Received: May 21, 2021. Revised: July 9, 2021.

306

Reliability Evaluation of Electric Distribution Network with Distributed

Generation Integrated

Ali Mohammed Jaleel1 Mohammed Kdair Abd1*

1
Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Technology - Iraq, Baghdad, Iraq
* Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected]

Abstract: The electrical power system, especially that of the Electric Distribution Network (EDN) is more complex
for the rapid deployment and penetration of Distributed Generation (DG). The DGs in the EDN are vulnerable to
faults, and the reliability index considered is a critical factor in the work continuation of the EDN. The Particle Swarm
Optimization (PSO) is modified to restrict the particle velocities when it runs to obtain the optimum solution for DG
placement and capacity in the distribution network. This modification prevents the velocities from reach an acceptable
level within a few iterations. This paper presents a new approach and good analysis to the evaluation of reliability and
estimates the optimal location and capacity of the DGs units with multi-objective functions for power loss reduction
and improves voltage profile. The optimization approach is based on the new Modified Particle Swarm Optimization
(MPSO) for decision-making on strategic distribution system points for location and capacity of DGs using Matlab
software.In this study, reliability is evaluated using the "Electrical Transient Analyzer Program, ETAP" and applied
on an IEEE 33-bus test system. The obtained results of the proposed approach show superior on the other methods a
reduction in real power losses by (60.13%) and an improvement in voltage profile by (88.34%).
Keywords: Reliability index, Distributed generator, PSO, Electrical transient analyzer, Power losses.

directly connected to the EDN or even on the

1. Introduction consumer's side of the meter. Inappropriate
placement and size of DGs in the EDN may have the
Power losses, energy efficiency issues, low
following negative consequences: Risings in the
voltage profiles [1], and consumer service issues are
short circuit current levels, the voltage becomes set
just a few of the challenges that EDN face. These
out of reasonable limits, lines may have overloading,
problems can be solved by adding DGs optimally to
and power loss increase. DGs have several benefits
the EDN [2], system reconfigurations [3], and finding
that have been noted, including certain drawbacks.
solutions to reduce reliance on fossil fuels by utilizing
Many of these benefits include Peak load saving,
renewable energy sources [4]. In power transmission
reliability and voltage stability improvement,
and distribution systems, electrical energy
decreasing power losses, power quality enhancement
management and pollution reduction are critical
and less polluting emissions, improved security, grid
issues, and Economic Dispatch (ED) is being used to
strengthening, and reduced on-peak operating cost
address these issues [5]. There is no definitive
[6]. The demand for electrical service reliability is
definition that encompasses all DG, so DGs are
growing in modern society. Therefore, the
small-scale decentralized generators directly
distribution system's reliability has gained more
connected to a power grid at the distribution voltage
attention as an important concern that needs to
level and its value usually depends on the network
address to provide customers with a higher level of
capacity. This often discusses network issues such as
trust. In EDN, reliability evaluation means
service availability, losses, and voltage profile. DGs,
determining the system's ability to meet the load's
also known as embedded distributed generation or
demands. The reliability of each variable used in the
decentralized generation, are sources of electricity
International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, Vol.14, No.5, 2021 DOI: 10.22266/ijies2021.1031.28
Received: May 21, 2021. Revised: July 9, 2021. 307

system determines the overall system's reliability. applied in [13] based on an integrated voltage
Each element has two states; on and off. By deciding stability index and (Dragonfly) algorithm. Different
whether a component is operating or not. case studies are simulated using the proposed
The configuration and operating characteristics of approach on the standard IEEE 83-bus test system.
the entire power system are reflected in distribution One of the Dragonfly algorithm drawbacks; lack of
system reliability. According to reports, distribution internal memory, which causes its premature
system failure is responsible for more than 80% of convergence to the local optimal. In reference [14]
consumer power outages [7]. Since it is the weakest Employing Biogeography-based optimization (BBO)
connection between the source of supply and the to determine the best position and sizing for DG units
consumer load points, the distribution system has the to minimize power losses and controlling voltage
most significant impact on supply reliability. Among (profile and harmonic distortion) within acceptable
the many research and papers published in this area; limits. In [15] analyzes the options for improving the
the optimal placement and capacity of distributed reliability of microgrids with a high presence of
energy storage systems are determined using a renewable generation by addressing variable
mixed-integer second-order cone programming renewable generation constraints. Load shedding,
model. It is demonstrated on an IEEE 33-bus energy storage, DGs, and the creation of smaller
distribution network. One potential drawback of the microgrids within a microgrid are all investigated.
proposed methodology is that the computational cost Show the impact of DG placement in distribution
of solving the optimization problem could increase as system networks on reliability worth [16].
the number of design variables rises, making large- Different reliability indices, such as SAIDI,
scale challenges impossible to address [8]. CAIDI, EENS, and ASAI, are used to measure the
In order to minimize the power loss and voltage improvement in reliability. The reliability of EDN
profile improvement using a loss reduction with DG sources has been assessed using the PSO
sensitivity factor (LRSF) to find the optimum DG approach is used to deal with complex formulations
placement while the size of the DG is calculated [17]. The focusing on system uncertainties and the
using the New Enhanced Symbiotic Organisms appropriate restoration strategies. The restoration
Search (NeSOS) method. The traditional SOS optimization formulation for reliability improvement
algorithm problems: lack of organism variability, has taken into account the uncertainties associated
inefficient computational time, and an imbalance of with; (i) Renewable energy power output, (ii)Time-
exploration and exploitation [9]. In reference [10], varying load demand, and (iii) Stochastic prediction
models for utility-based DG penetration in radial errors and random fault events. In [18] employed
distribution systems are both optimal and maximum. PSO approach in the EDN to find the best placement
Therefore, several problems with different and capacity of DG for increase reliability indices,
probabilistic indices as objective functions reduce real power loss, and improve the voltage
constrained by power flow equations, DGs profile. Furthermore, the encoded Markov cut set
penetration, voltage, and thermal limits are proposed. algorithm is used to test reliability indices.
The optimum DG placement and size were Reference [19] presents an integrated approach
determined using a novel approach. The DGs are for evaluating the effect that Distributed Energy
installed in the primary EDN to reduce power losses Resources (DERs) can have on power network
and improve voltage stability using the PSAT toolbox. reliability. The traditional Monte Carlo approach is
The PSAT toolbox has the disadvantage of requiring updated to include time-varying electricity demand
a pricey license, and making changes to the models profiles and network component failure rates. For
and algorithms provided with the program is often reliability evaluation, reference [20] proposes a
difficult [11]. combination of Monte Carlo simulation and the 2m
In [12], an offline-online approach for DG point estimate process, and the Genetic Algorithm
placement and sizing in the EDN divides the solution (GA) is used to reduce the penalty-taking cognizance
of the related parametric power flow problem and of investment cost by using the reliability tool to find
optimization into separate stages. The proposed optimal location and size of DG. The GA algorithm
method drawback, offline and online phases drawback is that the encoding and decoding
separately treated, offline decisions are made without procedures can take a long time to compute. As well,
regard for the downstream online solver's abilities, the Modified Gbest-guided artificial bee colony
while the applicability of the best methods for online meta-heuristic proposed method was updated and
decisions is restricted by the need for high applied to solve the problem of DG placement to
responsiveness. DGs placement in the EDN improves improve reliability, index of voltage stability, and
bus voltage profile and minimizes power loss,
International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, Vol.14, No.5, 2021 DOI: 10.22266/ijies2021.1031.28
Received: May 21, 2021. Revised: July 9, 2021. 308

lower operating costs, voltage variance, and power that the new MPSO provides the optimum balance
losses [21]. between voltage profiles, power loss reduction, and
The Teaching and Learning Based Optimization reliability enhancement. In addition, different
(TLBO) [22] and symbiotic organisms search (SOS) scenarios by fixing DGs in suitable locations and
[23] calculate the best placement for multiple DG in generating power based on the load conditions are
the EDN to minimize the power loss, increase presented to verify and performance of the proposed
reliability, and improve voltage profile. Improved method compared with other methods. An IEEE 33-
PSO (IPSO) and Bat Inspired Algorithms have been bus test system was selected to carry out the different
used to determine the best size and position for DG scenarios.
units in EDN [24]. For IEEE 33-bus and IEEE 69-bus The rest of the paper is organized as follows.
test systems, distributed load flow is used to calculate Section 2 presents the problem formulation and the
power system losses and voltage at each bus. The Ant objective function. Then, section 3 describes the PSO,
lion optimizer is used in [25] to decide the optimum and section 4 introduces the reliability of the power
DG placement and size for improving voltage system. Section 5 includes results and discussion.
profiles in the radial EDN. For power losses and bus Finally, the conclusions in section 6.
voltage profile enhancement, in [26] proposed a new
master-slave hybrid technique based on both the 2. Problem formulation
parallel PBIL (PPBIL) algorithm and the PSO. The
Distribution systems suffer from high power
parallel implementation of the Population-Based
losses, low voltage levels, high current, and low
Incremental Learning (PBIL) method was used for
reliability due to increase load demand. Therefore to
optimal DG placement, and Particle Swarm
improve these problems by incorporating DGs into
Optimization has been used for optimal capacity. The
the delivery system. One of the most common
Loss Sensitivity Factor (LSF), a Genetic Technique
techniques for reliability enhancement, power loss
(GA), and a Parallel Monte-Carlo algorithm (PMC)
reduction, and voltage profile improvement is
are all compared to the proposed technique.
optimal DG placement in the distribution system.
A particle swarm is an algorithm that uses the
Therefore, selecting the optimal placement and size
interaction of individuals in a group of particles to
of the DGs is needed to function appropriately in the
find optimal areas for complex search spaces.
EDN.
Therefore, the researchers were not able to elucidate
it well. Traditional versions of the algorithm have 2.1 Load flow
undesirable dynamic properties, particularly particle
velocities, which must be restricted to regulate their The analysis of load flow is an important aspect
paths. The particle's path is analyzed in separate time of power system studies because of their radial
"Algebraic display" before progressing to its width in topology and high (R/X) ratio and the Newton-
continuous time "Analytical view". These analyzes Raphson and Gauss-Seidel are failed in radial
result in a generalized algorithm model with a set of distribution networks. This study is dependent on
parameters for controlling system convergence trends. backward/forward sweep processes using Kirchhoff's
Some of the particle swarm optimizer results and rules [27].
implementation modifications derived from the
analysis suggest ways to change the original 2.2 Objective function (K)
algorithm to eliminate problems and improve the
particle swarm's ability to optimize some well- By incorporating DGs for a multi-objective on the
studied test functions. These modifications in this distribution grid, the goal is to minimize actual power
work yielded promising results in determining the losses and voltage profile improvement. After that,
location and size of the generators, thereby the reliability indexes are assessed by determining the
improving the reliability. optimal DG placement and size. The objective
This paper employed the new Modified Particle functions (K) can be expressed in the following
Swarm Optimization (MPSO) depending on the equations:
modification of particle velocity to find the optimal
placement and size of the DGs in the EDN. In this 𝐾 = 𝐶𝑆1 + 𝑆2 (1 − 𝐶) (1)
study, Three criteria are used to assess the 𝑃𝑇𝐿,𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝐷𝐺
effectiveness of the suggested approach: active 𝑆1 = 𝑃 (2)
𝑇𝐿,𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝐷𝐺
power loss reduction, voltage profile improvement,
and reliability enhancement. In contrast to the PPBIL,
PMC, GA, and LSF methods [26], the results show
International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, Vol.14, No.5, 2021 DOI: 10.22266/ijies2021.1031.28
Received: May 21, 2021. Revised: July 9, 2021. 309

voltage reception is determined using Eq. (7) [21].

With the help of Kirchoff's law, the set of Eqs. (5) to
(10) was derived.
𝑅𝑖𝑟 2 2
𝑃𝑖𝑟 = 𝑃𝑟𝐹 + 𝑃𝐿𝑟 − 𝑃𝑟𝐷𝐺 + (𝑃𝑖𝑟 + 𝑄𝑖𝑟 ) (5)
𝑉𝑖2

𝑋𝑖𝑟
𝑄𝑖𝑟 = 𝑄𝑟𝐹 + 𝑄𝐿𝑟 + (𝑃𝑖𝑟2 + 𝑄𝑖𝑟
2
) (6)
Figure. 1 Equivalent branch of an electrical network 𝑉𝑖2

𝑆2 = (𝑉𝑒𝑟
𝑉𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝐷𝐺
(3) 𝑉𝑟2 = 𝑉𝑖2 − 2(𝑃𝑖𝑟 𝑅𝑖𝑟 + 𝑄𝑖𝑟 𝑋𝑖𝑟 ) +
𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝐷𝐺 )(𝑛) 2
𝑅𝑖𝑟 2
+ 𝑋𝑖𝑟 2 2
(𝑃𝑖𝑟 + 𝑄𝑖𝑟 ) (7)
𝑉𝑖2
Where: S1 is the percentage of total active loss
with DGs compared to what was previously, S2 is the Moreover, the current flowing through an Iir
average ratio of (Ver) at each bus with DGs to total branch is measured using Eq. (8):
(Ver) before adding DGs, PTL,withDG is real power
losses after adding DG, PTL,withoutDG is real power 2
2
𝑃𝑖𝑟 2
+ 𝑄𝑖𝑟
losses before adding DGs, VerwithDG is voltage 𝐼𝑖𝑟 = 2
𝑉𝑖𝑟
(8)
profiles square error after adding DGs, Verwithout
DG is voltage profiles square error before adding The power loss of any bus connecting portion of
DGs, n is the number of buses and C the weight factor the line (i) and (r) as show in Eq. (9):
(1 ≥ C ≥0).
2
𝑃𝐿𝑂𝑆𝑆 (𝑖, 𝑟) = 𝐼𝑖𝑟 𝑅𝑖𝑟 (9)
2.3 Voltage profiles square error (Ver)

When the square error in the voltage profiles is The description of these power losses in each
being reduced, then the voltage profile of the system branch illustrates the network's total power loss, and
is improved. Square error in the voltage profiles can it can be described using Eq. (10);
be calculated as shown in Eq. (4)
𝑃𝑇 𝐿𝑂𝑆𝑆 = ∑𝑛−1
𝑖=0 𝑃𝐿𝑂𝑆𝑆 (𝑖, 𝑟 ) (10)
𝑖≠𝑟
𝑉𝑒𝑟 = ∑𝑛𝑗=1(𝑉𝑖 − 𝑉𝑟𝑒𝑓 ) 2
(4)
2.5.2. Power balance
Where: Vi is bus voltages at nodes i, Vref is the
reference voltage and Equals to 1 p.u. The active and reactive power balance
expressions are shown in Eqs. (11) and (12).
2.4 Reliability indices
𝑛
The indices are evaluated for divergent DGs 𝑃𝑛𝑒𝑡𝑖 = 𝑃𝐷𝐺𝑖 − 𝑃𝑑𝑚𝑖 − 𝑣𝑖 ∑ 𝑣𝑟 𝑦𝑖,𝑟 cos(𝛿𝑖 − 𝛿𝑟
reliability by finding the optimal size and location of 𝑟=1
the DGs. Besides that, the distribution network's −𝜃𝑖 + 𝜃𝑟 ) (11)
reliability has been improved by combining one DG
𝑛
with multiple DG in the distribution system. Some of
the reliability indices used to assess a system's 𝑄𝑛𝑒𝑡𝑖 = 𝑄𝐷𝐺𝑖 − 𝑄𝑑𝑚𝑖 − 𝑣𝑖 ∑ 𝑣𝑟 𝑦𝑖,𝑟 sin(𝛿𝑖 − 𝛿𝑟
reliability are EENS, AENS, SAIDI, SAIFI, and 𝑟=1
ASAI. They were also used in this study to assess the −𝜃𝑖 + 𝜃𝑟 ) (12)
improvement in reliability.
Where: Pneti and Qneti are the net active and reactive
2.5 Constraints power at i-bus, and equal to zero, PDGi and QDGi are
the active and reactive power at the i-bus for DGs,
2.5.1. Power flow calculation Pdmi and Qdmi are the active and reactive load demands,
The line segment is known to have series Vr is the bus voltage at the r-bus, Yi,r is the branch
impedance [Rir+jXir]. The active and reactive admittance between the i and r-buses, 𝛿i and 𝛿r are
[PLr+jQLr] load power, as shown in Fig. 1. The flow the phase angles of the i-bus and r-bus voltages, (𝜃i -
of active and reactive power between buses is 𝜃r) are the impedance angle of the branch connecting
calculated using Eqs. (5) and (6). The Vr end bus i and r-buses.

International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, Vol.14, No.5, 2021 DOI: 10.22266/ijies2021.1031.28
Received: May 21, 2021. Revised: July 9, 2021. 310

2.5.3. DGs capacity 3.2 New modified particle swarm optimization

(MPSO)
These constraints ensure the non-reversal of
power flow. The power supplied by the substation to If particulate speeds are not restricted when PSO
the distribution system should be higher than the DGs runs, the speeds can increase in a few iterations to
power. The DGs also have the power generation min unacceptable levels. The introduction of constraint
and max limits [28]. coefficients for the regulation of particulate speeds
therefore modified this approach. The coefficient
PDG min ≤PDG ≤ PDG max (13) controls and directs the particle movements to
convergence. Modified particles velocity can be
Where: PDG is the DGs active power, PDG min: Zero, shown as follows:
PDGmax is the max DGs power.
2.5.4. Voltage limitation 𝑉𝑖𝑘+1 = 𝑊𝑛𝑒𝑤 𝑉𝑖𝑘 + 𝑐1𝑛𝑒𝑤 𝑟1 (𝑋𝑝𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑘 − 𝑋𝑖𝑘 )
𝑖

Each bus voltage should be between the min and +𝑐2𝑛𝑒𝑤 𝑟2 (𝑋𝐺𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑘 − 𝑋𝑖𝑘 ) (18)
max ranges.

0.95 p.u.≤Vm≤1.05p.u. (14) 𝑋𝑖𝑘+1 = 𝑋𝑖𝑘 + 𝑉𝑖𝑘+1 (19)

2.5.5. Branch current Where: c1new, c2new are cognitive and social
elements that influence convergence speed and
The current in the distribution system lines should search space for optimal point. The c1 and c2 can be
be regulated and must not surpass the maximum written as follow:
current.
𝑐1𝑛𝑒𝑤 = (𝐷𝐹)∆1, 𝑐2𝑛𝑒𝑤 = (𝐷𝐹)∆2
Ii ≤ Imax,I (15)
𝑊𝑛𝑒𝑤 = 𝑊(𝐷𝐹) (20)
3. Particle swarm optimization (PSO) Modify Eq. (18) to improve PSO performance, as
3.1 Standard PSO particle velocities and spatial coordinates careen
towards infinity, the PSO random weighting of
PSO Technique will carry out DGs optimum control parameters generates an explosion. These
number and location in this case study. In 1995, constriction coefficients can avoid explosions and
Eberhart and Kennedy [29, 30] developed this can also cause particles to converge on local
method. The PSO algorithm was based on the social optimums. The constriction factor (DF) can be
behaviour of organisms like fish schooling and birds written as follow:
flocking. PSO provides a population-based method of
searching people called particles for a period to adjust 2
2 ℎ 2
their location. Speed and location for each particle 𝐷𝐹 = (1 − (𝐻) ) (21)
|∆−2+(√|∆2−4∆|)|
adjusted by following Eqs. (16) and (17) during each
iteration of the algorithm until the stop criteria have Where: W is inertia weight, ∆= ∆1 + ∆2, ∆1 +
been met. ∆2 ≥ 4, Δ is the co-efficient and equal to 4.1, Δ1
equal to Δ2, H is the number of iterations, and h = 1,
𝑉𝑖𝑘+1 = 𝑊𝑉𝑖𝑘 + 𝑐1 𝑟1 (𝑋𝑝𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑘 − 𝑋𝑖𝑘 ) + 2, 3, …, H. Without using velocity boundaries, the
𝑖

+𝑐2 𝑟2 (𝑋𝐺𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑘 − 𝑋𝑖𝑘 ) (16) constriction particles can bring the process closer to
the optimum solution.
𝑋𝑖𝑘+1 = 𝑋𝑖𝑘 + 𝑉𝑖𝑘+1 (17) 3.3 The MPSO model

Where: 𝑉𝑖𝑘 is the particle i velocity at iteration k, In the MPSO model, the particulate speeds are
𝑋𝑖𝑘 is the current particle i at iteration k, 𝑋𝑝𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑘 and restricted by the introduction of constraint
𝑖
𝑋𝐺𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑘 these are respectively the best fitness values coefficients. The coefficient controls and directs the
particle movements to convergence. The steps of the
and best values for any particle in the population, r1
proposed MPSO model can be described as follows:
and r2 is the random number between (0,1) and c1, c2
Step1: Input system data (line and bus data).
acceleration constants.
International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, Vol.14, No.5, 2021 DOI: 10.22266/ijies2021.1031.28
Received: May 21, 2021. Revised: July 9, 2021. 311

Step2: Create an initial population of particles with 4. Reliability of power system

random positions and velocities on dimensions in the
solution space (random number and position of DGs). For its customers, reliability is essential. Any
state of supplied electricity that causes a fault in
Set the iteration counter to 0.
equipment or a system is described as a power quality
Step3: Calculate the power loss for the base case by
using load flow. problem from the consumer's viewpoint. The utility
Step4: For each particle, compare the objective value would be able to do its job to the best of its ability to
to the best individual. If the objective value is less provide adequate voltage to its customers. Utilities
than XPbest, set this value to the current XPbest and are usually unconcerned about the current received
save the particle position. by end-users. An ideal sinusoid with unvarying
Step5: Set the value of Xgbest to the particle that is frequency and amplitude is needed for perfect power
associated with the lowest Xpbest. quality. The capacity of electricity generating stations
to provide consumers with continuous electricity is
Step6: Update the particle velocity and position
using Eqs. (18) and (19). referred to as system adequacy. The following basic
Step7: If the iteration number reaches the total limit, requirements for system adequacy must be met to
proceed to step 9. If not, return to Step 4 and set the ensure system adequacy: a- In addition to the load
iteration index to h = h + 1 demand, a plant generates capacity that should
Step8: Create a printout of the best solution, and this always be higher than total system power loss, b- The
is the perfect solution for the delivery systems system must be capable of transporting load demand
to the consumer end without disrupting equipment, c-
optimum DGs positioning and sizing. Fig. 2 shown
the flow chart of MPSO model. To provide service to the customer within a specific
voltage range. An acceptable voltage range based on
the number of customers must be served.
Input system data
4.1 Components modeling

Generate initial population of The reliability indices are commonly used to

particles
(random number and location of
assess EDN reliability [31], as shown as follow:
1. Average Failure Rate (λ): the load interruption
frequency. The sum of active (λa) and passive (λb)
Calculate active power loss of
each particle failure rates is the average failure rate.
2. Mean Time to Repair (MTTR): the time (in
hours) required to restore an element outage to its
Set the current Xpbest
normal operation. It is equal to r.

𝑀𝑇𝑇𝑅 = 𝑟 (22)

Set the current overall best Xgbest 3. Average Repair Rate (µ): Frequency of repair and
occurrence per year.
8760
Set new Update particle position and µ = 𝑀𝑇𝑇𝑅 (23)
iteration velocity
h= h+1

4. Mean Time to Failure (MTTF): The estimated

No amount or (proper) of time (in years) that the
If h = max. component will remain in a failed state.
iteraion
1
Yes
𝑀𝑇𝑇𝐹 = 𝜆 (24)

Print optimal location and size of 5. Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF): Expected
DGs time in years a component fails. The differences
between MTTR, MTTF, and MTBF are shown in Fig.
Figure. 2 Flow chart of MPSO model 3.

𝑀𝑇𝐵𝐹 = 𝑀𝑇𝑇𝐹 + 𝑀𝑇𝑇𝑅 / 8760 (25)

International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, Vol.14, No.5, 2021 DOI: 10.22266/ijies2021.1031.28
Received: May 21, 2021. Revised: July 9, 2021. 312

4.3 Modeling of system reliability

System Resume System
failure normal failure Compared to other components and parts of the
operation distribution system, the reliability assessment is just
s as important. The IEEE standard number 1366 [32]
provides a guide for distribution system reliability.
According to a given standard, the reliability of a
MTTR MTTF distribution system can be assessed using some
reliability indices. These indices are primarily
divided into two groups:
MTBF
4.3.1. Load point reliability indices
Figure. 3 Differences between MTTR, MTTF and
MTBF 1. Average Failure Rate at Load Point (i), λi (failure
per year):
4.2 Solar photovoltaic (SPV)
𝜆𝑖 = ∑𝑗∈Ne 𝜆𝑒,𝑗 (28)
A solar photovoltaic model was used in the
reliability assessment of the EDN, which is modelled
Where: λi is average failure rate at load point (i), Ne
by the ETAP program. This work employed the
is total number of elements whose fault will interrupt
Sunniva ART245-60-3-1 module of 240WP. The
load point i, λe,j is average failure rate.
characteristics of the ART245-60-3-1 are taken under
2. Annual Outage Duration at Load Point (i), Ui (an
STC (Standard Test Conditions) in the laboratory
hour per year):
environment. 1000W/m2 irradiation, 25°C, and 1.17
solar spectrum air mass are the default conditions.
Ui = ∑j∈Ne λe, j. 𝑟i,j (29)
Table 1 shows the details of the SPV module that was
used in this analysis.
Where: Ui is annual outage duration at load point (i),
𝐸𝑓𝑓 = 𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 / (𝐴 × 𝐼𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒) (26) λe,j: Average failure rate, Ne is total number of
elements whose fault will interrupt load point I, ri,j is
𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 failure duration at load point (i) due to a failed
𝐹𝐹 = 𝑉𝑜𝑐 ×𝐼𝑠𝑐
% (27) element j.
3. Average Outage Duration at Load Point (i), ri
Where: A is the area of PV array, (Eff) panel (hours):
efficiency in %, (FF) panel fill factor in per cent, Voc
and Isc are the open-circuit voltage and short-circuit 𝐴𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑡 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡 𝑖,𝑈𝑖
𝑟𝑖 = 𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑓𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑎𝑡 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡 𝑖,𝜆𝑖
(30)
current, respectively.
4.3.2. System based indices
Table 1. PV (Sunniva ART245-60-3-1) specifications
Parameter Rating (Unit) 1. System Average Interruption Frequency Index
Max power 240W (SAIFI)
Vmp (voltage at max power) 30.65V
Imp (current at max power) 7.82A ∑ 𝑁𝑖
Voc (open circuit voltage) 37.08V 𝑆𝐴𝐼𝐹𝐼 = 𝑁𝑇
(31)
Isc (short circuit current) 8.33A
Eff (panel efficiency) 14.9%
Tol. P (Tolerance of Power) ±4.8/0% Where Ni: Total number of interrupted customers,
Fill Factor 77.6% NT: Total number of customers served.
Temperature 25C° 2. System Average Interruption Duration Index
α (adjustment coefficient temperat- 0.036%/C° (SAIDI).
ure for short circuit current)
β (adjustment coefficient temperat- -0.332%/C° ∑ 𝑟𝑖 ∗𝑁𝑖
𝑆𝐴𝐼𝐷𝐼 = 𝑁𝑇
(32)
ure for open-circuit voltage)
γ (adjustment coefficient temperat- -0.465%/C°
ure for power) Where: ri is restoration time in minutes.
3. Customer Average Interruption Duration Index
(CAIDI).

International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, Vol.14, No.5, 2021 DOI: 10.22266/ijies2021.1031.28
Received: May 21, 2021. Revised: July 9, 2021. 313

∑ 𝑟𝑖 ∗𝑁𝑖 The results are obtained by following the

𝐶𝐴𝐼𝐷𝐼 = 𝑁𝑖
(33)
instructions below.
a) Power loss reduction and voltage square error are
4. Average Service Availability Index (ASAI).
taken into account while determining the best
Customer Hours Service Availability placement and capacity for DGs.
𝐴𝑆𝐴𝐼 = Customer Hours Service Demands
(34) b) To assess the findings obtained in step (a), the
power loss and bus voltage profile are obtained by
5. Energy Not Supplied (ENS). integrating the DG units for case1, case2, and case3
in the EDN.
𝐸𝑁𝑆 = ∑ 𝐿𝑖 𝑈𝑖 (35) c) For EDN, reliability indices calculated using two
different DGs reliability data, including failer rate (λi)
6. Average Energy Not Supplied (AENS). and repair time (ri).
Table 2 shows how the approaches performed to
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑑 reduce actual power losses and enhance voltage
𝐴𝐸𝑁𝑆 = (36)
𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑁𝑜.𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑟 𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑒𝑑 profiles in three cases. For comparison and analysis.
Adding a single DG unit with the best size and
7. Average Service Unavailability Index (ASUI). location is (1780KW) at bus 11, the active power
losses are decreased to (95KW) with minimum
ASUI=1−ASAI (p.u) (37) voltage is increased to (0.943 p.u), and the voltage
square error is reduced to (0.024 p.u).
5. Results and discussion Adding two DG units with the best sizes and
The optimum DGs placement and size are locations is (700KW) at bus 13 and (115kW) at bus
obtained and analyzed by employed the proposed 31. This configuration lowers the active power losses
approach, including distribution system reliability. to (89kW), a (57.8%), and the minimum voltage is
This analysis considers the 33 bus distribution system increased to (0.96p.u), and the voltage square error is
as shown in Fig. 4. The branch and load data are taken reduced to (0.0219p.u). At adding three DG units
from [26] for this method. It consists of 33 buses and with the best sizes and locations are (700KW) at bus
32 branches with active power and reactive power 15, (370kW) at bus 30, and (1000KW) at bus 33, the
loads of a total of (3.715MW) and (2.3MVAr). The active power losses are decreased to (82KW), a
distribution system operates at 12.66 kV. For the base (60.13%) reduction, the minimum voltage is
case, the active power losses are (0.211MW), and the increased to (0.97p.u), and the voltage square error is
Ver was (0.1338 p.u). The proposed design was reduced to (0.0156p.u). Fig. 5 shows that the active
implemented using Matlab R2015a programs and power losses reduction as percents for three cases test
executed on a computer with an Intel(R) Core(TM)i7 system. Similarly, Fig. 6 depicts the effect of the
processor running at 2.5 GHz and 8 GB of RAM. proposed approach on the voltage square error
With three case studies, MPSO is used to determine reduction. Fig. 7 shows the voltage profiles for three
the best location and size of DGs with unity power cases in which the proposed method has a positive
factors: effect on the voltage profiles.
1. Case #1: allocation and size of single DGs. The new MPSO approach allows for easy
2. Case #2: allocation and size of two DGs. convergence toward the optimum solution, as well as
3. Case #3: allocation and size of three DGs. quick, almost linear convergence and control of the
explosion caused by particle velocity randomness.
The classical PSO is enhanced by linear
decreasing of the inertia weights. This linear decrease
of inertia weights is used to get the preferable
solution. This modification can ensure convergence,
find better and better points in the search space, and
its relative weighting varies randomly with each
iteration. As compared the proposed method result
with the proposed in ref. [26] shows that the new
MPSO provides the optimum balance between
voltage profiles, power loss reduction, and reliability
enhancement.
Figure. 4 One-line diagram of IEEE 33-bus test system

International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, Vol.14, No.5, 2021 DOI: 10.22266/ijies2021.1031.28
Received: May 21, 2021. Revised: July 9, 2021. 314

Table 2. Results of the best placement and sizing of DGs for test systems
DGs DGs Size Plosses %Plosses Verror %Verror Vworst
Item
Location (MW) (MW) Reduction (p.u) Reduction (p.u)
Without DGs ---- ---- 0.2110 ---- 0.1338 ---- 0.904
MPSO / Case1 11 1.78 0.095 54.97 0.024 82 0.943
LSF 6 1.2 0.1387 34.21 0.0803 40 0.9221
GA 12 1.2 0.1259 40.31 0.0426 68.15 0.9347
Ref.(26)
PMC 13 1.2 0.1294 38.62 0.0384 71.28 0.9347
PPBIL 13 1.2 0.1294 38.62 0.0384 71.28 0.9347
MPSO / Case2 13, 31 0.7 , 1.15 0.089 57.8 0.0219 83.63 0.960
LSF 6 , 28 0.4739,1.0964 0.1180 44.04 0.0598 55.27 0.9277
GA Ref.(26) 16 , 32 0.7984, 0.7719 0.0954 54.77 0.0254 80.99 0.9603
PMC 15 , 30 0.7989, 0.7714 0.0938 55.53 0.0275 79.44 0.9552
PPBIL 14, 32 0.8721, 0.6982 0.0938 55.50 0.0258 80.70 0.9590
MPSO / Case3 15 , 30, 33 0.7 , 0.37 , 1 0.082 60.13 0.0156 88.34 0.970
LSF 6, 28, 8 0.0001, 0.6343,0.9355 0.1060 49.73 0.0472 64.66 0.940
GA Ref.(26) 14, 30, 32 0.3203, 0.5258,0.2404 0.0917 56.49 0.0276 79.31 0.9572
PMC 12, 18, 31 0.4993, 0.3966,0.6744 0.0916 56.57 0.0266 80.08 0.9578
PPBIL 12, 15, 31 0.4035, 0.5245,0.6422 0.0915 56.60 0.0265 80.16 0.9570

Figure. 5 Real power loss reduction

Figure. 7 Voltage profiles for 33 buses

1. Scenario #1: 0.2 f/yr and 12 h

2. Scenario #2: 0.4 f/yr and 12 h
3. Scenario #3: 0.6 f/yr and 12 h
4. Scenario #4: 0.2 f/yr and 24 h
5. Scenario #5: 0.2 f/yr and 48 h
6. Scenario #6: No failure
The above six scenarios were applied to three
indicators: SAIDI, SAIFI and EENS, whose value was
affected by changing the repair time (ri) and the
average failure rate (λi) of the DGs. For assessment
Figure. 6 Voltage profiles square error reduction of the distribution system's reliability, the following
main assumptions are taken into account.
a) Circuit breaker (CB), fuse, distribution line, and
5.1 Reliability assessment potential transformer are available throughout 100%
reliability.
There are two factors in the reliability data of b) Table 3 displays the average failer rate and repair
DGs used to determine the reliability indices. These time of feeders, buses, and substations [33] in
indices are based on two reliability data: the system's Appendix A.
elements' failer rate (λi) and repair time (ri). c) Table 4 displays the Load distribution for 33 buses
Considered a different reliability data for DGs only [33] in Appendix A.
in the present work as following scenarios:

International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, Vol.14, No.5, 2021 DOI: 10.22266/ijies2021.1031.28
Received: May 21, 2021. Revised: July 9, 2021. 315

Table 5. Reliability indices results of the EDN

Base
Item Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
case
SAIDI 23.2488 18.9444 11.6354 9.0630
SAIFI 2.4967 1.8323 1.1517 0.9281
EENS 82.804 68.594 43.771 34.561
AENS 0.0265 0.0220 0.0140 0.0111
ASAI 0.9973 0.9978 0.9987 0.9990

Table 6. SAIDI, SAIFI, and EENS were evaluated for different scenarios
SAIDI
Item Scenario1 Scenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5 Scenario6
Base case 23.2488 23.2488 23.2488 23.2488 23.2488 23.2488
Case 1 18.9444 18.9456 18.9468 18.9456 18.9480 18.9432
Case 2 11.6354 11.6382 11.6410 11.6382 11.6439 11.6325
Case 3 9.0630 9.0633 9.0638 9.0640 9.0634 9.0625
SAIFI
Item Scenario1 Scenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5 Scenario6
Base case 2.4967 2.4967 2.4967 2.4967 2.4967 2.4967
Case 1 1.8323 1.8326 1.8329 1.8323 1.8323 1.8321
Case 2 1.1517 1.1523 1.1528 1.1517 1.1517 1.1512
Case 3 0.9281 0.9292 0.9294 0.9281 0.9281 0.9278
EENS
Item Scenario1 Scenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5 Scenario6
Base case 82.804 82.804 82.804 82.804 82.804 82.804
Case 1 68.594 68.598 68.602 68.598 68.606 68.591
Case 2 43.771 43.780 43.790 43.780 43.799 43.761
Case 3 34.561 34.566 34.567 34.566 34.568 34.551

(a) (b)

(c)
Figure. 8 Reliability indices for different DGs λi and ri: (a) SAIDI, (b) SAIFI, and (c) EENS

International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, Vol.14, No.5, 2021 DOI: 10.22266/ijies2021.1031.28
Received: May 21, 2021. Revised: July 9, 2021. 316

The IEEE 33-bus distribution system is shown in better results in improving the distribution system's
Fig. 9, was already selected for analysis by using reliability. As compared to the base case, the SAIDI
ETAP Models in Appendix A. index is minimized by (4.3044), (11.6134), and
Table 5 shows results for the reliability indices of (14.1858), SAIFI index is minimized by (0.664),
the EDN before and after adding DGs for the three (1.345), and (1.5686) and, EENS index is minimized
cases mentioned above with 12 h (ri) and 0.2f/yr (λi) by (14.21), (39.033), and (4.243), AENS index is
for DGs reliability data. The addition of one DG minimized by (0.0045), (0.0125), and (0.0154) and
reduced the SAIDI, SAIFI, EENS, and AENS indices ASAI index is maximized by (0.0005), (0.0014), and
to (18.9444), (1.8323), (68.594), and (0.0220), (0.0017) for one, two, and three DGs, respectively.
respectively and increased the ASAI index to This paper will assist researchers in determining
(0.9978). Also, adding two DG resulted in reducing an appropriate method for reducing power loss,
the SAIDI, SAIFI, EENS, and AENS indices to improving voltage profile and distribution system
(11.6354), (1.1517), (43.771), and (0.0140), reliability. There are numerous research avenues to
respectively and increased the ASAI index to pursue in the future, like Incorporates renewable
(0.9987). Adding three DGs resulted in reducing the energy sources and their impact on EDN reliability.
SAIDI, SAIFI, EENS, and AENS indices to (9.0630), EDN reliability can also be improved by adjusting the
(0.9281), (34.561), and (0.0111), respectively and number of branches, a method known as system
increased the ASAI index to (0.9990). Table 6 shows reconfiguration, and its impact on distribution system
the SAIDI, SAIFI, and EENS results for three cases reliability.
based on the six scenarios. Fig. 8 (a)-(c), shows these
indicators for all cases based on the six scenarios. As Conflicts of Interest
the number of DGs units grows, these indices are
The authors confirm that there is no conflict of
reduced except the ASAI index. The increasing
interest.
number of DGs is incorporated into the EDN, the
length of the interruption, the number of interruptions
that occurred decreases, and improves the supplied
Author Contributions
energy in the distribution system. This improvement “Conceptualization, Mohammed Kdair Abd and
in the supplied energy will decrease the EENS and Ali Mohammed Jaleel; methodology, Mohammed
AENS linked to the energy not supplied. It should be Kdair Abd; software, Ali Mohammed Jaleel;
noted that the (ri) of the DGs does not impact the validation, Mohammed Kdair Abd; formal analysis,
SAIFI. This index, as shown in Eq. (31), is Mohammed Kdair Abd and Ali Mohammed Jaleel;
independent of (ri). When DGs integrate into EDN, investigation, Ali Mohammed Jaleel; resources, Ali
the ASAI index for all loads rises. As the ASAI grows, Mohammed Jaleel; data curation, Mohammed Kdair
the average system utility index ASUI decreases, as Abd; writing—original draft preparation, Ali
shown in Eqs. (34) and (37), which is beneficial for Mohammed Jaleel; writing—review and editing,
distribution system reliability. Mohammed Kdair Abd; visualization, Mohammed
Kdair Abd; supervision, Mohammed Kdair Abd;
6. Conclusion project administration, Ali Mohammed Jaleel”.
The proposed algorithm was used for one, two,
and three DGs to find optimal DGs placement and References
size for real power minimization, voltage profile [1] A. Mohammed and S. Shahl, “Impact of
improvement, and reliability enhancement. As Distributed Generation on a Distribution
compared to [26], the total real power losses are Network Voltage Sags in Baghdad City”,
minimized by (0.0309MW), (0.0048MW), and Engineering and Technology Journal, Vol. 39,
(0.0095MW) for one, two, and three GDs, No. 4A, pp. 528-542, 2021.
respectively. Compared to the base case, the worst [2] M. Nasser, I. Ali, and M. Alkhafaji, “Optimal
value of bus voltage is increased by (6.6%) for three Placement and Size of Distributed Generators
DGs. Based on Autoadd and PSO to Improve Voltage
The reliability enhancement for the DGs Profile and Minimize Power Losses”,
integrated delivery system is conducted after Engineering and Technology Journal, Vol. 39,
satisfactory results have been achieved. The No. 3A, pp. 453-464, 2021.
integration of three DGs and scenario #6 yields the [3] Z. Dawood and R. A. Rubayi, “Analysis of
best system reliability results. After all, scenario #6 is Distribution System Reconfiguration under
ideal. Case #3 with scenario #1 is thought to produce Different Load Demand in AL-KUT City by

International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, Vol.14, No.5, 2021 DOI: 10.22266/ijies2021.1031.28
Received: May 21, 2021. Revised: July 9, 2021. 317

using PSO Algorithm”, Engineering and (ENERGYCON), pp. 1-6, 2016.

Technology Journal, Vol. 39, No. 5A, pp. 738- [13] M. Suresh and E. Belwin, “Optimal DG
753, 2021. placement for benefit maximization in
[4] A. A. E. Motaleb and S. Bekdach, “Optimal distribution networks by using Dragonfly
sizing of distributed generation considering algorithm”, Renewables: Wind, Water, and
uncertainties in a hybrid power system”, Solar, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 1-8, 2018.
International Journal of Electrical Power & [14] M. Duong, T. Pham, T. Nguyen, A. Doan, and
Energy Systems, Vol. 82, pp. 179-188, 2016. H. Tran, “Determination of optimal location and
[5] R. A. Rubayi, M. Abd, and F. Flaih, “A New sizing of solar photovoltaic distribution
Enhancement on PSO Algorithm for Combined generation units in radial distribution systems”,
Economic-Emission Load Dispatch Issues”, Energies, Vol. 12, No. 1, p. 174, 2019.
International Journal of Intelligent Engineering [15] A. E. Blasco, M. Prodanovic, R. Segovia, and E.
and Systems, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 77-85, 2020. Castronuovo, “Reliability Evaluation of Grid-
[6] M. Abd, S. Cheng, and H. Sun, “Optimal DG Connected Microgrids with High Penetration of
placement and sizing for power loss reduction in Renewable Distributed Energy Resources”, In:
a radial distribution system using MPGSA and Proc. of the CIRED Workshop, 2018.
sensitivity index method”, In: Proc. of 2016 [16] Y. Kifle, B. Khan, and P. Singh, “Assessment
IEEE 11th Conf. on Industrial Electronics and and enhancement of distribution system
Applications (ICIEA), pp. 1579-1585, 2016. reliability by renewable energy sources and
[7] A. Tabares, G. M. Delgado, J. Franco, J. Arroyo, energy storage”, Journal of Green Engineering,
and J. Contreras, “An enhanced algebraic Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 219-262, 2018.
approach for the analytical reliability assessment [17] K. Zou, A. Agalgaonkar, K. Muttaqi, and S.
of distribution systems”, IEEE Transactions on Perera, “Distribution System Restoration With
Power Systems, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 2870-2879, Renewable Resources for Reliability
2019. Improvement Under System Uncertainties”,
[8] L. Bai, T. Jiang, F. Li, H. Chen, and X. Li, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics,
“Distributed energy storage planning in soft Vol. 67, No. 10, pp. 8438-8449, 2019.
open point based active distribution networks [18] P. Meera and S. Hemamalini, “Reliability based
incorporating network reconfiguration and DG optimal DG planning for a meshed distribution
reactive power capability”, Applied Energy, Vol. network”, Journal of Renewable and
210, pp.1082-1091, 2018. Sustainable Energy, Vol. 11, No. 6, p. 066301,
[9] U. Umar, G. Setyawan, F. Faanzir, F. Firdaus, A. 2019.
Soeprijanto, and O. Penangsang, “New [19] M. Ndawula, S. Djokic, and I. H. Gil,
Enhanced Symbiotic Organisms Search for “Reliability enhancement in power networks
Optimal Location and Sizing of Distributed under uncertainty from distributed energy
Generation in Radial Distribution System”, resources”, Energies, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 531,
International Journal of Intelligent Engineering 2019.
and Systems, Vol. 13, No. 5, pp. 170-180, 2020. [20] A. Verma and K. S. Swarup, “Optimal
[10] M. Akbari, J. Aghaei, M. Barani, T. Niknam, S. Placement of DG in Active Distribution System
Ghavidel, H. Farahmand, M. Korpas, and L. Li, Incorporating Performance Based Rates”, In:
“Convex models for optimal utility-based Proc. of 2018 Clemson University Power
distributed generation allocation in radial Systems Conf. (PSC), pp. 1-6, 2018.
distribution systems”, IEEE Systems Journal, [21] M. Dixit, P. Kundu, and H. Jariwala,
Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 3497-3508, 2018. “Integration of distributed generation for
[11] S. Essallah, A. Khedher, and A. Bouallegue, assessment of distribution system reliability
“Integration of distributed generation in considering power loss, voltage stability and
electrical grid: Optimal placement and sizing voltage deviation”, Energy Systems, Vol. 10, No.
under different load conditions”, Computers & 2, pp. 489-515, 2019.
Electrical Engineering, Vol. 79, pp. 106461, [22] C. Patel, K. Mistry, and R. Roy, “Loss
2019. Allocation in Radial Distribution System with
[12] R. G. Blanco, P. Díez, D. Borzacchiello, and F. Multiple DG Placement using TLBO”, In: Proc.
Chinesta, “A reduced order modeling approach of 2015 IEEE International Conference on
for optimal allocation of distributed generation Electrical, Computer and Communication
in power distribution systems”, In: Proc. of 2016 Technologies (ICECCT), pp. 5-7, 2015.
IEEE International Energy Conf. [23] S. Ahmad, S. Sardar, A. Asar, and B. Noor,
International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, Vol.14, No.5, 2021 DOI: 10.22266/ijies2021.1031.28
Received: May 21, 2021. Revised: July 9, 2021. 318

“Impact of distributed generation on the Advancement, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 1-11, 2019
reliability of local distribution system”, [28] I. Quadri, S. Bhowmick, and D. Joshi, “A
International Journal of Advanced Computer comprehensive technique for optimal allocation
Science and Applications, Vol. 8, No. 6, pp. 375- of distributed energy resources in radial
382, 2017. distribution systems”, Applied Energy, Vol. 211,
[24] Y. Kumar and N. Kumar, “Optimal allocation of pp. 1245-1260, 2018.
distribution generation units in radial [29] J. Kennedy and R. Eberhart, “particle swarm
distribution systems using nature inspired optimization”, In: Proc. of ICNN'95-
optimization techniques”, In: Proc. of 2018 international conf. on neural networks., Vol. 4,
International Conf. on Power, Energy, Control pp. 1942-1948, 1995.
and Transmission Systems (ICPECTS). IEEE, [30] M. Clerc and J. Kennedy, “The particle swarm-
pp. 1-6, 2018. explosion, stability, and convergence in a
[25] A. Ali, A. Youssef, T. George, and S. Kamel, multidimensional complex space”, IEEE
“Optimal DG allocation in distribution systems Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, Vol.
using Ant lion optimizer”, In: Proc. of 2018 6, No. 1, pp. 58-73, 2002.
International Conf. on Innovative Trends in [31] D. Transmission, “Ieee guide for electric power
Computer Engineering (ITCE). IEEE, pp. 324- distribution reliability indices”, IEEE Std, pp.
331, 2018. 1366-2003, 2003.
[26] L. G. Noreña, D. G. Montoya, and C. R. Paja, [32] I. Association, “IEEE 1366-2012-IEEE Guide
“Optimal sizing and location of distributed for Electric Power Distribution Reliability
generators based on PBIL and PSO techniques”, Indices”, New York: IEEE, 2012.
Energies, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 101, 2018. [33] S. Kumar, K. Sachin, A. Vardhan, R. Elavarasan,
[27] A. SalimonSA, F. Fajuke, and K. Suuti, “Load R. Saket, and N. Das, “Reliability assessment of
flow analysis of nigerian radial distribution wind-solar PV integrated distribution system
network using backward/forward sweep using electrical loss minimization technique”,
technique”, Journal of VLSI Design and its Energies, Vol. 13, No. 21, pp. 5631, 2020.

Appendix
Table 3. Reliability data for 33-bus
Bus, Feeder, etc. λi (f/yr) ri (h)
Load@4 0.321 11.04
Load@(5, 7–12, 29, 30, 14, 16, 18–22, 25–28) 0.301 11.44
Load@(13, 15) 0.314 11.17
Load@(17, 23, 24) 0.208 1.75
Load@(31–33) 0.327 10.96
substation 0.1 5
feeder (2, 3, 6) 0.2 3

Table 4. A load of distribution for 33-bus

Bus No. or Load Point No. of Loads Type of Load
2–5 148 Industrial
6–9 10 Commercial
11, 12 132 Commercial
13–15 110 Residential
16 2 Residential
17–20 118 Residential
21–26 126 Residential
27–31 108 Residential
32, 33 58 Residential

International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, Vol.14, No.5, 2021 DOI: 10.22266/ijies2021.1031.28
Received: May 21, 2021. Revised: July 9, 2021. 319

Figure. 9 Test system modelled in ETAP

International Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, Vol.14, No.5, 2021 DOI: 10.22266/ijies2021.1031.28