Received June 12, 2020, accepted June 18, 2020, date of publication June 25, 2020, date of current

version July 7, 2020.

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3005081

Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids

Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation
JULIANA RIBAS MONTEIRO 1,2 , YURI R. RODRIGUES3 , (Student Member, IEEE),
MAÍRA RIBAS MONTEIRO 1,3 , (Graduate Student Member, IEEE),
A. C. ZAMBRONI DE SOUZA 1 , AND BENEDITO ISAIAS LIMA FULY1 , (Senior Member, IEEE)
1 Institute of Electrical Systems and Energy, Federal University of Itajubá, Itajubá 37500-903, Brazil
2 Department of Automation, Federal Institute of Rio de Janeiro, Volta Redonda 27215-350, Brazil
3 School of Engineering, The University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC V1V1V8, Canada
Corresponding author: Juliana Ribas Monteiro (ribasjuliana@hotmail.com)
This work was supported in part by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Educational Personnel (CAPES), in part by the
National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), in part by the Minas Gerais State Research Support Foundation
(FAPEMIG), and in part by the National Institute of Electric Energy (INERGE).

ABSTRACT New opportunities enabled by renewable mobile power stations (RMPSs), in association with
microgrids (MGs) ability to operate islanded to the main grid, present a likely solution to ensure power system
novel reliability requirements in face of the increasing number of severe disruptive events. In this perspective,
this paper proposes a novel intelligent RMPS allocation method to support MGs during scheduled islanded
operation. In this mode, the isolated operation of a MG is beforehand planned to mitigate the effects caused by
possible predictable contingencies, e.g. weather-related events, as well as programmed maintenance. For this,
first a novel energy management strategy (EMS) based on dynamic programming specifically designed for
MG scheduled islanded operation is proposed. Next, a particle swarm optimization (PSO) method modified
to ensure a continuous search space in the face of discrete load shedding policies is developed to determine
the adequate allocation of RMPS. The proposed method is simulated considering different scenarios for a MG
system considering local distributed generation capacity, electric vehicles penetration, load shedding based
on priority groups, as well as technical and operational limits. The obtained results showcase the proposed
approach ability to meaningfully improve MG service capacity during scheduled islanded operation.

INDEX TERMS Microgrids, renewable mobile power stations, scheduled islanding, energy management
strategy.

NOMENCLATURES MER Mobile emergency resource

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS MESS Mobile energy storage system
ABO Average best objective MG Microgrid
ANEEL Brazilian Electricity Regulatory Agency MMG Multi-microgrid
BEST Battery-based energy storage transportation MPS Mobily power station
BI Backward induction OPF Optimal power flow
DER Distributed energy resource PCC Point of common coupling
DG Distributed generation PRER Portable renewable energy resource
DP Dynamic programming PSO Particle swarm optimization
EM Energy management RES Renewable energy resource
EMS Energy management strategy RMPS Renewable mobile power station
EV Electric vehicle TESS Transportable energy storage system
HEGS Hybrid energy generating station V2G Vehicle-to-grid
ISO Independent System Operator
MBESS Mobile battery energy storage system INDICES AND SETS
c Superscript of cases I-IV
The associate editor coordinating the review of this manuscript and ij ∈ N Index of system nodes
approving it for publication was Canbing Li. k, k1 k2 ∈ K PSO particles

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. For more information, see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
117946 VOLUME 8, 2020
J. Ribas Monteiro et al.: Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation

`, `† ∈ LV Index for load priority rank vk Adaptation velocities for each

m∈M Index of MG particle k
N Set of natural numbers x State variable
NDG (NEV ) NG (NL ) k , Yp Local optimal particle


Set of DGs (EVs) (DERs) (loads)
l ∈ Nm (NRMPS ) Set of candidate (allocated) ˆ , Ŷp Global optimal particle
nodes of RMPS ( k) Allocation of additional local
υ Set of transmission lines resources (RMPS)
( 0) ( S) PSO current (initial) (final) iter- ρi Number of commissioned
ation 
†  RMPS units at node i
8h`i `

Set of all candidate solutions for ϕ h`i ϕS
h`i
ϕβ Operational status of a
load priority group ` respective load priority group
β Index of candidate solution l (higher ranked load priority
position groups l† ) (candidate solution
|·| Cardinality of a set of a respective load priority
Plane PL-LV1, . . . , PL -LV’N’ group l)
 
h+i
1PG 1PG Available (surplus) generation
PARAMETERS
capacity
Bi Battery storage capacity at node i
ζ PSO stopped criteria
c1 c2 Velocity acceleration coefficients
K Incidence matrix
j j
1 2 Velocity random sequences FUNCTIONS
s PSO search space interval
 
h`i
F Fh`i Fβ


hDGi Optimization function of MGs service
SG,i
Rated power DG capacity (a generic load priority group
Tisl Tprog MG disconnect (reconnection) time with rank `) (candidate solution β and a
Inertia weight generic load priority group with rank `)
Y Admittance matrix f Function of MGs service capacity
α, β, γ Coefficients of the wind turbine g, h Operational and technical constraints
λ Velocity parameter L Optimization function of MGs losses
ωi ωir ωici



Current (rated) (cut-in) wind velocity at function
node i max (·) Maximization function
t, 1t Time step min (·) Minimization function
1T isl MG disconnect time duration sat (·) Saturation function
ζiter Pre-determined number of iterations W Wind turbine model
ζtol Stagnation tolerance (·), (·) Lower and upper limits

VARIABLES
I. INTRODUCTION


Ii Iij Node (branch) current
   New power systems requirements imposed by increasing con-
PG PG
hDGi
PG
hRMPSi Active power generation avail-
sumption, large penetration of renewable energy resources

hESSi

hMaini
 able (DG) (RMPS) (EV) (main
PG PG (RESs) and the growing impact and occurance of natural
grid) (MG) (RES)

hMGi

hRESi
 disasters [1], [2], are driving the pursue of microgrids (MGs)
PG PG development. These system regions provide an interesting
Pm Local generation in node i at solution due to their ability to operate isolated from the
G,i
MG m main grid, significantly improving power system reliabil-
hRMPSi,ωi ity and consequently its service capacity [1]–[5]. For this
PG,i Turbine power without wind
sake, the association of local energy resources and ade-
velocity limits
h`i

hMGi
 quate energy management strategies (EMSs) are needed to
PL PL Load for respective load prior- ensure the system demand/generation balance during isolated
ity group ` (MG) operation.
h`i
Ploss Active losses for respective In the literature, several works have been proposed to
load priority group ` improve MG operation performance during islanded mode. In
hDGi
QG,i Reactive power generation of [6] a distributed optimal power flow (OPF) strategy seeks to
DG minimize MG losses during islanded operation. The problem
SOC Energy level of MGs resilience is addressed in [7] using an EMS designed
Vi , Vj Nodal voltages to maximize the time of energy supply during MG isolated

VOLUME 8, 2020 117947

 J. Ribas Monteiro et al.: Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation
operation, i.e. autonomy capacity. For this, a neuro-fuzzy
forecasting tool provides data to support the decisions of the
fuzzy control that determines the unit’s respective operational
schedules. Similarly, in [8] a robust EMS is developed based
on fuzzy prediction interval models to determine the avail-
able energy from local generators. Following, a flexible time
frame for distributed energy resources (DERs) dispatch is
proposed using OPF solutions based on economic dispatch
[9]. In [10] a new EMS is developed to optimize MGs power
and energy regulation considering DERs operating in syn-
chronous mode. Natural disasters are tackled in [11] using a
proactive approach for the improvement of MG preparation to
mitigate chain contingencies. Communication non-idealities
are considered in the EMS design problem depicted in [12], in
which a consensus algorithm is used to solve energy manage-
ment (EM) problem with data losses. Further, EMS focused
on hybrid RES generation based systems, and transactive
energy frameworks are tackled in [13], [14]. An optimal
scheduling mode based on chance-constrained programming
is proposed to assist isolated MGs with battery storage [15].
Even though the literature has provided meaningful works
for improving MGs operation during islanded mode. There is
a gap for works focused on improving MGs service capacity
during planned/scheduled islanding scenarios, as the current
literature is mainly focused on the autonomy enhancement
of MGs [6]–[15]. In this perspective, this work seeks to
amend this research gap capitalizing on the novel opportu-
nities enabled by renewable mobile power stations (RMPSs)
to improve MGs service capacity during scheduled islanded
operations.
Mobily power stations (MPSs) provide movable generating
units that can be commissioned to support several power
systems requirements [16]–[32]. An integrated battery-based
energy storage transportation (BEST) provides benefits to the
transmission congestion and operation costs [16], while it can
aid in managing the large-scale integration of wind genera-
tion, reducing the curtailment of this resource and the system
operation cost [17]. In [18] importation costs are minimized
by the adequate allocation and dispatch of a mobile energy
storage system (MESS). The profit of the distribution com-
pany is maximized using MESS to support different services,
including energy arbitration, voltage regulation and mini-
mization of energy losses [19]. In [20] portable renewable
energy resource (PRER) is considered as demand response in
multi-objective and stochastic programming for EM in MGs.
Energy reserves for critical loads supplying and secondary
frequency regulation of isolated MG are respectively tackled
in [21], [22], using a multi-generation portfolio including
mobile hybrid energy generating station (HEGS) and truck-
mounted mobile emergency resources (MERs). The use of
a mobile battery energy storage system (MBESS), based on
experimental operation data and multi-state reliability model
for distributed RES generation and demand, increases the
system reliability during a failure in islanded MGs [23]. Pre-
positioning and allocation of MPS for MG restoration of
critical loads in the context of natural disasters are addressed
117948
in [24], whereas the economically optimal location during
normal operating condition is additionally tackled in [25].
Resilience applications are depicted in [26]–[28] addressing
MPS commissioning logistics, including the influence of
transportation and repair crews. In [29] a two-stage stochastic
recovery framework using MERs reduces the consumers’
outage time duration, while the total cost of the system is min-
imized using transportable energy storage systems (TESSs)
[30]. Also, MPS applications for isolated system regions
with difficult access are proposed in [31] for improving the
operational performance of remote military structures. Fur-
ther, MESSs are used for service restoration due to extreme
weather events and cyber-attacks [32].
This work proposes a novel EMS including an intelligent
allocation of RMPS for improving MG service capacity dur-
ing scheduled islanded operation. First, the proposed EMS
takes advantage of a MG known expected isolated operating
period to develop a new dedicated EM problem capable of
ensuring high priority loads supplying, while simultaneously
enabling the improvement of MG’s overall service capacity.
Next, based on the proposed EMS solution, an intelligent allo-
cation approach of RMPS is presented. For this sake, a new
particle swarm optimization (PSO) strategy considering a
two-layered objective function is developed. This perspective
is necessary to ensure a continuous search space in the face
of the discrete changes in the MG service capacity presented
by load shedding policies based on priority groups. The paper
main contributions are following depicted:
• Enhancement of MG service capacity during scheduled
islanding through RMPS support: RMPS capacity to
be commissioned at different system locations provide
the necessary local resources flexibility to meaning-
fully improve MGs service capacity during scheduled
islanded operation.
• Dynamic programming (DP) based EMS for MG oper-
ation during scheduled islanding: Scheduled isolated
operation allows for the EMS problem design in a finite
time. This perspective allows for the application of DP
technics, representing the EMS problem of MG through
simpler nested sub-problems solvable using backward
induction (BI) principle.
• Intelligent allocation of RMPSs based on PSO ded-
icated to supporting MGs scheduled islanded opera-
tion: The allocation of RMPSs based on PSO allows
for the maximization of the benefit provided by these
resources to support islanded MG service capacity. For
this, a two-layered PSO strategy is presented to avoid
local stagnations due to discrete load shedding policies,
where the first layer ensures the MG service capac-
ity maximization, and the second layer guarantees a
continuous search space towards the optimal solution
identification.
This work organization is following depicted. Section II
describes the analyzed MG. Section III presents the pro-
posed problem formulation and detail to depict the proposed
method. Section IV features the obtained results and the
VOLUME 8, 2020
J. Ribas Monteiro et al.: Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation

hRMPSi,ωi
respective discussion. Next, Section V presents the paper and PG,i are the turbine power with and without wind
conclusion and overall contributions. velocity limits, PG,i
hRMPSi
is the turbine rated power; α, β, γ are
coefficients responsible for modeling the non-linear behavior
II. MICROGRID DESCRIPTION
of the wind turbine and may be determined as in [34].
In this section, the employed system model is detailed. For EVs are considered able of operating in vehicle-to-grid
this, consider a single MG with local DERs and load shedding mode (V2G) [35]. In this sense, a unit i ∈ NEV NEV ⊂ NG

capacity. DERs are represented by electric vehicles (EVs), has its maximum dispatch power as a function of the maxi-
distributed generation (DG), and RMPSs. In addition, loads mum available dispatch power and technical limits, respec-
are composed of different priority levels to support islanded hESSi hESSi
operation. tively PG,i and PG,i .
hESSi
PG,i (t)
A. POWER FLOW n o
hESSi hESSi hESSi
MG operating states are obtained based on power flow solu- = sat PG,i (t) ; PG,i (t), PG,i (5a)
tion [33]: hESSi
 T PG,i (t)
Iij − K −1 · [Ii ]T = 0 (1) n o
hESSi
= sat SOC i (t) − SOC i · Bi · 1t −1 ; PG,i , 0
 

Vj − Vi − Yij−1 · Iij = 0 (2)
(5b)
where Ii and Iij represent node and branch current, Vi and
where SOC i is the energy level, SOC i represents the min-
 j are nodal voltages, Y is the admittance matrix, K =
V
imum limit of energy level, Bi denotes the battery storage
kij is the incidence matrix, i.e., kij = 1, ∀ ij ∈ N | i = j ,
and kij = −1, ∀ {i, j} ⊂ N × N |i 6 = j when there is a capacity and 1t is the time step.
connection between i and j, otherwise kij = 0, ∀ {i, j} 6⊂
υ |i 6 = j , N = NG ∪ NL , is the set of all MG nodes, NG and C. LOAD
NL are the sets of DERs and loads. Islanded MGs require load shedding capacity in order to
ensure generation/demand balance. In this sense, different
B. DERs MODEL load priority levels for consumers groups are considered
DERs are represented by traditional DG units composed of following a set of priority rank LV = {1, . . . , |LV |}, where
small hydropower plants and thermal units, as well as RMPSs the highest priority rank is denoted by ` = 1, | · | denotes
considering truck-mounted wind turbines. For a conventional the cardinality of a set. The MG load for a node i ∈ NL is
DG unit i ∈ NDG NDG ⊂ NG , its supplied power is control- represented as


lable and defined as [11]: h`i h`i h|LV |i

PL (t) = ϕ h`i · PL + . . . + ϕ h|LV |i · PL (6)
n
hDGi hDGi hDGi hDGi
PG,i (t) : PG,i ≤ PG,i (t) ≤ PG,i , where ϕ h`i ∈ {0, 1} denotes the operational status of a
h
hDGi
i2 h
hDGi
i2   
hDGi 2
respective load priority group with rank ` ∈ LV .
PG,i (t) + QG,i (t) ≤ SG,i (3)
D. OPERATIONAL AND TECHNICAL LIMITS
hDGi hDGi
where PG,i and QG,i denote current active and reactive Islanded MGs present several operational and technical con-
hDGi hDGi straints to ensure satisfactory and reliable operating con-
power generation, PG,i and PG,i represent the minimum
hDGi ditions. These constraints include hosting capacity, branch
and maximum active power generation, and SG,i is the rated flow limits, nodal voltage [36] and current limits, generation
generation power. capacity, as well as other equipment, grid, and control limita-
Following,
 the generation contribution of an RMPS unit tions [35]. These constraints are denoted by,
i∈NRMPS  NRMPS ⊂NG is non-controllable and given as a
function of available wind speed over time t, h (x) < 0, x < x < x (7)
(
hRMPSi,ωi
hRMPSi PG,i (t) , if ωici < ωi (t) ≤ ωir where x and x denote lower and upper technical and opera-
PG,i (t) = tional limits.
0, otherwise
(4a)
n o III. PROPOSED RMPS ALLOCATION METHOD FOR MGS
hRMPSi,ωi hRMPSi hRMPSi
PG,i (t) = sat W · PG,i ;PG,i ,0 SUPPORT DURING SCHEDULED ISLANDED OPERATION
h i MGs are able of operating isolated to the main grid in case
|W = α + β · ωi (t) + γ · ωi2 (t) (4b) of unpredicted and scheduled events such as programmed
maintenance [37]. In this operating mode, the MG goal is
where sat ; , = : ≤ < is a saturation function,
 
to maximize its service capacity, i.e. supplied load, during
and are lower and upper limits, ωi (t), ωir and ωici are
its islanded operation. However, due to the limited availabil-
hRMPSi
respectively actual, rated and cut-in wind velocities, PG,i ity of local resources, these grids may be unable to attend

VOLUME 8, 2020 117949

 J. Ribas Monteiro et al.: Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation
their desired threshold demand during the complete isolated
operation. Thus, requiring the allocation of additional local
resources, (7)-(9).
F (x, ϕ, ) = max f (x, ϕ, )
s.t. eq. (7),
g (x, ϕ, ) = 0
where f is the optimization function of MGs service capac-
ity, g and (7) denote equality and inequality constraints
responsible for guaranteeing solutions in compliance with
the islanded MG technical and operational requirements, x
is the state variable, ϕ is the operational status of the MG
load priority group, is the allocation of additional local
resources.
This perspective can be significantly improved considering
the new possibilities enabled by RMPS. These units feature
mobile renewable generators that can be easily commissioned
and decommissioned at different system locations. In this
The proposed method presents a modified objective function,
capable of avoiding possible stagnations of PSO caused by
MGs load shedding policy. The detailed description of the
(8) proposed methods is following depicted.
A. DYNAMIC PROGRAMMING EMS FOR MGS UNDER
(9) SCHEDULED ISLANDED OPERATION
During MG’s islanded operation mode, EMS algorithms are
focused on the maximization of the grid service capacity.
In this configuration, besides the consideration of traditional
technical and operational restrictions expressed by (7) and
(9), these systems must ensure that the MG load supplying
is continuously performed by (12) and respect loads’ priority
ranks described by (13). In this sense, for a generic allocation
of RMPS denoted by k , the EMS problem for MG (7)-(9)
can be represented as
F (x, ϕ, )| = k
= max f (x, ϕ, )| = k ,
 
perspective, providing an ideal solution for supporting MGs 
 |LV | TX
prog
scheduled islanded operation, as the same RMPS unit can be  f (x, ϕ, )| =
X h`i
ϕ h`i (t) · PL (t)

k
=
used at different systems’ MGs following pre-programmed 
 `=1 t=Tisl
maintenance. Thus, a marginal increase 1PG in MGs genera-
(11)
tion, provided by RMPS, can enable several times the benefit
of installing the same marginal increase 1PG in traditional s.t. eq. (7) and (9),
ϕ h`i (t + 1) − ϕ h`i (t) ≤ 0, ∀ t ∈ Tisl , TProg −1t
 
fixed RESs plants, as these units can be moved along and
taken advantage of various MG systems. (12)

RMPS |
 |NX ϕ h`+1i (t) − ϕ h`i (t) ≤ 0, ∀ ` ∈ [1, |LV | − 1]
hRMPSi  hRMPSi
PG,i = PG,i + ρi · PG
m m
 ρi · PG = 1PG (13)
 i=1
m ∈ M, i ∈ NRMPS NRMPS ⊆ Nm (10)
where Pm G,i is the local generation in node i at MG m, ρi is the
hRMPSi
number of commissioned RMPS units at node i, PG is
the generation contribution of each RMPS unit, M is the set
of MGs attended by RMPS, Nm represents the set of nodes
with renewable potential for RMPS installation.
The scalability of RMPS and MG scheduled islanding has
been demonstrated in [16]–[32], for a wide range of power
systems aspects, including reliability and resilience improve-
ment [20], [23]–[26], [28]–[30], as well as operational per-
formance enhancement [16]–[19], [21], [22], [32].
Seeking to capitalize on the novel possibilities enabled
by RMPS, this work proposes a novel method for RMPSs
where Tprog is the MG expected reconnection time.
Based on the restrictions imposed by constraint (13),
higher-ranked priority loads are supplyed before attending
lower priority ranked groups. The EMS problem (11)-(13)
can be reformulated using bottom-up DP [38]. This repre-
sentation presents F (x, ϕ, )| = k as a recursively solvable
problem built-on the solution of sub-problems representative
of each MG load priority group. In this sense, starting from
the highest-ranked load priority group a sub-problem inde-
pendent from the subsequent load priority groups is formu-
lated. Next, each subsequent load priority group constitutes
a new sub-problem that is built-on the solution(s) of the pre-
vious higher-ranked load priority sub-problem(s). The MG
EMS problem solution F (x, ϕ, )| = k is achieved once all
allocation to improve MGs service capacity during scheduled sub-problems are evaluated, i.e. the lowest ranked priority
islanded operation. The proposed method is composed of two group is evaluated, Fh|LV |i (x, ϕ, ) = ,ϕ=ϕ h|LV |i .
k
main stages, respectively EMS for scheduled MG islanded 
operation and RMPS intelligent allocation. The first stage F (x, ϕ, )| = k = F h|LV |i
(x, ϕ, ) = , (14)

k
takes advantage of the knowledge of the reconnection time ϕ = ϕ h|LV |i
during the scheduled islanding to develop a novel EMS based
on DP. The proposed method represents the optimization where,

problem (7)-(9) by several nested sub-problems retroactively Fh`i (x, ϕ, ) = ,

solvable. Thus, significantly reducing the search space for the k
optimal solution. Next, a PSO based algorithm is proposed to ϕ = ϕ h|LV |i
X 
perform the iterative adjustment of RMPSs allocation towards Tprog h`i
= max ϕ (t) · PL (t)
h`i
(15)
the highest benefit for the islanded MG service capacity. t=Tisl

117950 VOLUME 8, 2020

J. Ribas Monteiro et al.: Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation

h`i
s.t. (7), (9) and (12). for a subsequent sub-problem solution, PL (t + 1) <
hMGi
PL (t) PG (t + 1).
 
h`i h`i

ϕ h`i (t) · PL (t) , Fh`i (x, ϕ, ) = , = Fβ (x, ϕ, ) =
  
k k


`=1

h`i h`i
ϕ = ϕβ ϕ = ϕβ (t)

= h`i P`−1
`† 
†
`
ϕ (t) · PL (t) + `† =1 ϕS (t) · PL (t),
h`i 
h`i
+ . . . + Fβ (x, ϕ, ) = ,
 



otherwise k
h`i
(16) ϕ = ϕβ (Tprog )


where Fh`i (x, ϕ, ) = , ϕ=ϕ h`i denotes the sup-problems
  
 h`i n o
 F (x, ϕ, ) hESSi
k
†
`  β = k = min P G (t) (19)
for a generic load priority group with rank `, ϕS (t) is h`i
ϕ = ϕβ (t)


the operational status solution

† of higher-ranked
 load
 priority
groups sub-problems, F ` (x, ϕ, )
 †
h` i  ` < ` . The complete proposed EMS based on DP is the following

†
= k , ϕ=ϕS depicted in (20)-(22). Its solution is obtained recursively
Further, based on the fact that the system EMS problem has applying the BI solution method starting at the highest load
a finite period to be analyzed, i.e. 1T isl = Tprog −Tisl , where priority group towards the lowest priority groups of loads, i.e.
1T isl is the MG duration of the islanded operation. In asso- `= 1, . . . , |LV |.
ciation with the obligation imposed by constraint (12), the
MG must continuously supply load priority groups until their F (x, ϕ, )| = k
 
shedding. One can easily observe that the optimal solution for |LV |  TX
 prog

sub-problems Fh`i (x, ϕ, ) = , ϕ=ϕ h`i disregarding oper-
   

h`i
X
= BI Fβ (x, ϕ, ) = (20)
k

k
ational and technical limits (7)and (9) are represented by l=1

t=Tisl h`i

ϕ = ϕβ (t)
 

h`i
ϕ S (t) = 1, ∀ t ∈ Tisl , Tprog , i.e. this operational status
ensures that all loads on the respective sub-problem are con- where,
tinuously supplied during the complete islanded operation,  
consequently providing the general optimal solution for the  TX

 prog


 
h`i
respective sub-problem. BI Fβ (x, ϕ, ) =

k
This beforehand knowledge of sub-problems general opti-
 
t=Tisl h`i
ϕ = ϕβ (t)
 

mal solution allows for Fh`i (x, ϕ, ) = , ϕ=ϕ h`i to be

k
 
= Fh`i (x, ϕ, ) ϕ ⊂ 8h`i
 h`i
solved using BI method [39]. In this sense, starting from (21)

the general optimal solution, one can work backward to the = k
actual optimal solution that satisfies the sub-problem EMS ϕ = ϕ h`i
constraints, i.e. (7) and (9), and (12)-(13). For this, the first
h`i s.t. (7), (9) and (16),
candidate solutions ϕβ are obtained by inducing backwards
h`i and
from the general optimal solution ϕS . h`i
 n
hESSi
o
Fβ (x, ϕ, ) = = min PG (t)

( k
1, t ≤ Tprog −1t · (β − 1)
 
h`i
h`i
ϕβ (t) = (17) ϕ = ϕβ (t)
0, otherwise (22)
n o
h`i h`i
8 = ϕβ , . . . , ϕTprog
h`i
(18) s.t. (7), (9) and (16)
The problem solution describing the MG maximum service
h`i
where ϕβ (t) denotes the candidate solution, β ∈ capacity is represented by,
1, Tprog − Tisl 1t is the candidate solution position,

 
|LV | TX
prog
8h`i is the set of all candidate solutions for load priority h`i h`i
X
F (x, ϕ, )| = k
= ϕS (t) · PL (t) (23)
group h`i. l=1 t=Tisl
h`i
Then, based on these candidate solutions ϕβ a pre- h`i
knowledge of the sub-problem load priority status at each where ϕS (t) is obtained from (20)-(22).
time step t is obtained. In this sense, (14)-(16) can be
reformulated as a sequence of nested minimization sub- B. INTELLIGENT RMPS ALLOCATION BASED ON PSO
problems where the goal is to maximize the succeeding Next, based on the previous problem solution, an intelligent
hDGi algorithm for RMPSs allocation based on PSO is proposed.
maximum power available,  i.e. PG (t + 1) = PG +
For this, first, one should note that the previous optimiza-
hRMPSi hESSi  hESSi
PG + PG (t + 1) PG (t + 1) = SOC(t) − tion problem solution is a discontinuous step-based func-
hESSi P|LV | PTprog h`i h`i
PG (t) · 1t, so that a higher level of loads may be attended tion, i.e. F (x, ϕ, )| = k = `=1 t=T isl
ϕ (t) · PL (t).

VOLUME 8, 2020 117951

 J. Ribas Monteiro et al.: Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation

This feature can lead to the PSO stagnation if the The global optimal particle ˆ ( + 1) is determined based
step between subsequent solutions are significantly large, on the local optimal population set Yp ( + 1). For this,
i.e. |F (x, ϕ, ( )) − F (x, ϕ, ( + 1))|  0, where first a sub-set Ŷp ( + 1) representing the solutions with the
represents the RMPSs allocation, and denotes the highest service capacity is extracted from the complete set
PSO iteration. In this sense, the entire PSO popula- Yp ( + 1). Next, the optimal particle ˆ ( + 1) is deter-
tion K could be found in the same solution plateau, mined by identifying the solution presenting the lowest loss
leading to the PSO inability to identify the optimal in the refined population sub-set Ŷp ( + 1).
particle among the respective population that leads to
the system optimization path, i.e. F (x, ϕ, )| = k =
ˆ ( + 1) = ( + 1) |L (x, ϕ, k ( + 1))
k
1
n  o
F (x, ϕ, )| = k |∀ {k1 , k2 } ∈ K k1 6 = k2 , where k1 and k2 = min L x, ϕ, Ŷp ( + 1) (27)
2
represent particles in the PSO population K .   
Ŷp ( + 1) = Yp ( + 1) F x, ϕ, Ŷp ( + 1)

Still, one should know that even though these parti-
cles may present the same service capacity solution, i.e. = max F x, ϕ, Yp ( + 1)


(28)
F (x, ϕ, )| = k = F (x, ϕ, )| = k+1 | ∀ k ∈ K , they are
not necessarily equally optimal. In this sense, based on (19), where, |K| is the total number of particles in K, |Nm | is the
h+i number of all candidate locations for RMPSs allocation in
the available surplus generation capacity, i.e. 1PG (t) =
MG m ∈ M.
 
h`i h`i
PG − PL (t) + Ploss (t) , can be used as a supplemental
Once determined PSO’s local and global optimal particles,
metric for determining the optimal PSO particles. Given that
the population variation is performed calculating the respec-
PG is constant at each time step, one can show that the particle
tive adaptation velocities, vlk , for each particle, k .
presenting the highest surplus of generating capacity is the h i
one featuring reduced losses. vlk ( + 1) = · vlk ( ) + c1 · l1 ( ) · lk ( ) − lk ( )
L (x, ϕ, )| = k h i
X  + c2 · l2 ( ) · ˆ ( ) − lk ( ) (29)
|LV | XTprog h`i h+i
= max ϕ (t) · PL (t) + 1PG (t)
h`i
`=1 t=Tisl where, l1 ∼ (0, 1) and l2 ∼ (0, 1) are random sequences
and contribute to PSO stochastic nature, c1 > 0 and c2 ≤ 2
X 
|LV | XTprog h`i
= min ϕ (t) · Ploss (t)
h`i
`=1 t=Tisl are constants, called acceleration coefficients and influence
X|LV | XTprog h`i h`i respectively the maximum step toward lk and toward ŷ,
= ϕS (t) · Ploss (t) (24) is the inertia weight as defined in [41].
`=1 t=Tisl
In this perspective, the identification of PSO local and This process leads to the new population for RMPSs allo-
global optimal particles can be performed using a two-step cation denoted by k ( + 1).
verification process. First, the respective particles are evalu- ( + 1)
k
ated seeking to identify the ones leading to the highest service
capacity, i.e. F (x, ϕ, )| = k . Next, in case that multiple =  k ( ) + vk ( + 1)
h iT 
particles have the same service capacity, the one presenting vk ( ) = sat vl ( ) , . . . ,v|K| ( ) ;v, −v

k k (30)
the lowest energy loss is selected as the optimal one, i.e. loss

criteria L (x, ϕ, )| = k . This process leads to an implicit where v = λ · s | 0.1 < λ ≤ 1 , s is the boundary of the PSO
change in the PSO velocity update, consequently avoiding search space interval
premature stagnation as both global and local best solutions Following, the new population solution is evaluated,
are forced to a position change [40]. The determination of F (x, ϕ, k ( + 1)). This process iteratively performed until
local and global optimal particles is following depicted. stagnation is reached, i.e. the criterium ζ is consecutively
Local optimal particles k ( + 1) are obtained comparing satisfied for a pre-determined number of iterations ζiter .
each particle current and past candidate solutions for criteria
F (x, ϕ, )| = k and L (x, ϕ, )| = k ζ ( + 1)
 h    i 
k ( + 1)
 F x, ϕ, ˆ ( + 1) − F x, ϕ, ˆ ( ) =0 
=
k ( + 1), F(x, ϕ, k ( + 1)) > F(x, ϕ, k ( ))
 h    i

 & L x, ϕ, ˆ ( + 1) − L x, ϕ, ˆ ( ) < ζtol 
 ( + 1), F(x, ϕ, ( + 1)) = F(x, ϕ, ( ))

k k k
= (31)
 &L(x, ϕ, k ( + 1)) < L(x, ϕ, k ( ))
where ζtol denotes the stagnation tolerance.



k ( ) otherwise
The complete proposed intelligent method for RMPS allo-
(25)
cation to support MGs service capacity during programmed
Yp ( + 1) islanded operation is illustrated in the flowchart depicted in
= k ( + 1) , . . . , |K| ( + 1)
 
Fig. 1. In addition, detailed descriptions of the algorithms
 h iT to solve RMPSs allocation are depicted in Tables 1 and 2,
 k ( + 1) = l ( + 1) , . . . , |Nm | ( + 1)

 k k (26) respectively PSO algorithm and DP energy management

117952 VOLUME 8, 2020

J. Ribas Monteiro et al.: Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation
FIGURE 1. Proposed flowchart.
TABLE 1. PSO algorithm for RMPSs allocation.
algorithm. It should be noticed that the proposed method
applicability is dedicated to MGs planning and EM under
scheduled islanded operation, as assumptions used for the
proposed DP energy management algorithm design are spe-
cific to MGs operating conditions during the scheduled
islanded mode.
VOLUME 8, 2020
TABLE 2. DP energy management algorithm.
IV. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
In this section, the effectiveness of the proposed intelligent
RMPS allocation for MGs support during scheduled islanded
operation is verified. For this, a modernization planning
of a utility company is investigated. The respective utility
contains several MGs and is currently seeking to determine
which RES technology can offer the best benefit per installed
capacity, to maximize its overall MGs service capacity dur-
ing scheduled island operation, i.e. including all defined
MGs. This study is in line with the novel precautions nec-
essary to mitigate the increasing interruption of electricity
supply due to severe weather-related incidents, as well as
117953
 J. Ribas Monteiro et al.: Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation

programmed maintenance. For this, aiming at the repro-

ducibility of results, an MG based on a modified IEEE 34-bus
distribution system with scheduled islanded operation pro-
grammed for a duration 1T isl = 3h30min is employed. In
this system, local DERs are included, penetration of EVs
with V2G capacity is considered, as well as technical and
operational limits are implemented according to section II-D.
The respective MG presents load shedding capacity following
priority groups classification established by the Brazilian
Electricity Regulatory Agency (ANEEL) [42]. In this sense,
three levels of priority groups i are considered, i.e. ` ∈
LV |LV ⊂ N [1, 3] where the highest priority level ‘` = 1’
must be supplied before performing the supplying of the
FIGURE 2. Proposed method convergence process.
slowest level, i.e. ‘`= 3’. Also, a total investment in local
hMGi
RES capacity 1PG = 4.25 MW is available by the utility. TABLE 3. Proposed method RMPSs allocation solution.

This generation can be installed using wind turbines over the

nodes with wind potential contained in the set NRMPS =
{802, 826, 838, 858}. To determine these units’ generation
contributions, real measurements of wind potential are con-
sidered [43]. These considerations are detailed depicted in From Fig. 2, it is possible to observe that the obtained
Appendix A. Besides, the results are obtained for a per- service capacity F∗ (x, ϕ, )| = k considering only the
sonal computer with processor: IntelrCORETM I5-10210U first objective function leads to a premature solution, i.e.
ˆ ∗ ( ) = 8. This premature convergence occurs due to

CPU@ 1.60 GHz, Installed RAM 12.0 GB (11.9 GB usable),
System type 64-bit operating system, x64-based processor.
Based on this scenario, two main analyses are performed.
First, the proposed approach for RMPSs allocation is pre-
sented. This analysis depicts the proposed method conver-
gence process leading to the respective intelligent allocation
of RMPSs. Next, comparative case-studies are developed
seeking the validation of RMPS as the most adequate RES
technology for scheduled islanding operation support, and the
proposed method ability to determine the adequate locations
for RES placement. For this, four comparative case-studies
considering different RES technology and allocation are pre-
sented. Further, the scalability of the proposed approach to
assist power system planning and short-term operation is
verified based on processing requirements established by the
Brazilian Independent System Operator (ISO), which states
that short-term calculations should be available in intervals
of 30 min [44].
A. PROPOSED INTELLIGENT RMPS ALLOCATION
In this section, the proposed intelligent allocation of RMPSs
is presented. This analysis assumes the use of RMPS as the
selected RES technology for the utility investment. Besides,
the proposed method is used to select the sites for these units
allocation. This perspective is detailed depicted in Fig. 2,
including a comparative case study illustrating the proposed
approach’s ability to avoid premature convergence. For this,
two perspectives are assumed, first RMPS allocation consid-
ering only the main objective function is performed, denoted
by F∗ (x, ϕ, )| = k . Following, the proposed method with
the decrease of the particles’ velocity, which is motivated by
the discrete search space not allowing for position changes
among local and global best particles. Consequently, lead-
ing to the swarm stagnation. Following, the optimization
process is described for the proposed method considering
both objective function terms, respectively service capac-
ity F (x, ϕ, )| = k and energy loss L (x, ϕ, )| = k . First,
an overall analysis indicates that the proposed method can
continuously improve the designed objective function until
reaching convergence, i.e. ζ ( ) 6= 1, ∀ < ( S − ζiter ),
where S denotes the iteration leading to the proposed method
solution. Consequently, leading to a RMPSs allocation solu-
tion able
 to significantly
 improve
 the MG
 service capacity,
i.e. F x, ϕ, ( S )  F x, ϕ, ( 0 ) , where 0 denotes
ˆ ˆ
the initial iteration. Further, through a detailed analysis, one
can observe that the MG service capacity F (x, ϕ, )| = k
has a discontinuous step-based behavior, which as previously
discussed could lead to the PSO stagnation. This occurs once
the MG presents a discrete load shedding policy by priority
groups [35]. Still, this perspective is amended by the sec-
ond objective function term L (x, ϕ, )| = k . During itera-
tions presenting F (x, ϕ, )| = k constant, L (x, ϕ, )| = k
allows for the identification of an optimization path, i.e.
by minimizing L (x, ϕ, )| = k the MG can increase its
locally available energy capacity up to the point when
enough resources are preserved to supply  a subsequent

group of loads for an extra step, i.e. F x, ϕ, ( + 1) >
ˆ
 
F x, ϕ, ˆ ( ) . This process is held for 16 iterations until
two-layered objective function is considered, represented stagnation is observed, and the problem-solution reached,
by F (x, ϕ, )| = k and L (x, ϕ, )| = k . The employed i.e. ˆ ( S ) S = 16. The proposed method solution for

parameters for the PSO algorithm are described in Table 8. RMPSs allocation is described in Table 3.

117954 VOLUME 8, 2020

J. Ribas Monteiro et al.: Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation
FIGURE 3. MG power generation for (a) Case I; (b) Case II; (c) Case III; (d) Case IV.
Next, results indicate that the proposed approach has an
average best objective value (ABO) of 7.58 min considering
25 independent runs [45], which is significantly lower than
the requirements established by the Brazilian ISO. Then,
the proposed approach scalability for both power system
planning and short-term operation is verified, as its computa-
tional performance does not present a critical limiting factor
towards its application considering practical ISO standards
requirements.
B. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AND COMPARATIVE
ANALYSIS
Next, the proposed method solution is validated in compar-
ison with different approaches for the respective problem
solution. These solutions depicted by Cases I-IV include
different RES technology types, i.e. mobile and traditional
fixed RESs for Cases I-III; as well as, different EMS for RES
allocation respectively focused on service maximization and
autonomy improvement, i.e. Cases I and IV. The developed
case studies are following depicted: 1) Case I presents the
MG operation for the proposed method. This approach seeks
to maximize the MG service capacity for a scheduled islanded
operation using RMPSs; 2) Case II considers the installation
of traditional fixed RES. For this, a RES power plant is
considered associated at the substation bus connecting this
MG to the main grid, i.e. 802-bus. The RES plant is able of
isolating with the MG; 3) Case III represents a scenario where
the RES investment is performed at a different MG than the
one considered in this analysis, i.e. the utility has several MGs
and the RES power plant is installed in a different substation.
In this sense, the MG generation is provided only by the orig-
inally available local DERs. This perspective is significantly
improved by RMPS mobility capacity as will be following
discussed; and 4) Case IV considers the allocation of RMPSs
using an EMS focused on MGs autonomy improvement,
i.e. the maximization process is performed for an unknown
TABLE 4. Case-studies description.
until reconnection is performed at Tprog = 4h00min for
Cases I-III, whereas for Case IV reconnection is not consid-
ered to evaluate the MG autonomy capacity, i.e. Tprog → ∞.
During grid-connected mode, the MG is connected to the
main grid at the point of common coupling (PCC) with gen-
eration/demand balancing assumed by the main grid PG
hMaini
.
EVs are operated in charging mode, local DGs are dispatched
with a fixed contribution defined by the system operator,
whereas RESs/RMPSs (when available) operate in PQ-mode
with its generation directly injected accordingly to the wind
velocity. It should be noticed that due to RMPSs allocation
planning focused on improving MGs service capacity during
scheduled islanded operation, their allocation while in grid-
connected mode is not optimized. In contrast, when sched-
uled islanding occurs the main grid supplying is interrupted,
hMaini
i.e. PG = 0 and generation/demand balance must be
locally performed. In this sense, local dispatchable units such
as DGs and EVs contribution are controlled by MG EMS
to ensure generation/demand balance, and RMPSs allocation
represents focal points for the improvement of MGs service
capacity during scheduled islanding.
In Fig. 3(a)-(d), the main grid and DERs generated
power are depicted in detail. The power generated from
the main grid and EVs for Cases I-IV are denoted respec-
hMaini hESSi
tively by PG and PG . Also, the MG generated power
including local DGs and allocated RES  are respectively
reconnection time, Tprog → ∞. Table 4 summarizes case- hMGi,c 
studies comparison.
denoted for each case study as PG  c ∈ {I , II , III , IV }
hMGi,I
The obtained results shown in Figs. 3-4 present the MG where superscript c represents Cases I-IV, i.e. PG =
initially connected to the main grid for 30min when the hRMPSi,I
PG
hDGi
+ PG , PG
hMGi,II
= PG
hRESi,II hDGi
+ PG , PG
hMGi,III
=
scheduled islanding is executed, i.e. Tisl = 0h30min. Next, 
hDGi  hRESi,III hMGi,IV hRMPSi,IV hDGi
the MG is operated islanded for a duration 1T isl = 3h30min, PG PG = 0 , PG = PG + PG .

VOLUME 8, 2020 117955

 J. Ribas Monteiro et al.: Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation

FIGURE 4. Microgrid supplied load for (a) Case I; (b) Case II; (c) Case III; (d) Case IV.

Moreover, Fig. 4(a)-(d) illustrate the total MG supplied

load for Cases I-IV. In this perspective, analyzing Fig. 4(a)-d)
one may observe that the proposed approach leads to a
substantial improvement in the MG service capacity during
scheduled islanded operation in comparison with Cases II-IV.
First, comparing Cases I and II, the scheduled MG islanding
enables the proposed method to obtain a foreknowledge of
the MG global generation perspective during the complete
islanded operation, i.e. expected local energy reserves, gener-
ation capacity, and forecasted load demand. This information
allows the proposed method to identify RMPSs ideal place-
ment that will lead to an overall system generation capac-
ity improvement based on the complete scheduled islanded
operation. In contrast, Case II represents a scenario where
the RES capacity is fixed at the MG substation. This sce-
nario seeks to improve RES contribution to the main grid
FIGURE 5. MG attended load priority groups during scheduled islanded
during MG connected operation, while also supporting the operation.
MG during islanded operating conditions. In this sense, even
though both cases provide the same total amount of additional
generation capacity, the lack of RES mobility in Case II leads Further, a comparative analysis between different EMS
to reduced performance when compared to Case I, which can for RMPSs allocation and operation is presented comparing
feature optimized RMPSs placement for each scheduled MG Cases I and IV. Case IV performs RMPS allocation consid-
islanded operation. ering an EMS focused on MGs autonomy improvement. In
This perspective is even more highlighted when comparing this sense, its objective is to ensure the supplying of the most
Cases I and III. In Case III, the RES generation investment is critical loads for the longest possible time, i.e. an unknown
assumed to be performed through fixed generation similarly reconnection is assumed. Still, this strategy is not adequate
to Case II, however it is installed in another system region. In to improve MG service capacity during scheduled islanded
this sense, the service capacity of the respectively analyzed operations. As one may observe in Fig. 3 (d), Case IV pre-
MG is significantly reduced in comparison to Cases I-II, serves EVs energy to ensure critical loads supplying for a
which is not even able to guarantee the local supply of the period in which the MG would already be reconnected, i.e.
highest load priority, ϕ h`i |` = 1 , throughout the complete Tprog = 4h00min. Consequently, this leads to a reduction
islanded operating period as illustrated in Fig. 4 (c). Still, this in the local generation capacity that could be employed to
perspective can be meaningfully improved when considering improve MG service capacity during the actual scheduled
RMPS technology. Given RMPS mobility capacity, these islanded operation. This perspective showcases the require-
units can be decommissioned from one MG to another. In this ment for EMS specifically designing for MG scheduled
sense, these systems can provide an even greater benefit, as islanded operation.
their mobility allow for their improvement not to be limited to Following, the MG service capacity per priority group
a single MG. Instead, these units can be moved throughout the of loads for Cases I-IV is depicted in Fig. 5 and Table 5.
system benefiting different MGs. Therefore, the application First, one may observe that Case I ability to optimally placed
of RMPS leads to significant benefits over traditional fixed RMPSs leads to an improvement of 9.5% in the total MG
RES solutions to support MGs during scheduled islanded service capacity, and 28.9% increase in the supplying of loads
operation. in priority group LV2, when compared to the same generation

117956 VOLUME 8, 2020

J. Ribas Monteiro et al.: Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation
TABLE 5. MG service capacity during scheduled islanded operation.
support provided by tradition fixed RES, i.e. Case II. Next, in
comparison with Case III, Case I leads to an overall improve-
ment of 71.0% in the MG service capacity. This is obtained
due to RMPS’s ability to support different MGs in the sys-
tem, i.e. these units can be transported and commissioned at
different locations. Besides, Case I presents an improvement
of 32.8% in comparison with Case IV. This is achieved due
to the proposed EMS focused on scheduled islanded MG
operation, in contrast to Case IV traditional autonomy-based
EMS. Therefore, demonstrating the proposed method supe-
rior overall performance in comparison with all simulated
case-studies, and its ability to significantly improve MG ser-
vice capacity during scheduled islanded operation.
V. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a novel intelligent RMPSs allocation method is
proposed to support MGs during scheduled islanded opera-
tion. For this, first a novel EMS based on DP is developed
taking advantage of the MG known reconnection time. Based
on this method, a modified PSO approach capable of guaran-
teeing a continuous search space in face of discrete load shed-
ding policy is established to perform RMPS allocation. The
proposed method can significantly enhance MGs attended
loads in comparison with traditional approaches during MG
scheduled islanding operative conditions.
The obtained results demonstrate that RMPS ability to be
commissioned at different system locations can meaningfully
improve the system overall generation capacity. As well as,
the requirement for dedicated EMS focused on MG scheduled
islanded operation to perform adequate RMPS allocation and
dispatch of available local resources. The paper main contri-
butions are:
• Improvement of islanded MG service capacity by
RMPS, including intelligent allocation and support of
different system MGs, i.e. mobility capacity.
• Development of a novel EMS focused on MG operation
during scheduled islanding.
• Proposal of an intelligent allocation method for RMPS
based on PSO to support MGs scheduled islanded oper-
ation seeking the maximization of service capacity.
Future works based on the proposed methodology can
enable RMPS application to support multi-microgrid (MMG)
environments, as well as the integrated consideration of
intelligent allocation for grid connected mode and unsched-
uled islading scenarios.
VOLUME 8, 2020
APPENDIX
A. CONVERGENCE ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED
INTELLIGENT RMPS ALLOCATION BASED ON PSO
In this section, the proposed intelligent RMPS allocation,
based on PSO’s ability to avoid local stagnation, while mov-
ing towards global convergency is discussed and graphically
represented.
FIGURE 6. Representation of the MG service capacity maximization
problem for a 2-generators grid.
In Fig. 6 a reduced representation of the MG service capac-
ity maximization problem is illustrated for a grid with two
generating units and discrete load shedding policy. As one can
observe, this problem presents several discontinuous oper-
ational regions denoted by planes PL -LV1, . . . , PL -LV‘N’,
where plane PL -LV‘N’ contains the problem optimal solu-
tion. These zones characterize the objective function essential
discontinuity imposed by discrete load shedding policy (6),
and can lead the PSO to premature convergence if the veloc-
ity direction is only composed of PG1 and PG2 terms. In
this sense, to tackle this possible limitation, the proposed
PSO algorithm considers the association of a supplemental
objective metric denoted by L (x, ϕ, )| = k . This metric
is designed in a way to remove the essential discontinuity
imposed F (x, ϕ, )| = k and, consequently, avoid possible
premature convergence. Besides, it provides a velocity direc-
tion term PL , i.e. perpendicular to local stagnation planes
PL -LV‘k’, so that a transversal search direction towards the
problem global convergency can be obtained.
Analyzing this problem, one can observe that these
goals are achieved considering the supplemental metric
L (x, ϕ, )| = k design as 1) minimization of energy loss,
or 2) maximization of attended load nPaddedPto energy sur-
|LV | Tprog
plus, i.e. L (x, ϕ, )| = k = max `=1 t=Tisl ϕ
h`i (t) ·
o
hli h+i
PL (t) + 1PG (t) . The last is depicted in Fig. 7.
As onen may observe, othe metric L (x, ϕ, )| = k =
hMGi h+i
max PL + 1PG (t) removes the essential discontinu-
ity imposed F (x, ϕ, )| = k , enabling a continuous search
117957
 J. Ribas Monteiro et al.: Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation
FIGURE 7. Compact representation of the proposed method for the
general case.
TABLE 6. Operational limits.
FIGURE 8. Wind profile.
space for the PSO algorithm. Moreover, it provides a veloc-
ity with a perpendicular component to the local stagnation
hMGi
planes, i.e. PL . Thus, leading to a transversal search direc-
tion towards the system global convergence, i.e. the global
solution limited by MGs’ technical restrictions, e.g. PG .
B. SIMULATED MG CHARACTERISTICS
MG local DGs are represented by a small hydropower
plant and a gas turbine with respective rated power
hDGi
of PG,i = 1.0 MW |i∈NDG = {800, 856} . EVs penetration
with V2G capacity are included as depicted in [35]. Also,
operational limits established by the Brazilian regulatory
agency [36] and MG technical limitations are considered
[35] in Table 6. The respective system loads are divided into
117958
TABLE 7. Consumer priority level.
TABLE 8. PSO parameters.
three priority groups following ANEEL guidelines [42], as
depicted in Table 7. The considered wind potential is depicted
in Fig. 8, and the PSO algorithm parameters are described in
Table 8.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author Yuri R. Rodrigues especially thanks CAPES
Notice No. 18/2016 of the Full Doctoral Program Abroad/
Process n◦ 88881.128399/2016-01.
REFERENCES
[1] M. A. Mohamed, T. Chen, W. Su, and T. Jin, ‘‘Proactive resilience of power
systems against natural disasters: A literature review,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 7,
pp. 163778–163795, Nov. 2019.
[2] A. Hussain, V.-H. Bui, and H.-M. Kim, ‘‘Microgrids as a resilience
resource and strategies used by microgrids for enhancing resilience,’’ Appl.
Energy, vol. 240, pp. 56–72, Apr. 2019.
[3] Y. Rodrigues, M. Monteiro, M. Abdelaziz, L. Wang, A. Z. de Souza, and
P. Ribeiro, ‘‘Improving the autonomy of islanded microgrids through fre-
quency regulation,’’ Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 115, Feb. 2020,
Art. no. 105499.
[4] Y. R. Rodrigues, M. Abdelaziz, and L. Wang, ‘‘D-PMU based secondary
frequency control for islanded microgrids,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,
vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 857–872, Jan. 2020.
[5] Y. R. Rodrigues, M. F. Z. de Souza, A. C. Z. de Souza, B. I. L. Lopes,
and D. Q. Oliveira, ‘‘Unbalanced load flow for microgrids considering
droop method,’’ in Proc. IEEE Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meeting (PESGM),
Boston, MA, USA, Jul. 2016, pp. 1–5.
[6] E. Riva Sanseverino, L. Buono, M. L. Di Silvestre, G. Zizzo,
M. G. Ippolito, S. Favuzza, T. T. T. Quynh, and N. Q. Ninh, ‘‘A distributed
minimum losses optimal power flow for islanded microgrids,’’ Electr.
Power Syst. Res., vol. 152, pp. 271–283, Nov. 2017.
[7] D. Q. Oliveira, A. C. Zambroni de Souza, M. V. Santos, A. B. Almeida,
B. I. L. Lopes, and O. R. Saavedra, ‘‘A fuzzy-based approach for micro-
grids islanded operation,’’ Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 149, pp. 178–189,
Aug. 2017.
[8] F. Valencia, J. Collado, D. Saez, and L. G. Marin, ‘‘Robust energy manage-
ment system for a microgrid based on a fuzzy prediction interval model,’’
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 1486–1494, May 2016.
[9] F. Yang, X. Feng, and Z. Li, ‘‘Advanced microgrid energy management
system for future sustainable and resilient power grid,’’ IEEE Trans. Ind.
Appl., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 7251–7260, Nov. 2019.
[10] M. Parol, T. Wójtowicz, K. Ksiȩżyk, C. Wenge, S. Balischewski, and
B. Arendarski, ‘‘Optimum management of power and energy in low voltage
microgrids using evolutionary algorithms and energy storage,’’ Int. J.
Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 119, Jul. 2020, Art. no. 105886.
[11] M. H. Amirioun, F. Aminifar, and M. Shahidehpour, ‘‘Resilience-
promoting proactive scheduling against hurricanes in multiple energy car-
rier microgrids,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 2160–2168,
May 2019.
VOLUME 8, 2020
J. Ribas Monteiro et al.: Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation
[12] J. Duan and M.-Y. Chow, ‘‘Robust consensus-based distributed energy
management for microgrids with packet losses tolerance,’’ IEEE Trans.
Smart Grid, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 281–290, Jan. 2020.
[13] P. S. Kumar, R. P. S. Chandrasena, V. Ramu, G. N. Srinivas, and
K. V. S. M. Babu, ‘‘Energy management system for small scale hybrid
wind solar battery based microgrid,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 8336–8345,
Jan. 2020.
[14] Z. Liu, L. Wang, and L. Ma, ‘‘A transactive energy framework for coor-
dinated energy management of networked microgrids with distributionally
robust optimization,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 395–404,
Jan. 2020.
[15] Y. Li, Z. Yang, G. Li, D. Zhao, and W. Tian, ‘‘Optimal scheduling of an
isolated microgrid with battery storage considering load and renewable
generation uncertainties,’’ IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 66, no. 2,
pp. 1565–1575, Feb. 2019.
[16] Y. Sun, Z. Li, M. Shahidehpour, and B. Ai, ‘‘Battery-based energy storage
transportation for enhancing power system economics and security,’’ IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 2395–2402, Sep. 2015.
[17] Y. Sun, J. Zhong, Z. Li, W. Tian, and M. Shahidehpour, ‘‘Stochastic
scheduling of battery-based energy storage transportation system with the
penetration of wind power,’’ IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, vol. 8, no. 1,
pp. 135–144, Jan. 2017.
[18] H. H. Abdeltawab and Y. A.-R.-I. Mohamed, ‘‘Mobile energy storage
scheduling and operation in active distribution systems,’’ IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 64, no. 9, pp. 6828–6840, Sep. 2017.
[19] H. Abdeltawab and Y. A.-R.-I. Mohamed, ‘‘Mobile energy storage sizing
and allocation for multi-services in power distribution systems,’’ IEEE
Access, vol. 7, pp. 176613–176623, Dec. 2019.
[20] V. S. Tabar, M. A. Jirdehi, and R. Hemmati, ‘‘Energy management in
microgrid based on the multi objective stochastic programming incorpo-
rating portable renewable energy resource as demand response option,’’
Energy, vol. 118, pp. 827–839, Jan. 2017.
[21] B. Zhou, D. Xu, C. Li, Y. Cao, K. W. Chan, Y. Xu, and M. Cao,
‘‘Multiobjective generation portfolio of hybrid energy generating station
for mobile emergency power supplies,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 9,
no. 6, pp. 5786–5797, Nov. 2018.
[22] Q. Zhou, M. Shahidehpour, M. Yan, X. Wu, A. Alabdulwahab, and
A. Abusorrah, ‘‘Distributed secondary control for islanded microgrids with
mobile emergency resources,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 35, no. 2,
pp. 1389–1399, Mar. 2020.
[23] Y. Chen, Y. Zheng, F. Luo, J. Wen, and Z. Xu, ‘‘Reliability evaluation
of distribution systems with mobile energy storage systems,’’ IET Renew.
Power Gener., vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 1562–1569, Nov. 2016.
[24] S. Lei, J. Wang, C. Chen, and Y. Hou, ‘‘Mobile emergency generator pre-
positioning and real-time allocation for resilient response to natural disas-
ters,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 2030–2041, May 2018.
[25] J. Kim and Y. Dvorkin, ‘‘Enhancing distribution system resilience with
mobile energy storage and microgrids,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 10,
no. 5, pp. 4996–5006, Sep. 2019.
[26] Y. Xu, Y. Wang, J. He, M. Su, and P. Ni, ‘‘Resilience-oriented distribution
system restoration considering mobile emergency resource dispatch in
transportation system,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 73899–73912, Jun. 2019.
[27] S. Lei, C. Chen, Y. Li, and Y. Hou, ‘‘Resilient disaster recovery logistics of
distribution systems: Co-optimize service restoration with repair crew and
mobile power source dispatch,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 6,
pp. 6187–6202, Nov. 2019.
[28] S. Lei, C. Chen, H. Zhou, and Y. Hou, ‘‘Routing and scheduling of
mobile power sources for distribution system resilience enhancement,’’
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 5650–5662, Sep. 2019.
[29] A. Kavousi-Fard, M. Wang, and W. Su, ‘‘Stochastic resilient post-hurricane
power system recovery based on mobile emergency resources and recon-
figurable networked microgrids,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 72311–72326,
Nov. 2018.
[30] S. Yao, P. Wang, and T. Zhao, ‘‘Transportable energy storage for more
resilient distribution systems with multiple microgrids,’’ IEEE Trans.
Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 3331–3341, May 2019.
[31] Y. Song, Y. Liu, R. Wang, and M. Ming, ‘‘Multi-objective configuration
optimization for isolated microgrid with shiftable loads and mobile energy
storage,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 95248–95263, Jul. 2019.
[32] P. Prabawa and D.-H. Choi, ‘‘Multi-agent framework for service restoration
in distribution systems with distributed generators and static/mobile energy
storage systems,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 51736–51752, Mar. 2020.
[33] H. E. Farag, E. F. El-Saadany, R. El Shatshat, and A. Zidan, ‘‘A gen-
eralized power flow analysis for distribution systems with high penetra-
tion of distributed generation,’’ Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 81, no. 7,
pp. 1499–1506, Jul. 2011.
VOLUME 8, 2020
[34] P. Giorsetto and K. Utsurogi, ‘‘Development of a new procedure
for reliability modeling of wind turbine generators,’’ IEEE
Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-102, no. 1, pp. 134–143,
Jan. 1983.
[35] Y. R. Rodrigues, A. C. Zambroni de Souza, and P. F. Ribeiro, ‘‘An inclusive
methodology for plug-in electrical vehicle operation with G2 V and V2G in
smart microgrid environments,’’ Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 102,
pp. 312–323, Nov. 2018.
[36] ANEEL, PRODIST. Module 8-Quality of Electric Energy. Accessed:
May 9, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.aneel.gov.br/documents/
656827/14866914/M%C3%B3dulo_8-Revis%C3%A3o_10/2f7cb862-
e9d7-3295-729a-b619ac6baab9
[37] S. D. Manshadi and M. E. Khodayar, ‘‘Risk-averse generation maintenance
scheduling with microgrid aggregators,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 9,
no. 6, pp. 6470–6479, Nov. 2018.
[38] R. Bellman, Dynamic Programming. Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton Univ.
Press, 1957.
[39] C. D. Aliprantis, ‘‘On the backward induction method,’’ Econ. Lett.,
vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 125–131, Aug. 1999.
[40] F. van den Bergh and A. P. Engelbrecht, ‘‘A convergence proof for the
particle swarm optimiser,’’ Fundamenta Informaticae, vol. 105, no. 4,
pp. 341–374, 2010.
[41] A. A. A. Esmin, G. Lambert-Torres, and A. C. Zambroni de Souza,
‘‘A hybrid particle swarm optimization applied to loss power min-
imization,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 859–866,
May 2005.
[42] ANEEL. Normative Resolution N◦ 414. Brazilian Electricity Regulation
Agency–ANEEL. Accessed: May 9, 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://www.aneel.gov.br/documents/656877/14486448/bren2010414.pdf
/3bd33297-26f9-4ddf-94c3-f01d76d6f14a?version=1.0
[43] CRESESB. Reference Center Sergio Brito for Solar and Wind
Energy. Accessed: May 9, 2020. [Online]. Available: http://www.
cresesb.cepel.br/index.php?section=atlas_eolico&
[44] Brazilian Independent System Operator, Network Procedures.
Submodule 8.1: Daily Schedule of Electro-Energetic Operation.
Accessed: Jun. 9, 2020. [Online]. Available: http://www.ons.org.
br/%2FProcedimentosDeRede%2FM%C3%B3dulo%208%2FSubm
%C3%B3dulo%208.1%2FSubm%C3%B3dulo%208.1%202020.01.pdf
[45] Y.-F. Zhang and H.-D. Chiang, ‘‘A novel consensus-based particle
swarm optimization-assisted trust-tech methodology for large-scale global
optimization,’’ IEEE Trans. Cybern., vol. 47, no. 9, pp. 2717–2729,
Sep. 2017.
JULIANA RIBAS MONTEIRO received the
B.Eng. degree in electrical engineering from
Resende Engineering College, Resende, Brazil, in
2013, and the M.Sc. degree in electrical engineer-
ing from the Federal University of Itajubá, Itajubá,
Brazil, in 2015, where she is currently pursuing
the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering. She is
an Assistant Professor with the Federal Institute
of Rio de Janeiro, Volta Redonda, Brazil. Her
research interests include smart grids, control sys-
tems, nonlinear dynamic systems, and artificial intelligence.
YURI R. RODRIGUES (Student Member, IEEE)
was born in Volta Redonda, Brazil, in 1992. He
received the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees from the
Federal University of Itajubá, Itajubá, Brazil, in
2015 and 2017, respectively, all in electrical engi-
neering. He is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree
in electrical engineering with The University of
British Columbia, Kelowna, Canada. His research
interests include the dynamics, control, and analy-
sis of microgrids and active distribution networks,
the integration of distributed and renewable generation, and power system
short- and long-term stability.
117959
 J. Ribas Monteiro et al.: Intelligent RMPS Allocation for Microgrids Support During Scheduled Islanded Operation

MAÍRA RIBAS MONTEIRO (Graduate Student BENEDITO ISAIAS LIMA FULY (Senior
Member, IEEE) was born in Barra Mansa, Brazil, Member, IEEE) received the Ph.D. degree in elec-
in 1993. She received the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees trical engineering from the École Polytechnique
in electrical engineering from the Federal Uni- Pairlais de France. He is an Associate Professor
versity of Itajubá, Itajubá, Brazil, in 2015 and with the Federal University of Itajubá. He is an
2017, respectively, where she is currently pursuing Assistant Professor in advanced studies in quan-
the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering. She tum mechanics and applied artificial intelligence
is also an International Visiting Researcher with in the special courses of the CTA. He is a Professor
The University of British Columbia, Kelowna, of post-graduate courses in electrical engineering,
Canada. Her research interests include power sys- and control and automation engineering with the
tem restoration using microgrids, the integration of distributed and renewable UNIFEI. He is a researcher in the areas of stability and dynamic control sys-
generation, power system coherence critical areas, and short-term stability. tems, and electrical power systems. He is also a Researcher with the Fapemig
and Fapesp funding agencies. He also acts in the areas of development and
the applications of artificial intelligence techniques in information systems,
A. C. ZAMBRONI DE SOUZA received the bach-
automation, and process control.
elor’s degree in electrical engineering from Rio
de Janeiro State University, in 1987, the master’s
degree from the Pontifical Catholic University of
Rio de Janeiro, in 1990, and the Ph.D. degree
from the University of Waterloo, Canada, in 1995.
He was a Visitor at the University of Wisconsin–
Madison, in 2000, the University of Strathclyde,
in 2008, the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya,
in 2014, and Ryerson University. He is a Full
Professor with the Federal University of Itajubá, Brazil.

117960 VOLUME 8, 2020