IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 22, NO.

4, OCTOBER 2007 2473

Impact of Network Reconfiguration on Loss

Allocation of Radial Distribution Systems
J. S. Savier and Debapriya Das

Abstract—This paper presents allocation of power losses to con- Voltage at the substation.
sumers connected to radial distribution networks before and after Total number of branches in the loop
network reconfiguration in a deregulated environment. Loss allo- including the tie branch, when th tie
cation is made in a quadratic way and it is based on identifying the switch is closed.
real and imaginary parts of current in each branch, and losses are
allocated to consumers. The network reconfiguration algorithm Voltage of node corresponding to the
is based on the fuzzy multiobjective approach and the max–min opening of the th branch in the loop.
principle is adopted for the multiobjective optimization in a fuzzy Total real-power loss when the th branch
framework. Multiple objectives are considered for real-power loss in the loop is opened.
reduction in which nodes voltage deviation is kept within a range, Total real-power loss in the network
and an absolute value of branch currents is not allowed to exceed
their rated capacities. At the same time, a radial network structure
before reconfiguration.
Magnitude of current of branch- when
is maintained with all loads energized. The three objectives consid-
ered are modeled with fuzzy sets to evaluate their imprecise nature the th branch in the loop is opened.
and one can provide his or her anticipated value of each objective. Line capacity of branch- .
A 69-node example is considered to demonstrate the effectiveness
of the proposed method.
I. INTRODUCTION
Index Terms—Fuzzy multiobjective optimization, loss allocation,
network reconfiguration.

NOMENCLATURE
E LECTRIC power industries throughout the world are un-
dergoing major restructuring processes and are adapting
the deregulated market operation. The vertically integrated
systems have been restructured and unbundled to one or more
Node number. generation companies, transmission companies, and a number
Load current at the th node. of distribution companies. Competition has been introduced in
Real-power load at the th node. power systems around the world based on a premise that it will
Reactive power load at the th node. increase the efficiency of this industrial sector and reduce the
Voltage at the th node. cost of electrical energy for all consumers. Unlike the genera-
Total number of nodes in the system. tion and sale of electrical energy, activities of transmission and
Branch number . distribution are generally considered as a natural monopoly.
Current of branch- . The cost of transmission and distribution activities needs to be
Total number of nodes (consumers) allocated to the users of these networks. Allocation can be done
beyond branch- . through network use tariffs, with a focus on the true impact
Nodes (consumers) beyond branch- , they have on these costs. Among others, distribution power
for . losses are one of the costs to be allocated. The main difficulty
Load current of node . faced in allocating losses is the nonlinearity between the losses
Real component of load current at node and delivered power which complicates the impact of each user
. on network losses [1].
Reactive component of load current at Different techniques have been published in the literature for
node . the allocation of losses, most of them dedicated to transmis-
Real-power loss of branch- . sion networks and can be classified into three broad categories:
Resistance of branch- . 1) pro-rata procedures, 2) marginal procedures, and 3) propor-
Real-power loss of branch- allocated tional sharing procedures [2]–[8]. Costa and Matos [9] have ad-
to consumer . dressed the allocation of losses in distribution networks with
Real-power loss supported by consumer embedded generation by considering the quadratic-loss alloca-
. tion technique.
In recent years, considerable research has been conducted for
Manuscript received June 9, 2006; revised December 7, 2006. Paper no. loss minimization in the area of network reconfiguration of dis-
TPWRD-00343-2006. tribution systems. Distribution system reconfiguration for loss
The authors are with the Electrical Engineering Department, Indian Insti- reduction was first proposed by Merlin and Back [10]. They
tute of Technology, Kharagpur 721302, India (e-mail: savier_js@yahoo.com;
ddas@ee.iitkgp.ernet.in). have used a branch-and-bound-type optimization technique to
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRD.2007.905370 determine the minimum loss configuration. In this method, all
0885-8977/$25.00 © 2007 IEEE
2474 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 22, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2007

network switches are first closed to form a meshed network. The

switches are then opened successively to restore radial configu-
ration. Based on the method of Merlin and Back [10], a heuristic
algorithm has been suggested by Shirmohammadi and Hong
[11]. Also here, the solution procedure starts by closing all of
the network switches which are then opened one after another
so as to establish the optimum flow pattern in the network.
Borozan et al. [12] have presented a network reconfiguration
technique which contains three main parts: real-time load es-
timation, effective determination of minimum power loss con-
figuration, and cost/benefit evaluation. Civanlar et al. [13] have
proposed a heuristic method to determine a distribution system
configuration which would reduce line losses by using a simpli-
fied formula to calculate the loss reduction as a result of load Fig. 1. Sample distribution network with 12 nodes.
transfer between two feeders. Baran and Wu [14] have made
an attempt to improve the method of Civanlar et al. [13] by TABLE I
introducing two approximation formulas for power flow in the BRANCH NUMBER, SENDING END NODE, RECEIVING END
transfer of system loads. Liu et al. [15] have proposed two algo- NODE, AND NODES BEYOND DIFFERENT BRANCHES
rithms to minimize the real-power loss in distribution networks.
To obtain global optimal or, at least near global optimal solu-
tions, Chiang and Jean-Jumeau [16], [17] and Jeon et al. [18]
have proposed new solution methodologies using the simulated
annealing algorithm for the reconfiguration.
Taleski and Rajicic [19] have proposed a method to deter-
mine the configuration with minimum energy losses for a given
period. Lin et al. [20], Jeon and Kim [21], Shin et al. [22], Hsiao
[23], Huang [25], and Huang and Chin [26] have proposed ar-
tificial-intelligence-based applications in a minimum loss con-
figuration. Das [27] has presented an algorithm for network re-
configuration based on heuristic rule and fuzzy multiobjective
approach.
Till date, loss allocation, and network reconfiguration in
distribution networks are considered independently. But the
configurations of the distribution networks may be varied II. METHODOLOGY FOR QUADRATIC-LOSS ALLOCATION
with manual or automatic switching operations so as to re-
For the purpose of explanation, consider a sample distribution
duce power loss, increase system security, and enhance power
network as shown in Fig. 1. In Fig. 1, branch numbers are shown
quality. Hence, it is needed to consider loss allocation and
in (.). The branch number, sending end, and receiving end nodes
network reconfiguration together.
are given in Table I.
In the light of the above developments, this work formulates
The load current at any node , is given as
loss allocation based on quadratic loss allocation scheme to
consumers in a radial distribution network. It is assumed that
(1)
consumers have to pay for losses. The network reconfiguration
problem is formulated as a fuzzy multiobjective problem subject
to operational and electric constraints. Three objectives consid- Consider branch-8 of Fig. 1. The number of nodes beyond
ered are real-power loss reduction, maximum nodes voltage de- branch-8 is one and this is node 9. Therefore, the current through
viation is kept within a range, and the absolute value of branch branch-8 is
currents is not allowed to exceed their rated capacities. They are
(2)
modeled with fuzzy sets to evaluate their imprecise nature. The
problem formulation proposed herein considers the following Similarly consider branch-7. The total number of nodes be-
aspects. yond branch-7 is three and these nodes are 8, 9, and 12. There-
1) Loss allocation to consumers before network reconfigura- fore, the current through branch-7 is
tion.
2) Network reconfiguration using a fuzzy multiobjective ap- (3)
proach and, at the same time, the radial structure of the net-
work must remain after reconfiguration in which all loads From (2)–(3), it is clear that if we identify the nodes beyond
must be energized. all of the branches and if the load currents are known, then it
3) Loss allocation to consumers after network reconfigura- is extremely easy to compute the branch currents. In [28], an
tion. algorithm for identifying the nodes beyond all of the branches
SAVIER AND DAS: IMPACT OF NETWORK RECONFIGURATION ON LOSS ALLOCATION OF RADIAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 2475

has been proposed. A load-flow algorithm based on the identi-

fication of these nodes beyond all of the branches has also been
proposed in [28]. In this paper, the load-flow algorithm is used
to compute the load currents and branch currents.
The general expression of branch current through branch-
is given by [28]

Fig. 2. Membership function for power-loss reduction.

(4)

In Table I, the total number of nodes (consumers) be-

yond branch- and nodes (consumers) beyond
branch- are given for Fig. 1
for the purpose of explanation.
Let us define

(5)
Fig. 3. Membership function for maximum node voltage deviation.

From (4) and (5), we obtain

(6)

The magnitude of current in branch- is expressed as

Fig. 4. Membership function for branch current constraint violation.

With the development of expression given by (10),

the consumer (consumers beyond branch-
(7) for ) has the impact on the terms
and of the power loss
of branch- , which are exclusively due to consumers
for .
The terms

The power loss of branch-
From (8) and (9), we obtain
(8)
are the results of the simultaneous influence of consumers
can be written as and the remaining consumers in the compo-
nents of the current in branch- . These crossed terms must
(9) also be allocated. The allocation of crossed terms has been
done in a quadratic way, as mentioned in [1].
The crossed terms and
are split into two components
as described here. Let us define

for
(10) for (11)
2476 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 22, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2007

Fig. 5. A 69-node distribution system with five tie switches before reconfiguration.

and

for
for (12)

Equations (11) and (12) can be simply written as

(19)
(13)
(14) The global value of losses to be supported by consumer re-
sults from the sum of the losses allocated to it in each branch-
where and are the loss allocation factors for the crossed of the network, i.e.,
terms of the real and reactive components of load current.
In the quadratic loss allocation scheme, since the power losses
grow quadratically with power flows, the following constraint is
imposed [1]: (20)

(15) Note that node 1 is a substation. Equation (20) indicates that

each consumer has allocated losses only at branches to which
and
power flow contributes.
(16)
III. MULTIOBJECTIVE DISTRIBUTION RECONFIGURATION
From (13) and (15), we get
Multiobjective optimization problems have many objectives
and a tradeoff between the objectives exists and we never have
a situation in which all of the objectives can be satisfied simul-
(17) taneously in the best possible way. The methodology adopted
for the reconfiguration scheme in this paper is the fuzzy multi-
Similarly, from (14) and (16), we get objective optimization which will be described.

A. Membership Functions of Different Objectives

In the fuzzy domain, each objective is associated with a mem-
bership function. The membership function indicates the degree
(18) of satisfaction of the objective. In the crisp domain, the degree
of membership value is either zero or unity whereas in the fuzzy
Based on this principle, the power loss of the branch- of domain, the degree of membership function values varies from
the network allocated to consumers beyond branch- , for zero to unity. Thus, fuzzy set theory is an extension of a stan-
are dard set theory [29]. The membership function consists of a
lower and upperbound value, together with a strictly monoton-
ically decreasing and continuous function for different objec-
tives, which are described below.
SAVIER AND DAS: IMPACT OF NETWORK RECONFIGURATION ON LOSS ALLOCATION OF RADIAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 2477

1) Membership Function for Real Power-Loss Reduction TABLE II

: The basic purpose of this membership function is to LINE AND LOAD DATA OF
69-NODE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
reduce the real power loss in the system.
Let us define

(21)

Equation (21) indicates that if the value of is high, then

power loss reduction is low.
The membership function for real-power loss reduction is
given in Fig. 2. Mathematically, the membership function can
be expressed as

for
for (22)
for

In this paper, the values of and considered are 0.5

and 1.0, respectively. If the real-power loss reduction is more
than 50% of that before reconfiguration, one can say that the
configuration is good and such a configuration is acceptable to
the system operator. Hence, the value of is selected as 0.5.
Also, the system operator would not like to have a configura-
tion which increases power loss after reconfiguration compared
to that before reconfiguration. Hence, the value of is se-
lected as 1.0 for the membership function for real-power loss
reduction.
2) Membership Function for Maximum Node Voltage Devia-
tion : Let us define

(23)

It can be seen from (23) that if the value of is less, then the
system has a better voltage profile.
The membership function for the maximum node voltage de-
viation is given in Fig. 3. Mathematically, the membership func-
tion can be expressed as

for
for (24)
for

In the present work, the values of and considered

are 0.05 and 0.10, respectively. means that if the
substation voltage is 1.0 p.u., then the minimum system voltage
will be 0.95 p.u. and if the minimum system voltage is greater
than or equal to 0.95 p.u., the unity membership value is as-
signed. Similarly, if , the minimum system voltage
will be 0.90 p.u. and if the minimum system voltage is less than
or equal to 0.90 p.u., the zero membership value is assigned.
3) Membership Function for Absolute Value of Branch Cur-
rent Not to Exceed its Rated Capacity : Let us define

The membership function for the absolute value of branch

(25) current not to exceed its rated capacity is given in Fig. 4. Math-
2478
Fig. 6. A 69-node distribution system after reconfiguration using the fuzzy multiobjective approach.
ematically, the membership function can be expressed as
for
for
for
In this work, the values of and considered are 0.80
and 1.0, respectively. Hence, if the absolute values of branch
currents of the system are less than or equal to 80% of their
respective line capacities, unity membership value is assigned
. The absolute values of branch currents are not
allowed to exceed their rated capacities. Hence, the value of
is selected as 1.0.
B. Optimization in the Fuzzy Environment
When there are multiple objectives to be satisfied simultane-
ously, a compromise has to be made to obtain the best solution.
One solution methodology for the multiobjective optimization
in a fuzzy framework is based on the max-min principle which
is described as follows.
Step 1) For each option considered, the membership values
of different objectives are evaluated.
For example, when the th tie switch of a network
is closed, a loop is formed with number of
branches in the loop. Now, opening each branch
in this loop is an option. After opening the th
branch in this loop (radial structure is retained), the
load-flow run was carried out to compute
and , and for , using (22), (24),
and (26), respectively.
Step 2) The degree of overall satisfaction for this option is
the minimum of all of the membership values from
before.
Now, a fuzzy decision for overall satisfaction may
be interpreted as a logical “and” of the membership
values of the fuzzy sets. In the present work, the
classical fuzzy set intersection is used and the fuzzy
decision for overall satisfaction is then given by
Step 3) The optimal solution is the maximum of all such
overall degrees of satisfaction.
Now, a fuzzy decision for an optimal solution for the th tie
switch operation may be defined as the choice that maximizes
all such overall degrees of satisfaction and if we interpret this as
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 22, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2007
a logical “or,” we can model it with the union of fuzzy sets. In
the present work, the classical fuzzy set union is used and the
fuzzy decision for an optimal solution is then given by
(26)
(28)
C. Heuristic Rule and Algorithm
The optimal switching strategies for network reconfiguration
proposed by the researchers need to consider every candidate
switch to evaluate the effectiveness of loss reduction. In this
paper, all of the tie switches are considered and a heuristic rule
is incorporated for selecting the tie switches one at a time. This
heuristic rule is explained below.
In the first iteration, compute the voltage difference across all
of the open tie switches by running a load flow, and detect the
open tie switch across which the voltage difference is maximum
and consider this tie switch first for closing as it is expected that
this switching will cause a maximum reduction in real power
loss, an increase in nodes voltage, and a reduction in branch
currents. In the next iteration, the same procedure is repeated
for the remaining tie switches and so on.
A complete algorithm for the proposed method of the network
reconfiguration process is given below.
1) Algortithm:
Step 1) Read system data.
Step 2) Run the load-flow program for radial distribution net-
works.
Step 3) Compute the voltage difference across the open tie
switches, i.e., for ntie.
Step 4) Identify the open tie switch across which the
voltage difference is maximum and its code
(i.e., ).
Step 5) Select the tie switch “ ” and identify the total
number of loop branches , including the tie
branch when the tie switch “ ” is closed.
Step 6) Open one branch at a time in the loop and evaluate the
value for each objective [i.e., for to com-
pute , and using (22), (24) and (26), re-
(27) spectively, and then compute using (27)].
Step 7) Obtain the optimal solution for the operation of tie
switch “ ” using (28), i.e.,
Step 8) .
SAVIER AND DAS: IMPACT OF NETWORK RECONFIGURATION ON LOSS ALLOCATION OF RADIAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 2479

TABLE III
LOSS ALLOCATION TO CONSUMERS BEFORE
AND AFTER RECONFIGURATION
given in Table II. The loads considered are either commercial
or industrial type. The real-power loss of the system before
reconfiguration is 224.95 kW and the minimum system voltage
is p.u. The loss allocation to each
consumer before reconfiguration is given in Table III. It can
be seen that out of the total real-power loss of 224.95 kW, the
consumer at node 61 has been allocated 180.02 kW (80 % of
224.95 kW) and the remaining 44.93 kW (20% of 224.95 kW)
has been allocated to the remaining consumers. Nodes which
do not appear in Table III mean that no load is connected with
these nodes.
Loss allocation to each consumer after network reconfigu-
ration based on a fuzzy multiobjective approach is also given
in Table III. The minimum system voltage is
p.u. compared to p.u. before re-
configuration. Network reconfiguration has resulted in a system
real-power loss of 99.59 kW, out of which 71.26 kW (71.55% of
99.59 kW) was allocated to the consumer at node 61 and 28.33
kW (28.45% of 99.59 kW) to the rest of the consumers. It ap-
pears that the heavily loaded consumer at node 61 will be more
beneficial after reconfiguration and share less of a percentage
of total loss (71.55% of 99.59 kW) compared to the sharing of
a percentage total loss before reconfiguration (80% of 224.95
kW). Fig. 6 shows the radial distribution network after recon-
figuration. It can be seen from Table III that the power loss al-
located to most of the consumers has decreased but those few
consumers (consumers at nodes 39, 40, 45, 49, 50, etc.) has
increased even though the system real-power loss has reduced
from 224.95 kW to 99.59 kW. Although most consumers benefit
due to loss allocation after reconfiguration, it appears that some
of the consumers may have to pay more after reconfiguration.
For example, consumers at nodes 39, 40, 45, 49, 50, etc. have to
pay more after reconfiguration and their tariff structure needs to
be modified such that they need not pay more for this increase
in loss allocation. Also, it is worth mentioning here that the loss
allocation to each consumer depends on various objectives con-
sidered for network reconfiguration.

V. CONCLUSION
In this paper, the quadratic-loss allocation scheme has been
examined for allocating losses to consumers connected to a ra-
dial distribution system before and after reconfiguration. The
quadratic-loss allocation scheme is based on branch current flow
and ensures that each consumer only has allocated losses at
Step 9) Check whether . If Yes, go to Step 11).
branches for which current it contributes. An algorithm based on
Otherwise, go to Step 10).
a heuristic rule and fuzzy multiobjective approach has been pro-
Step 10) Rearrange the coding of the remaining tie switches
posed to solve the network reconfiguration problem in a radial
and go to Step 2).
distribution system. The analysis reveals that even though net-
Step 11) Print output results.
work reconfiguration results in a significant reduction in system
Step 12) Stop.
real-power loss and the loss allocation to most of the consumers
will decrease and they have to pay less, it also appears that loss
IV. EXAMPLE allocation to a small group of consumers may increase and they
The proposed algorithm is tested with a 12.66-kV radial may have to pay more after reconfiguration and their tariff struc-
distribution system that has 69 nodes and 73 branches, in- ture will need to be modified such that they need not pay more
cluding tie branches, as shown in Fig. 5, [25], and [30]. This for this increase of loss allocation. Further, it was also observed
network has five tie switches and these tie switches are open that the objectives considered for network reconfiguration have
under normal operating condition. Data for this system are an influence on the real-power loss allocated to each consumer.
2480
REFERENCES
[1] A. Gómez, J. M. Riquelme, T. González, and E. Ruiz, “Fair allocation
of transmission power losses,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, no. 1,
pp. 184–188, Feb. 2000.
[2] J. J. Gonzalez and P. Basagoiti, “Spanish power exchange market and
information system. Design concepts, and operating experience,” in
Proc. IEEE Power Industry Computer Applications Conf., Santa Clara,
CA, May 1999, pp. 245–252.
[3] J. W. Bialek, S. Ziemianek, and N. Abi-Samra, “Tracking-based loss
allocation and economic dispatch,” in Proc. 13th Power Systems Com-
putation Conf., Trondheim, Norway, Jul. 1999, pp. 375–381.
[4] F. D. Galiana, A. J. Conejo, and I. Kockar, “Incremental transmission
loss allocation under pool dispatch,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 17,
no. 1, pp. 26–33, Feb. 2002.
[5] J. W. Bialek, “Identification of source-ink connections in transmission
networks,” in Proc. 4th Int. Inst. Elect. Eng. Conf. Power Syst. Control
Management., London, U.K., Apr. 16–18, 1996, pp. 200–204.
[6] D. Kirschen, R. Allan, and G. Strbac, “Contributions of individual gen-
erators to loads and flows,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 12, no. 1, pp.
52–60, Feb. 1997.
[7] D. Kirschen and G. Strbac, “Tracing active and reactive power between
generators and loads using real and imaginary currents,” IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 1312–1319, Nov. 1999.
[8] A. J. Conejo, F. D. Galiana, and I. Kockar, “Z-bus loss allocation,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 105–110, Feb. 2001.
[9] P. M. Costa and M. A. Matos, “Loss allocation in distribution networks
with embedded generation,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 19, no. 1, pp.
384–389, Feb. 2004.
[10] A. Merlin and H. Back, “Search for a minimal loss operating spanning
tree configuration in an urban power distribution system,” in Proc. 5th
Power Syst. Compt. Conf., Cambridge, U.K., 1975, pp. 1–18.
[11] D. Shirmohammadi and H. W. Hong, “Reconfiguration of electric dis-
tribution networks for resistive line loss reduction,” IEEE Trans. Power
Del., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 1492–1498, Apr. 1989.
[12] V. Borozan, D. Rajicic, and R. Ackovski, “Improved method for loss
minimization in distribution networks,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol.
10, no. 3, pp. 1420–1425, Aug. 1995.
[13] S. Civanlar, J. J. Grainger, H. Yin, and S. S. H. Lee, “Distribution feeder
reconfiguration for loss reduction,” IEEE Trans. Power Del, vol. 3, no.
3, pp. 1217–1223, Jul. 1988.
[14] M. E. Baran and F. F. Wu, “Network reconfiguration in distribution sys-
tems for loss reduction and load balancing,” IEEE Trans. Power Del.,
vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 1401–1407, Aug. 1989.
[15] C. C. Liu, S. J. Lee, and K. Vu, “Loss minimization of distribution
feeders: Optimality and algorithms,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 4,
no. 2, pp. 1281–1289, Apr. 1989.
[16] H. D. Chiang and R. M. Jean-Jameau, “Optimal network reconfigura-
tion in distribution systems, part 1: A new formulation and a solution
methodology,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1902–1909,
Oct. 1990.
[17] H. D. Chiang and R. M. Jean-Jameau, “Optimal network reconfigura-
tions in distribution systems, part 2: Solution algorithms and numerical
results,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1568–1574, Jul.
1990.
[18] Y. J. Jeon, J. C. Kim, J. O. Kim, J. R. Shin, and K. Y. Lee, “An ef-
ficient simulated annealing algorithm for network reconfiguration in
large-scale distribution systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 17, no.
4, pp. 1070–1078, Oct. 2002.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 22, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2007
[19] R. Taleski and D. Rajicic, “Distribution network reconfiguration for
energy loss reduction,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 12, no. 1, pp.
398–406, Feb. 1997.
[20] V. H. Lin, C. S. Chen, C. J. Wu, and M. S. Kang, “Application of
immune algorithm to optimal switching operation for distribution
loss minimization and loading balance,” Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., Gen.,
Transm. Distrib., vol. 150, pp. 183–189, Mar. 2003.
[21] Y.-J. Jeon and J.-C. Kim, “Application of simulated annealing and
tabu search for loss minimization in distribution systems,” Int. J. Elect.
Power Energy Syst., vol. 26, pp. 9–18, 2004.
[22] D.-J. Shin, J.-O. Kim, T.-K. Ki, J.-B. Choo, and C. Singh, “Optimal ser-
vice restoration and reconfiguration of networks using genetic and tabu
search algorithm,” Int. J. Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 71, pp. 145–152,
2004.
[23] Y. T. Hsiao, “Multiobjective evolution programming method for feeder
reconfiguration,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 594–599,
Feb. 2004.
[24] Y. Y. Hong and S. Y. Ho, “Determination of network configuration
considering multiobjective in distribution systems using genetic algo-
rithm,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 1062–1069, May
2005.
[25] Y.-C. Huang, “Enhanced genetic algorithm based fuzzy multi-ob-
jective approach to distribution network reconfiguration,” Proc. Inst.
Elect. Eng., Gen., Transm. Distrib., pp. 615–620, Sep. 2002.
[26] K.-Y. Huang and H.-C. Chin, “Distribution feeder energy conservation
by using heuristics fuzzy approach,” Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst.,
vol. 24, pp. 439–445, 2002.
[27] D. Das, “A fuzzy multiobjective approach for network reconfiguration
of distribution systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 21, no. 1, pp.
202–209, Jan. 2006.
[28] S. Ghosh and D. Das, “Method of load flow solution of radial dis-
tribution networks,” Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., Gen., Transm. Dist., pp.
641–648, Nov. 1999.
[29] L. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets,” Inf. Contr., vol. 8, pp. 338–353, 1965.
[30] M. E. Baran and F. F. Wu, “Optimal capacitor placement in distribu-
tion systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 725–734, Jan.
1989.
J. S. Savier received the B.Tech. degree from the University of Kerala, Thiru-
vananthapuram, India, in 1996, the M.E. degree from the Indian Institute of
Science, Bangalore, in 2002, and is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree at the
Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur.
Debapriya Das received the B.E. degree from Calcutta University, Calcutta,
India, in 1982, the M.Tech degree from Indian Institute of Technology,
Kharagpur, in 1984, and the Ph.D. degree from Indian Institute of Technology,
Delhi.
Currently, he is Professor at the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur.
His research interests are electric power distribution system and power system
operation and control.