Capacitor placement in distribution systems using
heuristic search strategies
M.Chis
M.M.A.Salama
S.Jayaram
Indexing terms: Capacitor placement, Distribution systems, Heuristic search strategies
~~~~~
Abstract: Heuristic search strategies are used to
determine the optimum capacitor placement and
ratings for distribution systems. In the heuristic
approach proposed a small number of critical
nodes, named sensitive nodes, are selected for
installing capacitors that optimise the net savings
while achieving a large overall loss reduction.
This method insures that voltage constraints are
met. This heuristic approach is suitable for large
distribution systems and can be useful in online
implementation. The proposed approach is
applied to a test system and the results are
compared with other published techniques.
1 Introduction
Shunt capacitors are installed at appropriate locations
in large distribution systems to reduce power and
energy losses and to improve voltage profile along the
feeder. Several methods of loss reduction in distribu-
tion systems through allocation of shunt capacitors
have been developed over the years. Most of the early
works in this area, although using some good loss cal-
culation formulas [l], suffer from a lack of generality
and some unrealistic assumptions (uniform load distri-
bution, uniform feeder size, constant loads). Grainger
and Lee [2, 31 developed a generalised procedure for
optimising the net monetary savings associated with the
reduction of power and energy losses, through place-
ment of fixed and switched shunt capacitors on pri-
mary distribution feeders. For the first time, the real
size of the feeder was considered by introducing the
concept of ‘normalised equivalent feeder’. ‘This idea has
been further developed by Grainger and Civanlar [&6]
who offered a solution to the volt/VAr problem in dis-
tribution systems by decoupling the capacitor and the
regulator problems and combining them into a global
solution determined analytically. Salama et al. [7, 81
developed a method for the control of reactive power
in distribution systems with an end load for fixed load
and varying load conditions, giving generalised equa-
0IEE, 1997
IEE Proceedings online no. 19970945
Paper first received 10th May and in revised form 11th October 1996
T h e authors are with the Electrical and Computer Engineering
Department, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
N2L 3G1
IEE Proc-Gener. Trunsm. Distrib., Vol. 144, No. 3, May 1997
tions for calculating the peak power and energy loss
reductions and the optimum locations and ratings of
the capacitors. All the methods mentioned above are
similar in that they employ an analytical approach.
In contrast to these analytical optimisation tech-
niques, heuristic search strategies have been recently
proposed in literature [ll-131. The purpose of develop-
ing such heuristic techniques is to decrease the exhaus-
tive search space, while keeping the end result
(objective function) at an optimal or near-optimal
value. Civanlar et al. [ l l ] described a formula to esti-
mate the loss change resulting from the transfer of a
group of loads from one feeder to another feeder by
the closing of a single tie switch and the opening of a
single sectionalising switch. Taylor et al. [13] developed
a feeder reconfiguration strategy using heuristics for
the removal of transformer overloads and feeder con-
straint problems; the method has been implemented in
a knowledge based environment. Although the papers
mentioned above are in the area of feeder reconfigura-
tion for loss reduction, they present some valuable
ideas that can be employed in capacitor placement
optimisation. The advantages of the heuristic tech-
niques are very well appreciated for large distribution
systems, by providing realistic sizes and locations for
shunt capacitors on the primary feeder at a relatively
low computational burden.
Recently, Salam et al. [lo] adapted this kind of heu-
ristic search to the problem of capacitor placement.
According to this method the largest loss section of the
primary feeder is determined and then the node with
the highest impact on the losses in that section is
detected and compensated. The compensation level is
determined in such a way that the losses are reduced to
a minimum. The shortcomings of the method are sum-
marised as follows: (i) the compensation is based on
loss reduction in the system rather than the net dollar
savings; (ii) the execution of the method requires a
large number of power flow runs; (iii) the applicability
of the method to online studies on large systems is
questionable; (iv) the criterion of selecting the node
with the highest impact on the losses in a feeder section
is not totally representative for the state of the power
losses in the whole system.
In this paper a heuristic method is presented in which
only a number of critical nodes, named sensitive nodes,
are selected for installing capacitors in order to achieve
a large overall loss reduction in the system combined
with optimum savings. This is based on the idea that
the number of sensitive nodes is relatively small com-
pared to the total number of nodes, which will consid-
225
erably reduce the size of the problem. The sensitive
nodes are prime locations for both fixed and switched
capacitor banks; however, the study in this paper was
limited to fixed capacitors only. The sensitive nodes are
selected based on the losses caused in the system by the
reactive components of the load (bus) currents. The
capital cost of the capacitors is also considered and the
optimal number of capacitor banks (multiple of stand-
ard units) at the specific location is determined in order
to attain the highest dollar savings. Also, the variations
of the load during the day are taken into consideration
for the purpose of achieving a higher reduction of the
overall losses during the year.
2 Problem formulation
Determination of a solution to the capacitor problem
using heuristic rules involves searching through a set of
possible solutions. As the losses due to the active com-
ponents of the load currents cannot be affected by the
placement of capacitors, the search will focus only on
the losses due to the reactive currents. The objective of
this search is to determine the optimal locations, sizes,
and number of standard capacitor banks to be placed
in the distribution network to achieve maximum
annual dollar savings. The method outlined below
effectively implements heuristic approaches for solving
this problem, while accounting for the voltage con-
straints along the feeder.
1 read system
d-a,ta I be considered. The savings function is given by [4-91:
where
RbA,(k,j) = the total resistance of all feeder sections
that both load currents 1, and IJ flow
through,
Rtus(k,k) = the total resistance of the shortest path
between bus 'k'and the substation,
Irk = the magnitude of the reactive component
of the load current Ik ( I , = I& + I&) at
node being compensated ('k');
ITm = the magnitude of the reactive component
of the load current I, (Im = Ia, + ITm)at
node 'm';
n = the total number of nodes.
Eqn. 1 will be used for the sensitive node selection pro-
cedure.
The method for obtaining the optimal capacitor sizes
and locations is outlined as follows (Fig. 1)
Step I : The peak power losses caused by the reactive
load currents that flow through the feeder are com-
puted by applying eqn. 1 to every node of the distribu-
tion network. The node whose reactive load current has
the largest impact on the power loss in the system is
then selected for compensation and is called a sensitive
node. Let this node be 'k'.
Step 2: Secondly, the optimal size of the compensating
capacitor to be placed at node 'k' has to be determined.
To do this the annual net dollar savings resulting from
both the power and the energy loss reductions have to
NC

determine the node whose

s= K ~ L P+ K ~ L E C I G ( Q ~ ~(2)) Q ~
-
2=1
reactlve load current
causes largest Loss where Q,, is the size of capacitor 'i' (in kVAr) and Kp,
- K,, and K, are the coefficients to convert peak power
loss savings, energy loss savings, and capacitor bank
determine optimum rating to dollars, respectively. LP and LE represent the
Compensation level and find
nearest capacitor rating peak power loss reduction and the energy loss reduc-
I remove capacitor 1
and find next tion due to compensation, respectively. To evaluate S
sensitive node according to eqn. 2 it was assumed that the node loads
have a daily variation. The 24-hour day period was
I I divided into three 8-hour time intervals:
Ti = 00 : 00 - 08 : 00
T;!= 08 : 00 - 16 : 00
T3 = 16 : 00 - 24 : 00 (3)
The load factor of each node was assumed constant
during each of these periods. For node 'k',the load
factor will be FLD(k,l), FL,(k, 2), and FLD(k,3) during
T I ,T2,and T3,respectively.
According to [l, 71, and using eqn. 14, the savings
Fig. 1 Flowchart of algorithm for selecting the locations and number of achieved by compensation at node 'k'are:
sensitive nodes

1
n

sk =Kp (2 Rfus(k,m)ITmI& - I;&f,,(k,k)

Balanced three-phase networks, with balanced loads m=l

and negligible harmonics are assumed throughout this

paper. It is also assumed that the load currents are
independent of the node voltages. As shown in the
+ 2T
Ke-Ick
3 (g1 RbA,,(k, m)ImnFLD(m,1)
n
Appendix, the change in the power loss in the system
due to the compensation of the reactive component of + R&, ( k , m)IrmFLD (m,2)
the load, which is associated with any node 'k', is given na=l
n
by

m=l
n

- KeTI,21,Rfus(k,
k)
+
nz=l

-
RbA,,(k "-mFLD(m,

Kc(Qck)Qck
3)
) (4)
226 IEE Proc -Gene7 Transm Distrib , Vol 144, No 3, May 1997
T in eqn. 4 represents the total time period over which
the savings are calculated ( T = 8760 h for one year).
If the algorithm is used for online applications, eqn.
4 will allow the calculation of the optimum compensa-
tion level at each node during each time interval
described by eqn. 3. This can also be used to determine
a near-optimal switching sequence.
3 Application of the method
The described method is applied to a 34-bus three-
phase radial feeder with lateral branches, shown in
Fig. 3. Details of the feeder and the load characteris-
tics are given in Table 1.

-0
c
t Fig.3 Distribution network configuration
0
L
0
Y
- The total installed peak power is 5.4MVA, with an
U
0
a
0
average power factor of 0.85. The values the coeffi-
cients in eqn. 2 are Kp = lSO$IkW, K, = 0.07$/kWh,
and the variation K,(Q,) is shown by the curve a in
Fig. 2.
01 I I I
0 200 LOO 600 800 1000 The software implementation of the procedure has
capacitor size, 3-phase kVar been done using the Matlab'" environment for the ease
Fig.2 Capacitor annual cost/kVAr against capacitor size of operating with complex numbers; the loadflow
(i) = real cost results from our software have been compared with the
(ii) = approximated cost
ones obtained using two commercial packages,
EDSA'" and CYME'" , and proven to be consistent.
The capacitor size Qck will be chosen such that s k is All the calculations have been carried out in the per-
maximised at every step. The main problem in finding unit system with the three-phase base S, = 100MVA,
Qck that maximises S, resides in the nonlinearity of S, V B = 11kV.
with respect to Qck, due to the piecewise linear varia-
tion of K,(Q,), as shown in Fig. 2 [5]. To solve this an 4 Results
approximation was used, by interpolating through the
The initial power loss in the system is 221.72kW. The
midpoints of each interval of K,. The new variation application of the proposed method to the system
K,(Q,) is shown in Fig. 2 and is subsequently used in yields the following results:
eqn. 4 to solve for the estimated optimum value of Qck
from the condition (i) From eqn. 5 bus 26 needs an optimum compensa-
tion of 700kVAr (0.0070pu); however, to show the
effect of varying the compensation level on the savings,
(5) curve 1, Fig. 4, is shown. A value of 750kVAr (1 x 500
Once the Qck that maximises the objective function s k
+ 1 x 250kVAr for capacitor bank 1) is used to attain
11 272Wyear in savings and a peak power loss reduc-
is found, the nearest available kVAr rating multiple tion of 35.2kW. It is evident from curve (i), Fig. 4, that
units of capacitor is chosen and placed at node 'k'. using 750kVAr instead of 700kVAr does not offset the
Step 3: A load flow is performed in order to get the optimum savings significanfly, and yet it makes the
new values of the load currents and to check if the solution feasible.
voltage constraints are met. If any violation of the volt-
age constraints (*3% in urban areas, &6% in rural areas
[9]) occurs, the capacitor is removed and the next larg-
est loss node is selected as the next sensitive node, and
the procedure is repeated starting from Step 2.
Step 4: At every iteration the real dollar savings are
calculated using eqn. 4, where the actual &(e,)
is used
(Fig. 2, curve 1).
Step 5: The next largest loss node is selected as the next
sensitive node and Steps 2 4 are repeated.
Step 6: Total savings are calculated by adding s k for
each of the compensated nodes.
This process is repeated iteratively until the total sav-
ings reach a peak value; that will be the optimum com- capacitor bank size,pu
Fig. 4 Dollar savings against capacitor bank sizes
pensation scheme for the network and also the (i) capacitor bank 1, node 26
optimum number of capacitors. The flowchart in Fig. 1 (ii) capacitor bank 2, node 11
(iii) capacitor bank 3, node 21
illustrates the procedure described above. (iv) capacitor bank 4, node 20

IEE Psoc.-Gener. Transm. Distsib., Vol. 144, No. 3, May 1997 221
 Table 1: Distribution system data
Load Line impedance Load factors
Node Length TI T2 T3
no. P (kW) Q (kVar) r (Sllkm) x (Q/km) (km) 0O:OO 08:OO 16:OO
08:OO 16:OO 24:OO
1 0 0
2 230 142.5 0.195 0.080 0.60 0.55 0.70 0.65
3 0 0 0.195 0.080 0.55 0 0 0
4 230 142.5 0.299 0.083 0.55 0.55 0.70 0.65
5 230 142.5 0.299 0.083 0.50 0.55 0.70 0.65
6 0 0 0.299 0.083 0.50 0 0 0
7 0 0 0.524 0.090 0.60 0 0 0
8 230 142.5 0.524 0.090 0.40 0.55 0.70 0.65
9 230 142.5 0.524 0.090 0.60 0.55 0.70 0.65
10 0 0 0.524 0.090 0.40 0 0 0
11 230 142.5 0.524 0.090 0.25 0.55 0.70 0.65
12 137 84 0.524 0.090 0.20 0.50 0.60 0.55
13 72 45 0.524 0.090 0.30 0.45 0.65 0.60
14 72 45 0.524 0.090 0.40 0.45 0.65 0.60
15 72 45 0.524 0.090 0.20 0.45 0.65 0.60
16 13.5 7.5 0.524 0.090 0.10 0.60 0.70 0.65
17 230 142.5 0.299 0.083 0.60 0.55 0.70 0.65
18 230 142.5 0.299 0.083 0.55 0.55 0.70 0.65
19 230 142.5 0.378 0.086 0.55 0.55 0.70 0.65
20 230 142.5 0.378 0.086 0.50 0.55 0.70 0.65
21 230 142.5 0.378 0.086 0.50 0.55 0.70 0.65
22 230 142.5 0.524 0.090 0.50 0.55 0.70 0.65
23 230 142.5 0.524 0.090 0.50 0.55 0.70 0.65
24 230 142.5 0.524 0.090 0.60 0.55 0.70 0.65
25 230 142.5 0.524 0.090 0.40 0.55 0.70 0.65
26 230 142.5 0.524 0.090 0.25 0.55 0.70 0.65
27 137 85 0.524 0.090 0.20 0.50 0.60 0.55
28 75 48 0.524 0.090 0.30 0.55 0.75 0.70
29 75 48 0.524 0.090 0.30 0.55 0.75 0.70
30 75 48 0.524 0.090 0.30 0.55 0.75 0.70
31 57 34.5 0.524 0.090 0.30 0.57 0.63 0.58
32 57 34.5 0.524 0.090 0.40 0.57 0.63 0.58
33 57 34.5 0.524 0.090 0.30 0.57 0.63 0.58
34 57 34.5 0.524 0.090 0.20 0.57 0.63 0.58

(ii) The second node to be compensated is bus 11, point will offset the benefits. The variation of the total
which requires an optimum capacitor of 400kVAr annual savings is represented in Fig. 5.
(0.0040pu; curve (ii), Fig. 4); a rated value of 400kVAr
(1 x 150 + 1 x 250kVAr for capacitor bank 2) is used
to obtain additional savings of 2634$/year and to
reduce the peak power losses by another 11.24kW. 15 000

(iii) The next node that requires compensation is bus L

CI
aJ
21; a rated value of 250kVAr ( 0 . 0 0 2 5 ~=~ 1 x p 10000
e
250kVAr for capacitor bank 3) is used for the opti-
U)
mum size of 240kVAr (curve (iii), Fig. 4) to attain 0)

c 5000
additional savings of 1130$/year and an additional g
peak power loss reduction of 5.64kW.
0
(iv) Bus 20 requires an optimum compensation of 2 3
70kVAr (0.00007pu; curve (iv), Fig. 4); an 150kVAr
bank (bank 4) is used instead to bring additional sav- -5 OOOL number of capacitor banks
ings of 133$/year and to reduce peak power losses by Fig.5 Total annual savings against number of capacitor banks
1.29kW. 0 compensation for maximum additional savings.
0 compensation for maximum peak power loss reduction
At this point the overall savings, represented in Fig. 5,
reach the maximum value of 15 169$/year; in other The concept of maximum power loss reduction at
words, the cost of installing new capacitors from this each step has also been applied to the system shown in
228 IEE Proc -Gener Transm D u m b , Val 144, No 3, May 1997
Fig. 3. Comparative results (total annual savings and
power losses) with our method are shown graphically
in Figs. 5 and 6. When the compensation level is cho-
sen such as to maximise the loss reduction at each step,
the compensation scheme for the system is as follows:
(i) 1400kVAr (0.0140pu = 1 x 1000 + 1 x 2.50 + 1 x
1SOkVAr for capacitor bank 1) at node 26 for a peak
power loss reduction of 41.07kW and savings of 3347$1
year
(ii) 750kVAr ( 0 . 0 0 7 5 ~=~1 x 500 + 1 x 250kVAr for
capacitor bank 2) at node 11 for an additional loss
reduction of 10.64kW and total annual savings of
2028 Slyear
(iii) 300kVAr ( 0 . 0 0 3 ~=~2 x 15OkVAr for capacitor
bank 3 at node 17 for a peak power loss reduction of
another 1.17kW and total savings of 93 $/year
(iv) 250kVAr (0.0025 = 1 x 250kVAr for capacitor
bank 4) at node 4 for a peak power loss reduction of
0.81kW and money losses of -1409$/year. This is the
point of maximum loss reduction in the system and any
addition of capacitors will increase the losses due to
overcompensation. It is important to notice here that
although the power loss reduction is possible up to the
installation of capacitor bank 4, the savings drop con-
tinuously from a peak of 3347$/year to 1409$/year in
losses.
I two orders of magnitude to o(n2)operations.
220
200
3,
180
160
0 1 2 3
number of capacitor banks
Fig.6 Peak power loss in system against number of capacitor hunks
G compensation for maximum additional savings.
W compensation Cor maximum peak power loss reduction
Fig. 6 illustrates the peak power losses in the system
against the number of capacitors (as described above).
For the sake of comparison, it should be pointed out
that the use of the analytical method presented in [7]
reported a reduction in the peak power losses of 40kW
using a total compensation 1650kVAr. This was based
on load factors varying in different parts of the feeders
in the range (0.45-0.63). The method presented in this
paper gives a peak power loss reduction of 53.37kW
using 1550kVAr for the optimum case (first four
capacitors). The analytical method presented in [7]
decoupled the system into subsystems and the optimal
capacitor sizes and ratings were calculated for each
subsystem. This decoupling technique produces a near-
optimal solution; the heuristic technique proposed in
this paper handles the whole system and therefore pro-
duced better results.
It can be observed that the peak power loss reduction
using the objective function that focuses on financial
savings is less than that obtained when applying the
concept of maximum power loss reduction, as seen
from Fig. 6. However, the main difference between the
two concepts is in the dollar savings, shown in Fig. 5;
for the optimum case our method provides a total of
IEE ProccGeneu. Trunsm. Distuih., Vol. 144, No. 3, M a y 1997
1.5 169$/year as opposed to a maximum of 3347$/year
when the idea of maximum loss reduction is employed.
In our method we used more efficient compensators
that are based on the savings.
Also, our method needed to calculate the system
power flow only four times for the four sensitive nodes.
By comparison, a significantly larger number of itera-
tions is needed when the algorithm proposed in [lo] is
used.
5 Complexity of the problem
In this Section the effectiveness of using the proposed
technique to reduce the problem complexity and hence
the computation time is demonstrated. The simplified
formulas presented in the Appendix, along with the
concept of the sensitive nodes, considerably reduce the
number of power flow runs required during the execu-
tion of the algorithm. Power flow by the Newton-
Raphson method requires o(n3) arithmetic operations
per iteration for the inversion of the system Jacobian
matrix by triangular factorisation. If this is applied to
the n nodes, the total computational cost will be o(n4)
for the selection of each capacitor. When eqn. 14 is
used to calculate the power loss reduction, n summa-
tions, each requiring o(n) operations, need to be calcu-
lated. Therefore, the computational cost is reduced by
6 Conclusions
Heuristic search strategies are applied in this paper to
determine the optimal capacitor placement and rating
for distribution systems. The solution to the capacitor
problem using heuristic rules involves searching
through a set of possible solutions. This is achieved in
this paper by examining the solution at a set of critical
nodes named sensitive nodes. The sensitive nodes are
selected based on the losses caused in the system by the
reactive components of the load currents. The pro-
posed approach determines the compensation level
from the condition of maximising the net savings, as
opposed to only minimising the losses as in other pub-
lished methods [7, 101.
This method has the following advantages;
(i) Since the number of sensitive nodes is relatively
small compared to the total number of nodes in the
distribution system, the size of the problem is consider-
ably reduced. This makes this method very attractive
when dealing with large distribution systems.
(ii) Realistic sizes and locations for shunt capacitors are
considered in this algorithm. Unlike the analytical
approach, the heuristic rule-based approach accounts
for the difference between the theoretical-optimal and
actual sizes and locations of the shunt capacitors.
Because of the iterative nature of the heuristic
approach, the solution is updated (from the knowledge
base) and improved (based on the rules) at each itera-
tion.
(iii) No voltage violation due to the addition of capaci-
tors is allowed by the algorithm.
(iv) This method requires less computation time com-
pared to other analytical methods. This feature makes
it appropriate for online voltiVAr compensation.
(v) When this method was applied to a test system it
provided better savings compared to two other pub-
lished methods (one heuristic and one analytical).
229
~

7 References Substituting eqns. 9 and 10 into eqn. 8 we get [ll]:

1 CHANG, N.E.: ‘Generalized equations on loss reduction with
shunt capacitor’, ZEEE Trans., 1972, PAS-91, (5), pp. 2189-2195
2 GRAINGER. J.J.. and LEE. S.H.: ‘Outimum size and location of
shunt capacitors for reduction of lossks on distribution systems’,
ZEEE Trans, 1981, PAS-100, (3), pp 1105-1118
apkSs= 2Re
{ IC
m
l:
&,(km)IA
1 + lL12Rfus(k,k)
(11)
3 LEE. S H . and GRAINGER. J J ‘Ootimum ulacement of fixed Eqn. 11 is similar to the equation derived in [ 1I] for the
and switched capacitors on primary aistributibn feeders’, IEEE change in the power loss in the system resulting from a
Trans., 1981, PAS-100, (l), pp. 345-352
4 GRAINGER, J.J., and CIVANLAR, S.: ‘Volt/var control on dis- load transfer. In the following, this equation is modi-
tributions systems with lateral branches using shunt capacitors fied to account for the loss reduction due to capacitor
and voltage regulatorsiPart I: The overall problem’, ZEEE Trans., installation.
1985, PAS-104, (11), pp. 3278-3283
5 GRAINGER, J.J., and CIVANLAR, S.: ‘Voltivar control on dis-
tributions systems with lateral branches using shunt capacitors
and voltage regulators/Part 11: The solution method’, IEEE
Trans., 1985, PAS-104, (11), pp. 3284-3290
6 GRAINGER, J.J., and CIVANLAR, S.: ‘VolUvar control on dis-
tributions svstems with lateral branches using shunt cauacitors
and voltage regulatordPart 111: The numeri&l results: ZEEE
Trans., 1985, PAS-104, (ll), pp. 3291-3297
7 SALAMA. M.M.A.. and CHIKHANI. A.Y.: ‘A simulified net-
work approach to the VAR control problem for rad$l distribu-
tion systems’, ZEEE Trans. Powev Delivery, 1993, 8, (3), pp. 1529-
1535
8 SALAMA, M.M.A., MANSOUR, E.A.A., CHIKHANI, A.Y.,
and HACKAM, R.: ‘Control of reactive power in distribution
systems with end-load and varying load condition’, ZEEE Trans.,
1985, PAS-104, (4),pp. 941-947
9 GONEN, T.: ‘Electric power distribution system engineering’
(McGraw-Hill, 1986)
10 ABDEL-SALAM, T.S., CHIKHANI, A.Y., and HACKAM, R.:
‘A new technique for loss reduction using compensating capaci-
tors applied to distribution systems with varying load condition’,
ZEEE Trans. Power Delivery, 1994, 9, (2), pp. 819-827
11 CIVANLAR, S., GRAINGER, J.J., YIN, H., and LEE, S.S.H.:
‘Distribution feeder reconfiguration for loss reduction’, ZEEE
Trans. Power Delivery, 1988, 3, (3), pp. 1217-1223
12 SHIRMOHAMMADI, D., and HONG, H.W.: ‘Reconfiguration
of electric networks for resistive line losses reduction’, ZEEE
Trans. Power Delivery, 1989, 4, (2), pp. 1492-1498
13 TAYLOR, T., and LUBKEMAN, D.: ‘Implementation of heuris- b
tic search strategies for distribution feeder reconfiguration’, IEEE Fig.7 Example feeder
Trans. Power Delivery, 1990, 5, (l), pp. 239-246 a Before addition of capacitor
b After addition of capacitor at node ‘k’

8 Appendix
Let I, = I,, + jIrk be the complex load current at bus
In this Appendix, we will derive a new formula for the ‘k’ before the addition of the capacitor. If in eqn. 11 we
loss reduction in the feeder due to capacitor compensa- substitute I, = -jIrk we get:
tion. We use the same outline proposed by Civanlar
et al. [l 11 for calculating the loss change resulting from
the transfer of a group of loads from one feeder to
another by reconfiguration. Let us assume that a radial
distribution feeder A, shown in Fig. 7, has the bus cur-
aGtss= 2Re
{ -.I&k

+ I:h&s ( k k )
m=l
n

RfUs( km)(Iam- j I T m )
I
rents 11,I,, ..., I,, represented by the vector:
I,T = [Il,I2,. . . ,I,,. . . ,In]
To determine the reduction in losses in the feeder A
(6)

due to the addition of a capacitor (as shown in Fig. 7b) +“(k

n
n

Rfus(k,m)(-IThITm-3IrkIam)

k)
I
the vector of bus currents has to be modified as fol-
lows: apk, = -2 RkS(k”dTm + k)

: f +
1 = [ I l , I 2 , .. ,I, I,,. * ., I n ] (7)
m=l
(12)
where I, is the vector of bus currents after the addition where I, = I,, + jITmis the load current at bus ‘m’.
of the capacitor C of current I, at node ‘k’. The value expressed by eqn. 12 actually represents
The change in the power losses on feeder A due to the change in the system power loss when eliminating
the capacitor addition is: the reactive component of the load current at node ‘k’
0 by adding a capacitor of equal value. In this case, the
ap;ss = P&S - Pkxs (8) capacitor causes the loss reduction:
where do,,is the power loss in the distribution system n
before the addition of the capacitor and is given by
[ll]:
Qp! = -Apk,, = 2 C RfUS( k ,m)IrhIrm-I:&& ( k ,k )
m=l

PLS, = I,TR,A,,I,* (9) (13)

In a similar manner, if a capacitor of arbitrary rating
and the matrix RfUshas been defined in Section 2. I; Q, and current [I,[ is connected at node ‘h?, the loss
represents the complex conjugate of vector 1,.
reduction due to this compensation is:
The power loss in the system after the addition of the n
capacitor is:
PZSS = I,TR,AsI,* (10)
W L s c =2 E&s(k>m)IIcIIrm
m=l
- II~I~R,A,,(JC,5) (14)

230 IEE Proc -Gener Transm Distrib , Vol 144, No 3, May I997