Figure 1 - uploaded by Syed Ali Abbas Kazmi
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
This paper offers an enhanced voltage stability assessment index (VSAI) and loss minimalize condition (LMC) centered integrated planning approach. The proposed method aims at the simultaneous attainment of voltage stability, loss minimizations and various other related objectives with the employment of multiple distributed generation (DG) units, in...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... literature, it is designated with term VSI_L. The electrical equivalent LDS model is shown in Figure 1, which is based on three-wire equivalent distribution system, also considered in References [4,37,38]. A type-I loop topology, as advocated in Reference [28], is considered due to its simplicity and feasibility, where two radial feeders (branches) are joined to make a closed-loop and are fed by the same power transformer. ...
Context 2
... Unbs are the sending end (SB) bus voltages, nbsl is the number of SB, receiving end bus (RB) bus, tie-line-branch (TB), tie-switch (TS) and ITB is the TB current, as shown in LDS in Figure 1. ...
Context 3
... PLS across load growth can justify the employment of multiple DG sitting and sizing in MDS and this impact will be addressed in our future work. 1,7,3) DG_3@7 0.9742@7/ 0.9616@7 ...
Context 4
... trends and associated U-profiles from the perspective of each planning approach variants in-terms of respective scenarios of C2, are illustrated in Figures 10a,b and 11a,b. The evaluation of results pertaining to C2 with all associated scenarios is presented in Table 3. ...
Context 5
... comparative analysis of C2 with all relevant scenarios are illustrated in Figure 12a,b and covers all the performance evaluation indicators (PEIs) (as aforementioned in Section 4.4). It is worth mentioning that an increase in reactive power support from DG results in effective L_Min as shown in C2 and U_profile achieved is nearly identical to those achieved in C1. ...
Context 6
... can be observed in Figure 12a that a significant PLM and QLM were achieved with optimal PDG with multiple (three) DG sitting and sizing, in comparison with case 1 (mentioned in Figure 9a). Similarly, Figure 12b shows that a significant reduction was observed in terms of PLC and high margin in PLS have achieved with three DGs placement, as compare to C1 (mentioned in Figure 9b). ...
Context 7
... can be observed in Figure 12a that a significant PLM and QLM were achieved with optimal PDG with multiple (three) DG sitting and sizing, in comparison with case 1 (mentioned in Figure 9a). Similarly, Figure 12b shows that a significant reduction was observed in terms of PLC and high margin in PLS have achieved with three DGs placement, as compare to C1 (mentioned in Figure 9b). Table 3. Results of proposed planning approach under Case 2 (33-bus-MDS) aim at L_Min. ...
Context 8
... TS3 and TS5 in 69-bus TBS are closed to achieve multiple-loop configured MDS. The numerical results in the form of relevant VSI/VSAI trends and U-profiles of RDS, LDS and MDS are shown in Figure 13a,b. ...
Context 9
... (b) Figure 13. Base case 0b with no DG (Steps 1-4) (a) VSAI with no DG in 69-Bus test distribution system; (b) Voltage profile (U_Profile) with no DG in 69-Bus test distribution system. ...
Context 10
... Figure 13a, it is noticed that bus 65 is the weakest bus according to VSI_R [17]. However, in MDS, bus 61 is the weakest bus according to VSI_L [37,38], VSAI_MI and VSAI_MA. ...
Context 11
... in MDS, bus 61 is the weakest bus according to VSI_L [37,38], VSAI_MI and VSAI_MA. It is observed in Figure 13b that the U-profile at various buses is below the minimum acceptable voltage limit, (0.95 P.U). The findings of the proposed approach with no DG are illustrated in Table 4. ...
Context 12
... Steps 8 and 9 (of PA1), DG_3 sitting and sizing with associated conditions met, are designated by C3/S3. The VSAI trends and associated U-profiles from the perspective of VSAI_MI-LMC and VSAI_MA-LMC of all scenarios of case 2, are illustrated in Figures 14a,b and 15a,b. ...
Context 13
... of results pertaining to C3 with all associated scenarios is presented in Table 5. The comparative analysis aim at case C3 with all relevant scenarios is illustrated with PEIs in Figure 16a,b. It is observed in Figure 16a that optimal PDG (three DGs) sitting and sizing results in a noteworthy PLM and QLM by percentage. ...
Context 14
... comparative analysis aim at case C3 with all relevant scenarios is illustrated with PEIs in Figure 16a,b. It is observed in Figure 16a that optimal PDG (three DGs) sitting and sizing results in a noteworthy PLM and QLM by percentage. Similarly, the results in Figure 16b justified the reduction in PLC and an increase in the PLS margin. ...
Context 15
... is observed in Figure 16a that optimal PDG (three DGs) sitting and sizing results in a noteworthy PLM and QLM by percentage. Similarly, the results in Figure 16b justified the reduction in PLC and an increase in the PLS margin. The increased ACI can be justified on the basis of a better performance evaluation, achieved in C3. (2578,61,1) DG_1@61 ...
Context 16
... respective C4 aims at L_min and pf considered in C4 is 0.82 ± 2.5% lagging. The VSAI_MI- LMC and VSAI_MA-LMC trends and associated U-profiles, from the viewpoint of each C3 scenarios is distinctively illustrated in Figures 17a,b and 18a,b. ...
Context 17
... of results pertaining to C4 with all associated scenarios is presented in Table 6. The comparative analysis of C4 with all relevant scenarios from the viewpoint of PEIs are illustrated in Figure 19a,b. It is also interesting to know that increase in reactive power support from DG have result in almost the same U_profile trend as achieved in C3. ...
Context 18
... only difference from the TDS perspective is the selection of TSs (TS3 and TS5), which convert RDS to a multiple loop topology based MDS. The TS3 resides within the TB between buses 15 and 46. Likewise, TS5 resides within the TB joining buses 27 and 65. The TS3 and TS5 in 69-bus TBS are closed to achieve multiple-loop configured MDS. The numerical results in the form of relevant VSI/VSAI trends and U-profiles of RDS, LDS and MDS are shown in Figure ...
Context 19
... this work, the VSI for single loop configured LDS that is derived from our earlier publications [37,38] is used as a reference standard. The relevant VSI in Reference [37] is based on biquadratic method and VSI-LMC planning method is used for single loop LDS optimization. Besides comparison, the VSI in References [37,38] has been engaged to find out effectiveness of proposed VSAIs via comparison of attained results. In literature, it is designated with term VSI_L. The electrical equivalent LDS model is shown in Figure 1, which is based on three-wire equivalent distribution system, also considered in References [4,37,38]. A type-I loop topology, as advocated in Reference [28], is considered due to its simplicity and feasibility, where two radial feeders (branches) are joined to make a closed-loop and are fed by the same power transformer. Details on the VSI_L can be found in Reference [37]. The expressions for VSI_L and relevant feasible voltage solution on receiving end bus (URBI), are shown in Equations (1) and (2) ...
Context 20
... Unbs are the sending end (SB) bus voltages, nbsl is the number of SB, receiving end bus (RB) bus, tie-line-branch (TB), tie-switch (TS) and ITB is the TB current, as shown in LDS in Figure ...
Context 21
... Figure 13a, it is noticed that bus 65 is the weakest bus according to VSI_R [17]. However, in MDS, bus 61 is the weakest bus according to VSI_L [37,38], VSAI_MI and VSAI_MA. It is observed in Figure 13b that the U-profile at various buses is below the minimum acceptable voltage limit, (0.95 P.U). The findings of the proposed approach with no DG are illustrated in Table 4. The case 3 (C3) corresponds to the VSAI -LMC based planning approaches, considering 69-bus TDS. Subsequent to base case 0b, the DG_1 is placed in accordance with the Step 5 of computation procedure of PA1. This gives the first scenario of C3 and is shown as C3/S1. Each DG in this case is operating at pf = 0.9 ± 2.5%, primarily aiming at U-Max along with achieving other objectives. According to Steps 6 and 7 (of PA1), DG_2 (sitting and sizing) is designated as C3/S2. In Steps 8 and 9 (of PA1), DG_3 sitting and sizing with associated conditions met, are designated by C3/S3. The VSAI trends and associated U-profiles from the perspective of VSAI_MI-LMC and VSAI_MA-LMC of all scenarios of case 2, are illustrated in Figures 14a,b and ...
Context 22
... Figure 13a, it is noticed that bus 65 is the weakest bus according to VSI_R [17]. However, in MDS, bus 61 is the weakest bus according to VSI_L [37,38], VSAI_MI and VSAI_MA. It is observed in Figure 13b that the U-profile at various buses is below the minimum acceptable voltage limit, (0.95 P.U). The findings of the proposed approach with no DG are illustrated in Table 4. The case 3 (C3) corresponds to the VSAI -LMC based planning approaches, considering 69-bus TDS. Subsequent to base case 0b, the DG_1 is placed in accordance with the Step 5 of computation procedure of PA1. This gives the first scenario of C3 and is shown as C3/S1. Each DG in this case is operating at pf = 0.9 ± 2.5%, primarily aiming at U-Max along with achieving other objectives. According to Steps 6 and 7 (of PA1), DG_2 (sitting and sizing) is designated as C3/S2. In Steps 8 and 9 (of PA1), DG_3 sitting and sizing with associated conditions met, are designated by C3/S3. The VSAI trends and associated U-profiles from the perspective of VSAI_MI-LMC and VSAI_MA-LMC of all scenarios of case 2, are illustrated in Figures 14a,b and ...
Context 23
... Figure 13a, it is noticed that bus 65 is the weakest bus according to VSI_R [17]. However, in MDS, bus 61 is the weakest bus according to VSI_L [37,38], VSAI_MI and VSAI_MA. It is observed in Figure 13b that the U-profile at various buses is below the minimum acceptable voltage limit, (0.95 P.U). The findings of the proposed approach with no DG are illustrated in Table 4. The case 3 (C3) corresponds to the VSAI -LMC based planning approaches, considering 69-bus TDS. Subsequent to base case 0b, the DG_1 is placed in accordance with the Step 5 of computation procedure of PA1. This gives the first scenario of C3 and is shown as C3/S1. Each DG in this case is operating at pf = 0.9 ± 2.5%, primarily aiming at U-Max along with achieving other objectives. According to Steps 6 and 7 (of PA1), DG_2 (sitting and sizing) is designated as C3/S2. In Steps 8 and 9 (of PA1), DG_3 sitting and sizing with associated conditions met, are designated by C3/S3. The VSAI trends and associated U-profiles from the perspective of VSAI_MI-LMC and VSAI_MA-LMC of all scenarios of case 2, are illustrated in Figures 14a,b and ...
Context 24
... to a minor numerical value. The values in ΔU_Ref, ΔU_MI and ΔU_MA after DG_3, across buses 18-33 and 25-29, are (0.0000, 0.0004, 0.0001) and (0.0010, 0.0064, 0.0013). Moreover, it is also observed that VSAI_MI based values results in more deviation as compare to VSAI_MA based numerical values. Figure 9a that a significant PLM and QLM were achieved with optimal PDG with multiple (three) DG sitting and sizing (in both C1/S3a and C1/S3b). Similarly, Figure 9b shows that a significant reduction was observed in terms of PLC and a high margin in PLS was achieved with optimal sitting and sizing of three DGs with respective planning approaches, as illustrated by C1/S3a and C1/S3b. However, ACI increases with an increase in DG size. It is worth mentioning that the cost in terms of ACI can surpass in a trade-off solution if a better performance evaluation is achieved. Moreover, PLS across load growth can justify the employment of multiple DG sitting and sizing in MDS and this impact will be addressed in our future work. 1,7,3) DG_3@7 0.9742@7/ ...
Context 25
... (b) Figure 13. Base case 0b with no DG (Steps 1-4) (a) VSAI with no DG in 69-Bus test distribution system; (b) Voltage profile (U_Profile) with no DG in 69-Bus test distribution ...
Context 26
... 1.004@61 The respective C4 aims at L_min and pf considered in C4 is 0.82 ± 2.5% lagging. The VSAI_MI- LMC and VSAI_MA-LMC trends and associated U-profiles, from the viewpoint of each C3 scenarios is distinctively illustrated in Figures 17a,b and ...
Context 27
... of results pertaining to C3 with all associated scenarios is presented in Table 5. The comparative analysis aim at case C3 with all relevant scenarios is illustrated with PEIs in Figure 16a,b. It is observed in Figure 16a that optimal PDG (three DGs) sitting and sizing results in a noteworthy PLM and QLM by percentage. Similarly, the results in Figure 16b justified the reduction in PLC and an increase in the PLS margin. The increased ACI can be justified on the basis of a better performance evaluation, achieved in C3. (2578,61,1) ...
Context 28
... of results pertaining to C3 with all associated scenarios is presented in Table 5. The comparative analysis aim at case C3 with all relevant scenarios is illustrated with PEIs in Figure 16a,b. It is observed in Figure 16a that optimal PDG (three DGs) sitting and sizing results in a noteworthy PLM and QLM by percentage. Similarly, the results in Figure 16b justified the reduction in PLC and an increase in the PLS margin. The increased ACI can be justified on the basis of a better performance evaluation, achieved in C3. (2578,61,1) ...
Context 29
... of results pertaining to C3 with all associated scenarios is presented in Table 5. The comparative analysis aim at case C3 with all relevant scenarios is illustrated with PEIs in Figure 16a,b. It is observed in Figure 16a that optimal PDG (three DGs) sitting and sizing results in a noteworthy PLM and QLM by percentage. Similarly, the results in Figure 16b justified the reduction in PLC and an increase in the PLS margin. The increased ACI can be justified on the basis of a better performance evaluation, achieved in C3. (2578,61,1) ...
Context 30
... comparative analysis of C2 with all relevant scenarios are illustrated in Figure 12a,b and covers all the performance evaluation indicators (PEIs) (as aforementioned in Section 4.4). It is worth mentioning that an increase in reactive power support from DG results in effective L_Min as shown in C2 and U_profile achieved is nearly identical to those achieved in ...
Context 31
... DG_3 (sitting and sizing) employment during Steps 8 and 9 (C4/S3), LMC is achieved with reducing loop currents (ILP1 and ILP2) across both TS5 (buses 27 and 65) and TS3 (buses 15 and 46). The respective voltage difference values (for C4/S2) in ΔU_Ref, ΔU_MI and ΔU_MA, across TS5 is (0.0001, 0.00001 and 0.00012) and across TS3 is (0.0001, 0.0005 and 0.0001). Evaluation of results pertaining to C4 with all associated scenarios is presented in Table 6. The comparative analysis of C4 with all relevant scenarios from the viewpoint of PEIs are illustrated in Figure 19a,b. It is also interesting to know that increase in reactive power support from DG have result in almost the same U_profile trend as achieved in ...
Context 32
... trends and associated U-profiles from the perspective of each planning approach variants in-terms of respective scenarios of C2, are illustrated in Figures 10a,b and 11a,b. The evaluation of results pertaining to C2 with all associated scenarios is presented in Table ...
Context 33
... can be observed in Figure 12a that a significant PLM and QLM were achieved with optimal PDG with multiple (three) DG sitting and sizing, in comparison with case 1 (mentioned in Figure 9a). Similarly, Figure 12b shows that a significant reduction was observed in terms of PLC and high margin in PLS have achieved with three DGs placement, as compare to C1 (mentioned in Figure 9b). Table 3. Results of proposed planning approach under Case 2 (33-bus-MDS) aim at ...
Context 34
... can be observed in Figure 12a that a significant PLM and QLM were achieved with optimal PDG with multiple (three) DG sitting and sizing, in comparison with case 1 (mentioned in Figure 9a). Similarly, Figure 12b shows that a significant reduction was observed in terms of PLC and high margin in PLS have achieved with three DGs placement, as compare to C1 (mentioned in Figure 9b). Table 3. Results of proposed planning approach under Case 2 (33-bus-MDS) aim at ...
Similar publications
This paper offers a new improved voltage stability assessment index (VSAI_B)-centered planning approach, aiming at the attainment of technical and cost related objectives with simultaneous multiple asset deployment in a mesh distribution systems (MDS). The assets such as multiple distributed generation (DG) and distributed static compensator (D-STA...
Citations
... In [153], several techniques were examined to identify and address some rules for DG integrated mesh type networks. Some other approaches, such as multiobjective-based (MOGA) [137], sensitivity method [154], voltage stability index (VSI), MINLP [155,156], nonlinear programming (NLP), power loss sensitivity (PLS) [147], PSO [165], enhanced voltage stability assessment index (VSAI), loss minimalize condition (LMC) approach [148], multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) [157], integrated decision-making planning approach including VSAI, loss minimization condition, and multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) [149], and variational algorithm [150], have been reported by different research groups with the aim of power loss and cost minimization, energy loss minimization, and voltage profile enhancement. By overcoming the limits of traditional Shapley value combinatorial explosion, [38] suggested a loss allocation (LA) approach to offer an empirical alternative for both RDN and MDN. ...
To enhance the reliability and resilience of power systems and achieve reliable delivery of power to end users, smart distribution networks (SDNs) play a vital role. The conventional distribution network is transforming into an active one by incorporating a higher degree of automation. Replacing the traditional absence of manual actions, energy delivery is becoming increasingly dependent on intelligent active system management. As an emerging grid modernization concept, the smart grid addresses a wide range of economic and environmental concerns, especially by integrating a wide range of active technologies at distribution level. At the same time, these active technologies are causing a slew of technological problems in terms of power quality and stability. The development of such strategies and approaches that can improve SDN infrastructure in terms of planning, operation, and control has always been essential. As a result, a substantial number of studies have been conducted in these areas over the last 10–15 years. The current literature lacks a combined systematic analysis of the planning, operation, and control of SDN technologies. This paper conducts a systematic survey of the state-of-the-art advancements in SDN planning, operation, and control over the last 10 years. The reviewed literature is structured so that each SDN technology is discussed sequentially from the viewpoints of planning, operation, and then control. A comprehensive analysis of practical SND concepts across the globe is also presented in later sections. The key constraints and future research opportunities in the existing literature are discussed in the final part. This review specifically assists readers in comprehending current trends in SDN planning, operation, and control, as well as identifying the need for further research to contribute to the field.
... LDN/MDN-configured ADNs have been reviewed with indices-based asset optimization methods, i.e., analytical/numerical and hybrid techniques [5][6][7][8][9][16][17][18][35][36][37][38][39][40]. These methodologies mostly aim at techno-economic objectives such as loss minimization (LM), voltage profile stabilization (VPS), DG penetration (DGP), reliability, and concerning cost indices. ...
... The study in [39] reviewed voltage stability indices (VSI) evaluated across radially configured DGs and encompasses the technical perspective only. In recent work reported in [40,41] for MDNs, two different variants of an integrated planning approach integrating an improved voltage stability assessment indices (VSAI), also interchangeably used as VSI, (designated as VSAI_A and VSAI_B or simply VSI_A and VSI_B), as well as the loss minimization condition (LMC), were used for optimal optimization of assets in MDNs such as DGs only and REG-D-STATCOM sets for techno-economic targets under normal load. However, VSIs in [40,41] have conflicting critical criteria of stability and exhibit utilization issues when considered simultaneously. ...
... In recent work reported in [40,41] for MDNs, two different variants of an integrated planning approach integrating an improved voltage stability assessment indices (VSAI), also interchangeably used as VSI, (designated as VSAI_A and VSAI_B or simply VSI_A and VSI_B), as well as the loss minimization condition (LMC), were used for optimal optimization of assets in MDNs such as DGs only and REG-D-STATCOM sets for techno-economic targets under normal load. However, VSIs in [40,41] have conflicting critical criteria of stability and exhibit utilization issues when considered simultaneously. Another improved variant of [41] based on VSI_B and LMC followed by MCDMs in terms of the integrated decision-making planning (IDMP) approach in [42] was evaluated across techno-economic criteria considering a planning horizon of five years. ...
Abstract: Modern distribution mechanisms within the smart grid paradigm are considered both
reliable in nature and interconnected in topology. In this paper, a multiple-criteria-based sustainable
planning (MCSP) approach is presented that serves as a future planning tool for interconnected
distribution mechanisms and aims to find a feasible solution among conflicting criteria of various
genres. The proposed methodology is based on three stages. In the stage 1, a weighted voltage
stability index (VSI_W) and loss minimization condition (LMC) based approach aims at optimal asset
optimization (sitting and sizing). In this stage, an evaluation of alternatives (solutions) is carried
out across four dimensions (technical, economic, environmental, and social) of performance metrics.
The assets considered in the evaluations include distributed generation (DG), renewable DGs, i.e.,
photovoltaic (PV), wind, and distributed static compensator (D-STATCOM) units. In the stage 2,
various multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) methodologies are applied to ascertain the best
trade-off among the available solutions in terms of techno-cost (economic) (TCPE), environmento-
social (ESPE), and techno-economic-environmental-socio (TEES) performance evaluations (OPE).
In the stage 3, the alternatives are evaluated across multiple load growth horizons of 5 years each.
The proposed MCSP approach is evaluated across a mesh-configured 33-bus active distribution
network (ADN) and an actual NUST (which is a university in Islamabad, Pakistan) microgrid (MG),
with various variants of load growth. The numerical findings of the proposed MCSP approach are
compared with reported works the literature supports its validity and can serve as an important
planning tool for interconnected distribution mechanisms for researchers and planning engineers.
... In the same manner VSI for LDS has some limitations for MDS. Two enhanced VSI techniques (VSI_I and VSI_A) for MDS model are presented in [19]. Although, only constant power load model is used. ...
... The methodology used in this paper for finding the suitable location for DGs is described in [19]. There are many VSI methodologies for RDS presented in literature. ...
... The expressions of are described in [19]. The node having lowest value of VSI_A is the weakest node of system and favorable location for DG penetration. ...
... Despite the effort of presenting the solutions to the Pakistan power deficiency and issues of transmission and distribution losses, the previous research carried out does not give a proper way to cater the situation efficiently within shortest period of time and there is no research carried out that shows some cost to benefit analysis of the presented work. An extensive study [13] on Radial Distribution System (RDS) to Mesh Distribution System (MDS) conversion and improvement in voltage profile and loss minimization is presented. This paper also emphasizes on the planning of optimal DG placement. ...
... For efficient utilization of energy, loss minimization with the improvement of voltage profile is also carried out. IEEE 69 radial and mesh bus system is developed considering the optimal location for the DG installation as done in the study [13]. ...
... Due to this, the voltage profile, system security and reliability is improved. VSI for MDS referred [13] as mentioned in (1) is used for the weak node identification for the DG penetration after the load growth of the 69 bus system. ...
The integration of distributed generations (DGs) to the distribution networks is increasing day by day to reduce the pressure of rising load demand. The excessive penetration of the DGs at improper locations leads to performance deterioration in terms of higher losses, over-voltages, poor voltage stability and changes in fault levels. Thus, in this paper, the DGs' optimal location, size and power factor, capable of satisfying maximum load demand, are obtained in distribution networks using performance indices related to power loss, voltage stability, short-circuit current deviation and substation power intake. The optimisation is performed using particle swarm optimization and chaotic particle swarm optimisation algorithms considering the voltage and current constraints. A new voltage stability index that remains unaffected by radial or mesh flow of current in the network is proposed to quantify the voltage stability of the system. The short-circuit current deviation index is formulated to decrease the deviations in fault level, so the existing protective devices, with minimum or no changes in their settings, protect the system having DGs. The minimisation of the substation power index causes an increase in penetration of the DGs. The optimal power factor of the DGs gives better loss reduction. The proposed methodology is also applied to obtain optimal penetration of the DGs at their optimal locations for each hour of 96-h load profile representing the load curve of four seasons of a year. The methodology is tested on 33-node and 69-node distribution systems in both radial and mesh configurations.
The modern distribution networks under the smart grid paradigm have been considered both interconnected and reliable. In grid modernization concepts, the optimal asset optimization across a certain planning horizon is of core importance. Modern planning problems are more inclined towards a feasible solution amongst conflicting criteria. In this paper, an integrated decision-making planning (IDMP) approach is proposed. The proposed methodology includes voltage stability assessment indices linked with loss minimization condition-based approach, and is integrated with different multi-criteria decision-making methodologies (MCDM), followed by unanimous decision making (UDM). The proposed IDMP approach aims at optimal assets sitting and sizing in a meshed distribution network to find a trade-off solution with various asset types across normal and load growth horizons. An initial evaluation is carried out with assets such as distributed generation (DG), photovoltaic (PV)-based renewable DG, and distributed static compensator (D-STATCOM) units. The solutions for various cases of asset optimization and respective alternatives focusing on technical only, economic only, and techno-economic objectives across the planning horizon have been evaluated. Later, various prominent MCDM methodologies are applied to find a trade-off solution across different cases and scenarios of assets optimization. Finally, UDM is applied to find trade-off solutions amongst various MCDM methodologies across normal and load growth levels. The proposed approach is carried out across a 33-bus meshed configured distribution network. Findings from the proposed IDMP approach are compared with available works reported in the literature. The numerical results achieved have validated the effectiveness of the proposed planning approach in terms of better performance and an effective trade-off solution across various asset types.
This paper offers a new improved voltage stability assessment index (VSAI_B)-centered planning approach, aiming at the attainment of technical and cost related objectives with simultaneous multiple asset deployment in a mesh distribution systems (MDS). The assets such as multiple distributed generation (DG) and distributed static compensator (D-STATCOM) units have been utilized; aiming at voltage stabilization, loss minimization, and associated objectives. The proposed planning approach incorporates expressions of VSAI_B aiming at initial simultaneous assets placement followed by loss minimization conditions (LMC) for appropriate asset sizing, which is further utilized for performance evaluations. The VSAI_B-LMC-based integrated planning approach is applied to configured MDS models such as a 33-bus test distribution system (TDS) for detailed analysis. The performance evaluations with the presented approach have been conducted for different cases along with respective scenarios considering various technical and cost-economic performance metrics. First, three cases referring to multiple DGs sitting and sizing for various power factors have been presented, followed later by two cases of multiple DGs and D-STATCOMs with respective evaluation scenarios. Finally, benchmark analysis is conducted on a 69-bus TDS for validity demonstration of the proposed approach. The comparison of achieved results in comparison with the available literature points out toward the validity and improved performance of the proposed approach.
The authors wish to make the following corrections to their paper [...]
