International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive System (IJPEDS)

Vol. 16, No. 3, September 2025, pp. 1852~1864

ISSN: 2088-8694, DOI: 10.11591/ijpeds.v16.i3.pp1852-1864  1852

An analytical technique for failure analysis and reliability

assessment of grid daily outage performance in distributed
power system

Jacob Kehinde Ogunjuyigbe1, Evans Chinemezu Ashigwuike1, Kafayat Adeyemi2,

Ngang Bassey Ngang1, Timothy Oluwaseun Araoye3, Isaac Ojochogwu Onuh1, Benson Stephen Adole1,
Solomon Bala Okoh1, Iboi Endurance1
1
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Abuja, Abuja, Nigeria
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Abuja, Abuja, Nigeria
3
Department of Mechatronic Engineering, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article history: This paper modeled and analyzed the reliability performance of the 132/33
kV substation in Abuja, Nigeria through the historical data collected from
Received Dec 25, 2024 the APO substation using MATLAB 2021b. The probability distribution
Revised July 5, 2025 model was applied to determine the daily feeder’s outage using Reliability,
Accepted Jul 23, 2025 availability, mean time to repair (MTR), Failure rate, distribution indices,
and mean time between failures (MTBF). Due to the application of smart
energy meters, the use of prepaid energy meters has helped to regulate
Keywords: energy demand, reduce network overloading especially during peak hours,
and minimize the cost of energy consumed. There are more forced failures in
Availability the distribution system due to the switchgear and Transformer failures.
Daily outage feeders There are more forced failures in the distribution system since 2013, which
Failure rate caused a reduction in the number of interruptions even with an increase in
Maintenance several customers linked to the transmission network. The result shows that
Reliability the system was most available in the year 2015 with an average service
availability index (ASAI) value of 98.9971%. The system was least available
in year 2011 with an ASAI value of 98.6558%. The paper recommended that
there should be interconnections between different feeders through proper
configuration of switches or reclosers, to reduce failure occurrence in the
network.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.

Corresponding Author:
Jacob Kehinde Ogunjuyigbe
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Abuja
Federal Capital Territory (F.C.T.), Abuja, Nigeria
Email: [email protected]

1. INTRODUCTION
The power system network is vulnerable to random faults caused by component failure,
transmission problems, and weather conditions. As a result, the critical task of a power network is to supply
energy to customers in a cost-effective and reliable approach, even when exposed to random faults. The
analysis of power system reliability usually considers several functional zones, including the Transmission
network, generation network, distribution network, interconnected system, industrial systems, protection
systems, and commercial systems [1]. Thus, system reliability can be expressed as the probability of a
component executing a given task satisfactorily in the designated operational circumstances over time [2].
One of the methods for ensuring that a distribution network can consistently provide uninterrupted power for

Journal homepage: http://ijpeds.iaescore.com

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1853

consumers is reliability evaluation. This is especially necessary because the power system is complicated and
made up of many parts of machinery and equipment that are prone to malfunction while being used in the
system, resulting in significant financial losses for the nation [3], [4]. About 80% of power outage failures,
according to experts, are caused by the equipment and components of the distribution system [5], [6]. The
two major techniques used in reliability distribution network analysis are Analytical methods and simulation
(Monte Carlo) methods. The analytical method deals with statistical distributions of failure rate and time
required to restore it to normal service conditions. The Monte Carlo method usually requires much time due
to the large inference number needed to converge to precise outcomes. The analytical method applied failure
modes assessment, parallel, and series networks methods for the reliability indices evaluation [6].
Franklin and Gabriel [7] assessed the dependability of Nigeria's power distribution system by
conducting a monthly evaluation of the Ekpoma Network feeders in Edo State from January to December
2012, using feeder load data acquired from the power holding company of Nigeria (PHCN). Their studies
indicated that daily feeder failures were caused by intermittent electrical problems in the distribution system.
Uhunmwangho and Eseosa [8] applied the NEPLAN software to forecast the Port Harcourt distribution
systems reliability through the data collected from the PHCN for the Choba distribution network and
discovered that the use of NEPLAN revealed much about the network's performance and made predicting
easierfor the potential outages in the system. The study also found it difficult to get critical data for network
research and advised that the Utility guarantee complete recording of all data (operational and maintenance)
to improve research in the Port Harcourt power distribution network. Adefarati et al. [9] examined the
various subsystem components of the Ayede 330/132 KV injection substation, which supply the Jericho,
Ijebu ode, Ibadan North, Sagamu, Ayede, and Iseyin substations, and discovered that the substation's
reliability can be increased by lowering the component failure rate and improving the mean time between
failures (MTBF). Ogheneovo [10] compared the reliability of the Onitsha distribution network between 2009
and 2011 before and after the installation of some photovoltaic (PV) systems at the injection substations
using ETAP software. Researcher found that the PV system's inclusion significantly improved the
substation's performance and the utility's revenue.
Gazijahani and Salehi [11] developed dynamic reconfiguration and incentive-based demand
response to determine the cost-reliability using the exchange market algorithm (EMA). Ghiasi et al. [12]
focused on the management risk of metro structures for economic assessment and risk evaluation in
transmission network problem expansion using the probability technique. Hu et al. [13] classified outage
time load points from 4 types to 7 types and identified different types of corresponding reliability parameters.
Rocha et al. [14] analyzed reliability for the distribution networks that involved islanding dynamics using
Non-sequential Carlo Monte models and stability transient simulation with a complete synchronous machine
model which includes a voltage regulator and speed. Šnipas et al. [15] applied a stochastic automatic network
to evaluate the reliability and failure rate of power system substations. The [16], [17] applied novel prediction
models that focus on hybrid engine forecasts for energy cost and energy not used. Gazijahani and Salehi [18]
developed an integrated technique that depends on time rate smart demand response operation and distributed
heterogeneous energy sources for multi-microgrids-oriented reliability planning.
Teera-achariyakul and Rerkpreedapong [19] proposed a technique to determine the failure rate time
variation of each feeder's future interruptions using customer interruption time, interruption energy rates, and
total service areas KVA. The game theory method is applied to balance preventive maintenance costs and the
importance of reliability enhancement. Mirhosseini et al. [20] developed an analytical novel method for the
distribution network through the development of a new reliability-weighted cumulative diagnostic factor.
Abbasghorbani et al. [21] developed reliability-centered maintenance for power system networks through the
preventive maintenance mechanism. The application of the proposed technique was validated in the
Khorasan substation transmission network of Iran. Mahdavi et al. [22] determined the importance of
maintenance in the expansion of the generation-transmission network considering the generation and
transmission reliability. The research focuses on generation and transmission expansion, reliability
availability, and failure rate with network maintenance. The optimal value of a cooling tower's functional
availability in a steam turbine generator was predicted by Kumar et al. [23] using metaheuristic algorithms.
In order to estimate the availability of the hydroelectric generator, Maan et al. [24] used an adaptive neural
fuzzy inference system. The configuration is made of four elements which comprise hydropower systems:
turbine, turbine governor, generator converter, and generator. The system's availability is also affected by
human error and the lack of water, which are connected in series. Kumar et al. [25] developed an effective
stochastic model for generators through the principles of cold reserve reliability, geometrically dispersed
failure, and maintenance guidelines.
In automatic distribution grids with potential customer outage cost estimation in the presence of DG
units, the authors of the paper [26] presented a reliability optimization method. Gazijahani and Salehi [27]
presented a reliability survey for electrical energy systems. An evolution economic algorithm (EMA) was
employed to solve the suggested cost-reliability-based framework in Ghiasi et al. [28], which proposes a unified
An analytical technique for failure analysis and reliability assessment … (Jacob Kehinde Ogunjuyigbe)
1854  ISSN: 2088-8694

incentive-based demand-management (DR) and adaptive reconfiguration approach. Jayappa et al. [29] address
risk management in metropolitan structures, which offered a probabilistic method of evaluating risks and
assessing the economics of transmission network development planning issues.
Whenever a fault occurs in a distribution line, it is important to act quickly, isolate the fault part,
allow the operation of non-fault parts, and minimize the area of the power outage. The combination of
recloser and switch devices may successfully isolate more than 95% of the fault area, improving not only the
social and economic but also the dependability of the power supply and establishing the groundwork for
distribution automation.
This research paper applied the analytical model method in the assessment of the reliability of the
APO 132/33 KV power substation in Abuja, Nigeria through the historical data collected from the APO
substation from 2009 to 2018. To increase the value of system average interruption duration index (SAIDI),
system average interruption frequency index (SAIFI), customer average interruption duration (CAIDI), and
average service availability index (ASAI) of the substation, there is a need to apply interconnections between
different feeders through proper configuration of switches or reclosers, to reduce failure occurrence in the
network which other researcher in literature did not considered. Also, the paper recommends a proper control
mechanism to monitor the state of MTBF and downtime for reliability and availability improvement in the
network. Artificial intelligence is also recommended to ascertain the effectiveness of the network.

2. METHOD
The study analyzed the reliability of the APO 132/33 KV substation in the Abuja electricity
distribution network between January 2009 to December 2018 using the probability distribution models. The
substation has two incoming lines that link to the National grid at the 330/132 KV Katampe and Kukwaba
(Gwagwalada) stations with a capacity of 250 MVA. The 132/33 kV Apo Substation is a feeder station that is
part of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in Abuja, Nigeria. The substation has 10 by 33kV and 1 spare
outgoing feeder line, which is as follows: H37, H35, H33, H31, H3, H7, H11, H13, H15, H21, & H23. The
study carries out the models on MATLAB software for fast real-time performance operations. The collected
data failure comprises downtime and outages of each feeder. After that, the probability approach was applied
to determine the daily outage feeder’s reliability using reliability, availability, mean time to repair (MTTR),
Failure rate, Distribution indices, and MTBF.

2.1. Probability distribution models

Probability Distribution Models are used in reliability analysis to model the likelihood of failure or
performance degradation in system components over time. These models are essential for calculating
reliability indices and understanding the behavior of components under uncertain conditions. The
methodology begins with selecting an appropriate probability distribution to model the failure behavior of
each component. Common distributions used in reliability analysis include:
− Exponential distribution: Often used to model the time between failures of systems with a constant failure
rate, such as electrical components that degrade randomly over time.
− Weibull distribution: A versatile distribution used to model various failure rates, suitable for both early-
life failures and wear-out failures. It can model increasing, constant, or decreasing failure rates.
− Normal distribution: Applied when the component failures are related to variations around a mean value,
typically in cases of wear and tear.
− Log-normal distribution: Useful when the failure times are influenced by multiplicative random variables,
like environmental stress factors.
After choosing the appropriate distribution, failure data (e.g., time-to-failure or failure rates) is gathered from
system performance history or component testing. The parameters of the chosen distribution (e.g., scale,
shape) are estimated, often using methods like maximum likelihood estimation (MLE). With the distribution
model in place, reliability indices such as the MTBF or availability can be calculated, helping to predict
system performance and guide maintenance decisions

2.2. Availability
Availability is the probability that the system will be in a functional state within the specific period
of operation. It is usually expressed as the ratio of the expected value of operational time to the sum of the
expected values of operational time and downtime. Availability (A) is given in (1) to (6) [26].
𝑋[𝑂𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒]
𝐴= (1)
𝑋[𝑂𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒]+ 𝑋[𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒]

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 16, No. 3, September 2025: 1852-1864
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1855

Given a state function of the system Y(t), it can thus be expressed as (2).

1, 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝑓𝑢𝑛𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑡 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑡 = 0

𝑌(𝑡) = { (2)
0, 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒

Availability A(t) at any time t > 0 is given by (3).

𝐴(𝑡) = Pr[𝑌(𝑡) = 1] = 𝑋[𝑌(𝑡)] (3)

Define the average availability based on real line intervals with an assumption of an arbitrary constant c > 0,
then, average availability is given by (4).
1 𝑐
𝐴𝑐 = ∫0 𝐴(𝑡)𝑑𝑡 (4)
𝑐

The availability in a steady state condition of the system is given in (5).

𝐴 = lim 𝐴𝑐 (5)
𝑐→∞

Substituting (4) into (5):

1 𝑐
𝐴 = lim ∫0 𝐴(𝑡)𝑑𝑡 (6)
𝑐
𝑐→∞

2.3. Mean time between failure (MTBF)

Mean time between failure (MTBF) is the arithmetic mean value of the reliability function R(t),
which can be expressed as the probability value of the density function f(t) of time between failure, which
can be expressed in (7) [27].

𝐹(𝑡) = 𝜆𝑒 −𝜆𝑡 (7)

Where λ is the failure rate

MTBF is the solution of the definite integral of R(t), which is given in (8) to (11):
∞
MTBF = ∫0 𝑅(𝑡)𝑑𝑡 (8)

∞
MTBF = ∫𝑡 𝑡𝑓(𝑡)𝑑𝑡 (9)

where:
𝑓(𝑡) is the failure density function and t is the time until failure;
The discrete failure rate can be determined by substituting (7) with (9); and
Thus, MTBF is given by (10).
∞
MTBF = ∫𝑡 𝑡𝜆𝑒 −𝜆𝑡 𝑑𝑡 (10)

Solving the definite integral using integration by parts

1
MTBF = (11)
𝜆

2.4. Distribution indices

The most common distribution indices include the SAIDI, CAIDI, SAIFI, momentary average
interruption frequency index (MAIFI), customer average interruption frequency index (CAIFI), customers
interrupted per interruption index (CIII), average service unavailability index (ASUI), and the ASAI.

2.4.1. Interruption duration index (SAIDI)

SAIDI is a measure of the total interruption duration for a customer average over a given period. It
is often calculated monthly or annually. For a given total number of customers NT supplied by a distribution

An analytical technique for failure analysis and reliability assessment … (Jacob Kehinde Ogunjuyigbe)
1856  ISSN: 2088-8694

system, in case of interruption, I, there are several customers not affected for a duration of interruption d. The
total customer duration of interruption CDI for any given interruption is given in (12) to (13) [28]:

CDI = d ∗ N (12)

So, for a total number of faults for n = 1, 2, 3, …, n, the CDI is given by:
CDI = d1N1 + d2N2 + d3N3 + …. + dnNn
Therefore CDI = ∑𝑛𝑖=1 𝑑𝑖 𝑁𝑖
Thus, SAIDI is given by:

∑𝑛
𝑖=1 𝑑𝑖 𝑁𝑖
SAIDI = (13)
𝑁𝑇

where,
di = the duration of the interruption
Ni = the number of customers interrupted
NT = the total number of customers

2.4.2. Customer average interruption duration (CAIDI)

This is the average time to restore interrupted customers for a given period. This index allows
the measurement of the average outage duration for customers. The formula to calculate CAIDI is given
in (14) [27]:

∑𝑛
𝑖=1 𝑑𝑖 𝑁𝑖
CAIDI = (14)
𝑁𝑖

where,
di = the duration of the interruption
Ni = the number of customers interrupted

2.4.3. SAIFI
This is the average number of times a customer is affected by a power outage during the year (or
period). The SAIFI is the ratio of the total number of customers interrupted to the total number of customers
served. The formula to calculate SAIFI is given in (15), (16) [28]. It provides the fraction of the time
customers are without electricity throughout the predefined interval of time. It is expressed as:

∑𝑛
𝑖=1 𝑁𝑖
SAIFI = (15)
𝑁𝑇

Ni = Total number of customers interrupted.

NT = Total number of customers served.
SAIFI may also be given in (16) as:

SAIFI = SAIDI / CAIDI (16)

2.4.4. Customer average interruption frequency index (CAIFI)

CAIFI is the measure of the average number of customers interrupted per year. It is simply the
number of interruptions that occurred divided by the number of customers affected. For any interruption,
several customers are affected. If Σ(No) is the number of interruptions that occurred in a year, then the
number of customers affected that year is given by Σ(Ni). Hence, CAIFI is given in (17) as [28]:

∑𝑛
𝑖=1 𝑁0
CAIFI = ∑𝑛
(17)
𝑖=1 𝑁𝑖

where the customer average interruption frequency index.

No = Number of interruptions.
Ni= the Total number of customers interrupted.

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 16, No. 3, September 2025: 1852-1864
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1857

2.4.5. Customers interrupted per interruption index (CIII)

The CIII is defined as the average number of customers interrupted during an outage. It is an inverse
of the CAIFI and can be calculated in (18) as [29]:
∑𝑛
𝑖=1 𝑁𝑖
CIII = ∑𝑛
(18)
𝑖=1 𝑁0

where the customer average interruption frequency index.

No = Number of interruptions.
Ni= the Total number of customers interrupted.

2.4.6. Average service unavailability index (ASUI)

It provides a fraction of the time customers are without electricity throughout the predefined interval
of time. It is expressed in (19) as [28]:
∑ 𝑟 𝑖 𝑁𝑖
ASUI = (19)
𝑁𝑇 .𝑇

where,
di = the duration of the interruption
Ni = the number of customers interrupted
NT = the total number of customers.

2.4.7. Average service availability index (ASAI)

This is a measure of the average availability of the distribution system that serves customers. It is
usually represented in percentages. It is expressed in (20) as [28]:
∑ 𝑟𝑖 𝑁𝑖
ASAI = 1 – (20)
𝑁𝑇 .𝑇

Where,
di = the duration of the interruption
Ni = the number of customers interrupted
NT = the total number of customers
T = Time period under study

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Feeders 2, 3, 4, 6, and 10 also recorded a relatively high number of failures. The distribution system
encountered a total of 3818 failures over the ten years of study. When the ASAI is low, it indicates that the
network is frequently unavailable, meaning customers experience a higher number or longer durations of
power outages. A low ASAI signifies poor service reliability and is often the result of several factors. One
common cause of a low ASAI is poor infrastructure maintenance. If the equipment, such as transformers,
circuit breakers, and power lines, is aging or inadequately maintained, it may fail more often, leading to
increased outages. Weather-related issues can also contribute, such as storms, hurricanes, or flooding, which
damage critical infrastructure. Areas prone to natural disasters may experience a more significant drop in
ASAI during such events. Additionally, a lack of investment in system upgrades or insufficient capacity to
handle peak demand can strain the network. When demand exceeds supply or the network’s ability to
distribute power effectively, service interruptions become more frequent. In some cases, human errors or
inadequate staff training can lead to poor maintenance responses or delays in addressing faults. A low ASAI
ultimately results in higher customer dissatisfaction, as prolonged or frequent outages disrupt daily life,
businesses, and critical services. Utilities must address these issues by upgrading infrastructure, improving
maintenance schedules, and enhancing grid resilience to raise the ASAI and restore service reliability. Table
1 shows the system reliability indices from 2009 to 2018.
The mean time of operation of each feeder between the occurrences of consecutive failures is
measured by this index. From Table 1, feeders 9 and 11 show the longest MTBF, having an average of
561.8462 hours of operation before the occurrence of any forced failure. Feeder 1 has the least MTBF, with
just 142.9821 hours of operation before an occurrence of a failure. Hence, feeder 1 appears to be the least
stable in the distribution network. Feeders 2, 3, 4, 6, and 11, with MTBF of 153.4991 hours, 184.9114 hours,
203.3514 hours, 215.3514 hours, and 228.846 hours, respectively, also appear to be less reliable than the
other feeders.

An analytical technique for failure analysis and reliability assessment … (Jacob Kehinde Ogunjuyigbe)
1858  ISSN: 2088-8694

Table 1 shows the MTTR of each feeder in the distribution network. Feeder 11 has the highest
MTTR with a value of 8.9551 hours, while feeder 3 has the least MTTR with 6.1477 hours. In other words,
feeder 3 is the fastest to be fixed in any case of fault occurrence in the distribution system. This may be due
to factors that include the distance of the feeder from the substation, the time to fault discovery, the nature of
the fault, and logistical issues. Feeder 9 is the most available, having an availability value of 0.9878 for the
10-year duration of the distribution system. Feeder 1 has the least availability of 0.9552. Other feeders with
relatively low availability are feeders 2, 3, 4, and 6, each with 0.9592, 0.9678, 0.9688, and 0.9683,
respectively.
The average time of operation between two consecutive failures is recorded to be highest in feeders
9 and 10, while feeder 1 shows the least mean duration of operation between failures. Feeders 5, 7, and 8 also
show a considerable duration of operation before a failure occurs. It can be deduced that the feeders with
relatively high MTBF are fairly stable in operation, that is, they have a reduced frequency of failure
compared to the feeders with low MTBF. The result shows that the MTTR of feeder 3 is relatively quickly
restored compared to the other feeders. Feeder 11 has the highest MTTR value, which makes it the slowest to
be restored to operation mode after the occurrence of a failure.

Table 1. System reliability indices from 2009 to 2018

Feeder Total number of failures Total duration Total expected duration MTBF MTTR Availability
of outage (hr) of operation (hr)
Feeder 1 613 4110 87648 142.9821 6.7047 0.9552
Feeder 2 571 3731 87648 153.4991 6.5342 0.9592
Feeder 3 474 2914 87648 184.9114 6.1477 0.9678
Feeder 4 431 2826 87648 203.3596 6.5568 0.9688
Feeder 5 212 1558 87648 413.434 7.3491 0.9825
Feeder 6 407 2874 87648 215.3514 7.0614 0.9683
Feeder 7 202 1574 87648 433.901 7.7921 0.9824
Feeder 8 213 1688 87648 411.493 7.9249 0.9811
Feeder 9 156 1085 87648 561.8462 6.9551 0.9878
Feeder 10 383 2680 87648 228.846 6.9974 0.9703
Feeder 11 156 1397 87648 561.8462 8.9551 0.9843

3.1. System average interruption duration index (SAIDI)

In Table 2, the system average interruption duration index of the whole distribution network is
presented for each year for the ten-year duration of the study. The system recorded the highest value of
average interruption in the year 2011 with a SAIDI value of 117.752 hours while the least was recorded in
the year 2015 with an average of 87.8544 hours of system interruption. This implies that interruptions are
quickly discovered and the system was restored in 2015 compared to the other years. The system has
the highest average interruption duration in the year 2011 and the lowest average interruption duration in the
year 2015.

3.2. System average interruption frequency index (SAIFI)

The system had the highest average interruption frequency index in the year 2014, with a SAIFI
value of 0.4241 interruptions per customer, while the lowest SAIFI value was recorded in the year 2017 with
0.3547 interruptions per customer. This implies that in the entire period, a customer experiences less than one
interruption each year in the APO 132 kV/33 kV distribution system. The SAIFI value of this distribution
system is observed to be low compared with the IEEE 1366 1998 Standard for North American Utilities,
which has a median value of 1.1 interruptions per customer. The system recorded the highest value of SAIFI
in the year 2014 and the lowest value in the year 2017. The highest value is observed to be below 0.5
interruptions per customer, which makes it assumable that the system is fairly stable.
It is evident that the average duration of interruption experienced by customers connected to the
APO 132 kV/33 kV distribution system was extremely high in the year 2009, with a CAIDI value of
296.2305 hours, followed by the year 2011, which had a CAIDI value of 290.5187 hours. The lowest CAIDI
value was recorded in the year 2015 with a CAIDI value of 234.312 hours. This insinuates that electric power
was quickly restored to the customers in the year 2015 compared to the other years. Nonetheless, a low value
of CAIDI depicts the high reliability of a power system. Comparing the lowest CAIDI value of the APO
132 kV/33 kV distribution system with the IEEE standard value, it can be deduced that this distribution
system takes longer hours than the stipulated benchmark to restore power to the customers, hence making the
distribution system less reliable.

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 16, No. 3, September 2025: 1852-1864
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1859

3.3. Customer average interruption duration index (CAIFI)

The customer average interruption duration index presented in Table 2 shows that the most frequent
interruptions experienced by customers connected to the 132 kV/33 kV distribution station were recorded in
the year 2017, with an average of 0.0183 interruptions per customer, followed by the year 2019, with an
average CAIFI value of 0.0176 interruptions per customer. The lowest value of CAIFI was recorded in the
year 2016 with 0.0153 interruptions per customer. Again, considering the CAIFI of this system, one might
erroneously assume it is reliable when considering its very low values of frequency of interruptions per
customer. Other years with relatively high CAIFI values are 2009 and 2013. Years with low values of recorded
CAIFI are 2014 and 2016. The highest CAIFI value in the table is less than 0.02, which could have suggested
the system to be fairly reliable, but the results of other more defining indices do not support the assumption.

3.4. Customers interrupted per interruption index (CIII)

The average number of customers that experienced an interruption at a single time is presented in
the CIII column in Table 2. From Table 2, it is shown that more customers experienced interruptions at a
single time in the year 2016 than in any other year. The result shows that 65.3774 (approximately 65)
customers experienced interruptions together at any single occurrence of interruption in that year. The year
2017 recorded the lowest number of customers experiencing interruptions per interruption, with an average
of 54.709 (approximately 55) customers per interruption. Using this index to appraise the reliability of this
distribution system, the system may be considered unreliable as several customers are interrupted. It can be
observed from the graph that the highest number of customers interrupted per interruption was recorded in
the year 2016, followed by 2014. The lowest number of customers interrupted per interruption was recorded
in the year 2017.

Table 2. Customer reliability indices

Year Number Duration Expected Total Total SAIDI SAIFI CAIDI CAIFI CIII ASAI ASUI
of of outage duration of number of number of (hr) (int./cust.) (hr) (int./cust.) (cust./int.) (%) (%)
failures (hr) operation customers customers
(hr) served interrupted
2009 398 3112 8760 57239 22592 116.921 0.3947 296.2305 0.0176 56.7638 98.6653 1.3347
2010 363 2839 8760 57539 21486 106.0568 0.3734 284.0175 0.0169 59.1901 98.7893 1.2107
2011 400 2912 8760 57898 23467 117.752 0.4053 290.5187 0.017 58.6675 98.6558 1.3442
2012 404 2785 8784 58013 23544 110.6688 0.4058 272.6906 0.0172 58.2772 98.7401 1.2599
2013 392 2686 8760 58181 22597 105.8591 0.3884 272.5577 0.0173 57.6454 98.7916 1.2084
2014 384 2563 8760 58228 24694 113.9334 0.4241 268.6528 0.0156 64.3073 98.6994 1.3006
2015 352 2319 8760 58275 21850 87.8544 0.3749 234.312 0.0161 62.0739 98.9971 1.0029
2016 363 2339 8784 58290 23732 103.2281 0.4071 253.5464 0.0153 65.3774 98.8248 1.1752
2017 378 2508 8760 58306 20680 94.2196 0.3547 265.6465 0.0183 54.709 98.9244 1.0756
2018 341 2374 8760 58372 21018 90.306 0.3601 250.8013 0.0162 61.6364 98.9691 1.0309

3.5. Average service availability index (ASAI)

The result of the average availability index of the APO 132 kV/33 kV distribution system is presented
in the ASAI column of Table 2. The system was most available in the year 2015 with an ASAI value of
98.9971%. The system was least available in the year 2011 with an ASAI value of 98.6558%. This shows that
there are more forced failures in the distribution system, which is due to the switchgear and Transformer
failures. The system recorded the highest availability index in the year 2015. Other years with relatively high
availability indexes are 2017 and 2018, while the least availability was recorded in the year 2011.

3.6. Average service unavailability index (ASUI)

The ASUI column of Table 2 presents the result of the unavailability index of the APO
132 kV/33 kV distribution system. The year 2011 had the highest value of ASUI, with a value of 1.3442%
while the lowest value of ASUI was obtained in the year 2015, with a value of 1.0029%. Because ASUI is
the opposite measure of ASAI, it can be concluded that the system was most unavailable in 2011 and most
available in the year 2015. The highest mark of unavailability was recorded in the year 2011, while the
lowest mark was recorded in the year 2015.

4. INFERENCE
The practical implications of a high MTBF of an electric feeder are:
− Increased Reliability: The probability of the feeder failing is extremely low, which reduces the frequency
of outages and disruptions.
− High MTBF leads to lower cost of maintenance of the grid and vice versa.

An analytical technique for failure analysis and reliability assessment … (Jacob Kehinde Ogunjuyigbe)
1860  ISSN: 2088-8694

− Increased uptime: the feeder remains operational for longer periods, ensuring a consistent power supply to
connected loads.
− Improved grid stability: the failure rate reduction contributes to a more reliable and stable power grid.
− Increased customer satisfaction: fewer outages and disruptions result in higher customer satisfaction.
Therefore, feeders 9 and 11 performed better than the other feeders. Also, the practical implications of
MTTR are discussed below:
− Longer duration of outages: when a failure occurs, it takes longer to repair, leading to extended
downtime.
− Increased downtime costs: the longer the repair time, the more the quantity of undelivered energy and
hence, lost productivity, replacement power costs, and revenue loss.
− Reduced grid resilience: A high MTTR means the feeder remains forced out of service for an extended
period, potentially triggering cascading failures or straining the grid.
− Decreased customer satisfaction: Longer outages lead to frustrated customers, which could damage the
reputation of utilities and strain the relationship between the stakeholders.
− Reduced overall efficiency: High MTTR can indicate inefficiencies in the repair process, either through
the use of a quality workforce, potentially impacting the overall performance of the grid.
Therefore, feeder 3 performed better than the other feeders.

5. CONCLUSION
This paper analyzed the reliability performance of the 132/33 KV Transmission substation in Abuja,
Nigeria, through the historical data collected from the APO substation from 2009 to 2018. The probability
approach was applied to determine the daily outage feeder’s reliability using Reliability, availability, MTTR,
Failure rate, Distribution indices, and MTBF. There were more forced failures in the distribution system from
the year 2013, which caused a reduction in the number of interruptions with the increased number of
customers connected to the distribution network. Due to the application of smart energy meters, the use of
prepaid energy meters has helped to regulate energy demand, reduce network overloading, especially during
peak hours, and minimize the cost of energy consumed. The system interruption duration is extremely high,
which causes feeder 1 to have the highest failure rate of the APO 132 kV/33 KV distribution network. There
are more forced failures in the distribution system due to switchgear and transformer failures. The result
shows that the system was most available in the year 2015 with an ASAI value of 98.9971%. The system was
least available in the year 2011 with an ASAI value of 98.6558%. However, the system has the highest
duration of outage in the year 2009 with 3112 hours of aggregated outage and 3988 interruptions while the
year 2015 has the lowest duration of an outage with 2319 hours but recorded 352 interruptions. The
substation should use a proper control mechanism to monitor the state of MTBF and downtime for reliability
and availability improvement in the network. Artificial intelligence is also recommended to ascertain the
effectiveness of the network. Furthermore, the application of technological advancements such as IoE, IoT,
and service robots will reduce outage time and maximization of component revenue. There should be
considerations on methods to make the substation network smarter by data integration and collection through
autonomous robotics, IoT, analytical big data systems, cognitive systems, artificial intelligence (AI), virtual
reality, and augmented. Finally, smart grid should be encouraged in remote and rural areas to reduce the
strain on the national grid, automation of the entire network to facilitate the resolution of faults and around
substation feeders, and the implementation of the study's findings is anticipated to help electricity experts
enhance the design, planning, and operation of distribution substations.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors acknowledge the support received from Abuja Electricity Distribution Company
(AEDC) for data collection and enabled the timely completion of this research. Also, the authors expressed
their gratitude to the editor and reviewers of this journal whose feedback has been instrumental in enhancing
this paper.

FUNDING INFORMATION
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal
relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 16, No. 3, September 2025: 1852-1864
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1861

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS STATEMENT

This journal uses the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) to recognize individual author
contributions, reduce authorship disputes, and facilitate collaboration.

Name of Author C M So Va Fo I R D O E Vi Su P Fu
Jacob Kehinde Ogunjuyigbe ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Evans Chinemezu Ashigwuike ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Kafayat Adeyemi ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Ngang Bassey Ngang ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Timothy Oluwaseun Araoye ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Isaac Ojochogwu Onuh ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Benson Stephen Adole ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Solomon Bala Okoh ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Iboi Endurance ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

C : Conceptualization I : Investigation Vi : Visualization

M : Methodology R : Resources Su : Supervision
So : Software D : Data Curation P : Project administration
Va : Validation O : Writing - Original Draft Fu : Funding acquisition
Fo : Formal analysis E : Writing - Review & Editing

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

Authors state no conflict of interest.

DATA AVAILABILITY
Data availability is not applicable to this paper as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.

REFERENCES
[1] Y. Shiwen, H. Hui, W. Chengzhi, G. Hao, and F. Hao, “Review on risk assessment of power system,” Procedia Computer
Science, vol. 109, pp. 1200–1205, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2017.05.399.
[2] E. Zio, “Some challenges and opportunities in reliability engineering,” IEEE Transactions on Reliability, vol. 65, no. 4,
pp. 1769–1782, Dec. 2016, doi: 10.1109/TR.2016.2591504.
[3] T. Sucita, Y. Mulyadi, and C. Timotius, “Reliability evaluation of power distribution system with reliability index assessment
(RIA),” IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 384, no. 1, p. 012072, Jul. 2018, doi: 10.1088/1757-
899X/384/1/012072.
[4] M. Kornatka, A. Gawlak, and G. Dudek, “Determination of reliability indices of the distribution network based on data from
AMI,” E3S Web of Conferences, vol. 84, p. 02004, Feb. 2019, doi: 10.1051/e3sconf/20198402004.
[5] H. Abunima, J. Teh, C.-M. Lai, and H. J. Jabir, “A systematic review of reliability studies on composite power systems: a
coherent taxonomy motivations, open challenges, recommendations, and new research directions,” Energies, vol. 11, no. 9,
p. 2417, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.3390/en11092417.
[6] A. Kolawole, O. O. Agboola, P. P. Ikubanni, O. G. Raji, and C. Okechukwu Osueke, “Reliability and power loss analysis: a case
study of a power plant in Nigeria,” Cogent Engineering, vol. 6, no. 1, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.1080/23311916.2019.1579426.
[7] O. Franklin and A. Gabriel, “Reliability analysis of power distribution system in Nigeria: A case study of Ekpoma Network, Edo
State,” International Journal of Electronics and Electrical Engineering, vol. 2, no. 3, 2014, doi: 10.12720/ijeee.2.3.175-182.
[8] R. Uhunmwangho and O. Eseosa, “Reliability prediction of Port Harcourt electricity distribution network using NEPLAN,” The
International Journal of Engineering And Science (IJES), vol. 3, no. 12, pp. 68–79, 2014.
[9] T. Adefarati, A. K. Babarinde, A. S. Oluwole, and K. Olusuyi, “Reliability evaluation of Ayede 330/132 KV substation,”
International Journal of Engineering and Innovative Technology (IJEIT), vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 86–91, 2014.
[10] D. Ogheneovo, “Assessment of electric power distribution feeders reliability: a case study of feeders that supply Ede town,”
International Conference on Electric Power Engineering (ICEPENG 2015). October 14 - 16, 2015, no. October 2015, pp. 167–
176, 2015.
[11] F. S. Gazijahani and J. Salehi, “Reliability constrained two-stage optimization of multiple renewable-based microgrids
incorporating critical energy peak pricing demand response program using robust optimization approach,” Energy, vol. 161,
pp. 999–1015, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2018.07.191.
[12] V. Ghiasi, S. Ghiasi, H. Omar, B. Ebrahimi, and M. Ghiasi, “A review of metro tunnel safety parameters and role of risk
management, tehran metro,” Fourth International Symposium on Tunnel Safety and Security, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, pp.
511–515, 2010.
[13] B. Hu, X. H. He, and K. Cao, “Reliability evaluation technique for electrical distribution networks considering planned outages,”
Journal of Electrical Engineering and Technology, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 1482–1488, 2014, doi: 10.5370/JEET.2014.9.5.1482.
[14] L. F. Rocha, C. L. T. Borges, and G. N. Taranto, “Reliability evaluation of active distribution networks including islanding
dynamics,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, pp. 1–1, 2016, doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2016.2585648.
[15] M. Šnipas, V. Radziukynas, and E. Valakevičius, “Modeling reliability of power systems substations by using stochastic automata
networks,” Reliability Engineering & System Safety, vol. 157, pp. 13–22, Jan. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2016.08.006.
[16] M. Ghiasi, M. Irani Jam, M. Teimourian, H. Zarrabi, and N. Yousefi, “A new prediction model of electricity load based on hybrid
forecast engine,” International Journal of Ambient Energy, vol. 40, no. 2, Feb. 2019, doi: 10.1080/01430750.2017.1381157.

An analytical technique for failure analysis and reliability assessment … (Jacob Kehinde Ogunjuyigbe)
1862  ISSN: 2088-8694

[17] M. Ghiasi, E. Ahmadinia, M. Lariche, H. Zarrabi, and R. Simoes, “A new spinning reserve requirement prediction with hybrid
model,” Smart Science, pp. 1–10, Apr. 2018, doi: 10.1080/23080477.2018.1460890.
[18] F. S. Gazijahani and J. Salehi, “Integrated DR and reconfiguration scheduling for optimal operation of microgrids using Hong’s
point estimate method,” International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol. 99, pp. 481–492, Jul. 2018, doi:
10.1016/j.ijepes.2018.01.044.
[19] N. Teera-achariyakul and D. Rerkpreedapong, “Optimal preventive maintenance planning for electric power distribution systems
using failure rates and game theory,” Energies, vol. 15, no. 14, p. 5172, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.3390/en15145172.
[20] M. Mirhosseini, A. Heydari, D. Astiaso Garcia, F. Mancini, and F. Keynia, “Reliability based maintenance programming by a
new index for electrical distribution system components ranking,” Optimization and Engineering, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 2315–2333,
Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1007/s11081-022-09767-8.
[21] M. Abbasghorbani, Y. Damchi, and H. Rajabi Mashhadi, “Reliability-centered maintenance for overhead transmission lines in
composite power system,” International Transactions on Electrical Energy Systems, vol. 2022, pp. 1–11, Dec. 2022, doi:
10.1155/2022/1170269.
[22] M. Mahdavi, M. S. Javadi, and J. P. S. Catalão, “Integrated generation-transmission expansion planning considering power
system reliability and optimal maintenance activities,” International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol. 145, p.
108688, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.ijepes.2022.108688.
[23] A. Kumar et al., “Efficient stochastic model for operational availability optimization of cooling tower using metaheuristic
algorithms,” IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 24659–24677, 2022, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3143541.
[24] V. S. Maan, A. Kumar, M. Saini, and D. K. Saini, “Markov modelling and adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system computing of
hydroelectric power plant,” International Journal of Information Technology (Singapore), 2024, doi: 10.1007/s41870-024-01811-3.
[25] A. Kumar, D. Sinwar, N. Kumar, and M. Saini, “Performance optimization of generator in steam turbine power plants using
computational intelligence techniques,” Journal of Engineering Mathematics, vol. 145, no. 1, p. 12, Apr. 2024, doi:
10.1007/s10665-024-10342-6.
[26] T. Deveikis, R. Miliune, and E. V. Nevardauskas, “Reliability of divided small electric energy system,” Electronics and Electrical
Engineering, vol. 19, no. 10, Dec. 2013, doi: 10.5755/j01.eee.19.10.2727.
[27] F. S. Gazijahani and J. Salehi, “Integrated DR and reconfiguration scheduling for optimal operation of microgrids using Hong’s
point estimate method,” International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol. 99, pp. 481–492, Jul. 2018, doi:
10.1016/j.ijepes.2018.01.044.
[28] V. Ghiasi et al., “Design criteria of subway tunnels,” Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, vol. 4, no. 12,
pp. 5894–5907, 2010.
[29] R. S. Jayappa, M. H. Basappa, K. G. Ramaiah, and G. H. Rajappa, “Effects of integration of distributed generation on reliability
in distribution system,” International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive Systems (IJPEDS), vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 498-505,
Mar. 2024, doi: 10.11591/ijpeds.v15.i1.pp498-505.

BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS

Jacob Kehinde Ogunjuyigbe received a B.Eng. in Electrical and Electronic

Engineering from Kwara State University, Kwara State. He obtained M.Eng. from Bayero
University, Kano. He is currently doing his Ph.D. in Power and Machine Engineering from
University of Abuja, Nigeria. He is a Registered Member of Council for the Regulation of
Engineering in Nigeria (COREN) and the Nigerian Society of Engineers (NSE). His research
interests include industrial electrical power system, system reliability, network grid planning,
and protection. He can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Prof. Evans Chinemezu Ashigwuike received a B.Eng. (Hons) in Power

Systems Engineering and M.Eng. in Instrumentation Engineering from Nnamdi Azikiwe
University, Awka, in 1999 and 2005, respectively. He received a Ph.D. in Electronic and
Computer Engineering with a specialization in Electromagnetic Non-Destructive Testing and
Structural Health Monitoring from Brunel University, London, in 2015. His main research
interests include industrial instrumentation, precision measurement, sensor technologies,
electromagnetic nondestructive testing techniques, structural health monitoring, wireless
sensor networks, power system automation, and artificial intelligence. He is a registered
member of several professional bodies, including the Council for the Regulation of
Engineering in Nigeria (COREN), the Nigerian Society of Engineers (NSE), Nigerian
Computer Society (NCS), the Institute of Electrical/Electronic Engineering (IEEE), Canadian
Institute of Non-Destructive Testing, British Institute of Non-Destructive Testing. He has
published in several peer-reviewed and indexed journals both locally and internationally. He
can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 16, No. 3, September 2025: 1852-1864
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  1863

Prof. Kafayat Adeyemi obtained a B.Eng. in Mechanical Engineering from the

Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University Bauchi and an M.Eng. in Energy Studies from the
Bayero University Kano Nigeria. She later earned her Ph.D. degree in Mechanical
Engineering from Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University with specialization in Energy and
Environmental Engineering. Her research interests are in sustainable energy development and
consumption and energy planning. She has attended and presented papers at both local and
international conferences. Recently she has been involved in studies on energy modelling,
battery electric vehicles and green hydrogen deployment in Nigeria. She is a Professor at the
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Abuja and was the pioneer Director of
the Energy Research Centre. Currently, she coordinates the 3MW World Bank Solar Hybrid
Power Plant project that will ensure steady electricity supply to the University. She has also
developed the Energy Efficiency Policy for the University. She can be contacted at email:
[email protected].

Dr. Ngang Bassey Ngang is a fellow of the Nigerian Society of Engineers

(FNSE). He is an accomplished Power Systems Engineer and Head of the Department of
Electrical and Electronic Engineering at Veritas University, Abuja for the past four years. He
holds a B.Eng. and M.Eng. from the University of Port Harcourt and a Ph.D. from Enugu
State University of Science and Technology (ESUT). His research interests focus on power
system stability, electrical machines, and renewable energy, with over 60 scholarly
publications and a Google Scholar H-index of 7. He began his engineering career with the
National Electric Power Authority (NEPA) in 1987 and rose to the position of Manager in the
Electrical Maintenance Section before transitioning to Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited in
1994. During his 23-year tenure with the company, he undertook international assignments in
the United States and Malaysia, notably serving on a project commissioning team for a multi-
billion-dollar crude oil production platform at a Malaysian shipyard. After retiring from the
Oil and Gas sector, he moved into academia to share his extensive industry experience. He is a
Visiting Lecturer at the University of Abuja, where he teaches postgraduate courses. Engr.
Ngang is a Fellow of the Nigerian Society of Engineers (FNSE) since 2014, a registered
engineer with COREN since 2002, and a member of the Nigerian Institute of Electrical and
Electronic Engineers. He served as Chairman of the NSE Eket Branch (2016–2018). With
deep expertise in power generation, transmission, and distribution, Dr. Ngang is committed to
advancing engineering education and mentoring future engineers. He can be contacted at
email: [email protected].

Dr. Timothy Oluwaseun Araoye received a Bachelor's degree of Technology

(B.Tech.) in Electrical and Electronics Engineering from Ladoke Akintola University of
Technology (LAUTECH), Ogbomoso, Oyo State, master’s degree (M.Eng) from Enugu State
University of Science and Technology (ESUT) Agbani, Enugu State, and a Ph.D. degree at the
University of Abuja, Nigeria, in the same course with a specialization in Electrical Machine and
Power System. He is a Registered Member of the Nigeria Society of Engineers (NSE) and
Council for the Regulation of Engineering in Nigeria (COREN). His research interest includes
artificial intelligence, machine learning, power system and machine, renewable energy, power
system reliability, microgrid optimization and control, robotics, modeling and simulation,
distributed generation, control system, and power electronics. He has attended many conferences
where he presented papers. He can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Engr. Amb. Isaac Ojochogwu Onuh, Ph.D. (Honoris Causa) is a highly

accomplished Chartered Electrical Engineer and Freelance Management Consultant with over
25 years of extensive experience in the energy and power sectors. Currently serving as a
Principal Manager in System Operations and Area Control Center at the Transmission
Company of Nigeria (TCN), he has demonstrated exemplary leadership and technical
expertise in the management of critical national power infrastructure. He is a registered
member of the Council for the Regulation of Engineering in Nigeria (COREN, R.Eng.), and
his professional contributions have been recognized through numerous prestigious awards
from both national and international institutions. Notably, he has been honored as an
Ambassador for Peace (Amb.) by the Global Association of United Nations Ambassadors for
Peace (ASSUNAP). He holds two honorary Doctorate degrees: a Doctor of Business
Administration (DBA) from the London Bridge Business School (LBBS-UK), and a Doctor of
Electrical Machines and Power Engineering from the Commonwealth University of Business,
Arts, and Technology, London. His scholarly influence is also exemplified through multiple
fellowship recognition, including: Professorial Fellow of the Artificial Intelligence
Management & Finance Institute Nigeria (Prof. FAIMFIN), Distinguished Fellow of the
Africa Institute of Public Administration (AIPA-Ghana - DFAI), Fellow of the Nigeria Society
of Engineers (FNSE), Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Power Engineers of Nigeria/Nigeria
Institution of Power Engineers (FCIPEN/FNIPE), and Fellow of the Institute of Management

An analytical technique for failure analysis and reliability assessment … (Jacob Kehinde Ogunjuyigbe)
1864  ISSN: 2088-8694

Consultants (FIMC). In addition to his professional engineering credentials, he is an esteemed

academic. He holds two master's degrees: an M.Eng. in Electrical Machines & Power
Engineering from the University of Abuja, Nigeria, and an M.A. in Christian Leadership
Studies from the Redeemed Christian Bible College, Lagos, Nigeria. His academic foundation
is rooted in a Bachelor of Engineering (Hons) in Electrical and Electronics Engineering from
the University of Benin, Nigeria. He also possesses numerous diplomas and certifications
spanning various fields of study. An active member of several professional bodies, including
the Nigeria Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (NIEEE), the Association of
Illumination Professionals Nigeria (AIP), and the Global Project Professional Society, United
Kingdom. He can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Benson Stephen Adole is a researcher in electrical engineering with expertise in

power systems, renewable energy integration, and optimization techniques. He holds a
bachelor's degree in electrical engineering and a master's degree in electrical machine and
power engineering. Currently pursuing a Ph.D., his research focuses on optimizing the
integration of renewable energy sources into petroleum-based power systems for enhanced
sustainability. He is also an educator, serving as a lecturer at the University of Abuja and a
teacher with the Kaduna State Teachers Service Board. He can be contacted at email:
[email protected].

Solomon Bala Okoh is an accomplished facilities management specialist with

over 13 years of experience in property, infrastructure, and operational management. His
expertise spans power systems, HVAC, safety compliance, vendor management, and strategic
planning across diverse industries, including telecommunications and corporate environments.
Beyond his technical and managerial roles, Solomon is deeply passionate about community
development and capacity building. He has actively contributed to humanitarian projects
through Rotary International, overseeing impactful initiatives in health, education, and
environmental sustainability. A certified professional in facilities management, project
coordination, and risk management, he blends his technical proficiency with a strong problem-
solving mindset and a dedication to continuous learning. His contributions as a co-writer of
this publication reflect his commitment to sharing knowledge and fostering professional
excellence. He can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Iboi Endurance is an electrical engineer with more than 13 years’ experience in

Electrical Engineering. He holds a bachelor in Electrical Engineering from the University of
Abuja, Nigeria, and HND in Electrical Engineering from the Federal Polytechnic Bida, Niger
State, Nigeria. Endurance is proficient in transformer installations, stringing of HV lines (132
kV, 33 kV, and 11 kV), min grid solar installations, and domestic installations. He has worked
on several high-profile projects. Endurance is passionate about innovation and continuously
seeks to improve his skills. He can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 16, No. 3, September 2025: 1852-1864