102
1, JANUARY 2013
Optimal Planning of Electric-Vehicle Charging
Stations in Distribution Systems
Zhipeng Liu, Fushuan Wen, and Gerard Ledwich, Senior Member, IEEE
Abstract—With the progressive exhaustion of fossil energy and
the enhanced awareness of environmental protection, more atten-
tion is being paid to electric vehicles (EVs). Inappropriate siting
and sizing of EV charging stations could have negative effects on
the development of EVs, the layout of the city traffic network, and
the convenience of EVs’ drivers, and lead to an increase in network
losses and a degradation in voltage profiles at some nodes. Given
this background, the optimal sites of EV charging stations are first
identified by a two-step screening method with environmental fac-
tors and service radius of EV charging stations considered. Then,
a mathematical model for the optimal sizing of EV charging sta-
tions is developed with the minimization of total cost associated
with EV charging stations to be planned as the objective func-
tion and solved by a modified primal-dual interior point algorithm
(MPDIPA). Finally, simulation results of the IEEE 123-node test
feeder have demonstrated that the developed model and method
cannot only attain the reasonable planning scheme of EV charging
stations, but also reduce the network loss and improve the voltage
profile.
Index Terms—Distribution systems, electric vehicle (EV),
primal-dual interior point algorithm, service radius, siting and
sizing.
I. INTRODUCTION
W ITH THE development of battery technology, electric
vehicles (EVs) have grown rapidly in some developed
countries in the last ten years [1]. While in developing countries,
a grand development plan with the goal of increasing EV own-
ership numbers (including hybrid EVs, pure EVs, and fuel-cell
EVs, etc.) to 5 million vehicles by 2020 has also been brought
forward in China.
Given the aforementioned background, the optimal planning
of EV charging stations is becoming a significant problem to
be resolved. EVs cannot only increase energy utilization and
reduce pollution emission, but also smooth the load curve by
peak load shaving and, hence, enhance the security and eco-
nomics of the power system concerned by coordinating with in-
Manuscript received September 15, 2011; revised January 25, 2012, May 20,
2012, and October 02, 2012; accepted October 03, 2012. Date of publication
November 27, 2012; date of current version December 19, 2012. This work
was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51107114,
51177145). Paper no. TPWRD-00781-2011.
Z. Liu is with the School of Electric Power, South China University of Tech-
nology, Guangzhou 510640, China (e-mail: zhipeng.liu09@gmail.com).
F. Wen is with the School of Electrical Engineering, Zhejiang University,
Hangzhou 310027, China, and also with Queensland University of Technology,
Brisbane, Qld. 4001, Australia (e-mail: fushuan.wen@gmail.com).
G. Ledwich is with Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Qld.
4001, Australia (e-mail: g.ledwich@qut.edu.au).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRD.2012.2223489
0885-8977/$31.00 © 2012 IEEE
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 28, NO.
termittent renewable energies, such as wind generation. How-
ever, inappropriate siting and sizing of EV charging stations
could have negative effects on the development of EVs, the
layout of the traffic network in a city concerned, and the con-
venience of EV drivers. It could also lead to an increase in net-
work losses and degradation in voltage profiles at some nodes
[2]. In recent years, more attention has been paid to the op-
timal planning of EV charging stations, both in industry and
academics [3]–[8]. Many factors having impacts on the layout
of EV charging stations, such as the charging demands, the way
of energy supply, the performance and charging duration of a
battery, as well as the locations and environment of charging
stations, are investigated in [3]. In [4], the development proce-
dure of EV charging stations is divided into three stages (i.e., the
demonstration stage, public promotional stage, and commercial
utilization stage). Then, an optimization model for the planning
of EV charging stations is proposed with the interval distance
ratio, charging capacity redundancy, and charging power redun-
dancy considered. In [5], the feasibility of optimally utilizing the
potential of the Ontario’s grid for charging plug-in hybrid EVs
(PHEVs) is analyzed for offpeak load periods by employing a
simplified zonal model of the Ontario’s electric transmission
network and a zonal pattern of base-load generation capacities
for the years from 2009 to 2025.
In [6], environmentally and economically sustainable integra-
tion of PHEVs into a power system is addressed under a robust
optimization planning methodological framework with the con-
straints of the power system and the transport sector taken into
account. In [7], a smart load-management approach for coor-
dinating multiple plug-in EVs chargers in distribution systems
is proposed, with the objectives of shaving peak demand, im-
proving voltage profile and minimizing power losses as well as
the impact of EVs charging stations and typical daily residen-
tial loading patterns considered as constraints. In [8], a mini-
mized cost model for determining the locations and capacities
of charging stations for regional EVs is developed considering
some constraints, such as the distances between the substation
and candidate locations of EV charging substations, the number
of EVs, and the installed costs of EV charging stations.
The existing research work on the optimal planning of EV
charging stations does not systematically address all important
factors having impacts on the candidate sites of EV charging sta-
tions, such as the distribution features of the charging demands,
the performance of battery packs, and the possible effects of
the power system concerned. With this background, a two-step
screening method with the environmental factors and the ser-
vice radius of EV charging stations considered is first presented
to identify the optimal sites of EV charging stations. Then, a
LIU et al.: OPTIMAL PLANNING OF EV CHARGING STATIONS IN DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
mathematical model for the optimal sizing of EV charging sta-
tions is developed and solved by a modified primal-dual inte-
rior point algorithm (MPDIPA). Finally, the IEEE 123-node test
feeder is employed to illustrate the essential features of the de-
veloped model and method.
II. DETERMINATION OF CANDIDATE SITES
A. Environmental Factors
From the perspective of modern city planning, the siting of
each EV charging station should meet the requirements of the
city traffic network’s layout. While from the perspective of
power system planning, the locations of EV charging stations
should be compatible with the current situation—the short-term
as well as long-term planning of the distribution system con-
cerned. EV charging stations should be close to load centers
and respect the constraints of the load balance, power quality,
and power-supply reliability [9]. From the perspective of EVs’
owners, the sites of EV charging stations should be in locations
which are convenient for EV’s owners and near the charging
demands. Furthermore, other factors, such as the location
adaptability and land price, should also be considered. Thus,
the initial candidate sites of EV charging stations can be deter-
mined with the aforementioned factors properly considered.
B. Service Radius of EV Charging Stations
The cycle life of a battery pack is affected significantly by the
depth of discharge (DOD). However, the cycle life of the battery
pack can be well extended, with its DOD restricted between
50% and 70% [10]. Therefore, in order to maximize the cycle
life of the battery packs, the calculation of a reasonable EVs’
driving range is formulated in terms of DOD. It is defined here
as the driving distance of EVs between the state of charge (SOC)
corresponding to the minimal DOD of battery packs and the
SOC corresponding to the maximal DOD of battery packs.
The driving distance can be estimated by the constant speed
method [10] as follows:
(1)
where is the driving range of EVs, is the rated power
of EVs’ engine, is the total efficiency of the mechanical and
electrical systems of EV (i.e., the total efficiency of converting
the electrical energy into mechanical energy); is the con-
stant speed, which is set according to relevant standards con-
cerning the driving range tests of EVs [11]; and and
are the SOCs corresponding to the minimal and maximal DODs
of the battery packs, respectively; is the rated capacity of
the battery packs; is the terminal voltage of battery packs;
is the ratio between the rated discharging current and actual
discharging current, which will henceforth be called “the cur-
rent ratio.”
First, in order to meet the daily journey needs of EVs’ owners
and guarantee EVs’ driving ability, the actual distance between
two adjacent EV charging stations should not be too far. Second,
to avoid wasting resources, the actual distance between two ad-
jacent EV charging stations should not be too close. Thus, the
service radius of EV charging stations and the actual dis-
103
tance of two adjacent EV charging stations should re-
spect the following constraints:
(2)
where is the line length of the
feeders between two adjacent EV charging stations, and is
the buckling coefficient used for converting the line length of
the feeders into the actual distance between two adjacent EV
charging stations.
According to (2), the initial candidate sites of EV charging
stations can be first screened. Then, the optimal sites of EV
charging stations can be determined with the aforementioned
two steps. Finally, the charging service area of each EV charging
station is divided in terms of the Voronoi diagram (also called
Thiessen polygons) [12], which has been extensively employed
in geographic information systems (GIS). The EVs’ owners can
choose proper EV charging stations for charging based on the
SOC of battery packs.
III. MATHEMATICAL MODEL
A. Objective Function
In this paper, the objective function is defined as the mini-
mization of the total costs associated with EV charging stations
to be planned, including the investment costs, operation costs,
maintenance costs, and network loss costs in the planning pe-
riod. The mathematical model can be formulated as
(3)
where is the number of EV charging stations in the dis-
tribution system concerned, ,
and are, respectively, the investment cost, operation
cost, and maintenance cost of the th EV charging station and
the network-loss cost in the planning period; is the discount
rate and used to transform the future cost to the present value;
and is the number of years included in the planning period.
1) Investment Cost: The total capacity of the charging de-
vices in the th EV charging station (including chargers and
charging points) can be formulated as [13]
(4)
where and are, respectively, the number and the si-
multaneity coefficient of the charging devices in the th EV
charging station; and and are,
respectively, the rated capacity, the output active power, the
power factor and the charging efficiency of the th charging
device in the th EV charging station.
The total capacity of the transformers in the th EV charging
station can be obtained as [9]
(5)
104
where is the total capacity of other devices except the
transformers and charging devices (including the loads of the
lighting and office, etc.) in the th EV charging station and
is the daily maximal load rate of the th EV charging
station.
Thus, the investment cost of the th EV charging station in
the planning period can be formulated as
(6)
where and are the per-unit capacity
investment cost of the transformers, charging devices, and other
devices in the th EV charging station, respectively;
and are the per square meter land utilization cost and the
area of the th EV charging station, respectively.
2) Operation Cost: The operation cost of the th EV
charging station includes the charging cost , distribution system with the newly planned EV charging sta-
the power consumption cost of electric devices , the
active power filtering and reactive power compensation cost
, and the human resource cost in the planning
period. The operation cost can be represented as
(7)
where and are the rated power and the annual utiliza-
tion hours of the charging devices in the th EV charging station,
respectively; and are the maximal active power con-
sumed and the annual utilization hours of the electric devices in
the th EV charging station, respectively; and is the elec-
tricity purchasing price of the th EV charging station.
In order to encourage EV charging stations to increase the
daily average load rate at connected nodes, enhance the valley
load, and avoid increasing the peak load, as well as improve the
reliability of power supply [14], the electricity purchasing price
of EV charging stations can be adjusted with relevant policy
permission. For example, an electricity price adjustment coeffi-
cient can be added to the retail electricity price to determine the
electricity purchasing price of EVs, as shown
(8)
where is the retail electricity price, and is the
daily average load rate of the th EV charging station.
Equation (8) is just a sample of an incentive mechanism. In
fact, many methods can be employed to set the electricity pur-
chasing price in order to encourage EV charging stations to con-
tribute to the improvement of the security and economics of a
power system concerned [15].
To maintain required power qualities, some measures, such as
active power filtering and reactive power compensation, can be
taken. Thus, the costs associated with the planning period can
be described as [16]
(9)
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 28, NO. 1, JANUARY 2013
where is the per-unit capacity cost of the active
power filtering and reactive power compensation in the th EV
charging station; is the overall correction coefficient of
the charging devices in the th EV charging station; and
and are the reliability coefficient and the harmonic
current containing rate in the ac power input terminal of the th
charging device in the th EV charging station, respectively.
3) Maintenance Cost: The maintenance cost of the th EV
charging station in the planning period can be formulated as
(10)
where and are the per-unit capacity
maintenance cost of the transformers, charging devices, and
other devices in the th EV charging station, respectively.
4) Network Loss Cost: The network loss cost of the studied
tions in the planning period can be formulated as
(11)
where is the on-grid price of electricity; is the annual
utilization hour, and is the power loss of the entire distri-
bution system.
It should be mentioned that each cost item mentioned in this
work has been converted into the cost in each year of the plan-
ning period.
B. Constraints
The constraints considered here include the equality and
inequality ones. The equality constraints refer to power-flow
equations.
A high level of harmonics can be produced by the nonlinear
loads of charging devices. In particular, the fast-charging EVs
may lead to some significant changes in the load power and
voltage amplitude at some nodes [17]. To prevent the negative
effects of EV charging stations on the power quality and power
system security from occurrence, a methodological framework
for the optimal planning of EV charging stations is developed
with the following inequality constraints [18], [19].
1) The permitted maximal transformer capacity limit of the
th EV charging station (i.e., )
(12)
2) The lower and upper limits of reactive power needed for
compensation in the th EV charging station (i.e.,
and )
(13)
where is the reactive power needed for compen-
sation in the th EV charging station.
3) The lower and upper voltage limits at each bus (i.e.,
and )
(14)
LIU et al.: OPTIMAL PLANNING OF EV CHARGING STATIONS IN DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 105

where is the number of nodes in the distribution system IV. MODIFIED PRIMAL-DUAL INTERIOR POINT ALGORITHM
studied.
4) The permitted maximal current limits in each feeder (i.e., A. Lagrange Function
) The MPDIPA employed here first transforms all of the in-
equality constraints in (19) into equalities by adding non-nega-
(15) tive variables. Then, the non-negative conditions of slack vari-
ables are handled by incorporating them into logarithmic barrier
where is the current in the feeder between nodes and terms [20]. Finally, a Lagrangian function is built as follows by
. incorporating equalities into the objective function of (19)
5) The permitted minimal and maximal charging power limits
of EV charging stations (i.e., and )

(16)
(20)
where is the charging power of where and are vectors of the slack
the th EV charging station. This constraint is used to re- variables; and are vectors of the Lagrange multipliers;
flect the supply capability limitations of the associated dis- is the iteration counter; is the number of inequality constraints;
tribution system. and is the barrier parameter.
6) The permitted maximal daily average load rate limits of the The relationship between the barrier parameter and comple-
th EV charging station (i.e., ) mentarity gap is as follows [21]:
(17) (21)

7) The minimal load power factor limits of the th EV where is the centering parameter,
charging station with newly added EVs (i.e., ) and is the complementarity
gap.

(18)
where is the actual active/reactive load power.
C. Methodological Framework
The developed mathematical model for the optimal sizing of
EV charging stations can be described as
B. Correction Equations
The minimal point of the Lagrange function in (20) must
satisfy the Karush–Kuhn–Tucker (KKT) optimality conditions
[22]. The optimal search direction
can be solved by the Newton’s method and the correction equa-
tions can then be obtained

(19)

where is the objective function, is the vector of
the equality constraints, is the vector of the inequality
constraints, is the vector of the maximal/minimal
limits of , is the vector of continuous decision variables
consisting of the capacities of all EV charging stations, and
is the vector of the maximal/minimal limits of .
The problem described by (19) is a typical nonlinear con-
strained programming problem. Up to now, many optimization
algorithms are available for solving this problem in the field
of operations research. In this paper, the modified primal-dual
interior point algorithm (MPDIPA) is employed due to its fast
convergence rate, strong robustness, and insensitive starting
points. The calculation amount of the primal-dual interior algo-
rithm mainly involves solving correction equations. To speed
the solving procedure, the correction equations are simplified
by taking full advantage of their sparse structures.
(22)
where and are diagonal matrices with the vector and
is the diagonal matrix of ones, and are diagonal
matrices with the vector and is the Jacobian of
is the Jacobian of and is the number of equality
constraints (i.e., the number of power-flow equations).
C. Modification of the Correction Equations
From the aforementioned description, it is obvious that the
calculation amount of the primal-dual interior point algorithm
(PDIPA) mainly lies in the correction equations expressed in
(22). Therefore, a lot of calculation time and computer memory
will be required with PDIPA [23]. To solve this problem more
efficiently, an alternative form of the correction equations is pro-
posed here, and this represents the key point of MPDIPA. The
details of the alternative form are given below.
106 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 28, NO. 1, JANUARY 2013

First, (22) can be written as follows: where is the vector of
ones.
Simplifying the third and fourth items of (23), shown at the
bottom of the page, yields
(24)
Substituting the first and second items of (24) into the first
and second items in (23) yields (25), shown at the bottom of the
page.
Substituting the second item of (25), shown at the bottom of
the page, into the fifth item of (23) yields (26), shown at the
bottom of the page.
Combining the first item of (26) with the sixth item of (23),
the simplified matrix of the modified equations can be obtained
as follows [24]:
speed, different kinds of variables are employed with different
step lengths in this paper. The step lengths are mathematically
expressed as follows: where is the step length of primal vari-
ables, is the step length of dual variables, and is the safety
factor.
According to the step length and optimal search direction, the
primal and dual variables can be modified. Then, the starting
points of the next iteration are determined by
(29)
E. Convergence Conditions

(27) The convergence conditions of MPDIPA should include the

complementarity condition, primal feasibility, dual feasibility,
Therefore, and can be calculated by (27). Then, and optimality condition [26]. Therefore, it can be expressed in
and can be calculated by (24) and (25), shown the form of inequality constraints as follows:
at the bottom of the page. Therefore, the calculation time can
be reduced.

D. Step Length (30)

In the iteration procedure, the step length should be modi-
fied in order to guarantee the primal feasibility and dual feasi-
bility of solutions [25]. Meanwhile, to enhance the convergence where , and are constants.

(23)

(25)

(26)

(28)
LIU et al.: OPTIMAL PLANNING OF EV CHARGING STATIONS IN DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 107

TABLE I
LINE LENGTHS OF THE IEEE 123-NODE TEST FEEDER

Fig. 1. IEEE 123-node test feeder.

F. Computational Procedure
Step 1) Set the iteration counter and specify the
starting points (including the charging power of the
EV charging stations).
Step 2) According to (21), determine the barrier parameter
, complementarity gap , and centering param-
eter .
Step 3) According to (27), (24), and (25), calculate the search
directions of each variable.
Step 4) According to (28), shown at the bottom of the pre-
vious page, determine the step length of primal vari-
ables and dual variables.
Step 5) According to (29), update the primal variables and
dual variables.
Step 6) According to (30), judge whether the convergence
conditions are met. If yes, stop the calculation
and output the results; otherwise, set the iteration
counter , and then return to Step 2).

V. CASE STUDIES
The IEEE 123-node test feeder [27], as shown in Fig. 1, is
used to demonstrate the developed model and method. The line
lengths, the states of three-phase switches, and the original load
data are shown in Tables I–III, respectively.
The demonstration, expansion, and application planning of
energy savings and new energy vehicles in China (the so-called
Ten-city 1000-vehicle planning) have been launched since Jan-
uary 2009, with the major goal of applying EVs to the public
service sectors as buses, business cars, taxis, and postal cars.
With this background, a kind of electricity-powered bus named
HFF6112GK50 [12] is taken as an example here.

A. Known Parameters
1) For HFF6112GK50 [10], 124 kW, 90%, 2) For EV charging stations [15], 12%,
40 km h 384 V, 255 Ah, 3, 0.95, 90%,
50%, 30%, 1.41, and 1.32. 1.05, 0.8, 0.61, 3%,
The line length of the feeders between two adjacent EV $0.06 kWh U.S.$0.04 kWh
charging stations (i.e., ) can be calculated by the sum U.S.$40.84 kVA U.S.$34.71 kVA
of the feeder lengths of all feeders between the two nodes U.S.$30.94 kVA U.S.$95.63
to which the two EV charging stations are connected, as m U.S.$10.16 kVA
shown in Table I. U.S.$11.92 kVA U.S.$8.92 kVA
108
TABLE II
STATES OF THREE-PHASE SWITCHES
TABLE III
ORIGINAL LOAD DATA
U.S.$5.21 kVA and
U.S.$16476.41.
3) For MPDIPA [21],
0.2, 0.2, and 0.99995.
B. Computational Procedures
Step 1) According to the environmental factors at EV
charging stations’ locations described in the
Subsection A of Section II, some nodes in the
IEEE 123-node test feeder are identified as the
initial candidate sites for EV charging stations, as
shown in Table IV.
Step 2) According to (1), (2), and Table I, it can be obtained
that the service radius of EV charging stations is
7.22 km and the actual distance of two
adjacent EV charging stations is (7.22,
14.44) km. Finally, the charging service area of each
EV charging station is divided in terms of the char-
acteristics of the Thiessen polygons, as shown in
Fig. 2.
According to the characteristics of the Thiessen polygons
[12], the distance between the EVs in a charging service area
(i.e., the convex polygons in Fig. 2) and the EV charging station
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 28, NO. 1, JANUARY 2013
TABLE IV
CANDIDATE LOCATIONS AND CAPACITIES OF EV CHARGING STATIONS
Fig. 2. Optimal locations of EV charging stations in the IEEE 123- node test
feeder.
TABLE V
OPTIMAL LOCATIONS AND CAPACITIES OF EV CHARGING STATIONS
located in this charging service area is less than the distance be-
tween the EVs and the EV charging station located in any other
charging service areas.
After the EV charging stations’ optimal locations are de-
termined by the two-step screening method, the MPDIPA
is employed to solve the developed model for EV charging
stations’ optimal capacities. The optimal sites and capacities
of EV charging stations that have been obtained are shown
in Table V. The detailed configuration of each EV charging
station is shown in Table VI.
The convergence of MPDIPA is achieved when the comple-
mentarity gap tends to zero [28]. The curve shown in Fig. 3 in-
dicates that the complementarity gap approaches zero with the
iteration process proceeding. This illustrates that the algorithm
has good convergence characteristics.
As shown in Fig. 4, MPDIPA is continually searching for
the optimal capacities of EV charging stations in the iteration
process with a declining power loss rate. It indicates that the
LIU et al.: OPTIMAL PLANNING OF EV CHARGING STATIONS IN DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
TABLE VI
DETAILED CONFIGURATIONS OF EV CHARGING STATIONS
Fig. 3. Complementarity gaps in each iteration.
Fig. 4. Variations of the power-loss rate in the iteration process with MPDIPA.
power loss of the IEEE 123-node test feeder has been reduced
with the different planning schemes of EV charging stations and
the incentive policy of the electricity purchasing price. With the
optimal planning scheme of the EV charging stations listed in
Table V, it can be observed from Figs. 5 and 6 that the voltage
profile at each node of the test feeder has been significantly
improved.
VI. CONCLUSION
To solve the optimal planning problem of EV charging sta-
tions, a method combining the two-step screening method and
the modified primal-dual interior point algorithm (MPDIPA) is
developed in this paper. The two-step screening method with the
environmental factors and the service radius of EV charging sta-
tions considered is first presented to identify the optimal sites for
EV charging stations. Then, a mathematical model for the op-
timal sizing of EV charging stations is developed, and solved by
109
Fig. 5. Voltage magnitude at each bus in the IEEE 123-node test feeder without
the optimal planning of EV charging stations.
Fig. 6. Voltage magnitude at each bus in the IEEE 123-node test feeder with
the optimal planning of EV charging stations.
a modified primal-dual interior point algorithm with the sparse
structures of the correction equations fully explored. In this way,
the solving procedure is significantly faster. Finally, simulation
results of the IEEE 123-node test feeder demonstrate that the
developed model and method cannot only attain the reasonable
planning scheme of EV charging stations, but also reduce the
network loss and improve the voltage profile. Some related fac-
tors, especially the EV fleet distribution, traffic situation, and
charging demand pattern, will be systematically addressed in
our future work.
REFERENCES
[1] K. Schneider, C. Gerkensmeyer, M. Kintner-Meyer, and R. Fletcher,
“Impact assessment of plug-in hybrid vehicles on pacific northwest dis-
tribution systems,” in Proc. IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Gen. Meeting-Con-
vers. Del. Elect. Energy in 21st Century, Pittsburgh, PA, Jul. 20–24,
2008, pp. 1–6.
[2] M. Etezadi-Amoli, K. Choma, and J. Stefani, “Rapid-charge elec-
tric-vehicle stations,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 25, no. 3, pp.
1883–1887, Jul. 2010.
[3] F. Xu, G. Q. Yu, L. F. Gu, and H. Zhang, “Tentative analysis of layout
of electrical vehicle charging stations,” Proc. East China Elect. Power,
vol. 37, no. 10, pp. 1677–1682, Oct. 2009.
[4] C. Y. Wu, C. B. Li, L. Du, and Y. J. Cao, “A method for electric vehicle
charging infrastructure planning,” Autom. Elect. Power Syst., vol. 34,
no. 24, pp. 36–39, Dec. 2010.
[5] A. Hajimiragha, C. A. Caizares, M. W. Fowler, and A. Elkamel, “Op-
timal transition to plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in Ontario, Canada,
considering the electricity-grid limitations,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Elec-
tron., vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 690–701, Feb. 2010.
110
[6] A. H. Hajimiragha, C. A. Canizares, M. W. Fowler, S. Moazeni, and A.
Elkamel, “A robust optimization approach for planning the transition
to plug-in hybrid electric vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 26,
no. 4, pp. 2264–2274, Nov. 2011.
[7] A. S. Masoum, S. Deilami, P. S. Moses, M. A. S. Masoum, and A.
Abu-Siada, “Smart load management of plug-in electric vehicles in
distribution and residential networks with charging stations for peak
shaving and loss minimisation considering voltage regulation,” Inst.
Eng. Technol. Gen., Transm. Distrib., vol. 5, no. 8, pp. 877–888, Aug.
2011.
[8] L. F. Kou, Z. F. Liu, and H. Zhou, “Modeling algorithm of charging
station planning for regional electric vehicle,” Modern Elect. Power,
vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 44–48, Aug. 2010.
[9] State Grid Corporation of China, Technical guidance document
of state grid corporation of china for the typical designs of elec-
tric vehicle charging facilities. May 5, 2011. [Online]. Available:
http://wenku.baidu.com/view/0b7f84c72cc58bd63186bd1c.html
[10] G. B. Xu, Z. P. Wang, and C. N. Zhang, “Analysis of the energy com-
putation and influence factors of electric vehicle range,” Vehicle Power
Technol., no. 2, pp. 53–56, 2005.
[11] Y. Chen and F. C. Sun, “Study on range and its related factors of electric
vehicles,” J. Beijing Inst. Technol., vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 578–582, Oct.
2001.
[12] N. K. Bose and A. K. Garga, “Neural network design using Voronoi
diagrams,” IEEE Trans. Neural Netw., vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 778–787, Sep.
1993.
[13] P. T. Staats, W. M. Grady, A. Arapostathis, and R. S. Thallam, “A pro-
cedure for derating a substation transformer in the presence of wide-
spread electric vehicle battery charging,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol.
12, no. 4, pp. 1562–1568, Oct. 1997.
[14] P. T. Staats, W. M. Grady, A. Arapostathis, and R. S. Thallam, “A
statistical analysis of the effect of electric vehicle battery charging on
distribution system harmonic voltages,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol.
13, no. 2, pp. 640–646, Apr. 1998.
[15] Z. P. Liu, F. S. Wen, and G. Ledwich, “Optimal siting and sizing of
distributed generators considering uncertainties,” IEEE Trans. Power
Del., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 2541–2551, Oct. 2011.
[16] R. Bass, R. Harley, F. Lambert, V. Rajasekaran, and J. Pierce, “Resi-
dential harmonic loads and EV charging,” in Proc. IEEE Power Eng.
Soc. Winter Meeting, Atlanta, GA, Jan. 28–Feb. 1, 2001, vol. 2, pp.
803–808.
[17] J. C. Gomez and M. M. Morcos, “Impact of EV battery chargers on the
power quality of distribution systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol.
18, no. 3, pp. 975–981, Jul. 2003.
[18] K. Clement-Nyns, E. Haesen, and J. Driesen, “The impact of charging
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles on a residential distribution grid,” IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 371–380, Feb. 2010.
[19] S. Rahman and G. B. Shrestha, “An investigation into the impact of
electric vehicle load on the electric utility distribution system,” IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 591–597, Apr. 1993.
[20] Y. C. Wu, A. S. Debs, and R. E. Marsten, “A direct nonlinear pre-
dictor-corrector primal-dual interior point algorithm for optimal power
flows,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 2, no. 9, pp. 876–883, May 1994.
[21] Y. C. Wu and A. S. Debs, “Initialisation, decoupling, hot start, and
warm start in direct nonlinear interior point algorithm for optimal
power flows,” Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., Gen., Transm. Distrib., vol. 148,
no. 1, pp. 67–75, Jan. 2001.
[22] F. Capitanescu, M. Glavic, D. Ernst, and L. Wehenkel, “Interior-point
based algorithms for the solution of optimal power flow problems,”
Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 508–517, Apr. 2007.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 28, NO. 1, JANUARY 2013
[23] X. H. Yan and V. H. Quintana, “An infeasible interior-point algorithm
for optimal power flow problems,” Elect. Power Energy Syst., vol. 39,
no. 4, pp. 39–46, Oct. 1996.
[24] G. L. Torres and V. H. Quintana, “An interior-point method for
nonlinear optimal power flow using voltage rectangular coordinates,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 1211–1218, Nov. 1998.
[25] H. Wei, H. Sasaki, and R. Yokoyama, “An application of interior point
quadratic programming algorithm for power system optimization prob-
lems,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 260–266, Feb. 1996.
[26] S. Granville, “Optimal reactive dispatch through interior point
methods,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 136–146, Feb.
1994.
[27] IEEE Distribution System Analysis Subcommittee, Nov. 5, 2010, IEEE
Radial Test Feeders. [Online]. Available: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/
pes/dsacom/testfeeders.html
[28] R. A. Abr, A. H. Coonick, and B. J. Cory, “A primal-dual interior point
method for optimal power flow dispatching,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 654–662, Aug. 2002.
Zhipeng Liu was born in 1983. He received the B.E. and M.E. degrees in
electrical engineering from Shandong University of Science and Technology
(SDUST), Qingdao, China, in 2007 and 2009, respectively, and is currently pur-
suing the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the South China University
of Technology (SCUT), Guangzhou.
He was a Research Assistant in the Department of Electrical Engineering,
Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, in 2010, and a Visiting Ph.D.
student at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, from 2011 to 2012. His
research interests are in the field of planning for distributed generators and
electric-vehicle charging stations, underfrequency load shedding, and optimal
power flow.
Fushuan Wen received the B.E. and M.E. degrees in electrical engineering from
Tianjin University, Tianjin, China, in 1985 and 1988, respectively, and the Ph.D.
degree in electrical engineering from Zhejiang University, Zhejiang, China, in
1991.
He joined the faculty of Zhejiang University in 1991, and has been a Full
Professor and the Director of the Institute of Power Economics and Informa-
tion since 1997, and the Director of Zhejiang University-Insigma Joint Research
Center for Smart Grids since 2010. He had been a University Distinguished
Professor, the Deputy Dean of the School of Electrical Engineering, and the Di-
rector of the Institute of Power Economics and Electricity Markets at South
China University of Technology (SCUT), Guangzhou, China, from 2005 to
2009. His current research interests lie in power industry restructuring, power
system alarm processing, fault diagnosis and restoration strategies, as well as
smart grids.
Gerard Ledwich (SM’89) received the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering
from the University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia, in 1976.
He has been Chair Professor in Electrical Asset Management at Queens-
land University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Australia, since 1998, and was
Head of the Electrical Engineering Department, University of Newcastle, New-
castle, Australia, from 1997 to 1998. Previously, he was with the University of
Queensland, Brisbane, Australia, from 1976 to 1994. His research interests are
in the areas of power systems, power electronics, and controls.
Dr. Ledwich is a Fellow of the Institute of Engineers, Australia.