112

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 3, NO. 1, JANUARY 2012

Distribution System Planning With Incorporating DG

Reactive Capability and System Uncertainties
Kai Zou, Associate Member, IEEE, Ashish Prakash Agalgaonkar, Member, IEEE,
Kashem M. Muttaqi, Senior Member, IEEE, and Sarath Perera, Member, IEEE

AbstractDistributed generation (DG) systems are considered

an integral part in future distribution system planning. The active
and reactive power injections from DG units, typically installed
close to the load centers, are seen as a cost-effective solution for
distribution system voltage support, energy saving, and reliability
improvement. This paper proposes a novel distribution system expansion planning strategy encompassing renewable DG systems
with schedulable and intermittent power generation patterns. The
reactive capability limits of different renewable DG systems covering wind, solar photovoltaic, and biomass-based generation units
are included in the planning model and the system uncertainties
such as load demand, wind speed, and solar radiation are also accounted using probabilistic models. The problem of distribution
system planning with renewable DG is formulated as constrained
mixed integer nonlinear programming, wherein the total cost will
be minimized with optimal allocation of various renewable DG systems. A solution algorithm integrating TRIBE particle swarm optimization (TRIBE PSO) and ordinal optimization (OO) is developed to effectively obtain optimal and near-optimal solutions for
system planners. TRIBE PSO, OO, and the proposed algorithm
are applied to a practical test system and results are compared and
presented.
Index TermsOptimization, power distribution planning, reactive power, solar power generation, wind power generation.

I. INTRODUCTION

ENEWABLE distributed generation (DG) systems, with

dispatchable and nondispatchable generation patterns,
exhibit techno-economic benefits to various stakeholders. The
grid integration of dispatchable renewable DG units such as
biomass generators has been seen as one of the attractive
options to meet the ever increasing load demands while significantly improving customer reliability and reducing the overall
emissions. In recent years, an increasing number of renewable
DG units having intermittent generation patterns are being
interconnected into the distribution system. The integration of
these renewable DG units such as wind and solar photovoltaic
(PV)-based units provides an opportunity to further support the
distribution system while possibly reducing the fuel cost asso-

Manuscript received December 31, 2010; revised June 12, 2011; accepted
July 06, 2011. Date of current version December 16, 2011. This work was supported by Endeavour Energy, New South Wales, Australia.
The authors are with the Endeavour Energy Power Quality and Reliability Centre, School of Electrical, Computer and Telecommunications
Engineering, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, 2522, Australia
(e-mail: kz965@uow.edu.au; ashish@uow.edu.au; kashem@uow.edu.au;
sarath@uow.edu.au).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TSTE.2011.2166281

ciated with the fuel-based DG units. However, the integration

of nondispatchable renewable DG units cannot guarantee fixed
power output due to the uncertainties in power availability.
Therefore, it is important to assess and quantify the relative
system performance with the integration of nondispatchable
renewable DG units.
The allocation of DG units in distribution systems has been
investigated in the literature from different perspectives. A costbenefit-analysis-based heuristic approach with the consideration of multiple load levels and fluctuations in electricity market
price has been proposed in [1] to minimize the investments with
DG integration. In [2], an optimization model is proposed for
distribution system expansion with DG in order to minimize
the total cost over a planning period. In [3], the impact of increasing DG penetration on system losses has been analyzed for
different generating resources. An analytical approach is developed in [4] in order to minimize energy losses by optimal DG
placement in a distribution system. A methodology based on
genetic algorithm (GA) is presented in [5] to minimize network
losses with the consideration of system constraints such as reliability, voltage limits, and DG penetration. An iterative method
based on analysis of system voltage stability is proposed in [6]
for optimal placement of DG units in distribution networks. The
impact of network investment deferral on DG expansion is analyzed in [7] by considering DG at various candidate locations.
A comprehensive framework for distribution system planning
in the presence of DG units is proposed in [8] and a sequential
two-stage optimization algorithm is developed to minimize the
total system cost by considering system upgrades. In order to
find an optimal solution with minimum computational burden,
an ordinal optimization (OO) approach is used in [9] for maximizing incentives associated with DG connections and losses.
In [10], a binary particle swarm optimization (BPSO) is proposed to allocate biomass fueled generating systems in distribution networks by considering optimal investment costs and
corresponding benefits.
It has been realized that most of the existing work on distribution system planning with DG have considered DG as purely
active power resources. The reactive power from DG units can
help improve the voltage profile and reduce energy loss. The
lack of attention to reactive capability exhibited by DG units at
the planning stage may lead to potential increase in investment
cost and improper allocation of DG units. It is of vital importance that the reactive capability limits of DGs are accounted in
the distribution system planning problem to quantify the associated benefits. The allocation of DG units in distribution systems is a nondeterministic polynomial-time (NP) hard optimiza-

1949-3029/$26.00 2011 IEEE

ZOU et al.: DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM PLANNING WITH INCORPORATING DG REACTIVE CAPABILITY AND SYSTEM UNCERTAINTIES

113

is the system voltage at node over a system state

where
, and
is the active power injection from the biomass
generator-based DG unit.
The reactive power injection limit
imposed by maximum rotor voltage
[11] can be derived as
(2)

Fig. 1. Reactive capability limits of (a) synchronous machine-based biomass

generator unit, (b) DFIG-based wind unit, and (c) VSI-based PV unit.

tion problem, wherein discrete decision variables and various

problem constraints are involved. The incorporation of system
uncertainties and reactive capability limits of DG units into the
planning model further increases the complexity of the problem.
Moreover, it may be very difficult to justify the feasibility of a
single optimal solution from the system planners perspective
especially under prevailing practical conditions.
In this paper, a new solution algorithm with the selective use
of TRIBE particle swarm optimization (PSO) and OO is proposed to obtain the optimal solution with minimum computational effort. The proposed algorithm can also provide multiple
near-optimal solutions as alternative choices to system planners.
This paper is organized as follows: The reactive capability of
different DG systems is elaborated in Section II and the modeling of system uncertainties is introduced in Section III. The
planning problem is formulated in Section IV and the corresponding solution algorithm is proposed in Section V. The simulation results and conclusions are presented in Sections VI and
VII, respectively.
II. REACTIVE POWER CAPABILITY LIMITS
DIFFERENT DG SYSTEMS

FOR

In this paper, DG technologies including synchronous machine-based biomass generators, doubly fed induction generator (DFIG)-based wind systems, and voltage source inverter
(VSI)-based PV systems are considered as candidate DG systems that can be integrated into the network. The static reactive
capability limitations of these DG technologies are discussed in
the following subsections.

is the direct axis component of synchronous reacwhere

tance for a synchronous machine.
In the case of under-excitation, the maximum reactive power
absorption
limited by maximum load angle
[11] can
be calculated as
(3)
is the quadrature axis component of synchronous rewhere
actance for a synchronous machine.
B. DFIG-Based Wind System
The reactive power limits of a DFIG-based wind system depend on its operation in terms of slip and active power output
[12]. Therefore, the reactive capability limits of such a system
vary in accordance with the fluctuations in the wind speed. Typically, the maximum reactive power absorption
of such
a system will be limited by the maximum stator current
[13] expressed as
(4)
where
is the active power injection of a DFIG-based wind
unit and
is the slip associated with the steady-state operation of a DFIG-based wind unit.
The maximum reactive power injection
will typically
[13] calculated
be limited by the maximum rotor current
as

(5)
where
and
are the equivalent main and stator impedances of a DFIG-based wind unit,
respectively, and the power factor angle
can be derived as

A. Synchronous Machine-Based Biomass Generator

The synchronous machine-based biomass generators possess
the capability of controlling reactive power output by adjusting
the field excitation. The reactive capability limits of such a
system, as shown in Fig. 1(a), can be determined in relation to
the maximum stator current, maximum rotor voltage, maximum
load angle, minimum startup capacity, and prime mover limit
[11].
The maximum reactive power injection and absorption
(
and
) limited by the maximum stator current
[11] can be expressed as
(1)

(6)
With the inclusion of the mechanical power limit of the wind
turbine and the limits described in (4) and (5), the reactive capability of the DFIG-based wind unit is shown in Fig. 1(b).
C. VSI-Based PV System
The active and reactive power output from a voltage source
inverter (VSI)-based PV system can be independently controlled by the power angle and modulation index [14]. The
reactive capability limits of VSI interfaced PV system, as
shown in Fig. 1(c), are usually dependent on the inverter rating

114

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 3, NO. 1, JANUARY 2012

and the rated active power output of the PV cells [15]. The
lower and upper reactive capability limits imposed by the
inverter current
can be calculated as
(7)
where
PV unit.

is the active power injection of a VSI-based solar

III. MODELING OF INTERMITTENT RENEWABLE ENERGY

GENERATION AND LOAD UNCERTAINTIES

Fig. 2. Weibull probability distributions.

In order to consider system uncertainties in terms of varying

wind speed, solar radiation, and load demand for planning
studies, the synthetic data generated based on the historical
data can be used. In this paper, probabilistic models are used
to generate synthetic data and a clustering method is proposed
to aggregate similar system states so as to reduce the computational burden in the optimization process.

Therefore, the approach using the single sub-distribution function is adopted in this paper for modeling the associated uncertainties. In this case, the statistical mean and standard deviation in (8) can be directly estimated based on the historical
data set as
(9)

A. Probability Density Functions for Modeling Uncertainties

Probability density functions can be used to characterize the
behavior of time-varying variables (such as wind speed, solar
radiation, and load demand) in a statistical manner. The probability density function for each time-varying variable can be
expressed in a generalized form as [16]
(8)
is a set of
where
statistical parameters,
is total number of terms in
,
is the weight in the th term satisfying
, and
is a sub-probability density function with
statistical mean
and standard deviation in the th term of
.
The general probability density function
given in (8)
is a weighted sum of sub-probability distribution functions. The
total number
and the type of each sub-probability distribution function
may need to be guessed and prespecified. The set of parameters in can be obtained by some
well-established approaches such as maximum-likelihood estimation (MLE), the method of least squares, and Bayesian statistics [17]. Goodness-of-fit tests [18] should be carried out to
identify the most suitable number and type of sub-probability
distribution functions representing the statistical feature of the
historical data.
The most common practice for statistical modeling a timevarying variable is to use a predefined type of single sub-distribution function
. Alternatively, a Gaussian mixture
model with a prespecified number of Gaussian distribution functions can also be used if the single distribution function does
not follow the statistical characteristic of a time-varying variable [19]. The statistics of time-varying wind speed, solar radiation, and load demand are commonly described by using probabilistic models based on the single sub-distribution function.

(10)
where
is the total number of data points in a data set and
is the th data point.
The probability distribution functions used in this paper for
modeling the uncertainties associated with wind speed, solar
radiation, and load demand are presented as follows.
1) Wind Speed: Wind speed, as an essential measurement for
selecting a candidate site, is influenced by many factors such as
the weather conditions, the land terrain, and the height above the
ground surface [20]. Although wind speed exhibits an intermittent feature throughout both short-term and long-term periods,
the wind speed characteristics in a predefined time period can
be statistically described by using Weibull distribution [21] as
illustrated in Fig. 2. In the Weibull distribution, the probability
function for the wind speed over a time interval can be expressed as
(11)
and scale
In (11), the shape parameter
parameter
can be estimated using the Gamma
function
, the mean
, and standard deviation
related
to wind speeds in the predefined time period.
2) Solar Radiation: The uncertainty in solar radiation cannot
be directly modeled using a probability distribution function due
to the fact that the solar radiation has very strong diurnal patterns. The uncertainty in solar radiation incident on a PV array
mainly comes from the stochastic nature of weather conditions.
In this paper, a method using a clearness index [22] representing
the weather conditions is adopted to address the uncertainty in
solar radiation. The clearness index is defined as the ratio of the
solar radiation on a horizontal plane to the extraterrestrial solar
radiation. It is assumed that the solar radiation on a horizontal

ZOU et al.: DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM PLANNING WITH INCORPORATING DG REACTIVE CAPABILITY AND SYSTEM UNCERTAINTIES

Fig. 3. Beta probability distributions.

Fig. 4. Truncated Gaussian distribution.

plane can be fully collected by the PV array, thus the solar radiation incident on the PV array
can be evaluated as

B. Generation of Synthetic Data

(12)
where
is the extraterrestrial solar radiation which can be
accurately calculated based on the site and the orbit of the earth,
and
is the clearness index.
The random behavior of the clearness index can be statistically described by using the Beta distribution function [22], as
shown in Fig. 3. In the Beta distribution, the probability function
for the clearness index over a time interval can be expressed
as
(13)
where the Beta parameters and can be obtained using the
mean
and standard deviation
of clearness index in a predefined time period
(14)
(15)
3) Load Demand: The Gaussian distribution uses
as the
lower limit and
as the upper limit, which is not suitable for
load representation. This is because load has specific minimum
and maximum values. Therefore, a Gaussian distribution with
specified lower and upper limits [23] is used in this paper to
describe the variation of load demand over a period of time.
Fig. 4 depicts a sample truncated Gaussian distribution. In the
truncated Gaussian distribution, the probability function for the
loading level
over a time interval can be expressed as

115

The procedure to generate hourly average wind and solar PV

generation levels, and loading levels over a planning period is
as follows:
Step 1) Divide the historical data into a specified number of
segments representing different probability distribution patterns of time-varying variables such as wind
speed, solar radiation, and load level. There will be
multiple data points for the same hour (considering
data for every single day) over a month. The data
points involved in each segment can be used to derive a probability distribution function for a particular hour of a month. Accordingly, hourly measurement data for all the days over a year can be divided
into 288 (which is 24 12) segments.
Step 2) Explore the most appropriate probability density
functions (pdfs) for fitting the statistical characteristics of historical data in each segment.
Step 3) Obtain the cumulative distribution functions (cdfs)
and associated inverse cdfs based on the obtained
pdfs for each segment.
Step 4) Use the derived inverse cdfs to simulate hourly average wind speed, solar radiation, and loading level
over a year.
Step 5) Multiply the hourly loading levels by a load growth
factor so as to consider the load growth in a year.
Step 6) Calculate the active power (in percentage of rated capacity) generated by wind [24] and solar PV-based
units [25] using the performance curves of these
units.
Step 7) Combine the simulated hourly wind and solar PV
generation levels, and average loading levels to form
hourly system states (three dimensional data points)
over the planning period.
C. Clustering of Similar System States

(16)
where
and
are statistical mean and standard deviation
of the load demand in a predefined period of time respectively,
and
and
are minimum and maximum loading levels,
respectively.

The evaluation of the fitness of a candidate planning option

associated with all the system states over a specified planning
period can pose heavy computational burden in the optimization process. The aggregation of similar system states by using
specified number of representative states is one of the clustering
methods that can be used to reduce the computational burden
[26].

116

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 3, NO. 1, JANUARY 2012

evaluated by formulating a master optimization with inclusion

of suboptimizations for all considered system states.
A. Master Optimization Problem

Fig. 5. Generation of representative system states.

In the master optimization problem, the optimal allocation of

DG units in terms of DG capacities, types, and locations will
be achieved through the minimization of total cost
over a
planning period. The objective function for master optimization problem, as given in (17), can be formulated as the summation of DG capital cost and the associated state dependent
costs. The state dependent cost
for each system state
can be obtained as an output of the suboptimization as outlined
in Section IV-B
(17)

Fig. 6. Estimation of total cost associated with a DG allocation scheme.

In this paper, a clustering method based on normalization is

proposed to reduce the system states. By using this method, the
simulated wind and solar PV power generation, and load demand for each system state will be first normalized in the range
of 0 to 1. Then, each normalized variable can be further divided into a specified number of segments with equal intervals
(e.g., from 0 to 0.1, 0.1 to 0.2, and so on). With this, the total
number of possible representative states, as shown in Fig. 5,
can be generated and the hourly system states located in each
three-dimensional bin (spanning all three variables) can be identified. The load demand and power generation from wind and
solar PV-based units of a representative system state can be obtained by using the respective mean values. The total number of
hourly system states located in a corresponding bin represents
the cumulative hours of the representative state over a planning
horizon. In case of representative states with cumulative hour
of zero, these representative states can be neglected while evaluating finesses of candidate solutions so as to further reduce the
computational burden.

is the total number of system nodes,

,
, and
where
are cost factors (in $/kVA) for calculating capital costs for
wind, solar PV, and biomass generator, respectively, and
,
, and
are the installed capacity of wind, solar PV, and
biomass generator, respectively, at node .
The constraints of the master optimization problem include
the following.
1) Penetration Limit for DG Units: The DG penetration limit
can be set based on the capacity factor and the peak load demand
expressed as
(18)
and
are capacity factors for wind and solar PV,
where
respectively,
,
, and
are the rated active power
output of wind, solar PV, and biomass generator, respectively,
is the penetration limit, and
is the peak load demand.
2) Total Installed DG Capacity at Each System Node: The
total installed DG capacity or hosting capacity at each system
node may be limited by the maximum allowable DG capacity
on hosting capacity
due to the land space and network
constraints
(19)
B. Suboptimization Problem

IV. PLANNING MODEL CONSIDERING DG CAPABILITIES AND

SYSTEM UNCERTAINTIES
The integration of multiple DG units into the electricity grid
demonstrates various advantages such as voltage support and
reliability improvement. However, the economic considerations
are equally important from a long-term planning perspective.
In this paper, the objective of the DG planning is to minimize
the total cost incurred by an utility over a planning period. As
illustrated in Fig. 6, the total cost associated with a candidate
allocation scheme of utility owned DG units can be estimated
based on the DG capital cost and other variable costs relevant
to DG operations associated with corresponding system states.
Therefore, an optimal investment over a planning period can be

In the suboptimization problem, the optimal active and reactive power from DG units will be derived so as to minimize the
state dependent cost
expressed as
(20)
The DG operation and maintenance (O&M) cost
can be
evaluated based on the total active power generated by the DG
units as

(21)

ZOU et al.: DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM PLANNING WITH INCORPORATING DG REACTIVE CAPABILITY AND SYSTEM UNCERTAINTIES

where
is the total number of planning years,
is the present
worth factor of cost in a year ,
is total hours for a system
state
in a year , and
,
, and
are cost factors
(in $/kWh) for estimation of operation and maintenance (O&M)
costs for wind, solar PV, and biomass generator, respectively.
The total fuel cost
of biomass generators can be estimated
based on their total energy generation in a planning horizon as
formulated in
(22)
is the cost factor (in $/kWh) for estimating fuel cost.
where
The cost
for purchased energy from grid can be assessed
in relation to the active power loss, the active power injected
by DG units, and the active power consumed by the loads as
expressed in

117

the cost associated with system reliability,

is the failure
rate of a feeder section,
is the probability of occurrence
of a system state,
,
, and
are sets of system
nodes that can be restored after automatic switching, manual
switching, and repair, respectively, and
,
, and
are
automated switching time, manual switching time, and repair
time, respectively.
The constraints, to be accounted, in the suboptimization
problem include:
1) System Voltage Limits: The nodal voltage magnitudes
should be within a specified bandwidth
(26)
where
and
are lower and upper voltage limits,
respectively.
2) Feeder Current Limit: The magnitudes of branch currents
should be less than the overall current rating
of the
corresponding branches
(27)
3) Power Factor Regulation for a DG Site: The operating
power factor of a DG site may need to be regulated as per corresponding standards

(23)
is the cost factor (in $/kWh) for evaluating the cost
where
associated with the purchased energy from grid,
is a set of
feeder sections,
is the branch current,
is the feeder
resistance, and
is the load demand.
The cost
for emissions can be estimated associated with
the total energy imported from grid and the energy injected by
biomass-based generators as indicated in
(24)
is the cost factor (in $/kg) for evaluating the cost aswhere
sociated with emissions, and
and are emission factors (in
kg/kWh) of emissions associated with the actual energy consumption by the system and total energy supplied by biomass
generators, respectively.
The cost
for system reliability is evaluated based on the
cost associated with energy not supplied (ENS) as calculated in

(25)
where
is the cost factor (in $/kWh), derived from the practical reliability studies conducted in Australia, for evaluating

(28)

(29)
(30)
where
is the specified lower limit of the operating power
factor of a DG site,
and
are total active and reactive
,
, and
power injections of a DG site respectively,
are reactive power injections from wind, solar PV, and
biomass-based DG units, respectively.
4) DG Reactive Capability Limits: The reactive power injection and absorption of individual DG unit should be within
the upper and lower limits associated with the steady-state DG
operation as discussed in Section II.
V. SOLUTION ALGORITHM
In this paper, a solution algorithm based on TRIBE PSO and
OO is proposed in order to find an optimal solution for the formulated problem with high performance and accuracy. The proposed algorithm can also derive a set of near-optimal solutions
for system planners to compare in case these solutions are practically more feasible. In the proposed algorithm, TRIBE PSO is
dedicated to exploring feasible candidate solutions through approximate evaluation using a crude model to form a representative set for OO. Subsequently, OO is used to allocate intensive
assessment using an accurate model for candidate solutions involved in a selected subset so as to find the optimal and near-optimal solutions. In this paper, the crude and accurate models can
be built with the representative states determined based on the
specified number of segments for each normalized variable as
developed in Section III-C. The solution accuracy and computational burden will be increased with the increase of the number

118

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 3, NO. 1, JANUARY 2012

Fig. 8. Movement of a particle by using (a) simple pivot strategy, (b) noisy
pivot strategy.

Fig. 7. Proposed algorithm for solving the planning problem.

of representative states in crude and accurate models. The flowchart shown in Fig. 7 summarizes the proposed algorithm.
A. Determination of Feasible Solutions Using TRIBE PSO
In the proposed algorithm, the master TRIBE PSO is used to
obtain the candidate DG allocation schemes in terms of sizes,
types, and locations of DG units. Associated with the DG allocation scheme generated by the master TRIBE PSO, the subTRIBE PSO is applied to obtain the state dependent operation
strategies in terms of active and reactive power from individual
DG unit.
In TRIBE PSO, the particles, informers, and tribes are three
basic elements. A particle made up with problem variables is
the representation of a candidate solution for an optimization
problem. The informer is a particle, which passes useful information to other particles. The tribe is a group of particles
that share the information with each other. The TRIBE PSO applies unique strategies, named the simple pivot strategy and
the noisy pivot strategy, to guide the movements of particles
for exploring the optimal solution without fine tuning any algorithm parameters [27]. By using the simple pivot strategy,
the new position of a particle representing a new DG allocation scheme and associated operation strategies can be obtained
based on its previous best position and the previous best position of its informer depicted in their respective hyper-spheres as
illustrated in Fig. 8(a). In this case, the candidate DG allocation
schemes and operation strategies inside the intersection of two
hyper-spheres will be explored. On the other hand, the noisy

pivot strategy allows particles to explore candidate DG allocation schemes and operation strategies outside the hyper-spheres
as shown in Fig. 8(b) by adding random noise to the particle position reached through the simple pivot strategy. As a whole,
the simple pivot strategy allows TRIBE PSO to explore similar but potentially better DG allocation schemes and operation
strategies, whereas the noisy pivot strategy allows TRIBE
PSO to generate distinct but possibly better solution in case of
the particles are trapped in a local optimal solution.
Since only feasible solutions will be preserved, there is no
need for master TRIBE PSO to evaluate a DG allocation scheme
for all system states if any of the defined constraints are violated. In such a case, a new scheme will be generated. This
strategy allows the master TRIBE PSO to evaluate more feasible
solutions effectively with less computational efforts. Similarly,
a strategy for reducing the computational time is also applied
for sub-TRIBE PSO. It can be observed from the flowchart that
the sub-TRIBE PSO will be terminated (a) if no feasible solution is obtained for maximum number of iterations or (b) if no
improvement in the feasible solution is achieved for specified
number of iterations. The use of these termination conditions
can significantly reduce the computational time for performing
the suboptimization of each system state if only approximate estimation is required.
B. Selection of Optimal and Near-Optimal Solutions Using OO
The feasible candidate solutions identified by TRIBE PSO
will be preserved to form a representative set representing the
whole problem space. The size of the representative set is a
problem independent parameter which can be obtained [28]
based on the requisite quality of the sample solutions and the
specified probability of achieving such quality as given in
(31)
where is the size of the representative set,
(in percentage)
is the specified quality in terms of at least one of the sample
solutions in top
of the entire solution space, and
is the
associated probability for achieving the requisite quality.
It is noted that the total cost as fitness value of a candidate solution is only approximately evaluated by using a crude model
with limited system states in TRIBE PSO. The true optimal and
near-optimal solutions in the representative set can be identified
only if all candidate solutions are re-estimated with an accurate model consisting of more system states. To avoid exhausted
evaluation of all candidate solutions in the representative set, the

ZOU et al.: DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM PLANNING WITH INCORPORATING DG REACTIVE CAPABILITY AND SYSTEM UNCERTAINTIES

selection rules specified in OO can be applied to allocate intensive assessment for candidate solutions involved in a selected
subset. The size of the selected subset can be determined [28]
based on the size of the representative subset and the user-defined requirements in terms of the size of the good enough
subset , the alignment level , and the alignment probability
. The good enough subset is a set of top best solutions defined as satisfied solutions in the problem space. The alignment
level is the number of solutions involved in both selected subset
and the good enough subset. The alignment probability is the
probability that the specified alignment level is achieved. In this
paper, the size of the selected subset is estimated by using the
method based on the ordered performance curve (OPC), which
can be obtained by sorting the solutions in the representative set
according to their approximately evaluated fitness values. The
obtained OPC can be categorized into one of the five standard
OPCs and the size of the selected subset can be accordingly determined [28] as

119

Fig. 9. An 11-kV distribution system under study.

(32)
where , , , and are constants associated with the OPC
shape, noise characteristics, and prespecified requirements.
VI. SIMULATION AND DISCUSSION
In this section, simulation studies are carried out in order to illustrate the proposed methodology for distribution system planning with incorporating reactive capability of different DG systems and system uncertainties.
A. Test System and Data
A rural 11-kV distribution system with a total length of 35 km
is derived from a practical distribution network in the Cattai region of New South Wales, Australia. The diagrammatic representation of the test feeder is shown in Fig. 9. The average load
demand of the test feeder is 590 kVA with an average power
factor of 0.9 lagging. The substation voltage for the distribution system is 10.7 kV set by the utility. The voltage limit is
set to 5% of the nominal voltage in the simulation as one of
the constraints. Moreover, it is also assumed that the feeder has
an annual load growth of 1% and the overall planning period is
30 years. The corresponding data and DG parameters for cost
calculations are given in the Appendix.
In this paper, it is also assumed that the variation in load demand at each load point has the same trend because of predominantly residential type. The daily average load demand, wind
speed, and solar radiation for each month, derived based on historical data [29], [30], are shown in Fig. 10. These data sets are
used as baseline data in the corresponding probabilistic models
to generate synthetic data.
B. Parameters for the Proposed Solution Algorithm
The proposed method can be applied for determination of
both single DG and multiple DG solutions. The number of DG
units has to be planned in advance at the planning stage. For
demonstration of the capability of the proposed method, two
nodes will be selected for installation of DG units. Three DG

Fig. 10. Daily average load demand, wind speed, and solar radiation for 288
time segments (24 hours 12 months).

types, including the synchronous machine-based biomass unit,

the DFIG-based wind unit, and the VSI-based solar PV unit, are
considered as candidate types for the planning. With the consideration of the land space limit, it is also assumed that single type
of DG unit can be installed at each node and the size of the DG
unit at each node is within the limit between 100 and 1500 kVA
with discrete interval capacity of 100 kVA (15 discrete capacity
levels). Based on the combination theory, the total number of
planning options
can be calculated as

(33)
The exhaustive search for exact global minimum total cost
associated with a DG allocation scheme in such large solution
space is not practical due to immense computational burden.
Instead, the exploration of a set of high quality solutions that
potentially involve optimal and near-optimal solutions with
high probability and reasonable computational time seems more
practical for system planners. For demonstration purposes, the
specified parameters used in proposed solution algorithm are
given as follows:
A crude model is built with 125 representative states
(5 segments for each normalized variable).

120

An accurate model is built with 1000 representative states

(10 segments for each normalized variable).
A representative set is required that consists of top 1%
solutions of the whole solution space
with
associated probability of 99.99%
.
The good enough subset is defined as top 50 solutions of
the representative set
.
The requisite alignment level is 3
.
The alignment probability is 95%
.
It is noted that the parameters are not limited to these values.
System planners can select more or less strict requirements as
they prefer.
With the specified requirements, the size of the representative set
can be obtained as per (31). Although the size
of the representative set is very small as compared to the size
of the whole solution space, it statistically guarantees probability of 99.99% that at least one of the top 1% solutions will
be in the 917 sample solutions. These sample solutions will be
obtained by TRIBE PSO with approximate evaluation of total
costs associated with DG allocation schemes. Moreover, the size
of the selected subset
is obtained by (32) with a observed
flat-shaped OPC and the predefined parameters. This means that
at least three solutions including one optimal and two near-optimal solutions with the probability of 95% will be involved in
the good enough subset if only 88 candidate solutions are selected from the representative set for accurate evaluation.
C. Planning Options Obtained by the Proposed Algorithm
In order to examine the benefit brought about by considering
DG reactive capability at planning stage, the optimization is carried out with the consideration of three cases: (a) DG units can
only be operated at unity power factor using historical data, (b)
DG units can be operated with power factors in the range of zero
(leading and lagging) and unity using historical data, and (c) DG
units can be operated with power factors in the range of zero
(leading and lagging) and unity using increased capacity factor
of wind-based DG units to match the capacity factor of solar
PV-based DG units obtained from historical data. For cases (b)
and (c), it should be noted that the reactive power injected by
individual DG units will be limited as per its corresponding reactive capability if the constraint on power factor regulation indicated in (28) is relaxed.
The optimal and near-optimal DG allocation schemes obtained by the proposed solution algorithm for the three cases
are shown in Table I. For case (a) wherein DG units are seen to
be purely active sources, the solutions suggest to use biomassbased DG units. The solar PV-based DG unit is not attractive in
these planning options due to the fact that the daily peak load
demand always occurs during the night time when the active
power from solar PV-based DG unit is not available to fulfil
system requirements. Also, the wind-based DG unit is not attractive because of its low capacity factor associated with poor
wind resources. For case (b) wherein reactive power from DG
units can be exploited, the optimal and near-optimal planning
options (shown in Table I) suggest to use a solar PV-based DG
unit in combination with a biomass-based DG unit. The integration of the solar PV-based DG unit becomes a cost-effective
option in case (b) not only due to its free active power output

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 3, NO. 1, JANUARY 2012

TABLE I
OBTAINED OPTIMAL AND NEAR-OPTIMAL DG ALLOCATION SCHEMES

during the day time but also due to its reactive capability to support system in peak load condition during the night. Although
the wind-based DG unit can support system in the same manner
by means of reactive power injection, its low capacity factor is
again a main limiting factor for its deployment. By increasing
the capacity factor of wind-based DG units to 18.8% to match
the capacity factor of solar PV-based DG units in case (c), it is
observed that the wind-based DG units become more attractive
than other two candidate DG units due to increased active power
injection and the matching between wind profile and load profile at certain time segments (as shown in Fig. 10). Moreover,
the wind-based DG units with reactive power injection further
enhance their capability for voltage support especially with the
peak load demand.
Fig. 11 shows the costs associated with the optimal DG allocation schemes for three cases. It can be seen that the total cost
of
can be achieved in case (b), which shows reduction of 6.16% as compared to case (a). It is also highlighted
that the fuel cost associated with the biomass-based DG unit
can be significantly reduced if reactive power injections from
DG units are allowed. The reduction of fuel cost in case (b) is
achieved through the injection of reactive power from solar PV
and biomass-based DG units. The reactive power injected by the
solar PV-based DG unit can help to reduce frequent start of the
biomass-based DG unit especially in the situations of high load
demand and low solar radiation. Moreover, the fuel consumption associated with the biomass-based DG unit can be reduced
if reactive power generated from biomass-based DG unit is used
as much as possible for system voltage support. The reactive
power injections of the solar PV and biomass-based DG units
[for optimal solution found in case (b)] over varying system conditions, in terms of different solar radiation levels and loading
levels, are shown in Figs. 12 and 13, respectively. It is observed
that the solar PV-based DG unit always injects reactive power
to the system in order to reduce system power losses as well as

121

ZOU et al.: DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM PLANNING WITH INCORPORATING DG REACTIVE CAPABILITY AND SYSTEM UNCERTAINTIES

Fig. 11. Comparison of costs associated with optimal DG allocation schemes.

Fig. 13. Reactive power injections by biomass-based DG unit installed at

node 82.
TABLE II
COMPARISON OF OPTIMAL SOLUTIONS OBTAINED
TRIBE PSO, OO, AND PROPOSED ALGORITHM

Fig. 12. Reactive power injections by solar PV-based DG unit installed at

node 61.

BY

The simulation results indicate that it is important to incorporate reactive capabilities of DG units in the planning model
in order to obtain better planning options with minimum total
cost. Moreover, the obtained near-optimal solutions along with
the optimal solution allows planners to compare in case of these
solutions are practically more feasible.
D. Comparative Study

to support system voltage profile. The biomass-based DG unit

is only operated to support system voltage when load demand
becomes high.
With a capacity factor of 18.8% for wind-based DG units,
the total cost in case (c) can be reduced to
, which
is 13.7% less than the total cost in case (b). Although the capital cost in case (c) is higher than those of other two cases due
to increased installed capacity of wind-based DG units, the active energy injection from wind-based DG units significantly reduces the costs associated with purchased energy and emission.
The costs for purchased energy and emission in case (c) show
the reduction of 78.35% and 79.41%, respectively, as compared
to those in case (b). Moreover, the fuel cost of biomass-based
DG units can be avoided due to the fact that biomass-based DG
units are not required.

The comparative results highlighting optimal solutions obtained from different optimization algorithms are tabulated in
Table II. In TRIBE PSO, the optimal solution is obtained by directly performing evaluation with the accurate model over the
optimization process. In OO, the representative set is generated
by random search and the optimal solution is obtained by applying the same requirements used in the proposed algorithm
as specified in Section VI-B. Simulations are carried out on a
Core2 machine with 2.4-GHz CPU and 2-GB RAM.
As compared to OO, the total cost obtained by the proposed
algorithm is 1.57% less than that found by OO. This is due to the
fact that the proposed algorithm can explore the problem space
in a more intelligent manner with its unique search strategies.
As compared to TRIBE PSO, it is found that proposed algorithm
presents more than 10-fold reduction in computation time with

122

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 3, NO. 1, JANUARY 2012

negligible difference in total cost as compared to TRIBE PSO.

As a whole, the proposed solution algorithm demonstrates its
effectiveness for finding the optimal or near-optimal solution by
successfully compromising the quality of the optimal solution
and the associated computation time.

TABLE III
PARAMETERS FOR CALCULATING CORRESPONDING COSTS

VII. CONCLUSION
This paper has presented a new optimization framework for
distribution system planning with incorporating DG reactive
capability and system uncertainties. The reactive capabilities
of renewable DG technologies including the synchronous machine-based biomass generator, the DFIG-based wind unit, and
the VSI-based solar PV unit were considered in distribution
system expansion planning. The system uncertainties associated with the time-varying load demand and intermittent renewable power generation in the planning framework have been addressed and solutions using probabilistic models and clustering
technique have been developed. The integrated solution algorithm with TRIBE PSO and OO has been developed to determine optimal and near-optimal solutions that provide the options to the system operator to compare and decide for the best
feasible solution for practical implementation. The total cost associated with different DG systems, comprised of capital cost,
operation and maintenance cost, reliability cost, cost of deferred
energy, and emission cost has been minimized for evaluating optimal allocation of DGs. The simulation results also highlighted
the reduction in total cost with the consideration of DG reactive
capabilities at the planning stage. It was also observed that the
solar PV and wind-based DG units can offset the biomass-based
generator with reactive capability considerations. The effectiveness of proposed solution algorithm in terms of computational
time and accuracy has also been emphasized in this paper.
APPENDIX
A. Parameters for Cost Calculations
The parameters used for calculating various costs in the
simulation study are obtained based on the work of [31][34].
The parameters as listed in Table III are assumed to be kept
unchanged over the planning horizon. It is also assumed in
the planning horizon of 30 years that the annual average electricity price
will be linearly increased from $59/MW to
$110/MW and the annual average carbon price
will be
from $20/tonne to $67/tonne.
B. DG Parameters
It is assumed that the maximum active power output of a DG
unit will be rated at 90% of the nominal DG capacity. The machine parameters (on the generator kVA base) for different DG
systems are given below.
1) Synchronous Machine-Based Biomass Generator: In this
paper, the synchronous machine-based biomass generator is approximated as a cylindrical rotor machine [11]. The direct axis
reactance
of 1.54 pu is used. It is assumed that the maximum
stator current
is 1 pu and the maximum rotor voltage
is 2.17 pu. The startup limit is assumed to be 30% of the nominal active real power output.

TABLE IV
PARAMETERS FOR DFIG-BASED WIND UNITS

2) DFIG-Based Wind System: The parameters for modeling

the DFIG reactive capability curve is given in Table IV [13].
It is assumed that the slip
linearly changes from 0.25 to
0.25 with the change of wind speed from the cut-in speed of
3.5 m/s to the rated speed of 12.5 m/s. For wind speed higher
than the rated speed of 12.5 m/s and less than the cutout speed
of 25 m/s, the slip is assumed to be maintained at 0.25 through
pitch control.
3) VSI-Based PV System: For VSI-based PV unit, it is assumed that the rated inverter current
is 1 pu.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank Endeavour Energy personnel
for providing data and information related to the network.
REFERENCES
[1] W. El-Khattam, K. Bhattacharya, Y. Hegazy, and M. M. A. Salama,
Optimal investment planning for distributed generation in a competitive electricity market, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 19, no. 3, pp.
16741684, Aug. 2004.
[2] W. El-Khattam, Y. G. Hegazy, and M. M. A. Salama, An integrated
distributed generation optimization model for distribution system planning, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 11581165, May
2005.
[3] V. H. Mendez, J. R. Abbad, and T. G. S. Roman, Assessment of energy
distribution losses for increasing penetration of distributed generation,
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 533540, May 2006.
[4] T. Gozel and M. H. Hocaoglu, An analytical method for the sizing
and siting of distributed generators in radial systems, Electric Power
Syst. Res., vol. 79, pp. 912918, Jun. 2009.
[5] C. L. T. Borges and D. M. Falcao, Optimal distributed generation allocation for reliability, losses, and voltage improvement, Elect. Power
Energy Syst., vol. 28, pp. 413420, Jul. 2006.
[6] H. Hedayati, S. A. Nabaviniaki, and A. Akbarimajd, A method for
placement of DG units in distribution networks, IEEE Trans. Power
Del., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 16201628, Jul. 2008.

ZOU et al.: DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM PLANNING WITH INCORPORATING DG REACTIVE CAPABILITY AND SYSTEM UNCERTAINTIES

[7] A. Piccolo and P. Siano, Evaluating the impact of network investment deferral on distributed generation expansion, IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 15591567, Aug. 2009.
[8] A. Kumar and W. Gao, Optimal distributed generation location using
mixed integer non-linear programming in hybrid electricity markets,
IET Gener. Trans. Distrib., vol. 4, pp. 281298, Feb. 2010.
[9] R. A. Jabr and B. C. Pal, Ordinal optimisation approach for locating
and sizing of distributed generation, IET Gener. Trans. Distrib., vol.
3, pp. 713723, Aug. 2009.
[10] P. R. Lopez, M. G. Gonzalez, N. R. Reyes, and F. Jurado, Optimization of biomass fuelled systems for distributed power generation using
particle swarm optimization, Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 78, pp.
14481455, Aug. 2008.
[11] P. A. Lof, G. Andersson, and D. J. Hill, Voltage dependent reactive
power limits for voltage stability studies, IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 220228, Feb. 1995.
[12] R. J. Konopinski, P. Vijayan, and V. Ajjarapu, Extended reactive capability of DFIG wind parks for enhanced system performance, IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 13461355, Aug. 2009.
[13] T. Lund, P. Sorensen, and J. Eek, Reactive power capability of a wind
turbine with doubly fed induction generator, Wind Energy, vol. 10, pp.
379394, Apr. 2007.
[14] F. Delfino, G. B. Denegri, M. Invernizzi, R. Procopio, and G.
Ronda, A P-Q capability chart approach to characterize grid connect
PV-units, in Proc. CIGRE/IEEE PES Joint Symp., Calgary, Canada,
Jul. 2009.
[15] L. J. Borle, M. S. Dymond, and C. V. Nayar, Development and testing
of a 20-kW grid interactive photovoltaic power conditioning system in
Western Australia, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 502508,
Mar. 1997.
[16] M. E. Tarter and M. D. Lock, Model-Free Curve Estimation. New
York: Chapman & Hall, 1993.
[17] B. W. Silverman, Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis. London, U.K.: Chapman & Hall, 1986.
[18] R. DAgostino and M. Stephens, Goodness-of-Fit Techniques. New
York: Marcel Dekker, 1996.
[19] R. Singh, B. C. Pal, and R. A. Jabr, Statistical representation of distribution system loads using Gaussian mixture model, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 2937, Feb. 2010.
[20] T. Burton, D. Sharpe, N. Jenkins, and E. Bossanyi, Wind Energy Handbook. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2001.
[21] S. H. Jangamshetti and V. G. Rau, Optimum siting of wind turbine
generators, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 813,
Mar. 2001.
[22] V. A. Graham and K. G. T. Hollands, A method to generate synthetic
hourly solar radiation globally, Solar Energy, vol. 44, pp. 333341,
1990.
[23] Y. V. Makarov, C. Loutan, M. Jian, and P. de Mello, Operational impacts of wind generation on california power systems, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 10391050, May 2009.
[24] P. Giorsetto and K. F. Utsurogi, Development of a new procedure for
reliability modeling of wind turbine generators, IEEE Trans. Power
Appl. Syst., vol. 102, no. 1, pp. 134143, Jan. 1993.
[25] S. Conti and S. Raiti, Probability load flow using monte carlo techniques for distribution networks with photovoltaic generators, Solar
Energy, vol. 81, pp. 14731481, Dec. 2007.
[26] A. Pregelj, M. Begovic, and A. Rohatgi, Quantitative techniques for
analysis of large data set in renewable distributed generation, IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 12771285, Aug. 2004.
[27] M. Clerc, Tribes, a parameter free particle swarm optimizer, in Proc.
OEP03, Paris, France, 2003.
[28] T. W. E. Lau and Y. C. Ho, Universal alignment probabilities and
subset selection for ordinal optimization, J. Optimization Theory
Appl., vol. 93, pp. 455489, Jun. 1997.
[29] (2010) Bureau of Meteorology [Online]. Available: http://www.bom.
gov.au/climate/how/contacts.shtml

123

[30] (2010) Surface Meteorology and Solar Energy [Online]. Available:

http://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/sse/
[31] Renewable EnergyA Contribution to Australias Environment and
Economic Sustainability McLennan Magasanik Associates Pty Ltd,
Jun. 2006, Final Report to Renewable Energy Generators Australia.
[32] Benefit and Costs of the Expanded Renewable Energy Target
McLennan Magasanik Associates Pty Ltd, Jan. 2009, Report to
Department of Climate Change.
[33] Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, National Greenhouse Accounts (NGA) Factors [Online]. Available: http://www.climatechange.gov.au/en/publications/greenhouse-acctg/national-greenhouse-factors.aspx
[34] R. N. Allan, R. Billinton, I. Sjarief, L. Goel, and K. S. So, A reliability
test system for educational purposeBasic distribution system data
and results, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 813820, May
1991.

Kai Zou (S09A10) received the B.Eng. degree in electrical power engineering in 2005 from the Huazhong University of Science and Technology,
China, and the M.Eng. degree in 2006 from the University of Wollongong,
Australia. He is currently working toward the Ph.D. degree in the area of power
distribution system planning and optimization with embedded generation at
University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.

Ashish Prakash Agalgaonkar (M09) received the Ph.D. degree from Indian
Institute of Technology-Bombay, Mumbai, India, in 2006.
Currently, he is working as a Lecturer at the Endeavour Energy Power Quality
and Reliability Centre, School of Electrical, Computer, Telecommunications
Engineering, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia, where he also
worked as a Postdoctoral Research Fellow from February 2008 to November
2010. He was associated with the School of Engineering, University of Tasmania, Australia, as a Postdoctoral Research Fellow from October 2007 to January 2008. He also worked as a Scientist in the Energy Technology Centre,
NTPC Limited, India, from 2005 to 2007. His research interests include load
modeling, impact of distributed generation on distribution systems, micro-grids,
and system stability.

Kashem M. Muttaqi (M01SM05) received the Ph.D. degree from Multimedia University, Malaysia, in 2001.
Currently, he is an Associate Professor at the School of Electrical, Computer, and Telecommunications Engineering, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia. He was associated with the University of Tasmania, Australia as a Research Fellow/Lecturer/Senior Lecturer from 2002 to 2007, and
with the Queensland University of Technology, Australia as a Research Fellow
from 2000 to 2002. Previously, he also worked for Multimedia University as a
Lecturer for three years. His special fields of interests include distributed generation, renewable energy, distribution system automation, and power system
planning.

Sarath Perera (M95) received the B.Eng. degree in electrical power engineering from the University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka, the M.Eng. degree from
the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, and the Ph.D. degree
from the University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.
He was a Lecturer at the University of Moratuwa. Currently he is an Associate
Professor with the University of Wollongong, where he is also the Technical
Director of the Endeavour Energy Power Quality and Reliability Centre.