and lower within d
th
The main component of search in the GOA algorithm is the force of dimension. T d is the d dimension target (optimum solution
social interaction which is calculated as [33]: found). The parameter c converges the swarm towards the target.

X
N
 
SOi ¼ s dij c
dij ð3Þ
j¼1;
j–i

where N is the number of grasshoppers and dij denotes the

th th
Euclidean distance between the i , and j grasshoppers and
defines as the following equation.
 
dij ¼ Pj  Pi  ð4Þ

Moreover, c
th th
dij denotes a single vector from the i to the j
grasshoppers and can be obtained as follows:
 
c Pj  Pi

dij ¼   ð5Þ
Pj  Pi 
s denotes a function to explain the power of social forces as pre-
sented below:
 r
s ¼ fexp   expðr Þ ð6Þ
l
where l and f are the intensity of attractive and attraction
length scale. The force of social interaction between grasshoppers
includes two categories of forces i.e., repulsion and attraction
[32]. The attraction rises within the period ½2:079; 4; in addition
to that reduces regularly, whilst the repulsion happens within Fig. 1. A conceptual model of the interaction between grasshoppers considering
½0; 2:079. The distance is taken into account within ½0; 15. Once attraction, repulsion, and comfort area.

3
M. Ahmadipour, M. Murtadha Othman, Z. Salam et al. Ain Shams Engineering Journal 14 (2023) 101835

Y
It is a reducing coefficient and the initial adjusting parameter in the VSM ¼ Li ð13Þ
GOA algorithm, that requires to be reduced in proportion to the i¼X
iteration number. It is updated as the following equation [33]. in which O is defined as the branches set establishing the feeder
cmax  cmin (starting at source bus p and ending at bus q). Hence, the voltage
c ¼ cmax  t ð11Þ
tmax stability considering of multiple feeders is estimated as follows:
in which cmax and cmin are the maximum and minimum coeffi- VSMsys ¼ minðVSM 1 ; VSM2 ;    ; VSM z Þ ð14Þ
cient value of c respectively. t and t max are the current and the max-
in which z denotes the number of system’s feeders.
imum iterations respectively. In this work, the values of cmax and
5 Some loads ought to be shed to decrease the loading level of
cmin are 1and10 respectively.
feeders and push the voltage stability margin of system to a suit-
The GOA pseudo code is exposed in Algorithm 1.
able level. Hence, by using of GOA algorithm, the optimal load
quantity which must be shed from the system is specified.
Algorithm 1. The GOA algorithm
1: Start: input, GOA parameters 3. The proposed load shedding method by means of
2: Initialize: the swarm of grasshoppers randomly grasshopper optimization algorithm
3: Initialize: cmin , cmax , and maximum number of iteration
t max The objectives of the suggested load shedding scheme are to
4: Evaluate: the fitness of each grasshopper f ðPi Þ enhance the VSM profile, while minimizing the load amount that
5: T ¼ the best solution should be shed. To achieve this, some loads should be curtailed
6: While (t < t max ) Do in the system to decrease the loading level of feeders. In addition,
7: Update: c using eq. (11) the load priority need to considered too. Hence, the GOA must be
8: For i ¼ 1; 2;    ; n Do able to handle the multi-objective function with regard to these
9: For j ¼ 1 : 1 : N Do operational constraints.
10: Normalize: the distance among grasshoppers within [1,4].
11: Update: the present position of the grasshopper using the 3.1. Problem formulation
equation Eq. (10).
12: Fetch the present grasshopper if it drives out the limits 3.1.1. Operational constraints
13: End for The number operational constraints that must be considered to
14: Update T if the present solution is better than the previous design the VSM-based load shedding are listed as follows:
optimum solution
15:t tþ1 (1) Balance of power flow.
16: End while
17: output: Return T ¼ the optimum solution The whole power consumption must be equal to entire power
18: End generation during optimization. The power flow balance equations
are defined as follows:
X X X
P generation;i ¼ Pconsumed;i þ P loss ð15Þ
X X X
2.2. Voltage stability margin (VSM) Q generation;i ¼ Q consumed;i þ Q loss ð16Þ

in which P generation;i , Pconsumed;i , and P loss represent the generated,

The VSM provides advance information that can be used for
consumed, and loss active powers respectively, whilst Q generation;i ,
load shedding, hence avoiding the voltage collapse and system
Q consumed;i , Q loss are the produced, consumed, and loss reactive pow-
blackout. In order to determine the distance to voltage collapse
or critical load of the system, the values of the VSM should be cal- ers respectively.
culated at two different operating points [29,34]. Consider a redial
feeder of a distributed system, where branch i is joined in the mid- (2) Power flow restriction.
dle of bus n and bus m as exposed in Fig. 2.
The apparent power which propagates through branch j must
For the branch i, If the amplitude and angle for the voltages of
bus are known, the loading index is calculated as shown below be smaller and or equal to the maximum thermal restriction in a
[29]: steady-state operation, i.e.,
  Sj  Smax ð17Þ
Vm j
Li ¼ 2 cosdnm  1 2 ð12Þ
Vn in which Sj is the apparent power and Smax denotes the maxi-
j
in which V m and V n denote the voltage for buses of m, and n mum thermal limit.
respectively, whilst dnm is the angle between buses of m, and n.
Moreover, the maximum value of the load levels for the single line (3) Stability of bus voltage.
section are assessed through the Li index by knowing its linear
relationships. It is used to show the stability of voltage at each The voltage range at every bus should be adjusted around its
loading level of each line section. It must be noted that this index typical value so as to avoid voltage instability. Consider that V i is
h i
can change between zero (point of voltage collapse) and unity the bus voltage that is determined within V min ; V max . Thus, the
i i
(without load) such as other voltage stability indices. In the mean-
restriction is defined as follows:
time, the feeder’s VSM is taken into account when the product of
loading indices of all feeder branches, that is defined as. V min  V i  V max ð18Þ
i i

4
M. Ahmadipour, M. Murtadha Othman, Z. Salam et al.
Fig. 2. The configuration of a typical redial distribution feeder.
where V min , and V max are the maximum and minimum allowable
i i
voltage at bus i respectively. Basically, this deflection can reach
around 10% of the voltage nominal value [35].
(4) Load shedding restriction.
A load priority restriction is considered to limit the allowable
value of load in the system. A priority list is taken into account
to store the minimum load which must be kept for every load dur-
ing the optimization process. Hence, the load shedding restriction
can be defined as follows:
Spri  Sji  Si
ji
in which S denotes the load priority limit, whilst S , and Si
pri
are the nominee amount of the load power remainder, and the load
of bus i beforehand load shedding respectively.
(5) Voltage stability margin restriction.
An allowable range for voltage stability margin in the whole the
system (VSM sys ) is defined as follows:
0  VSM sys  1
sys
The VSM should be kept in this certain range to keep the pro-
file of voltage containing the minimal value. Practically, this certain
range of VSM sys is within [0.67, 1] owing to the profile of voltage
and obeying the IEEE Std. 18–2002. [36].
(6) Power generator restriction.
In order to provide whole accessible power to maintain the
islanded system within the load shedding states, the generator
power should be adjusted at its maximum value. This restriction
is defined as follows:
Pgenerator ¼ Pmaximum
By knowing all the aforesaid operational constraints, the fitness
function is explained in the next subsection for the islanded sys-
tem to assess the optimum load shedding method.
3.1.2. The fitness function evaluation
In this step, a fitness function will be considered to assess the
optimum load shedding based on some indices in islanded system.
The fitness function is defined as follows:
 
fitness ¼ max VSMsys þ Premload
sys remload
in which VSM , and P are the overall voltage stability
margin and the whole remaining load, respectively. So as to have
the best value of fitness function, the aforesaid operational con-
straints should be satisfied during the assessment. In this paper,
Ain Shams Engineering Journal 14 (2023) 101835
in order to get the optimal load shedding, the GOA algorithm is uti-
lized. The set of considered solutions in that optimization problem
 
is the vector of load shedding Lsefact . The vector of load shedding
includes the value of the allowable load that must be shed for
every bus in which the dimension of the load shedding vector
match up to the amount of buses in the islanded case study system.
The Lsefact changes in the range of [0, 1]. Moreover, the load shed-
ding vector Lsefact must be within [Spri ; Si ]. The optimization pro-
cesses for selecting the best fitness function value are repeated
several times and the load shedding based on the best value of fit-
ness function is selected in which the optimum value of the
remaining load at the specific time is produced.
ð19Þ In order to prevent the voltage breakdown in the islanding
operation mode of the system, the overall voltage stability margin
(VSMsys ) in eq. (22) must obey the constraint eq. (25) and maintain
within [0.67, 1] to keep the profile of voltage at the minimal value.
By means of the system voltage profile, the VSMsys can assess the
critical load. Apart from this, the element of Premload in eq. (22) is
used to guarantee which the remaining value of the load is maxi-
mum, which also has the lowest load value in the system to be
shed in which it satisfies restrictions eq. (21).
ð20Þ 3.2. The optimum load shedding method using the GOA algorithm
For the islanded case study system, the GOA is used to specify
the optimum load shedding method and the power flow of MAT-
POWER. The proposed load shedding method is executed as the
following procedures.
1) Input parameters of system: the system parameters (i.e.,
load, line, data of generator) are fed into the algorithm.
2) Particle initialization and the GOA parameters setting: ran-
domly generate initial population size, and set the GOA
parameters with the number of repetitions, the parameter
of shirking factor (cmin , cmax ), and the intensity of attraction.
ð21Þ Set iteration = 0, and do the procedure from steps 3–14.
3) Set iteration t tþ1
4) To obtain the power loss and voltage deviation by running
MATPOWER power flow and find the total voltage stability
margin system (VSM sys ) by eq. (14).
5) Fitness evaluation: the fitness function is evaluated for each
particle by Eq. (22).
cd .
6) Put the best grasshopper as T
7) Update the variable of c by eq. (11).
8) Standardize the distance among the grasshoppers, dij by eq.
ð22Þ (4).
9) Update the position Pdi of the present search agent by eq.
(10)
10) To obtain the power loss and voltage deviation by running
MATPOWER power flow and find the total voltage stability
margin system (VSM sys ) by eq. (14).
5
M. Ahmadipour, M. Murtadha Othman, Z. Salam et al.
11) The fitness function is evaluated for each particle by Eq. (22).
12) Update the position T cd with the fitness function, if there is a
better solution
13) Stop criteria: if the predefined maximum iteration is met,
store the best solution, otherwise, go to step 3.
The flowchart of implementing the GOA algorithm in the
islanded system for optimizing the load shedding, which is
denoted in Fig. 3.
4. Studied system
So as to assess the efficiency of GOA-based optimized load shed-
ding method, a radial distribution system of IEEE 33-bus and four
units of distributed generation are tested. The system is shown
in Fig. 4. As can be observed in Fig. 4, four islanding scenarios are
considered, namely, Island A, B, C, and D based on the previous
research work [37,38].
The studied system is a balanced system which include 32
branches with 33 buses. It operates at level of voltage equal
to12.66 kV. The central substation is joined as bus 1. The total loads
connected to buses are equal to (3.720 MW real loads) and
Fig. 3. The flowchart of the GOA for optimizing the load shedding in the islanding operation mode.
6
Ain Shams Engineering Journal 14 (2023) 101835
(reactive loads as 2.290MVar). The line data, and load data of the
examined system can be found in [36]. The load condition details
of the initial base for the studied system can be found in [39].
Meanwhile, the DGs as constant power sources are modeled and
their injections are based on sort and hour of the day. The types
of DGs 1 and 3 are photovoltaic (PV) power plants, whilst DGs 2
and 4 are constant power generator types. In Table 1, the details
of the max active rating for these DG units are tabulated. The
details of separable load outlines, daily power consumption of pho-
tovoltaic generator, and for the IEEE 33-bus system, the percentage
of load priority boundaries for the load shedding study can be
found in [35].
Furthermore, it should be noted that the for a certain bus, the
load priority limit is not fixed. At a specific hour, the load priority
limit changes with the bus’s load demand. Indeed, the minimum
value of power (Spri ) which must be saved at a specific time is
the product of base event load power, limit of priority, and per-
centage load level. The Spri as the low boundary is utilized in vector
Lsefact , while the upper boundary is employed as the demand of
hourly load Si . The priority limits of percentage load for each bus
in the considered case study system are determined in [35]. For
example, the percentage of load priority limits for buses 1, 2, 3,
M. Ahmadipour, M. Murtadha Othman, Z. Salam et al. Ain Shams Engineering Journal 14 (2023) 101835

Fig. 4. Single line diagram of case study.

Table 1 in identifying the location and value of load to be shed avoiding the
The details of DG units in study system. cut of substantial load from the islanded system type A. The perfor-
The DG’s The model of DG unites The maximum rating of active mance of the GOA algorithm is compared to other metaheuristics
number power (MW) techniques, namely GA, PSO, and GW. The second experiment ana-
DG1 PV generator unit 0.03 lyzes the optimal load shedding for the remaining types of islanded
DG2 Constant power 0.8 systems in Fig. 4. The described IEEE 33-bus system under island-
generator unit ing scenarios is considered to validate the effectiveness of the sug-
DG3 PV generator unit 0.6
gested approach. The mentioned simulations are implemented on
DG4 Constant power 0.6
generator unit a computer with intel Ò core TM i7-4702MQ CPU@ 2.20 GHz with
Ram 8 GB.

and 4 are 0, 34, 23, and 64% respectively. It must be noted that each 5.1. Performance of the proposed method for islanded system type a
load is not able to be curtailed with a 100% limit from a bus, but all
loads can be curtailed with a 0% limit. Island A occurs once the circuit breaker at bus 1 is opened. It A
Fig. 4 shows also the four possible islanding configuration that includes 32 loads, with a maximum demand of 3.715 MW. Since
is able to be molded in the IEEE 33-bus system (Island type A, B,
C, and D). Meanwhile, the overall maximum load and available Table 2
DG supply can be found in [35]. The GOA-based optimal load shed- The parameter setting for different models.
ding is executed for any islanding scenario with regards to the for- GA algorithm PSO algorithm GW algorithm GOA algorithm
mer system conditions i.e., load priority limits, load demand, and
Population size: Swarm size: 50 Population size:50 Population size:
accessible power from generators hourly. So as to consequently
50 50
verify the performance of the suggested method, it compares to Maximum of Maximum Maximum of Number of
GA [40], PSO [41], and GW [42] techniques. The whole of the opti- iterations: generations: iterations: 100 iterations: 100
mization parameters is standardized so that the algorithms can be 100 100
Cross Self-confidence: Linear control C min = 0.00001
compared equitably. Table 2 displays the essential parameter set-
probability: 1.2 parameter: [0,2]
tings of the competing different mentioned optimization methods. 0.95
Mutation rate: Swarm Other parameter C max ¼ 1
0.08 confidence: 1.2 set as Ref [36].
5. Results and discussion  Inertia weight:  the intensity of
0.6 attraction:0.5
The offered GOA load shedding method is simulated for two  Maximum  
velocity: 4
main experiments. The first experiment evaluates its effectiveness
7
M. Ahmadipour, M. Murtadha Othman, Z. Salam et al. Ain Shams Engineering Journal 14 (2023) 101835

the system is totally cur-off form the mains, the demand must be
supplied by all DG units. The maximum supply by all DG units is
1.83 MW. The hourly profile of the everyday load demand and
accessible island A power generation are shown in Fig. 5. As can
be observed, the power mismatch between them is around 44–
64% from vale to highest daily load. In order to confirm which, sys-
tem can continue its operation, the load shedding method must cut
off certain loads such that the mismatch is reduced to (ideally)
zero. Furthermore, based on the priority list, it has to distinguish
the value of load and location to be shed.
The load shedding performance using GOA for island A system
is exposed in Fig. 6. As can be observed, the amount of supply–de-
mand mismatch after the optimization is remarkably close for each
hourly operation. These results prove that the proposed scheme
can choose the optimum value of load to be shed by avoiding shed-
ding an excessive value of system load. Otherwise, it can provoke a
generation excess which results in an over-frequency condition in
the system. Moreover, it must be noted that the difference between
the generated power and load demand after optimization by the
GOA algorithm in Fig. 6 denotes the power loss in the system. Fig. 6. The performance of the proposed method for Island A.
The amount of power lost is low when DG1 and DG3 (PV generator
units) are active during hours of 11.00–14.00. On the other hand,
the amount of power loss is high throughout the early morning
as well as evening hours because PV generator units do not support respectively. It proves that the obtained amount of the remaining
the system. load by GOA is better than the other mentioned approaches. The
The detail on the load shedding is analyzed at hour 9.00. The proposed scheme can also provide the optimum value of load to
requested load at this hour is equal to 0.68p.u. (i.e., equal to be shed with avoiding the cutting substantial load in the studied
2.575 MW) but the generation is 1.414 MW. The mismatched system.
power is around 46%. Thus, operating the system, the 46% load Fig. 8 denotes the comparison of the performance of GOA and
should be curtailed from the system. The effectiveness of the load GA, PSO, and GW algorithms in terms of individual load demand
shedding methods using GOA algorithms is illustrated in Fig. 7. As in the islanded system A at 9:00 h. As can be observed, the GA algo-
seen, the load shedding method is able to fulfill the load priority rithm curtails more load than other methods, in which the differ-
limit requirement for the entire bus system. ence ranges from 0% to 41%. The GOA algorithm curtails less load
Table 3 displays the details of amount of load that must be cur- in this system. Because of a higher value of load limitation using
tailed and the total remaining loads, based on the GOA algorithms. GA than using other methods (i.e., GOA, GW, and PSO) in the sys-
So as to evaluate the effectiveness of the offered technique, it is tem, an enhancement in the profile of voltage for most buses is
compared with other optimization methods, namely, GA, PSO, seen as shown in Fig. 9. Fig. 9 displays the comparison of the volt-
and GW optimization algorithms. As can be observed in Table 3, age profiles at hour 9:00 (in p.u). The details of the base case volt-
the total load demand in the system is approximately 2.575 MW. age profile in Fig. 9 can be found in [35], and [43]. As seen in Fig. 9,
The total amount of load curtailed by the proposed scheme is some voltage profile obtained by means of GA in comparison with
1.176 MW, leaving 1.399 MW for the entire residual load. The the obtained voltage using other methods are higher. In general,
entire amount of residual load recommended using GOA is more there is a small different in the profile of voltage arise owing to
than the amount calculated by GA (around 0.176 MW), PSO the load shedding executed using different aforesaid methods.
(around 0.088 MW), and GW (around 0.008 MW) algorithms

Fig. 5. The load profile and power generation on an hourly basis for island A. Fig. 7. Individual load demand by the proposed algorithm for island A at hour 9.00.

8
M. Ahmadipour, M. Murtadha Othman, Z. Salam et al. Ain Shams Engineering Journal 14 (2023) 101835

Table 3 Hence, in spite of the improvement of voltage profiles obtained by

The analysis of optimal load shedding using different models at hour 9.00 in the GA because of a large amount of load curtailment in the islanded
system.
system, it is not better than GOA and other methods in finding
Methods The total load The amount of The entire the optimum value of remaining load.
demand (MW) curtailed load (MW) remaining load
(MW)
GA 2.575 1.352 1.223 5.2. Performance of proposed method for other islanded systems
PSO 2.575 1.264 1.311
GW 2.575 1.184 1.391 The performance of GOA, GA, PSO, and GW load shedding
GOA 2.575 1.176 1.399 schemes are evaluated for other islanded systems, namely, islands
B, C, and D as shown in Fig. 4. These phenomena occurred in the
study system according to previous work [35], and [43]. The
island B occurred when the circuit breakers at buses 3, 23, and
26 are opened. The islanded system type B includes 16 loads,
with a maximum demand of 1.405 MW. Since the system is
cut-off at buses 3, 23, and 26, the demand must be supplied by
DG1, and DG2 units. The maximum supply by these two DG units
is 0.83 MW. Likewise, the maximum demand for islands C, and D,
are 2.335 MW, and 2.325 MW respectively. The demand for
island C is supplied by DG1, DG2, and DG3, with a maximum sup-
ply equal to 1.43 MW, whilst the demand for island D is supplied
by DG1, DG2, and DG4, with a maximum supply equal to
1.23 MW.
The load shedding procedures are the same as the adopted pro-
cedure for island A. In order to further estimate the efficiency of the
offered load shedding method, its performance is analyzed at hours
9.00. The load demand at this hour for islands B, C, and D is equal to
0.974 MW, 1.619 MW, and 1.612 MW respectively as exposed in
Table 4. The percentage of power mismatch for islands B, C, and
D is equal to 16, 37, and 25% respectively, whilst for island A was
equal to 45%. Table 4 denotes the amount of load curtailment
which is calculated and the whole residual load which is suggested
Fig. 8. Comparison of performance of GOA and other methods in terms of by different methods in B, C, and D islands. As can be observed, the
individual load demand for island A.
performance of GOA in the load shedding method is better than
other methods with less value of load curtailed for totally islanded
states.
Moreover, at time 9.00, Fig. 10 denotes the comparison of the
performance of GOA, GA, PSO, and GW algorithms in terms of indi-
vidual load demand for B, C, and D power islands. As seen, the GA
based technique curtails more load in comparison with other
methods in islanded systems. As previously mentioned, because
of a large amount of load curtailment by GA, an enhancement in
the profile of voltage on utmost buses, is shown in Fig. 11. In gen-
eral, there is a small difference in the profile of voltage arises owing
to the load shedding implemented using different aforesaid
methods.
Finally, the summary results of the performance of the pro-
posed method in respect of fitness value, VSM, and the value of
load should be curtailed from the system are compared with
other methods and tabulated in Table 5. It is noticeable that
the performance of the GOA-based technique in optimal load
shedding is better than other techniques. The calculated fitness
value by GOA is higher than other techniques and the voltage
stability margin and the value of load curtailment, which are
Fig. 9. Comparison of the obtained voltage profile by GOA and other methods at achieved by GOA are remarkably lesser than that achieved by
hour 9.00 for island A. other methods.

Table 4
The results of performance of load shedding scheme using different optimization techniques.

Island Load demand (MW) Power mismatch (%) The amount of load should be curtailed The total remaining load in the system
from the system (MW) (MW)
GA PSO GW GOA GA PSO GW GOA
B 0.974 16 0.212 0.197 0.192 0.162 0.762 0.777 0.782 0.812
C 1.619 37 0.700 0.667 0.653 0.616 0.919 0.952 0.966 1.003
D 1.612 25 0.537 0.508 0.465 0.451 1.075 1.104 1.147 1.161

9
M. Ahmadipour, M. Murtadha Othman, Z. Salam et al. Ain Shams Engineering Journal 14 (2023) 101835

Fig. 10. Comparison of GOA and other mentioned optimization methods in terms of
Fig. 11. Comparison of GOA and other mentioned optimization methods in terms of
individual load demand in (a) B island, (b) C island, (c) D island.
voltage profile in (a) B island, (b) C island, (c) D island.

10
M. Ahmadipour, M. Murtadha Othman, Z. Salam et al.
Table 5
Comparison of the performance of optimum load shedding by different optimization methods for different islanded systems at hour 9.00.
Island Fitness value Voltage stability margin
GA PSO GW GOA GA
A 1.8218 1.8658 1.9362 1.9787 0.9364
B 1.8384 1.8328 1.874 1.9286 0.8995
C 1.8726 1.8807 1.9263 1.9619 0.9154
D 1.7806 1.8082 1.8964 1.9482 0.9023
6. Conclusion
In this study, a novel technique is proposed to optimize load
shedding using the GOA. The GOA is used in conjunction with
the static voltage stability margin (VSM) to assess the voltage sta-
bility in the offered load shedding method. The VSM takes extra or
smaller amount of linear characteristics in the whole operational
area and therefore could be utilized to provide accurate results
with changeable load levels by extrapolation. The GOA-VSM shed-
ding scheme is optimized to handle the multi-objective con-
straints, namely the generation restrictions, allowable load
curtailment, and the load priority such that the system will contin-
uously provide the power to the critically selected loads. To assess
the effectiveness of the suggested load shedding method, a com-
prehensive evaluation is applied for the IEEE 33-bus system and
four DER units within different islanding situations. Additionally,
the effectiveness of performance of the GOA-based load shedding
is compared in terms of fitness value, voltage stability margin,
and percentage of load that should be curtailed with three well-
known optimization approaches (i.e., the particle swarm optimiza-
tion (PSO), grey wolf optimization (GW), and genetic algorithm
(GA)) under different islanded scenarios. The obtained results
show that the performance of the proposed method is better than
other methods with the less value of load curtailed for totally
islanded states (i.e., 45.67% for island A, 16.63% for island B,
38.05% for island C, and 27.98% for island D in this study). In addi-
tion, the results of the simulation display the efficacy of the GOA to
ensure voltage stability with the optimal load quantity to be shed
for dissimilar islanding scenarios.
Moreover, in future work, more complex conditions including
more disturbance, faults, and islanding will consider and the pro-
posed method will apply for precise microgrid monitoring.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the Long-Term Research Grant
(LRGS), Ministry of Education Malaysia for the program titled
‘‘Decarbonization of Grid with an Optimal Controller and Energy
Management for Energy Storage System in Microgrid Applications”
with project code LRGS/1/2018/UNITEN/01/1/3; and also by the
Research Management Centre (RMC), Universiti Teknologi MARA
(UiTM), Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia with project code 100-
RMC 5/3/SRP (019/2021). The authors would also like to acknowl-
edge RMC, UiTM for the facilities provided to support this research.
References
[1] Burger SP, Luke M. Business models for distributed energy resources: A review
and empirical analysis. Energy Policy 2017;109:230–48.
Ain Shams Engineering Journal 14 (2023) 101835
The amount of load should be curtailed (%)
PSO GW GOA GA PSO GW GOA
0.9330 0.9136 0.8941 52.50 49.08 45.98 45.67
0.8793 0.8606 0.8471 21.77 20.22 19.71 16.63
0.9136 0.9044 0.8819 43.24 41.19 40.33 38.05
0.8971 0.8781 0.8437 33.31 31.51 28.84 27.98
[2] Talaat, M., Alsayyari, A. S., Alblawi, A., & Hatata, A. Y. (2020). Hybrid-cloud-
based data processing for power system monitoring in smart grids. Sustainable
Cities and Society, 55, 102049.
[3] Rokrok E, Shafie-Khah M, Catalão JP. Review of primary voltage and frequency
control methods for inverter-based islanded microgrids with distributed
generation. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018;82:3225–35.
[4] Nikam V, Kalkhambkar V. A review on control strategies for microgrids with
distributed energy resources, energy storage systems, and electric vehicles.
International Transactions on Electrical Energy Systems 2021;31(1):e12607.
[5] Bakar NNA, Hassan MY, Sulaima MF, Mohd Nasir MN, Khamis A. Microgrid and
load shedding scheme during islanded mode: A review. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2017;71:161–9.
[6] Wang C, Mei S, Yu H, Cheng S, Du L, Yang P. Unintentional Islanding Transition
Control Strategy for Three-/Single-Phase Multimicrogrids Based on Artificial
Emotional Reinforcement Learning. IEEE Syst J 2021;15(4):5464–75.
[7] Mortaji H, Ow SH, Moghavvemi M, Almurib HAF. Load shedding and smart-
direct load control using internet of things in smart grid demand response
management. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 2017;53(6):5155–63.
[8] Sun M, Liu G, Popov M, Terzija V, Azizi S. Underfrequency Load Shedding using
Locally Estimated RoCoF of the Center of Inertia. IEEE Trans Power Syst
2021;36(5):4212–22.
[9] Boussadia F, Belkhiat S. A New Adaptive Underfrequency Load Shedding
Scheme to Improve Frequency Stability in Electric Power System. Journal
Européen des Systèmes Automatisés 2021;54(2):263–71.
[10] Chandra A, Pradhan AK. An adaptive underfrequency load shedding scheme in
the presence of solar photovoltaic plants. IEEE Syst J 2020.
[11] Javadi M, Amraee T. Mixed integer linear formulation for undervoltage load
shedding to provide voltage stability. IET Gener Transm Distrib 2018;12
(9):2095–104.
[12] Samuel IA, Katende J, Awosope CO, Awelewa AA. Prediction of voltage collapse
in electrical power system networks using a new voltage stability index.
International Journal of Applied Engineering Research 2017;12(2):190–9.
[13] Michaelson D, Mahmood H, Jiang J. A predictive energy management system
using pre-emptive load shedding for islanded photovoltaic microgrids. IEEE
Trans Ind Electron 2017;64(7):5440–8.
[14] Wang C, Li X, Tian T, Xu Z, Chen R. Coordinated control of passive transition
from grid-connected to islanded operation for three/single-phase hybrid
multimicrogrids considering speed and smoothness. IEEE Trans Ind Electron
2019;67(3):1921–31.
[15] Mohammadi J, Ajaei FB. Adaptive Time Delay Strategy for Reliable Load
Shedding in the Direct-Current Microgrid. IEEE Access 2020;8:114509–18.
[16] Rahmani S, Rezaei-Zare A, Rezaei-Zare M, Hooshyar A. Voltage and frequency
recovery in an islanded inverter-based microgrid considering load type and
power factor. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2019;10(6):6237–47.
[17] Tamilselvan V. A hybrid PSO-ABC algorithm for optimal load shedding and
improving voltage stability. Int J Manuf Technol Manage 2020;34(6):577–97.
[18] Jallad J, Mekhilef S, Mokhlis H, Laghari J, Badran O. Application of hybrid meta-
heuristic Techniques for optimal load shedding planning and operation in an
islanded distribution network integrated with distributed generation. Energies
2018;11(5):1134.
[19] Larik RM, Mustafa MW, Aman MN, Jumani TA, Sajid S, Panjwani MK. An
improved algorithm for optimal load shedding in power systems. Energies
2018;11(7):1808.
[20] Abid, M. S., Apon, H. J., Ahmed, A., & Morshed, K. A. (2022). Chaotic slime
mould optimization algorithm for optimal load-shedding in distribution
system. Ain Shams Engineering Journal, 13(4), 101659.
[21] Tamilselvan V, Jayabarathi T. A hybrid method for optimal load shedding and
improving voltage stability. Ain Shams Eng J 2016;7(1):223–32.
[22] Mageshvaran R, Jayabarathi T. Steady state load shedding to mitigate blackout
in power systems using an improved harmony search algorithm. Ain Shams
Eng J 2015;6(3):819–34.
[23] Mageshvaran R, Jayabarathi T. GSO based optimization of steady state load
shedding in power systems to mitigate blackout during generation
contingencies. Ain Shams Eng J 2015;6(1):145–60.
[24] Pourghasem, P., Seyedi, H., & Zare, K. (2022). A new optimal under-voltage load
shedding scheme for voltage collapse prevention in a multi-microgrid system.
Electric Power Systems Research, 203, 107629.
[25] Saboune S, Ladjici AA, Tiguercha A. Adaptive decentralized fuzzy logic-based
underfrequency load shedding to enhance power system stability.
International Transactions on Electrical Energy Systems 2021;31(11):e13087.
[26] Ebeed M, Kamel S, Aleem SHA, Abdelaziz AY. Optimal allocation of
compensators. In: Electric distribution network
planning. Singapore: Springer; 2018. p. 321–53.
11
M. Ahmadipour, M. Murtadha Othman, Z. Salam et al.
[27] Ahanch, M., Asasi, M. S., & Amiri, M. S. (2017, December). A Grasshopper
Optimization Algorithm to solve optimal distribution system reconfiguration
and distributed generation placement problem. In 2017 IEEE 4th international
conference on knowledge-based engineering and innovation (KBEI) (pp. 0659-
0666). IEEE.
[28] Barman M, Choudhury ND, Sutradhar S. A regional hybrid GOA-SVM model
based on similar day approach for short-term load forecasting in Assam, India.
Energy 2018;145:710–20.
[29] Hauqe, M. H. (2006, June). A linear static voltage stability margin for radial
distribution systems. In 2006 IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting
(pp. 6-pp). IEEE.
[30] Elazab OS, Hasanien HM, Alsaidan I, Abdelaziz AY, Muyeen SM. Parameter
estimation of three diode photovoltaic model using grasshopper optimization
algorithm. Energies 2020;13(2):497.
[31] Talaat, M., Farahat, M. A., Mansour, N., & Hatata, A. Y. (2020). Load forecasting
based on grasshopper optimization and a multilayer feed-forward neural
network using regressive approach. Energy, 196, 117087.
[32] Saremi S, Mirjalili S, Lewis A. Grasshopper optimisation algorithm: theory and
application. Adv Eng Softw 2017;105:30–47.
[33] Talaat, M., Hatata, A. Y., Alsayyari, A. S., & Alblawi, A. (2020). A smart load
management system based on the grasshopper optimization algorithm using
the under-frequency load shedding approach. Energy, 190, 116423.
[34] Aghamohammadi M, Hashemi SS, Ghazizadeh MS. Improving voltage stability
margin using voltage profile and sensitivity analysis by neural network.
Iranian Journal of Electrical and Electronic Engineering 2011;7(1):33–41.
[35] Khamis A, Shareef H, Mohamed A. Islanding detection and load shedding
scheme for radial distribution systems integrated with dispersed generations.
IET Gener Transm Distrib 2015;9(15):2261–75.
[36] University of Washington, Power Systems Test Case Archive. Available online:
https://www.ee.washington. edu/research/pstca/ (accessed on 12 June 2017).
[37] Rao RS, Ravindra K, Satish K, Narasimham SVL. Power loss minimization in
distribution system using network reconfiguration in the presence of
distributed generation. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2012;28(1):317–25.
[38] K N, Siddiqui SA, Fozdar M. Optimal placement of distributed generators in
radial distribution system for reducing the effect of islanding. J Electr Eng
Technol 2016;11(3):551–9.
[39] Hamada MM, Wahab MA, Hemdan NG. Simple and efficient method for
steady-state voltage stability assessment of radial distribution systems. Electr
Power Syst Res 2010;80(2):152–60.
[40] Jabian ME, Funaki R, Murata J. Load shedding optimization considering
consumer appliance prioritization using genetic algorithm for real-time
application. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2018;51(28):486–91.
[41] Ketabi A, Fini MH. Adaptive underfrequency load shedding using particle
swarm optimization algorithm. J Appl Res Technol 2017;15(1):54–60.
[42] Mirjalili S, Mirjalili SM, Lewis A. Grey wolf optimizer. Adv Eng Softw
2014;69:46–61.
[43] Vita V. Development of a decision-making algorithm for the optimum size and
placement of distributed generation units in distribution networks. Energies
2017;10(9):1433.
Masoud Ahmadipour received the B.S. and the M.S.
degree from Iran in 2007 and 2011, respectively, and the
Ph.D. degree from Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM),
Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia, in 2019, all in electrical
engineering with focus on power systems. Currently, he
is an associate researcher at the faculty of electrical
engineering, University Teknologi MARA (UiTM), 40450
Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia. He is also attached to
UiTM-Solar Energy Research (U-SER) Center. His
research interests include renewable energy, power
system analysis, power system protection, signal pro-
cessing, computational intelligence, and smart grid.
Muhammad Murtadha Othman received his B.Eng.
(Hons) from Staffordshire University, England in 1998;
M.Sc from Universiti Putra Malaysia in 2000 and Ph.D.
from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia in 2006. He is
currently working as a Director for the UiTM-Solar
Research Institute (SRI), a center under the project of
50MW LSSPV at Gambang, Pahang. He is also an Asso-
ciate Professor at the School of Electrical Engineering,
Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Malaysia. He served
as the Head of the Department of the Centre for Elec-
trical Power Engineering Studies (CEPES) from February
2009 to December 2010. From 2012 until the present,
he served two times as the Deputy Director for the collaborative research project
under the auspices of the Ministry of Energy, Green Technology and Water (KeT-
THA), Malaysia, and also the Public Works Department (JKR), Malaysia. He also
served as the Deputy Director for service commercialization on energy efficiency
12
Ain Shams Engineering Journal 14 (2023) 101835
technology under collaboration with the Centre of Excellence for Engineering and
Technology JKR (CREaTE), Malaysia. He has served as the panel assessor for research
grant proposals at the Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE), Malaysia and the
Latvian Science Council, Europe. His area of research interests is artificial intelli-
gence, energy efficiency, transfer capability assessment, integrated resource plan-
ning, demand-side management, hybrid renewable energy, power system stability,
reliability studies in a deregulated power system, power quality, and active power
filters.
Prof. Dr. Zainal Salam (Senior Member’19) obtained his
B.Sc (Electronics Engineering), M.E.E (Electrical Engi-
neering) and Ph.D. (Power Electronics), from California
State University (Chico, California), Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia (UTM Kuala Lumpur) and University of Birm-
ingham (UK), in 1985, 1989 and 1997, respectively. He
is now the Professor in Power Electronics and Renew-
able Energy at the Centre of Electrical Energy Systems,
School of Electrical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia. From 2011-13, Prof.
Salam served as an Editor of IEEE TRANSACTION ON
SUSTAINABLE ENERGY. He has authored and coauthored
over 250 papers in various technical journals and conference proceedings. He also
represented the country as the expert for the International Energy Agency (IEA) PV
Power Systems Task 13 Working Group, which focus on the reliability and perfor-
mance of PV power system. Prof. Salam was the Vice-Chair of IEEE Power Elec-
tronics, Industrial Electronics and Industry Application Joint Chapter, Malaysia
Section (2011-2013). He is involved in over 30 projects and consulting work on
power converters, solar energy, and integration of power electronics in renewable
energy systems.
Moath Alrifaey received a B.S. degree in electronic
engineering from IBB University, Yemen, in 2005, an M.
S. degree in engineering management from the Delft
University of Technology& Taiz University in 2014, and
a Ph.D. degree in industrial engineering from Universiti
Putra Malaysia, Malaysia, in 2020. From 2008 to 2016,
he worked as a Control System and Instrumentation
Engineer in an oil and gas plant, in Yemen. Currently, He
is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow with the Faculty of
Engineering Technology and Built Environment, UCSI
University. His current research interests include intel-
ligent manufacturing, reliable maintenance, and com-
putational intelligence, focusing on problems of Classification, Optimization, and
Machine Learning, deeply in industrial applications and Big Data Engineering.
Hussein Mohammed Ridha received a B.S. degree in
the Department of Computer Engineering, the Univer-
sity of Al-Mustansiriyah in 2012 and an M.S.E degree in
2020 at Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), Malaysia. He is
currently doing his Ph.D. in electrical power engineering
at UPM, Malaysia. His research interests include
renewable energy, modeling of the PV cells, Optimiza-
tion of the PV system, and Multi-criteria decision mak-
ing. He has several ISI-published papers.
Veerapandiyan Veerasamy (Member, IEEE) received
his Bachelor’s degree in Electrical and Electronics Engi-
neering from Panimalar Engineering College, Chennai,
India, in 2013. Masters of Engineering in Power Systems
Engineering from Government College of Technology,
Coimbatore, India, in 2015. Since 2015, he was working
as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Electrical
and Electronics Engineering, Rajalakshmi Engineering
College, Chennai, India. He has completed his Ph.D. in
Power Systems from Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malay-
sia, in 2021. Currently, he is a Research Fellow at
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore whose
research area includes the design of robust controllers, Distributed and Decen-
tralized control, Fault classification, Power Flow Analysis, and Recurrent Neural
networks.