SPECIAL SECTION ON EVOLVING TECHNOLOGIES IN ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS FOR

ENERGY SYSTEMS APPLICATIONS

Received March 30, 2020, accepted April 21, 2020, date of publication April 24, 2020, date of current version May 8, 2020.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2990345

Reliability Assessment of Distribution Power

System When Considering Energy Storage
Configuration Technique
MEHMET RIDA TUR , (Member, IEEE)
TBMYO Electrical and Energy Department, Batman University, 72500 Batman, Turkey
e-mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT The main task of distribution systems is to provide acceptable reliability, economic and quality
service of electrical power according to the demanded load value. To fulfill this task more accurately,
the reliability performance of the distribution system can be performed and measured using a wide variety
of indices, which are divided into energy indices and frequency/expectation indices. This study evaluates the
reliability indices of a part of the distribution network selected as a model and deals with the selection
of the most suitable feeder by connecting energy storage units to the busbars. Using IEEE Standard
1366 reliability indices, historical data from Prosperous Electricity Distribution Company (PEDC), which is
used to evaluate reliability based on the 5-year past reliability assessment of the power system (RAPS),
was selected. In addition, as an innovation in this application process, energy storage systems (ESS)
have been evaluated according to four different network configurations (A-B-C-D) to increase RAPS and
achieve more realistic results. Using DigSILENT, ESS-based configurations are designed, comparisons are
made, and configuration B is the best result to increase system reliability and the 80E6 feeder is optimal.
In addition, reliability changes achieved by network configuration have demonstrated the importance of
optimal configuration planning to improve the uninterrupted and sustainable energy quality of the system
based on storage technology.

INDEX TERMS Energy storage, Monte Carlo methods, power distribution faults, power system control,
power system reliability.

I. INTRODUCTION modeled configurations and appropriate indices for the actual

The main task of the electric power system is to provide load points are calculated. The feeder-based storage model
consumers with affordable, quality and acceptable reliable will contribute to uninterrupted energy in the system. Also,
and uninterrupted energy. The ability of the system to per- the indices obtained at the level covering the production and
form this self-expected task during the operating period is transmission regions have been neglected because the effect
called reliability. Electric power system reliability analysis is of the indices is very low.
carried out on three levels. Reliability analysis at the level The concept of reliability in the power system (PS) is
that includes the production region is performed to determine defined as the probability of supplying the requested load
whether the system can meet the total system load of the adequately in the planned time in the case of nominal opera-
generated power. It is the evaluation of the system related to tion [1], [2]. Reliability can be divided into two basic parts,
meeting the load need at the level of big load points cover- which are defined as system capability and system security.
ing the production and transmission regions. In this study, The ESS is frequently used both in the face of developing
the level covering all three regions is generally considered energy demands and to facilitate the integration of renewable
only as of the distribution system reliability assessment due energy into distribution power grids [3]. The capacity of ESS
to the size of the system. The reliability assessment of the must be enough concerning the demanded energy demand
and safety, which dynamically responds to the failure of
The associate editor coordinating the review of this manuscript and the PS. Unsustainable electrical energy services have been
approving it for publication was Eklas Hossain . restructured and identified as various generation, distribution

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. For more information, see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
77962 VOLUME 8, 2020
M. R. Tur: Reliability Assessment of Distribution PS When Considering Energy Storage Configuration Technique

and transmission companies. In addition, the responsibility deviations, simulation simulations provide additional results
for maintaining the reliability of the entire PS is divided by a in the form of probability distributions, and therefore the most
single electrical service by all relevant companies [4]. In order suitable feeder is preferred for reliability assessment.
to ensure the stable operation of a system, a power balance Presenting a technique for generating dependent data [23]
must be ensured by smart control under all circumstances. and applied this to the reliability analysis for generation
Thus, the system operators are adjusted to accommodate plants involving multiple wind farms, the effects on the capa-
changes in the net requirement of the power output of trans- bility (or reliability) of the production system are demon-
missible production sources. strated [24]. There are three basic parameters used to measure
An implicit or explicit numbering process or Monte Carlo the reliability, which are loss of load expectation (LOLE),
methods (MCM) sampling is based on reliability analysis loss of energy expectation (LOEE) and loss of load frequency
methods. However, recently, methods based on artificial intel- (LOLF) [25]. It has also been seen that the demand for PSs
ligence, both as an alternative to MCM for the exploration to assess capacity is carried out considering the effects of
process and with MCM have been examined. It will exam- the demand response. In addition, a composite reliability
ine the conceptual basis of the overall RAPS process and model is presented for demand response [26]. Some sim-
investigate the role of artificial intelligence methods in this ulation results (IEEE 37 and IEEE 8500) demonstrate the
context [5]. Commonly used reliability indices, including accuracy of the proposed real-time simulation based on large-
System Average Downtime Indices (SAIDI), System Aver- scale scenarios, such as a test feeder, which may be useful
age Downtime Frequency Indices (SAIFI), Average Service for applications involving network reconstruction, distributed
Availability Indices (ASAI), Customer Average Downtime production management, storage control, and cybersecurity
Indices (CAIDI), and Downtime Customer Cuts by Index assessment [27].
(CIII), are used to measure network reliability [6]. It is gen- The Taylor series approach calculates the reliability of
erally used as an IEEE-RBTS reference system [7]. the performance function and evaluates the reliability of the
Using the statistical and reliability theory of distribution performance functions in terms of possible design variables,
networks, reliability indices are carried out on energy sustain- one of the first-degree reliability methods, the reliability
ability. There are analytical technical studies for the safety index approach [28]–[30]. In this study, the most reliable
assessment of the distribution network including the dis- feeder configuration was determined by considering differ-
tributed generation. Depending on the breaker control regions ent designs. In order to prevent these situations, either the
and the feeder sections, a directed relationship graph is gen- reliability indices should be taken into consideration in the
erated for an electrical distribution network to define the PSs or the ESS amount in the PSs must be kept against
structure of the distribution network [8]–[11]. The quality of sudden interruptions [31]. This amount of ESS is usually
the network is of paramount importance because the failures provided by the amount of capacity needed if the largest
experienced by customers are due to failures in the distribu- power plant is out of order. However, this is not always
tion system. The accuracy and quality of the results obtained enough, for which socioeconomic parameters should be con-
in the applications have been improved with the proposed new sidered as the Value of Lost Load (VOLL) and the Energy Not
model [12]. The increasing capacity of wind and solar energy Supplied (ENS).
in PSs has greatly changed the distribution of energy supply To ensure economic stability, many distribution companies
over time. Unlike thermal power plants and hydrogenation, are managed with various processes [32]. In the unlikely
power generation can change frequently because these renew- event of energy supply, customers can reduce losses by antic-
able sources are relatively uncontrollable [13]–[15]. Research ipating and reducing the likelihood of downtime during the
on the quality of the network has progressed in a few areas, day ahead or the day ahead of the planning process to avoid
including the definition of reliability, index types, algorithms power outages. This economic gain is achieved by keeping
and applications for evaluation and comparison models. As a the ENS value at a minimum, which is achieved by using
result of this study, it has been concluded that power plants, the required ESS in unexpected power cuts. Unexpected sit-
transmission lines, distribution systems, and substations can uations that reduce system reliability adversely affect sys-
be successfully applied to the design, planning and opera- tem planning, which can lead to system failures, sudden
tional analysis processes. In addition, both the development load changes, and adverse environmental conditions. Energy
of smart grids and the success and risk analysis of the energy sustainability is very important as it does not experience
system including renewable energy have been successful in disruptions such as power outages and the planning is directly
recent years [16]–[21]. affecting both costs and system reliability. Thus, it is prefer-
The reliability approach of a PS is analyzed by analyt- able to provide energy through the safe feeder and the non-
ical calculations or simulation procedures, which are ana- secure feeders should be rehabilitated. After the interruptions,
lytical approaches based on mathematical models, compares measures were taken regarding the measures related to the
the status of the system to four different configurations to electricity-saving measure and in the context of this elec-
obtain appropriate numerical solutions of system reliability tricity supply-demand gap, solutions to the problems related
indices [22]. The outputs of analytical procedures integrated to the demand response, especially in the rise of electricity,
into the system are limited to average values and standard were developed [33], [34]. The model used as part of the

VOLUME 8, 2020 77963

 M. R. Tur: Reliability Assessment of Distribution PS When Considering Energy Storage Configuration Technique

FIGURE 1. Part of the typical Istanbul distribution network configuration that provides the city load.

typical distribution network configuration that provides its of 13 feeders, which are in Etiler, Hurriyet Hill, Sisli Gis,
actual load is shown in Figure 1. Levent, Cendere and Alibeykoy regions. In this network,
VOLL is the money that consumers want to pay per kW to the number of Customers Interruptions to previous periods
use continuous electrical energy, in other words not to be de- was 436014 in total. The total interruption Duration of the
energized, which is a measure of the total capacity of power network with different interruption frequencies is 4694.58
supply [35]. This value is determined by the preferences of hours. In addition, this model is designed in four different
consumers in the country where it is represented, and the configurations with different switching points. Also, among
power capacity received in the system is associated with the energy indices, the ENS is used to quantify the amount of
the lost load [36]. A new framework for preparing switch- MWh that is not supplied due to a reliability problem.
ing operation procedures, considering the reliability of the
power supply, has been made by determining a sequence II. THE RELIABILITY INDICES OF POWER SYSTEMS
of transition configurations obtained from the candidates for Network connection standards are very important for reliabil-
downtime planning [37]. There is a very important general ity, efficiency, and cost [39]. The evaluation of the reliability
situation for consumers, which is to ensure the best level of of distribution network systems is divided into two parts,
reliability, while the cost of using the electricity and the cost which are future performance estimation and historical per-
of the consumer is minimal [38]. formance measurement [40]. In addition, there are two index
In this study, it is aimed to obtain the most reliable design groups to evaluate the reliability performance of distribution
based on ESS by modeling based on cutter and feeder con- systems, which are the system index and the customer load
figuration. The configuration provided undertakes to provide point index [41]. The generally accepted reliability indices,
uninterrupted energy, giving confidence to the consumer in IEEE, which is the Standard P1366 number, are defined
providing more reliable energy. The novelty side of this as the Rules for the Distribution of Electrical Reliability
method compared to other methods is that it is recommended Indexes [42].
to use an energy storage technology feeder based on switch-
ing design in the configuration. Thus, higher quality energy A. SYSTEM AVERAGE INTERRUPTION FREQUENCY
is provided in the distribution network by conducting reli- INDICES (SAIFI)
ability analysis with the MCM method. Costs or losses on The SAIFI is defined as the average number of interruptions
the consumer side due to power outages are measured, for a customer has experienced during the year or during the
which there are some indices. It is mainly divided into energy working period, which is the total number of interrupted
indices and frequency/expectation indices, which are SAIDI, customers divided by the total number of customers served.
SAIFI, ASAI, CAIDI, and CIII. PEDC network consists This value calculates the average number of minutes that

77964 VOLUME 8, 2020

M. R. Tur: Reliability Assessment of Distribution PS When Considering Energy Storage Configuration Technique

a customer stays uninterrupted. Where Ni is the number of

customers and λi is the failure rate to load point i.
λi Ni
P
TotalNumberOfCustomerInterruption
SAIFI = = P
TotalNumberOfCustomersServed Ni
(1)

B. SYSTEM AVERAGE INTERRUPTION FIGURE 2. Steps of estimating reliability indices.

FREQUENCY INDICES (SAIFI)
The SAIDI is defined as the most used performance metric for
a continuous downtime, which is normally used to measure F. AVERAGE SYSTEM AVAILABILITY INDICES (ASAI)
downtime for the average customer during each period calcu- The ASAI value is obtained as the ratio of the total number
lated monthly or yearly. However, it can also be calculated on of customer hours that the service is available in each period
a daily or other time and is designed to provide information to the total number of customer hours requested, which is
about a customer’s average pause time. It is commonly known also called the service reliability index. It is also calculated
as minutes of customer outages or customer hours. Where Ni monthly (730 hours) or yearly (8760 hours) which can be
is the number of customers and Ui is the annual outage time calculated for each period.
of load point i. P
TotalNumberOfCustomersInterrupted Ni
SumOfCustomerInterruptionDurations ASAI = =P
SAIDI = TotalNumberOfInterruptions N0
TotalNumberOfCustomersServed (6)
P
Ui Ni
= P (2)
Ni In order to obtain the reliability indices of the network model,
which has been informed and analyzed, the steps shown
C. CUSTOMER AVERAGE INTERRUPTION
below and shown in Figure 2 were performed.
DURATION INDICES (CAIDI)
The CAIDI is calculated as the average time to restore the • Fault data for all components integrated into the PS is
service during any interruption, which is calculated simi- provided.
larly to SAIDI. However, the share should correspond to the • Switching and downtime data for all components inte-
number of customers cut and the total number of auxiliary grated into the PS are provided.
customers. Generally, refers to the average time required to • The average load and energy at all load points in the PS
restore. Where Ui is the annual outage time, Ni is the number are calculated using the indexes directly using the data
of customers and λi is the failure rate of load point i. of the substations.
• Information is received about all connected consumers
SumOfCustomerInterruptionDuration
CAIDI = in the PS (e.g. number of customers).
TotalNumberOfCustomersInterruption • The length of the lines used in the PS is obtained.
P
Ui Ni
= P (3) After all these steps, the load point information for the feeders
λi Ni is estimated.
D. CUSTOMER AVERAGE INTERRUPTION
In this study, two cases are considered. In the first case,
FREQUENCY INDICES (CAIFI)
reliability indices are calculated at each feeder. The calculated
indices are used to compare among the feeders concerning
The CAIFI value is calculated by the calculation method of
investment priority for rehabilitation.
the SAIFI value, which is used to measure the average number
of interruptions per customer that is interrupted per year. It is
III. THE MATERIAL AND METHOD OF SYSTEM
generally obtained by dividing the number of interruptions by
the number of customers affected by the interruption. The listed steps are followed to evaluate the reliability of
P TEIAS down-load transformers and energy storage devices
TotalNumberOfCustomersInterrupted N0 and distribution networks;
CAIFI = = P
TotalNumberOfCustomersServed Ni
• To determine the malfunctions of the active components
(4)
connected to the system,
• Choosing models with different configurations and
E. CUSTOMER INTERRUPTED PER INTERRUPTION
assuming that a malfunction has occurred. Next, to sim-
INDICES (CIII)
ulate the operation of the required capacity for the pro-
The CIII is used to give the average number of customers
tection power balance for the fault.
interrupted during an interruption. The value of CIII can be
• Identify the zones created in the distribution network
considered as the equivalent of CAIFI.
P after the fault isolation: the flow of the fault, the inside
TotalNumberOfCustomersDuring Ni of the fault and the downstream of the fault are shown
CIII = =P (5)
TotalNumberOfInterruptions N0 in Figure 3.

VOLUME 8, 2020 77965

 M. R. Tur: Reliability Assessment of Distribution PS When Considering Energy Storage Configuration Technique

TABLE 2. Feeders indices for the network under study.

FIGURE 3. Zones in the distribution network after fault isolation within

the network.

• The feed restoration for each area is then evaluated to

calculate the failure rate and downtime, and the best
configuration is achieved with switching differences.

A. CASE-1 GENERAL RELIABILITY

ANALYSIS OF THE SYSTEM
In PSs, interconnected networks consist of a four-unit net-
work model, and each unit network model is interconnected
by four different interconnection configurations [43]. The
total number of customers interrupted can be found by sum- reliability process, decreases the error rate and increases the
ming the customers at the downside of the interrupted feed- accuracy rate.
ers [44]. The total number of customers is 119842 for the For each feeder, these parameters were calculated sepa-
distribution network under study. While reliability analysis rately, and the results were obtained. SAIDI, SAIFI, CAIDI,
on real distribution systems, basic load point indices and CIII, and ASAI indices are calculated for each feeder and
performance indices simulation method such as interruption shown in Table 2 [46].
numbers and durations of networks with simulation method, In addition, the results of calculated indices are shown in
another feed line is 100% reliable in case of failure in open Fig.3. It can be observed from Table 2 that Feeders 80E6,
ring network [45]. The number of customers interrupted and 83ED, 83F7, and 83F8 have the smallest SAIDI, 0.584,
interruption duration per each feeder is given in Table 1. The 4.71, 4.48, and 4.23 mines/interruption respectively. There-
duration and number of discontinuities given are taken as the fore, the customers supplied from these feeders experience
data of the last five years of the model. Thus, the use of past the least duration of sustained interruptions between all the
5 years’ data, which takes the total value for the historical feeders. On the other hand, the Feeders 80CD, 83F3, 83F2,
and 83F5 have the highest SAIDI, 80.50, 51.72, 31.28, and
90.65 mines/interruption respectively, it can observe from
TABLE 1. Summary of the collected data. Fig. 4. So that this feeder requires special attention and these
feeders need to be paid more attention. Because the average
interruption value is quite high, they are not reliable compared
to other feeders.

FIGURE 4. Reliability indices for the Feeders of network SAIDI.

77966 VOLUME 8, 2020

M. R. Tur: Reliability Assessment of Distribution PS When Considering Energy Storage Configuration Technique

FIGURE 7. Reliability indices for the Feeders of CIII.

FIGURE 5. Reliability indices for the Feeders of network SAIFI.

FIGURE 6. Reliability indices for the Feeders of network CAIDI. FIGURE 8. Reliability indices for the Feeders of network ASAI.

Similarly, Feeder 80E6, 83F7, 83E8 and 83F8 have the 83F5 should be given priority for rehabilitation. In addition,
smallest SAIFI, 0.005, 0.035, 0.067 and 0.075 interrup- the most reliable feeder can also be used, preferably with
tions/customer respectively. Therefore, the customers sup- feeder 80E6.
plied from this feeder experience the least occurrence of
sustained interruptions between all the feeders. On the other B. CASE-2 THE RELIABILITY OF NETWORK FOR
hand, the Feeder 83F5, 83F3, 83F4 and 83E9 have the highest DIFFERENT STORAGE CONFIGURATIONS
SAIFI, 1.581, 0.452, 0.345 and 0.275 interruptions/customer In the second case, three configurations of network operation
respectively, it can observe from Fig. 5. So that this feeder are considered. These configurations are compared with each
requires special attention. other to system reliability. Dig SILENT Power factory is used
Besides, Feeder 83ED, 83E9, 83F8 and 83F5 have the to calculate the indices for all systems. The failure rate and
smallest CAIDI, 39.09, 54.66, 56.55 and 57.34 interruptions / maintenance data for the cable and transformer are shown
customer respectively. Thus, the customers supplied from this in Table 3.
feeder experiences the least occurrence of sustained interrup-
tions between all the feeders. On the other hand, the Feeder TABLE 3. Maintenance data for transformer.

80CD, 83F2, 83EB, and 83E8 have the highest CAIDI,

771.58, 144.45, 134.93 and 124.42 interruptions /customer
respectively, it can observe from Fig. 6. So that this feeder
requires special attention.
Next, the Feeder 83F5, 83F4, 83F7, and 83E9 have the
highest CIII, 27063.85, 13797.66, 8978 and 8259,5 inter-
ruptions /customer respectively, it can observe from Fig. 7.
So that this feeder requires special attention.
Finally, in terms of reliability, it can observe from Fig. 8
that the 80E6 Feeder is the most reliable Feeder with ASAI In these four case configurations selected for comparison,
equals to 0.999952; while 83F5 Feeder is the least reliable the feeder-dependent ESS is given in Figure 9, where dif-
one with ASAI equals to 0.992565. These results can be ferent network models that can generate random switching
examined in order of priority, to prioritize investments in the points as A-B-C-D can be generated and cases are examined.
service organization (PEDC) in order to rehabilitate from the Thus, clear conclusions will be drawn about which model the
network. Based on this analysis, the worst feeder in terms feeder-based design may be safer, which is designed for a
of reliability can be rehabilitated first, for example, feeder more accurate analysis.

VOLUME 8, 2020 77967

 M. R. Tur: Reliability Assessment of Distribution PS When Considering Energy Storage Configuration Technique

FIGURE 9. Network configuration for different configuration (A-B-C-D).

In this paper, most of the distribution networks associated the data of the previous 5 years of the system were obtained.
with PEDC Company are modeled with Dig SILENT soft- In order to make the system more reliable, it is aimed to select
ware. The RAPS is examined according to four configura- the most suitable feeder by controlling with a smart network
tions A, B, C and D, which are randomly selected for the configuration mechanism.
position of the switches to be opened. The main concern of
this study is to show the change in reliability according to IV. ANALYSIS OF EVALUATION RESULTS
the variation of network operation. According to the network According to Table 4, the system in configuration B has the
model shown in Figure 2, the different switching states are smallest SAIFI, 0.220627 downtime/customer with a bet-
used in four configurations A, B, C and D. Because reliability ter result than the A, C and D configurations. Therefore,
is evaluated according to the opening and closing status of the customers experience the least occurrence of sustained
switches with different points in the test system. In addition interruptions. On the other hand, the system in configuration
to the three locations in the form of a position close to the D has the highest SAIFI, 0.326308 interruption /customer that
feeder, a midpoint, and a remote point, all switches are closed. means that the customers experience the highest occurrence
The main purpose of making these configurations in different of sustained interruptions. Similarly, the system in configura-
models is to form an interconnected structure by considering tion B has the smallest SAIDI, 0.182-hour/customer.
the points of the breakpoints before and after the bar and The smart mechanism that makes these comparisons will
the distance from the busbar’s point. Considering all these work by considering the relevant parameters for the most
situations, the reliability analysis of the system was made and appropriate configuration selection.

77968 VOLUME 8, 2020

M. R. Tur: Reliability Assessment of Distribution PS When Considering Energy Storage Configuration Technique

TABLE 4. Reliability indices for configurations A, B, C and D.

FIGURE 12. ENS for A, B, C and D cases.

is 58.16 MWh, the non-preferred has a maximum value equal

to 153.13 MWh in the D configuration as given in Figure 12.
Therefore, this clearly shows how reliability can be affected
depending on the configuration of the network. Thus, the util-
ity can select the optimum network configuration that maxi-
mizes overall reliability by performing the work.
According to the network configuration, SAIDI, SAIFI,
ASAI, CAIDI, and CIII reliability change are the most reli-
able and reliable feeders for selecting the most appropriate
configuration for increasing the reliability of the distribution
network. The reliability indexes were designed with four
FIGURE 10. Network SAIFI, SAIDI and CAIDI indices for A, B, C and D different configurations including indexes. According to this
configurations. situation, it has been suggested that investors use the most
reliable feeder to operate the system by making investments
to improve the feeder. This case limited only to show how
the reliability could vary for variation of network configura-
tion. As a result, future work can focus on determining the
optimal configuration of the smart control mechanism using
optimization algorithms, which is connected to the smart grid
component and considers the demand situation.
In the results of the first case analysis, calculated indices,
FIGURE 11. Reliability Indices (ASAI) for A, B, C and D Cases. the feeders 80E6, 83ED, 83F7, and 83F8 had the small-
est SAIDI, 0.584, 4.71, 4.48, and 4.23 mines/interruption
As a result of the comparison of the mechanism, customers respectively, which is the least uninterrupted interruption
have been chosen to ensure minimum downtime. However, among all feeders. remains. Feeders 80CD, 83F3, 83F2,
contrary to the decision, the system in configuration D and 83F5 have the highest SAIDI, 80.50, 51.72, 31.28, and
has the highest SAIDI of 0.466 hours/customer, as shown 90.65 mines / interruptions respectively, which is not reliable
in Figure 10. compared to other feeders as the average interrupt value
Whence, the customer average interruption the highest is quite high. Feeders 80E6, 83F7, 83E8, and 83F8 have
duration of sustained interruptions. In terms of reliability, the smallest SAIFI, 0.005, 0.035, 0.067, and 0.075 inter-
the system in configuration C is the most reliable with CAIDI rupts/customers, respectively, which ensure that the supplied
equals to 0.749 and in configuration D is the most unreliable interruptions are minimal among all feeders. Feeder 83F5,
with CAIDI equals to 0.1428 as shown in Fig. 6. It can be 83F3, 83F4, and 83E9 have the highest SAIFI, 1.581, 0.452,
noticed that the system ENS increases with a decrease in its 0.345, and 0.275 interruptions/customer respectively, which
reliability. Therefore, the customers experience the highest requires special attention. In addition, Feeders 83ED, 83E9,
duration of sustained interruptions. In terms of reliability, 83F8, and 83F5 have the smallest CAIDI, 39.09, 54.66, 56.55,
the system in configuration B is the most reliable with ASAI and 57.34 interruptions/customers, respectively, which are
equals to 0.999979 and in configuration D is the most unreli- the customers supplied from this feeder, with the least con-
able with ASAI equals to 0.999940 as shown in Fig. 11. It can tinuous interruptions across all feeders experienced. Feed-
be noticed that the system ENS increases with the decreasing ers 80CD, 83F2, 83EB, and 83E8 have the highest CAIDI,
in its reliability. 771.58, 144.45, 134.93, and 124.42 interruptions/customer,
In this study, the mechanism that makes an intelligent respectively, which needs attention. Finally, in terms of relia-
evaluation creates the most economical and reliable config- bility, the 80E6 feeder is the most reliable Feeder with ASAI
uration, and the results show how well the system works. value 0.999952; The 83F5 Feeder equals 0.992565, which is
While the value for the ENS in the selected B configuration the least reliable with ASAI.

VOLUME 8, 2020 77969

 M. R. Tur: Reliability Assessment of Distribution PS When Considering Energy Storage Configuration Technique

The second Case analysis should first give priority to the where it is best to increase system reliability and where the
83F5 feeder for the worst nutritional rehabilitation in terms 80E6 feeder is optimal.
of reliability, and the most reliable feeder can preferably
be used with the 80E6 feeder. The smallest SAIFI, which REFERENCES
outperforms the A, C and D configurations, is the B config- [1] R. Billinton and S. Jonnavithula, ‘‘A test system for teaching overall power
uration with 0.220627 interruptions/customer. The system in system reliability assessment,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 11, no. 4,
D configuration has the highest SAIFI value, 0.326308 inter- pp. 1670–1676, 1996.
[2] R. N. Allan, R. Billinton, A. M. Breipohl, and C. H. Grigg, ‘‘Bibliography
rupt/customer, and the highest 0.466 hours/customer SAIDI on the application of probability methods in power system reliability
value, which is the longest downtime of the customer aver- evaluation,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 51–57, 1999.
age interruption. The system in configuration C is the most [3] A. Escalera, M. Prodanovic, and E. D. Castronuovo, ‘‘An analysis of the
energy storage for improving the reliability of distribution networks,’’
reliable, which equals CAIDI 0.749, and in configuration D, in Proc. IEEE PES Innov. Smart Grid Technol. Conf. Eur. (ISGT-Eur.),
the CAIDI is the most reliable system that equals 0.11288. Oct. 2018, pp. 1–6.
The system in configuration B is the most reliable where [4] B. O. Anyaka and B. C. Onyia, ‘‘Steady state security assessment of
distribution networks with distribution generation in Nigeria, advances in
ASAI is equal to 0.999979, and in configuration D, it is the agriculture,’’ Sci. Eng. Res., vol. 3, pp. 701–712, Mar. 2013.
most reliable where ASAI is equal to 0.999940. Although the [5] S. Chanan and W. Lingfeng, ‘‘Role of artificial intelligence in the reliability
ENS value in the selected B configuration is 58.16 MWh, the evaluation of electric power systems,’’ Turkish J. Elect. Eng. Comput. Sci.,
undesirable has a maximum value in configuration D equal vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 1–8, 2008.
[6] A. S. Al-Abdulwahab, K. M. Winter, and N. Winter, ‘‘Reliability assess-
to 153.13 MWh. ment of distribution system with innovative smart grid technology imple-
mentation,’’ in Proc. IEEE PES Conf. Innov. Smart Grid Technol. Middle
V. CONCLUSION East, Dec. 2011, pp. 1–6, doi: 10.1109/ISGT-MidEast.2011.6220780.
[7] T. J. Kendrew and J. A. Marks, ‘‘Automated distribution comes of age,’’
The results obtained seem to be extremely useful in terms of IEEE Comput. Appl. Power, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 7–10, Jan. 1989.
reference to the distribution system compared to other tech- [8] F. M. Noroğlu and A. B. Arsoy, ‘‘Central coordination relay for distribution
niques used in the past RAPS. It is also an important tool in systems with distributed generation,’’ TURKISH J. Electr. Eng. Comput.
Sci., vol. 23, pp. 2150–2160, Dec. 2015.
the planning, design and maintenance programming of PSs.
[9] H.-G. Park, J.-K. Lyu, Y. Kang, and J.-K. Park, ‘‘Unit commitment con-
In many utilities, past RAPS is an important approach to sup- sidering interruptible load for power system operation with wind power,’’
port ESS to identify weak parts of the network, then increase Energies, vol. 7, no. 7, pp. 4281–4299, 2014.
the reliability of these parts to achieve the best performance [10] K. Reinders and A. Reinders, ‘‘Perceived and reported reliability of the
electricity supply at three urban locations in indonesia,’’ Energies, vol. 11,
of the system. The importance of historical evaluation stems no. 1, p. 140, 2018.
mainly from the fact that it is based on real data collected [11] M. N. Hidayat and F. Li, ‘‘Impact of distributed generation technologies on
periodically by energy services. generation curtailment,’’ in Proc. IEEE Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meeting,
Jul. 2013, pp. 1–5, doi: 10.1109/PESMG.2013.6672607.
In this article, past RAPS has been made for some of the [12] I. Noor and A. Syamnd, ‘‘Principal component regression with artificial
PEDC related distribution network based on five years of neural network to improve prediction of electricity demand,’’ Int. Arab
real data. Results from the past RAPS of the PEDC section J. Inf. Tech., vol. 13, no. 1A, pp. 196–202, 2016.
reviewed show that the 80E6 feeder is the most reliable, and [13] Y. Ding, L. Cheng, Y. Zhang, and Y. Xue, ‘‘Operational reliability evalua-
tion of restructured power systems with wind power penetration utilizing
the acne 83F5 feeder is vulnerable. The intelligent control reliability network equivalent and time-sequential simulation approaches,’’
mechanism to be used in the selection of the appropriate J. Modern Power Syst. Clean Energy, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 329–340, Dec. 2014.
feeder is integrated into the system, taking into account relia- [14] X. Xu, Y. Cao, H. Zhang, S. Ma, Y. Song, and D. Chen, ‘‘A multi-objective
optimization approach for corrective switching of transmission systems in
bility indices, and selects the most suitable configuration for emergency scenarios,’’ Energies, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 1204–1208, 2017.
the customer who will use uninterrupted energy with ESS. [15] H. Zhong, Q. Xia, Y. Xia, C. Kang, L. Xie, W. He, and H. Zhang,
In summary, the historical method for RAPS is a powerful ‘‘Integrated dispatch of generation and load: A pathway towards smart
grids,’’ Electric Power Syst. Res., vol. 120, pp. 206–213, Mar. 2015.
tool to identify weaknesses in the network and then makes [16] W. Li, Risk Assessment of Power Systems: Models, Methods and Applica-
smart decisions about the relevant remedial actions required tions. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2004.
to achieve certain levels of service reliability. In addition, one [17] S.-H. Lim and S.-T. Lim, ‘‘Analysis on coordination of over-current relay
of the suggested solution actions is to change the network using voltage component in a power distribution system with a SFCL,’’
IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 1–5, Aug. 2019.
configuration through an intelligent configuration to increase [18] Y. Lili, C. Yan, and Z. Shibin, ‘‘An efficiency batch authentication scheme
the overall reliability of the system. The system in the B con- for smart grid using binary authentication tree,’’ Int. Arab J. Inf. Technol.,
figuration has the smallest SAIFI, which gives better results vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 435–441, 2019.
[19] X. Song, Y. Zhao, J. Zhou, and Z. Weng, ‘‘Reliability varying charac-
than the A, C and D configurations, has 0.220627 interrup- teristics of PV-ESS-based standalone microgrid,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 7,
tions/customers, which is the least continuous interruption. pp. 120872–120883, 2019, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2937623.
The system in configuration D has the highest SAIFI value [20] D.-L. Duan, X.-Y. Wu, and H.-Z. Deng, ‘‘Reliability evaluation in substa-
tions considering operating conditions and failure modes,’’ IEEE Trans.
and is 0.326308 interrupts /customers, which means that the Power Del., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 309–316, Jan. 2012.
customers have the highest continuous interruptions. Simi- [21] A. Akhavein, M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad, R. Billinton, and D. Farokhzad, ‘‘Ade-
larly, the system in B configuration has the smallest SAIDI, quacy equivalent development of composite generation and transmission
which is 0.182 hours/customer. As a result, four configura- systems using network screening,’’ IET Gener., Transmiss. Distrib., vol. 5,
no. 11, pp. 1141–1148, 2011.
tions based on ESS have been studied using DigSILENT, [22] R. Billinton and R. N. Allan, Reliability Evaluation of Power Systems,
and configuration B is provided with a smart mechanism 2nd ed. New York, NY, USA: Plenum, 1996.

77970 VOLUME 8, 2020

M. R. Tur: Reliability Assessment of Distribution PS When Considering Energy Storage Configuration Technique

[23] Y. Li, K. Xie, and B. Hu, ‘‘Copula-ARMA model for multivariate wind [40] H. Kakuta and H. Mori, ‘‘Probabilistic reliability evaluation with multi-
speed and its applications in reliability assessment of generating systems,’’ objective meta-heuristics in consideration of solution diversity,’’ IEEJ
J. Electr. Eng. Technol., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 421–427, May 2013. Trans. Power Energy, vol. 132, no. 1, pp. 125–132, Feb. 2012.
[24] RTSTFAPM Subcommittee, ‘‘A reliability test system,’’ IEEE Trans. [41] IEEE Guide for Electric Power Distribution Reliability Indices Sponsored
Power App. Syst., vol. 98, no. 6, pp. 2047–2054, Nov./Dec. 1979. by the Transmission and Distribution Committee, IEEE Power Energy
[25] R. Billinton and W. Li, Reliability Assessment of Electrical Power Systems Soc., Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2012.
Using Monte Carlo Methods. New York, NY, USA: Plenum, 1994. [42] S. Ahmad, S. Sardar, A. Ul, and B. Noor, ‘‘Impact of distributed generation
[26] J. Feng, B. Zeng, D. Zhao, G. Wu, Z. Liu, and J. Zhang, ‘‘Evalu- on the reliability of local distribution system,’’ Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci.
ating demand response impacts on capacity credit of renewable dis- Appl., vol. 8, no. 6, 2017.
tributed generation in smart distribution systems,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 6, [43] T. Uchida, H. Taniguchi, and J. Baba, ‘‘Study on cascading failures by the
pp. 14307–14317, 2018. configuration of the power systems:-Differences by the methods for cor-
[27] E. H. Miguel, G. A. Ramos, M. Lwin, P. Siratarnsophon, and S. Santoso, recting supply-demand imbalance-,’’ Energies, vol. 138, no. 2, pp. 62–68,
‘‘Embedded real-time simulation platform for power distribution systems,’’ 2018.
IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 6243–6256, 2018. [44] A. Lewis and C. Clerk, ‘‘Boulder’s energy future municipalization explo-
[28] D.-W. Kim, Y.-H. Sung, G.-W. Jeung, S.-S. Jung, H.-J. Kim, and ration,’’ in Boulder City Council Study Session. Boulder, CO, USA:
D.-H. Kim, ‘‘Reliability assessment on different designs of a SMES system Council Chambers Municipal Building, Feb. 2018.
based on the reliability index approach,’’ J. Electr. Eng. Technol., vol. 7, [45] L. Goel and R. Billinton, ‘‘Evaluation of interrupted energy assessment
no. 1, pp. 46–50, Jan. 2012. rates in distribution systems,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 6, no. 4,
[29] A. Haldar and S. Mahadevan, Probability, Reliability, and Statistical Meth- pp. 1876–1882, 4th Quart., 1991.
ods in Engineering Design. New York, NY, USA: Wiley, 2000. [46] M. Wadi, M. Baysal, and A. Shobole, ‘‘Comparison between open-ring and
[30] B. D. Youn and K. K. Choi, ‘‘An investigation of nonlinearity of reliability- closed-ring grids reliability,’’ in Proc. 4th Int. Conf. Electr. Electron. Eng.
based design optimization approaches,’’ J. Mech. Design, vol. 126, no. 3, (ICEEE), Ankara, Turkey, Apr. 2017, pp. 8–10.
pp. 403–411, May 2004.
[31] M. R. Tür, S. Ay, A. Erduman, A. Shobole, and M. Wadi, ‘‘Impact of
demand side management on spinning reserve requirements designation,’’
Int J. Renew. Energy Res., vol. 7, no. 2, p. 18, 2017.
[32] M. E. Honarmand, M. S. Ghazizadeh, A. Kermanshah, and M. R. Haghi-
fam, ‘‘Visibility of electric distribution utility performance to manage
loss and reliability indices,’’ J. Elect. Eng. Technol., vol. 12, no. 5,
pp. 1764–1776, 2017.
[33] B. Liu, L. Chen, Y. Zhang, C. Fang, S. Mei, and Y. Zhou, ‘‘Model-
ing and analysis of unit commitment considering RCAES system,’’ in MEHMET RIDA TUR (Member, IEEE) received
Proc. 33rd Chin. Control Conf., Jul. 2014, pp. 7478–7482, doi: 10.1109/ the B.S. degree in electrical engineering from
ChiCC.2014.6896244. Marmara University, İstanbul, Turkey, in 2005,
[34] A. Primadianto and C.-N. Lu, ‘‘A review on distribution system state the M.Eng. degree electric and electronic engineer-
estimation,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 3875–3883, ing from the Institute of Science, Firat University,
Sep. 2017. Turkey, in 2008, and the Ph.D. degree in 2018.
[35] Y. Wang, D. Gan, M. Sun, N. Zhang, Z. Lu, and C. Kang, ‘‘Probabilis- He held a senior position with the Technical Pro-
tic individual load forecasting using pinball loss guided LSTM,’’ Appl. grams of Mardin Artuklu University, Turkey, from
Energy, vol. 235, pp. 10–20, Feb. 2019. 2010 to 2019. From 2010 to 2020, he held vari-
[36] C.-J. Ye, W.-D. Liu, X.-H. Fu, L. Wang, and M.-X. Huang, ‘‘Capacity allo- ous positions at the Department of Electrical and
cation of hybrid solar-wind energy system based on discrete probabilistic Energy, Artuklu University and Batman University, Turkey. He is a coauthor
method,’’ TURKISH J. Electr. Eng. Comput. Sci., vol. 23, pp. 1913–1929, of Electrical Energy in Turkey (Seta, 2017). Because of his interest in apply-
2015.
ing economic analysis and quality methods in power systems, he worked
[37] K. Kawahara, J. Tatebe, Y. Zoka, and H. Asahara, ‘‘A proposal for drawing
up switching operation procedures considering power supply reliability,’’
on many different aspects of his career in power engineering. He has been
IEEJ Trans. Power Energy, vol. 131, no. 7, pp. 567–573, 2011. appointed to the Electric and Energy Department, Batman University, since
[38] M. R. Tur, A. Shobole, M. Wadi, and R. Bayindir, ‘‘Valuation of reliability 2019, where he is currently working as an Assistant Professor and the Head
assessment for power systems in terms of distribution system, a case of the Department. The focus of his career has been on utility distribution
study,’’ in Proc. IEEE 6th Int. Conf. Renew. Energy Res. Appl. (ICRERA), systems. His main interests are protection-reliability, power systems quality,
Nov. 2017, pp. 1114–1118. power systems economy, renewable energy systems, and smart grid. He is
[39] K. Arulkumar, K. Palanisamy, and D. Vijayakumar, ‘‘Recent advances and a member of the committee of the International Conference on Renewable
control techniques in grid connected PV system—A review,’’ Int. J. Ren. Energy Research and Applications of the IEEE.
Energy Res., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 1–13, 2016.

VOLUME 8, 2020 77971