3568 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 38, NO.

4, JULY 2023

Robust Multi-Objective Congestion Management in

Distribution Network
Omniyah Gul M Khan , Graduate Student Member, IEEE, Amr Youssef , Senior Member, IEEE,
Magdy Salama , Life Fellow, IEEE, and Ehab El-Saadany , Fellow, IEEE

Abstract—Increased penetration of heavy loads is expected to Parameters

lead to congestion in distribution networks. The distribution net- β Price Sensitivity Coefficient Matrix.
work operator can use Demand Side Management (DSM) to moti- δ Percentage of the maximum branch limit.
vate consumers to shift their load from peak to off-peak times. In
this paper, multi-objective optimization is utilized to schedule flex- η, γ Step size.
ible load to alleviate potential congestions. The proposed scheme τ Small constant.
minimizes consumers’ electricity cost and decreases the peak to ah,t Availability of EV h at time t.
average ratio of the load curve to a required level that alleviates Chi Internal heat capacity of house h.
existing congestion. This results in a consumer load schedule that Chs Surface heat capacity of house h.
is economical and does not require the imposition of congestion tar-
iffs. However, the success of the proposed congestion management Ch Coefficient of Performance of HP of house h.
scheme relies on the accuracy of the consumer load consumption. D Power Transfer Distribution Factor.
Hence, in this paper, uncertainty analysis of consumers’ flexible E Customer to bus mapping matrix.
load schedule is executed to ensure the desired robustness of the Fmax
b
Maximum power of branch b.
power flowing in the distribution network to changes in uncertain k Iteration Number.
variables. The results obtained are compared with the existing
congestion management scheme demonstrating the advantage of Phevmax Maximum EV charging power.
the proposed multi-objective framework in terms of decreasing Pmax
hp
Maximum HP output limit.
price and flattening the load curve while alleviating congestion. Phreq Total required EV battery charge of house h.
Index Terms—Multi-Objective, Pareto, valley-filling, price-
pt Day-ahead electricity price.
based, Demand Side Management. Rhie Thermal resistance between interior and exterior of
house h.
Rhis Thermal resistance between interior and surface of
NOMENCLATURE house h.
Rhse Thermal resistance between surface and exterior of
Sets and Indices house h.
b Branch Number. Tte External temperature at time t.
h Consumer Number. Thmax Maximum internal temperature requirement.
Na Total number of aggregators. Thmin Minimum internal temperature requirement.
Nb Total number of network branches.
Variables
Nd Total number of load buses.
α Pareto Weight.
Nh Total Number of consumers.
λ Lagrange multiplier.
NT Total number of time slots.
μh Water level of consumer h.
t Time Slot.
fin ith normalized objective function.
fi ith objective function.
Manuscript received 23 February 2022; revised 5 July 2022 and 29 July Ft b
Power flowing in branch b at time t.
2022; accepted 8 August 2022. Date of publication 22 August 2022; date of
current version 22 June 2023. This work was supported in part by Khalifa L(x, λ) Lagrangian Function.
f
University, UAE under Grant CIRA-013-2020 and in part by NSERC, Canada. Ph,t Flexible Load of consumer h at time t.
Paper no. TPWRS-00256-2022. (Corresponding author: Omniyah Gul M Khan.)
Omniyah Gul M Khan and Magdy Salama are with the Electrical and Com-
Ph,t
ev
EV Power of consumer h at time t.
hp
puter Engineering Department, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Ph,t HP Power of consumer h at time t.
Canada (e-mail: ogulmkhan@uwaterloo.ca; msalama@uwaterloo.ca). nf
Amr Youssef is with the Concordia Institute for Information Systems En- Ph,t Non-Flexible Load of consumer h at time t.
gineering, Concordia University, Montreal, QC H3G 1M8, Canada (e-mail: Pi,t Aggregator i total load requirement at time t.
youssef@ciise.concordia.ca).
Ehab El-Saadany is with the Advanced Power and Energy Cen-
Th,t
i
Internal temperature of house h at time t.
ter, EECS Department, Khalifa University, Abu Dhabi, UAE (e-mail: Th,t
s
Surface temperature of house h at time t.
ehab.elsadaany@ku.ac.ae). xti
Aggregator i multi-objective variables at time t.
Color versions of one or more figures in this article are available at
https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2022.3200838. zi ∗ Ideal Point of aggregator i.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRS.2022.3200838 zinadir Nadir Point of aggregator i.

0885-8950 © 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Raghu Engineering College - Visakhapatnam. Downloaded on July 11,2023 at 09:58:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
KHAN et al.: ROBUST MULTI-OBJECTIVE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT IN DISTRIBUTION NETWORK
Uncertainty Parameters
ΔFt Change in line loading at time t.
ΔPreq Uncertainty in required EV charge.
ΔT e Uncertainty in ambient temperature.
Δtar Uncertainty in arrival time.
Δtdep Uncertainty in departure time.
σT Resulting distribution total standard deviation.
σTe Standard deviation of external temperature distribution.
ζPreq Sensitivity of line loading to changes in required EV
charge.
ζT e Sensitivity of line loading to changes in ambient tem-
perature.
ζtar Sensitivity of line loading to changes in electric vehicle
arrival time.
ζtdep Sensitivity of line loading to changes in electric vehicle
departure time.
ai Gaussian Scaling Limits.
bi Gaussian density function means.
ci Gaussian density function standard deviation.
R Robust Metric.
U Uncertainty variables.
I. INTRODUCTION
ATELY, the smart grid has observed heavy penetration of
L renewable energy sources (RES)s, such as solar and wind,
to help with peak demands. However, this causes bidirectional
power flow in the grid and also introduces uncertainty due to
their intermittent nature. Moreover, to decrease greenhouse gas
emissions, the smart grid drives towards the electrification of
the transportation system, via electric vehicles (EVs), and space
heating, via heat pumps (HPs). This has increased the usage
of such heavy flexible loads and changed the operating condi-
tions of the distribution system [1]. The demand for electricity
appears to be increasing as HPs are replacing many traditional
heating/cooling units in order to reduce oil consumption and
heating costs, and EVs are replacing combustion engine vehicles
to reduce harmful exhaust emissions. Moreover, the dependence
of such technologies on uncontrollable factors, such as tem-
perature, wind speed, etc., may result in potential congestion
problems in the distribution network which were not of concern
in the past. Congestion has been defined in [2] as an event
that “occurs when planned or actual flows across a system
component exceed its safe design capacity”. Congestion in the
distribution network occurs due to the high power consumption
of active loads and the weakening correlation between electricity
prices and demand resulting from the increased penetration
level of intermittent RESs [3], [4]. Such congestion results in
voltage violations and/or thermal overloading as a result of
the power flow exceeding a network asset’s transfer capability,
possibly damaging devices such as distribution transformers
and feeders [5]. Hence, reinforcement of overloaded network
assets is required incurring costs [6] that may seem redundant
as peak load generally appears only for a few hours. To avoid
or postpone such costs, this paper utilizes the grid’s demand
side management (DSM) feature to alleviate congestion in the
Authorized licensed use limited to: Raghu Engineering College - Visakhapatnam. Downloaded on July 11,2023 at 09:58:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3569
distribution network. Utilization of DSM [7] to schedule flexible
loads helps in reducing these challenges. To manage congested
networks, DSM techniques, specifically load shifting and valley
filling methods, have been developed. These techniques encour-
age consumers to adjust their electricity consumption profiles.
Dynamic Tariff (DT) [8] and Distributed DT (DDT) are price-
based load shifting methods [9] in which a charge is imposed
at congested times. Aggregators, representing consumers in the
electricity market, re-optimize their customers’ load schedules
to meet their demand preferences while minimizing their costs.
On the other hand, incentive-based load shifting methods, such
as subsidy-based [10] and peak time rebate [11], pay consumers
a rebate for reducing their peak load. Load shifting methods
result in reducing both power consumption and energy costs. On
the other hand, valley filling techniques have been used in the
literature to flatten the load curve through efficient scheduling
of the flexible load in off-peak times. In [12], vehicle to grid
peak shaving and valley filling control strategy was utilized,
while [13], [14], [15] adopted the water-filling algorithm to flat-
ten the overall power consumption. In [16], a nested optimization
approach was adopted to schedule EV charging. The optimal EV
charging schedule was characterized to be a valley-filling profile.
Similarly, [17] developed a decentralized shrunken primal-dual
subgradient algorithm to effectively schedule charging of EVs
while flattening the demand profile. Table I lists other existing
literature in managing congestion in the distribution network.
Load shifting and valley filling DSM techniques contribute to
postponing huge investments needed in reinforcing distribu-
tion network assets to deal with the increased peak demand
[18].
The existing price and incentive-based congestion manage-
ment methods [8], [9], [10], [11] aims to alleviate congestion
using an electricity cost minimization objective function. How-
ever, this may result in new peaks as loads are scheduled at
times when prices are low. Moreover, the peak to average ratio
of load curves in such modeling is high. On the other hand,
valley filling techniques [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17] results
in flattening the load curve by filling the valleys in the load
profiles which is advantageous. However, as the price is not taken
into consideration, consumers end up paying more compared to
load shifting methods. To gain the advantage of both worlds,
multi-objective optimization is proposed to schedule flexible
loads by merging load shifting and valley filling methods. This
would result in consumers minimizing their electricity costs as
well as flattening the curve enough to alleviate any existing
congestion in the network.
Accuracy of the proposed multi-objective congestion man-
agement scheme, and any other existing technique, relies on the
accuracy of the modeling parameters. However, the scheduling
of flexible loads is generally reliant on uncertain data. For
example, planning the day-ahead operation of HPs relies on un-
certain ambient temperature. As a result of load uncertainty, the
consumers’ power profiles would deviate in real-time from the
day-ahead load schedule impacting congestion in the network.
Hence, it is essential that the sources of load uncertainty are
identified and the propagation of uncertainty, reflected as the
 3570
TABLE I
SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW OF CONGESTION MANAGEMENT METHODS IN DISTRIBUTION NETWORK
change in power flowing in the distribution network due to un-
certain variables, is studied. To the authors’ knowledge, [3], [25]
is the only work that has incorporated uncertainty in modeling a
dynamic tariff-based congestion management model. However,
the proposed model only considered EVs as stochastic flexible
loads and is not distributed in nature, i.e. it relies on the network
operator to forecast consumer flexibility and load requirements.
This paper presents a robust multi-objective congestion man-
agement framework to alleviate congestions in the distribution
network. The contributions of this paper can be summarized as
follows:
r A multi-objective congestion management model is de-
veloped using valley filling to flatten the load curve to
an optimal level that alleviates congestion in the network
while maintaining minimum consumer electricity costs.
This would avoid the need for any extra congestion tariffs
to be imposed to manage network congestions. Since the
success of the proposed congestion management scheme
in the real-time market depends on the accuracy of the
consumer load consumption model in the day-ahead mar-
ket, the robustness of the proposed multi-objective conges-
tion management model to uncertainties in consumer load
scheduling is investigated. An iterative scheme is adopted
to determine the multi-objective Pareto weight that ensures
the robustness of the line loading despite uncertainties in
consumer flexible load.
r The proposed method is tested using an IEEE 33 bus system
and the results are compared to that of the DDT congestion
management scheme.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section II
explains the proposed deterministic multi-objective congestion
management scheme. Sources of uncertainty in the proposed
model are identified and a robust solution is developed in Sec-
tion III. In Section IV, the proposed multi-objective flexible load
scheduling is tested in an IEEE 33 bus system. The obtained
results are compared with price-based congestion management
method prior to concluding the paper.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Raghu Engineering College - Visakhapatnam. Downloaded on July 11,2023 at 09:58:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 38, NO. 4, JULY 2023
II. DETERMINISTIC MULTI-OBJECTIVE CONGESTION
MANAGEMENT SCHEME
To schedule flexible loads, DSM methods, using either load
shifting or valley filling, have been utilized in the literature.
These methods have their advantages and disadvantages and
can be compared in terms of electricity price paid by customers
and peak-to-average (PAR) of the power flowing in the network
feeder as follows:
r Electricity Price: Price-based optimization is based on
determining the optimal schedule that minimizes the con-
sumers’ electricity cost. Hence, price-based optimization
results in the most economic schedule. On the other hand,
valley-filling schemes aim to flatten the load curve resulting
in higher electricity costs for the consumer.
r PAR: Price-based optimization’s advantage in terms of
minimum electricity cost consumption can result in re-
bound peaks, and hence a higher PAR. Flexible load is
scheduled in the early morning and late-night hours when
the price of electricity is the lowest resulting in peaks in
demand. On the other hand, flattening the load curve as a
result of valley-filling optimization results in a lower PAR
compared to price-based optimization.
In this paper, to gain the advantage of minimizing consumers’
bills and flattening the load curve to alleviate congestion, a multi-
objective model is proposed.
A. Modeling Assumptions
Prior to formulating the problem, the necessary assumptions
adopted are listed and justified as follows:
r Forecasted day-ahead prices, pt , are determined by the
market operator and forwarded to the grid operators
who in turn sends them to the aggregators in the
network [19].
r EVs and HPs are chosen as flexible loads. Not only do they
represent the heaviest residential loads, but they represent
shiftable and non-shiftable flexible loads [9].
KHAN et al.: ROBUST MULTI-OBJECTIVE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT IN DISTRIBUTION NETWORK 3571

r Aggregators are defined as entities that are not only respon- following constraints
sible for adjusting consumers’ demand to minimize their 1
costs but are also the retailers of the consumers [26]. Th,t
i
− Th,t−1
i
= (P hp Ch + Rhis (Th,t
s
− Th,t
i
)
r Aggregators are assumed to be motivated to participate in Chi h,t
the day-ahead market as they provide financially binding + Rhie (Tte − Th,t
i
)) (1c)
prices protecting consumers from unexpectedly high real-
1
time prices [27]. Th,t
s
− Th,t−1
s
= (Ris (T i − Th,t
s
) + Rhse (Tte − Th,t
s
))
r Aggregators have the option to not participate in the day- Chs h h,t
ahead market to schedule their flexible loads. The network (1d)
operator, hence, utilizes its load forecasting tools to com- hp
0 ≤ Ph,t ≤ Pmax
hp
(1e)
plete the missing aggregator’s load information.
r Aggregators have no incentive to lie. Thmin ≤ Th,t
i
≤ Thmax (1f)
where Chi and Chs represent the internal and surface heat capacity
B. Problem Formulation of house, h, respectively. R , R , and R represent thermal
is ie se

The Distribution Network Operator (DNO) is the entity re-
sponsible for ensuring the alleviation of any congestions in the
distribution network. Price-based load shifting and valley-filling
objective functions are combined into a single multi-objective
resistance between the interior and surface, interior and external,
and surface and exterior respectively. Ch symbolizes the coef-
ficient of performance of the HP. Pmax hp
is the maximum heat
output limit. Th,t is the internal temperature of house h at time,
i

optimization problem to schedule consumers’ flexible loads. t, and Thmax and Thmin are the maximum and minimum indoor
Since both objective functions are convex, the weighted-sum temperature preferences of the consumers. Tte is the external
method is adopted as follows: temperature and Th,t s
is the surface temperature of house h at
time t.
 
min α μh + (1 − α) Ph,t
ev T
βPh,t
ev Similarly, EV charging is modeled by:
ev ,P hp
μh ,Ph,t 
h h,t
Phreq ≤ Ph,t
h,t ev
(1g)

hp Thp hp t
+ Ph,t βPh,t + pt (Ph,t
ev
+ Ph,t ) (1a)
0≤ Ph,t
ev
≤ ah,t Phevmax (1h)
where weight, α ∈ [0, 1] is used to scalarize the objective func- where Phreq is the total required battery charge for EV h, energy
tions proportional to the valley-filling level desired. A higher at time t, Phevmax is the maximum charging power, and ah,t is
α represents a higher priority to flattening the load curve over how the availability of EV h at time t for charging.
minimizing the electricity cost for the consumers and vice versa.
hp
Ph,t
ev
and Ph,t represents the EV power and HP power for each C. Determining Optimal Pareto Solution
house, h, at time t respectively. It should be noted that h ∈ Nh Solving the multi-objective optimization problem (1) results
and t ∈ NT , where Nh and NT are the total number of houses in a set of optimal solutions referred to as the Pareto optimal
and hours in a day respectively. β ∈ RNT ×NT represent the price front [29]. Neither point on the Pareto front is considered better
sensitivity coefficient matrix. μh , is referred to as the water level than the other except in terms of the decision-makers objective.
of consumer h and it represents the summation of its flexible, To determine the Pareto front, the two objective functions of
f nf f
Ph,t , and non-flexible, Ph,t , load. The flexible load, Ph,t , is the (1) have to be initially normalized as they are not of the same
hp
summation of the existing EV load, Ph,t ev
and HP load Ph,t for type. The ideal point, z ∗ , and the nadir point, z nadir , defined
house h at time t. The valley-filling part of the multi-objective respectively as the lower and upper bound of the Pareto optimal
optimization problem, hence, aims to minimize the water level set [30] are utilized to normalize the objective functions (1a) as:
of the consumers and maximize the feeder’s capacity using the
fi − zi∗
following equality constraint: fin = , for i = 1, 2 (2)
zi
nadir − zi∗
hp nf +
s.t. Ph,t
ev
+ Ph,t = (μh − Ph,t ) , ∀h ∈ Nh (1b) where,

Heat pumps (HPs) utilize electrical energy to extract heat from f1 = μh
a low-temperature region (referred to as a source) and transfer it h
to a warmer area (referred to as a sink). Some of the commonly  T hp hp T
hp
f2 = Ph,t
ev
βPh,t
ev
+ Ph,t βPh,t + pt (Ph,t
ev
+ Ph,t ) (3)
used sources of HPs are air and ground-source HPs. Air-source
h,t
HPs extract heat from the external air for heating and pump heat
outside for residential cooling. On the other hand, ground-source fin is the ith normalized objective function, fi is the ith objective
HPs use groundwater and/or the earth to extract heat for heating function, zi∗ is the ith objective function ideal point, and zinadir
or pump heat into it for residential cooling. In this paper, air- is the ith objective function nadir point.
source HPs are utilized as flexible loads as they dominate global The multi-objective function (1) symbolizes a trade-off be-
HP sales [28]. The thermal dynamics of HPs are modeled by the tween total electricity price and feeder congestion level, as the

Authorized licensed use limited to: Raghu Engineering College - Visakhapatnam. Downloaded on July 11,2023 at 09:58:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3572 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 38, NO. 4, JULY 2023

weight, α, varies. An increase in the weight, α, increases, the

importance of valley filling load scheduling. This results in a
flexible load schedule that is more costly compared to that of
lower weights where price-based scheduling is dominant. How-
ever, a higher weight indicates lower congestion levels. Hence,
given the Pareto front, to determine the desired optimal Pareto
solution, an interactive method is utilized in which the decision-
maker is allowed to search for the optimal solution that achieves
its desired objection [31]. In this paper, the decision-maker is
the DNO and the goal of clearing congestions in the day-ahead
market would determine the desired optimal Pareto for solving
(1). In the absence of congestion, the weight α is chosen to be 0 to
schedule the flexible loads using price-based optimization. This
results in the most economical flexible load schedule resulting
in satisfied consumers. However, as the flexible load increases,
the scheduling of the soft load is shifted from price-based to
valley-filling optimization. This would result in flattening the
curve to the level needed to alleviate the existing congestion.
Using this method, congestion tariff is not imposed and hence
the price paid by the consumers is lower compared to existing
price-based congestion management schemes.
Initially, each aggregator schedules its flexible load using
(1) and α1 , where 1 represents the k iteration number, is set
Fig. 1. Flowchart for determining multi-objective Pareto weight and optimal
to 0. Hence, the flexible loads are initially scheduled using consumer load schedule.
economical price-based optimization to determine if there is
congestion in the network or not. Aggregator i consumers’ total
load requirement, Pi,t , is calculated as: Pareto weight of the multi-objective optimization problem and
i,nf i,f
the resulting consumers’ optimal load schedules.
Pi,t = E(Ph,t + Ph,t ), ∀i ∈ Na , ∀t ∈ NT (4) As an additional feature, to ensure the absence of manipu-
lation of day-ahead load schedules by the aggregators in the
Given that Na and Nd are the set of aggregators and load buses
distribution network, an imbalance penalty factor (IPF) [32]
in the network, E is the customer-to-bus mapping matrix where
is imposed by the utility operator in the real-time market.
E ∈ RNd ×Nh . Ph,t
i,nf i,f
and Ph,t are the non-flexible and flexible
i,nf i,f
This penalty is initially zero for all aggregators in the network
loads of customer, h, of aggregator i, where {Ph,t , Ph,t }∈ assuming they are all truthful. However, proportional to the
R . Before day-ahead market closure, aggregators forward
Nh
deviation between their day-ahead load schedule and real-time
their consumers’ load requirement, Pi,t , securely to the DNO. consumption, IPF for each aggregator is adjusted accordingly.
The network operator is responsible for determining the optimal Once the IPF exceeds a certain threshold the aggregator would
Pareto weight that resolves congestion and minimizes con- not be allowed to take part in the day-ahead market.
sumers’ costs. Hence, the DNO performs power flow analysis
to determine if the power flowing in the branches, Ftb , where
branch b ∈ Nb , exceeds the branches maximum limits, Fmax b
. III. DEVELOPING A ROBUST SOLUTION FOR THE PROPOSED
The Pareto weight, α , is then updated in proportion to the
k CONGESTION MANAGEMENT SCHEME
congestion level using, The proposed congestion management scheme relies on the
accuracy of the consumer load profiles submitted by the aggre-
αk+1 = αk + Dθ min(b, Ftb − Fmax
b
) (5) gators in the network, Pi,t , to the DNO. Despite the fact that
congestion management is executed in the day-ahead market, if
where θ represents the step size and D represents the power
the proposed scheme is highly sensitive to changes in demand,
transfer distribution factor. αk+1 is updated in proportion to the
the network can experience congestion in real-time. Sensitivity
most congested feeder in the network. As feeders that are not
is measured as the change in the line loading, ΔFtb , of a distri-
congested would result in negative αk+1 ,
bution network that reflects network congestion to changes in
αk+1 = (αk+1 )+ (6) network parameters. The line loading, Ftb , is highly sensitive
if the power flowing in the network feeder changes drastically
all negative αk+1 are replaced by zeros. This iteration continues due to changes in input variables. Hence, to consider a solution
between the DNO and the aggregators until the network is not of the multi-objective optimization problem robust, the network
congested, and the difference between the Pareto weights in two line loading, Ftb , should not be very sensitive to uncertainties
consecutive iterations is less than a small constant, τ . Fig. 1 in consumer load parameters, U . The stochastic-based robust
illustrates the flowchart of steps involved in determining the metric, R, is hence defined in this paper as the probability,

Authorized licensed use limited to: Raghu Engineering College - Visakhapatnam. Downloaded on July 11,2023 at 09:58:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
KHAN et al.: ROBUST MULTI-OBJECTIVE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT IN DISTRIBUTION NETWORK 3573

TABLE II
ARRIVAL AND DEPARTURE TIME PDF PROPERTIES

P, of the change in the line loading, ΔFtb , as a result of load

uncertainties being less than factor δ of the branch’s maximum
limit, Fmax
b
. The proposed model should have robustness, R,
less than η as follows,
R = P(ΔFtb ≤ δFmax
b
)≤η (7)
To achieve the desired robustness, R, the classical uncertainty
propagation theorem [3] is adopted. This is explained in the
following subsections after identifying the uncertain variables,
U , in the network and characterizing their stochastic nature using
probability density functions (PDF).

A. Identification of Uncertain Variables

To schedule their consumers’ flexible load with higher accu-
racy, aggregators in the distribution network have to factor in any
source of uncertainty in their optimal load scheduling. Assuming
accurate day-ahead price forecast by the market operator, pt , ag-
gregators have to incorporate flexible load-related uncertainties,
U . For example, the amount of charge EV consumers require on Fig. 2. PDF of EV (a) arrival, and (b) departure times.
returning home, Phreq , depends on their distance traveled during TABLE III
the day. In the occurrence of extra traffic or a road blockage, an CASE STUDY PARAMETERS
EV driver would require to travel a larger distance and hence
require more battery charge, Phreq , than what was forecasted in
the day-ahead schedule. These uncertainties are hence due to
the stochastic nature of such flexible loads and it has to be iden-
tified, represented using PDFs, and included in the congestion
management model. The sources of uncertainty, U , considered
in this paper and their respective modeling are as follows:
r Uncertainty in modeling EVs: The stochastic nature of EVs
is due to the random behavior of each EV owner. Schedul-
ing EV charging depends on three uncertain parameters:
time of arrival to the residence level charger, Δtar , the state
of charge of the EV battery on arrival, ΔP req , and the time
of departure the next day with a full EV battery, Δtdep . To
simulate EV availability in residential parking lots, data was used. RMSE was determined to be 0.00845 for de-
obtained from the US department of transportation [33] parture time, and 0.005336 for arrival time demonstrating
is used to model arrival and departure times of cars to the function’s fit for prediction. Hence, the availability of
residences. A two-term Gaussian model, represented by EV h, represented as ah,t (1h), depends on the arrival
(8), is fit as illustrated in Fig. 2 respectively. and departure times obtained probabilistically from the
gaussian PDF. The initial state of charge (SOC) of each EV
2 2
P(t) = a1 e−((t−b1 )/c1 ) + a2 e−((t−b2 )/c2 ) , ∀t ∈ NT is randomized to be normally distributed with a mean of
(8) 30% and a standard deviation of 4%. Hence, the required
The probability of departure/arrival time, t, where t is power to charge EV h battery, Phreq , can be determined
between 1 and 24, is represented by P(t). a1 and a2 from the stochastic SOC as it is assumed that the car should
represents the scaling factors, b1 and b2 represents the be completely charged on departure.
mean, and c1 and c2 represents the standard deviations r Uncertainty in modeling HPs: The operation of HPs relies
of the PDF. Table II demonstrates the properties of the on the ambient temperature, Tte . In the event of colder
arrival and departure time density functions. To evaluate the weather in winter (or higher temperatures in summer), the
hp
goodness of the fit, the Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) heat pump would require more electrical power, Ph,t , to

Authorized licensed use limited to: Raghu Engineering College - Visakhapatnam. Downloaded on July 11,2023 at 09:58:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3574 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 38, NO. 4, JULY 2023

maintain the indoor temperatures, Th,t

i
, within the desired solving (8) deterministically. λ is the Lagrange multiplier of
min max
range, [Th , Th ]. However, there is uncertainty associ- the active constraints. For each aggregator, i, the associated
ated with the forecasted outdoor temperature, ΔT e , which Lagrangian function, L(x, λ), is
impacts the day-ahead load scheduling. Uncertainty in the L(x, λ) = xT β̄x + g T x + m − λ(Ax − b) (14)
ambient temperature, ΔT e , hence is modelled as a normal
density function with a standard deviation, σT e , of 1 °C. Minimizing the Lagrangian function over x results in,
x = 0.5β̄ −1 (AT λ − g) (15)
B. Sensitivity Analysis
Using the Lagrangian’s function’s differentiation over the La-
The robustness of the proposed congestion management
grangian multipliers, the results obtained are substituted in (15).
scheme is impacted by the uncertainty in scheduling the flexible
Optimal variable x∗ is hence defined as,
load, U , identified in the previous subsection. If consumers
deviate from their load requirements, the multi-objective Pareto x∗ = β̄ −1 AT (Aβ̄ −1 AT )−1 (b + 0.5Aβ̄ −1 g) − 0.5β̄ −1 g (16)
weight, α, determined in Section II, might not manage existing
The change in the optimal solution, x∗ , as a result of changes in
network congestion. To ensure the robustness of the proposed
the uncertain variables, U , reflected by changes in b, is,
multi-objective congestion management scheme, the uncertainty
propagation theorem [3] is adopted. Based on [3], the uncer- ∂x
= β̄ −1 AT (Aβ̄ −1 AT )−1 (17)
tainty in power flowing in a network branch, ΔFtb , is a func- ∂b
tion of uncertainties in EV and HP modeling parameters, i.e. Hence, to determine the impact on congestion in the distribution
U = {Δtar , Δtdep , ΔP req , and ΔT e }. Hence, propagation of network, change in the power flow, ΔFt , in the network at the
uncertainty from the input variables to the line loading can be time, t, as a result of a change in EV and HP loading due to their
determined as follows, uncertainties is determined as follows,
      
hp 2 ev )2  ∂x
ΔFtb = DEi (ΔPi,t ) + (ΔPi,t (9) ΔFt = DEi ΔPi,t + ΔPi,t =
ev hp
DEi Δb
b∈Nb i∈Nd i i
∂b
where, (18)
 2  ev 2 where D is the power transfer distribution factor and Ei is the
ev 2
∂Pi,t
ev
∂Pi,t
(ΔPi,t ) = Δtar + Δtdep customer to bus mapping matrix for aggregator i.
∂tar ∂tdep
  2
∂Pi,tev
C. Robustness Enhancement of Proposed Scheme Through
+ ΔP req (10) Uncertainty Propagation
∂P req

and, As a result of the uncertainty in scheduling consumers

 hp
2 load, the deterministic scheme explained in Section II may
hp 2 ∂Pi,t not clear congestions in the real-time market using the deter-
(ΔPi,t ) = ΔT e (11)
∂T e mined the Pareto weight, α. The modeled congestion man-
e
agement scheme identifies four sources of uncertainty, U =
For the rest of the paper, ζ ar , ζ dep , ζ P , and ζ T represents {Δtar , Δtdep , ΔP req , and ΔT e }. Using (17-18), the sensitiv-
hp
ity of the consumers’ load, and hence the line loading ΔFt ,
ev ev ev ∂Pi,t
∂Pi,t ∂Pi,t ∂Pi,t
∂tar , ∂tdep , , and
∂P req respectively. Hence, to ensure
∂T e
the effectiveness of the proposed model the sensitivity of the is determined for changes in each of the uncertain variables
optimal flexible loads, and consequently line loading, as a result independently. Respective rows of vector b corresponding to
of uncertain loading is studied. As each aggregator, i, is re- changes in EV power as a result of changes in arrival time,
sponsible for its own flexible load scheduling, the sensitivity of departure time, and EV charge required results in ζ ar , ζ dep ,
multi-objective congestion management problem (1) variables, and ζ P as sensitivity coefficients. Similarly, rows of vector b
represented by xit , where, corresponding to changes in HP power as a result of changes
e
in ambient temperature result in ζ T as sensitivity coefficient.
hp T
xit = [Pi,t
ev
Pi,t ] , ∀i ∈ Na , ∀t ∈ NT (12) Based on (9), the change in power flowing in the distribution
network, ΔFtb , depends on the sensitivity of the EV and HP
to the uncertainty of EV arrival time, departure time, SOC, and
power, ζ U , to changes in the uncertainty variables, U . The robust
ambient temperature is studied. Hence, rewriting (1) in standard
metric, R, is hence determined as the probability, P, of the
form for each aggregator, i, in the network (hence subscript i
change in line loading, ΔFtb , as a result of load scheduling
has been dropped),
uncertainties, U , as follows,
min xT β̄x + g T x + m  
x 
R=P ΔFt ≤ δFmax
b
s.t. Ax = b, (λ) (13) b∈Nb
 
where β̄ = (1 − α)β, constant m = αPtnf 1,
and gt = [α1 + 
(1 − α)(pt 1)T ]. A and b are the coefficients of the active con- =P DEi ζiU ΔU ≤ δFmax (19)
straints related to EV and HP modeling (1b-1f) determined after i∈Nd

Authorized licensed use limited to: Raghu Engineering College - Visakhapatnam. Downloaded on July 11,2023 at 09:58:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
KHAN et al.: ROBUST MULTI-OBJECTIVE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT IN DISTRIBUTION NETWORK
Fig. 3. Day-ahead electricity price.
To measure the robustness of the proposed scheme, the robust
metric, R (19), is determined for the result of the Pareto optimal
obtained in the deterministic case following Fig. 1. To enhance
the robustness of the proposed model, if R is greater than η,
then the Pareto is updated by a step size, γ, proportional to
the sensitivity of the line loading to the uncertainty in the load
schedule. Algorithm 1 illustrates the steps involved to determine
the optimal Pareto weight, α, taking into consideration the
uncertainty of the consumers’ load. On executing Algorithm
∗
1, the probability of the resulting optimal solution, Pi,t , causing
congestion in the network due to randomness of EV arrival time
or departure time, EV power required, and ambient temperature,
should be below η.
IV. CASE STUDY, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The IEEE 33 bus system [35], is adopted as a case study in
this paper. The distribution network consists of 32 residential
load buses representing both flexible and non-flexible loads.
The default loading of the IEEE 33 bus system represents the
non-flexible base load profiles of the load buses. The flexible
residential loads consist of EVs and HPs [18]. The case study
involves a total of 32 aggregators, one aggregator representing
consumers of each load bus. GAMS [36] and MATLAB R2021a
were used for executing the optimizations.
A. Deterministic Multi-Objective Flexible Load Scheduling
Using the case study explained above, Fig. 3 illustrates the
forecasted day-ahead price of electricity, pt . To develop the
Pareto front, the multi-objective function weight, α, is varied
in (1) from 0 to 1, in increments of 0.01. The resulting Pareto
optimal front of the multi-objective optimization is illustrated
in Fig. 4. Neither point on the Pareto front is considered better
than the other except in terms of the higher-level objective of a
user. An α closer to 0 increases the importance of price-based
scheduling resulting in a more economical consumer load sched-
ule. This is illustrated in Fig. 4 as a decrease in the price objective
function at the cost of an increase in the valley filling objective
value. Similarly, an α closer to 1 increases the importance of
valley-filling-based scheduling resulting in a more flattened load
curve.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Raghu Engineering College - Visakhapatnam. Downloaded on July 11,2023 at 09:58:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3575
Algorithm 1: Robust Enhanced Multi-objective Congestion
Management Scheme.
Input: Consumers’ comfortable internal temperature range: Thmin
and Thmax , required EV charging power, Phev , EV availability
for charging, ah,t , and PDFs of uncertain parameters,
U = {Δtar , Δtdep , ΔP req , and ΔT e }.
Output: Multi-objective function Pareto weight, α, and optimal
∗
load schedule, Pi,t , for aggregator, i.
0
Initialize: Set α = 0 for iteration k = 0.
1) while (αk+1 − αk > τ ) do
a) Using αk and mean of the random variables, U , solve
multi-objective optimization (1) for i ∈ NA to determine
∗
consumers’ optimal load, Pi,t .
b) Each aggregator forwards their total optimal consumer
∗
loads, Pi,t , ∀i ∈ NA and ∀t ∈ NT , to the DNO.
c) The network operator performs power flow analysis to
determine the power flow in each branch in the network,
Ftb .
d) The DNO checks for congestion and determines the extent
of congestion, Ctb , with respect to a branch’s maximum
limit.
Ctb = Ftb − Fmaxb
, ∀b ∈ Nb
e) The DNO updates the Pareto weight, αk , such that,
αk+1 = αk + Dθ min(b, Ftb − Fmax b
)
f) if (α k+1
< 0) then
αk+1 = 0
2) Using αk , solve (17-18) to determine the sensitivity, ζ U , of
the line loading to changes in the random variables, U .
3) Determine the robustness, R, of the solution (19) to flexible
load uncertainties, U .
4) whileR > η do
a) Set αk+1 = αk + γζiU , where γ is a step size. Since αk
obtained from step 1 clears congestion in the network,
αk+1 ≥ αk also clears congestion as the weight of
flattening the load curve increases.
b) Using the updated Pareto weight, αk+1 , the multi-objective
function (1) is solved for each aggregator i ∈ NA to
∗
determine consumers’ optimal load, Pi,t .
c) Repeat steps 2 and 3.
Solving the normalized multi-objective function (1), Fig. 5
illustrates the effect of varying the multi-objective function
weights, α, on the power flowing, Ft , in the main feeder of the
IEEE 33 bus system. An α of 0 represents price-based flexible
load scheduling. Hence, as the aggregator schedules the load by
minimizing consumption costs, the load is concentrated at times
in which the cost of electricity is low leading to congestion at
times t = 20 − 23. However, as α increases, the dominance of
the valley-filling load scheduling is observed to increase and the
curve is flattened. An α of 1 represents valley filling flexible
load scheduling. The impact of changing α is seen in the PAR of
the load buses. An α of 0 results in a mean PAR of 1.3936 while
an α of 1 returns a mean PAR of 1.0011. Hence, the PAR keeps
improving as α increases. Fig. 6 illustrates the trade-off between
electricity price and that of feeder congestion level as the weight,
α, of the objective function (1) varies. The importance of valley
filling load scheduling increases as the weight, α, increases.
 3576
Fig. 4. Pareto optimal front, ideal and nadir points.
Fig. 5. Effect of varying multi-objective function weight, α, on power flowing
in main feeder.
Fig. 6. Percentage congestion in the network versus electricity cost as a
function of Pareto weight.
This results in a flexible load schedule that is more costly com-
pared to that of lower weights where price-based scheduling is
dominant. However, a higher weight indicates lower congestion
levels.
1) Comparison of Results with Existing Distributed Dynamic
Tariff Congestion Management Scheme and Discussion: To
evaluate the performance of the proposed multi-objective con-
gestion management scheme, the results obtained on simulating
the IEEE 33 bus case study are compared with that of the exist-
ing Distributed Dynamic Tariff (DDT) congestion management
Authorized licensed use limited to: Raghu Engineering College - Visakhapatnam. Downloaded on July 11,2023 at 09:58:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 38, NO. 4, JULY 2023
Fig. 7. Comparison using proposed multi-objective load scheduling versus
DDT congestion management scheme.
scheme [9]. Comparison is executed in terms of electricity price
paid by consumers and Peak-To-Average (PAR) of the power
flowing in the main feeder as follows.
r Electricity Price: DDT congestion management results in
scheduling the load such that the electricity cost of the
consumers is minimized. Hence, as illustrated in Fig. 7,
flexible loads are scheduled mainly in the early and late
hours of the night when the price of electricity is the lowest.
If the line was not congested, consumers had to pay a
total of 4853.8$, based on electricity prices illustrated in
Fig. 3. However, as a result of congestion at t = 21 − 22,
a congestion tariff of 0.063, and 0.075$/kW was, hence,
imposed on the consumers at that time to alleviate the
congestion. This tariff is eventually paid by the consumers
as a total increase in electricity cost by 21.6%. On the
other hand, no tariffs are imposed using the proposed multi-
objective congestion management scheme. The proposed
algorithm aims to improve the welfare of the consumer in
terms of minimizing electricity price while maintaining
indoor temperatures within consumers preferences and
charging their EVs based on their availability. Moreover,
the proposed scheme improves the welfare of the network
operator, in terms of flattening the curve and reducing the
PAR. Consumers following the proposed multi-objective
optimization would end up paying a total of 4964.6, which
is 15.9% lower than price-based optimization.
r PAR: As DDT congestion management scheme aims to
minimize electricity costs, consumer loads end up being
concentrated at times in which the electricity price is low
causing congestion. To alleviate congestion, tariffs need
to be imposed to clear the peak, as illustrated in Fig. 7.
The PAR of the resulting power flowing in the feeder is
observed to be 1.362 which is caused as a result of the
peak in demand at t = 21 − 22 causing congestion. On
the other hand, the proposed multi-objective optimization
resulted in a congestion-free network with a PAR of 1.152
which is sufficient enough to have a congestion-free feeder
at minimum electricity price.
From the above discussion and comparison, the superiority of
the proposed multi-objective flexible load scheduling to manage
KHAN et al.: ROBUST MULTI-OBJECTIVE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT IN DISTRIBUTION NETWORK
Fig. 8. Sensitivity of the IEEE 33 bus system main feeder line loading to
changes in EV power required.
congestion in the network with minimal impact on electricity
prices has been demonstrated.
B. Robustness of the Proposed Multi-Objective Congestion
Management Scheme
As a result of the uncertainties in the load scheduling de-
sign parameters, U , as described in Section III, the IEEE
33 bus system is adopted to study the sensitivity of the
power flowing in its main feeder to uncertainties in the load,
ζU . Four uncertain parameters are considered in the design,
where U = {Δtar , Δtdep , ΔP req , and ΔTe }. Using the results
obtained from the deterministic case, the sensitivity, ζU =
{ζ ar , ζ dep , ζ P , ζ Te } = { ∂t
∂Ft
ar
, ∂t∂Ft
, ∂Ft , ∂T
dep ∂Preq
∂Ft
e
}, of the power
flowing in the main feeder to the random design variables was
determined by executing (17-18). For example, as a result of
uncertainty in power required by an EV, the sensitivity factor,
ζPreq , which represents the change in power flowing in the main
feeder of the IEEE 33 bus system as a result of 1 kWh change
in the consumer loads due to more EV charge required, was
observed to complement the power flowing in the main feeder.
This is illustrated in Fig. 8. When the main feeder is lightly
loaded, the sensitivity is observed to be higher compared to peak
times. This results in flattening the curve and ensuring that no
congestion occurs.
Using the sensitivities and the PDFs of the four uncertain
parameters, U , described in Section III-A, Algorithm 1 was
executed. Using the deterministic model, a Pareto weight, α =
0.4328, resolves the congestion in the distribution network as
illustrated in Fig. 9. However, on evaluating the robustness (19),
R, of the resulting distribution due to the uncertainties in the
load, U , given γ = 1%, change in the line loading, ΔF b , in the
main feeder was determined to be 0.1207 MW. This violates the
robustness constraint and the Pareto had to be updated following
Algorithm 1 until a change in the line loading, ΔF b , in the
main feeder was determined to be lesser than γ = 1%. A Pareto
weight, α = 0.4928, resulted in a change in line loading of
the main feeder, ΔF b , equal to 0.0997 MW. Hence, given the
normal density function of the random variables, the probability
of the proposed consumers load profile to cause congestion
Authorized licensed use limited to: Raghu Engineering College - Visakhapatnam. Downloaded on July 11,2023 at 09:58:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3577
Fig. 9. Comparison between the robust and deterministic schemes in terms of
power flowing in the main feeder.
in the network by 1% of the feeder limit was determined to
be less than 0.15%. Fig. 9 illustrates the difference in power
flowing in the main feeder as a result of the change in the Pareto
weight. The deterministic scheme having a lower Pareto weight
of α = 0.4328 did not satisfy the robustness constraint (19). As
observed at times t = 21 − 22, power flowing in the main feeder
is just below the feeder limits. Any slight increase in consumer
demand at those times would cause congestion in the network.
Hence, the robust scheme was executed and it resulted in having
a larger Pareto which ensures that the power flowing in the main
feeder is below its congestion limit, as illustrated in Fig. 9.
V. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a multi-objective flexible load scheduling al-
gorithm was proposed to manage congestions in the distribu-
tion network. The proposed model combines the advantages of
price-based and valley-filling demand-side management (DSM)
and based on the congestion level in the network branches, a
weight is assigned to each objective. The higher the congestion,
the higher is the weight given to the valley-filling portion of
the multi-objective problem compared to that of the price-based
objective function. This results in determining an optimal Pareto
from the resulting Pareto front that is sufficient enough to relieve
congestion at the minimum electricity price. Moreover, the
stochastic nature of flexible loads has also been incorporated
into the congestion management scheme. A sensitivity analysis
was executed to determine the propagation of uncertainty in
the proposed model ensuring that the probability of overloading
the network is less than a specific level given the uncertainty
involved in scheduling the flexible loads. The proposed con-
gestion management scheme was compared with the existing
Distributed Dynamic Tariff price-based congestion management
scheme to demonstrate the superiority of the technique. The
proposed multi-objective model resulted in the most economical
solution in the presence or absence of congestion and an im-
proved peak to average ratio compared to that of the price-based
method. Therefore, combining the advantages of price-based
and valley-filling DSM into one optimization problem resulted
in a model that is economical for the consumer and also relieves
congestion.
 3578
REFERENCES
[1] T. Vo, A. Haque, P. Nguyen, I. Kamphuis, M. Eijgelaar, and I. Bouwman,
“A study of congestion management in smart distribution networks based
on demand flexibility,” in Proc. IEEE Manchester PowerTech, 2017,
pp. 1–6.
[2] N. Damsgaard, “Study on the effective integration of distributed energy
resources for providing flexibility to the electricity system,” Rep. Eur.
Commission, 2015.
[3] S. Huang, Q. Wu, L. Cheng, Z. Liu, and H. Zhao, “Uncertainty manage-
ment of dynamic tariff method for congestion management in distribu-
tion networks,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 4340–4347,
Nov. 2016.
[4] R. Verzijlbergh, L. Vries, and Z. Lukszo, “Renewable energy sources and
responsive demand. Do we need congestion management in the distribu-
tion grid,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 29, pp. 2119–2128, Sep. 2014.
[5] A. Haque, P. Nguyen, F. Bliek, and J. Slootweg, “Demand response for real-
time congestion management incorporating dynamic thermal overloading
cost,” Sustain. Energy, Grids Netw., vol. 10, pp. 65–74, 2017.
[6] A. N. M. M. Haque, P. H. Nguyen, W. L. Kling, and F. W. Bliek,
“Congestion management in smart distribution network,” in Proc. 49th
Int. Universities Power Eng. Conf., 2014, pp. 1–6.
[7] A. A. Sallam and O. P. Malik, Demand-Side Management and Energy
Efficiency. Piscataway, NJ, USA: IEEE Press, 2019, pp. 429–463.
[8] S. Huang, Q. Wu, L. Cheng, and Z. Liu, “Optimal reconfiguration-based
dynamic tariff for congestion management and line loss reduction in dis-
tribution networks,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 1295–1303,
May 2016.
[9] S. Huang, Q. Wu, H. Zhao, and C. Li, “Distributed optimization based
dynamic tariff for congestion management in distribution networks,” IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 184–192, Jan. 2019.
[10] S. Huang and Q. Wu, “Dynamic subsidy method for congestion manage-
ment in distribution networks,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 9, no. 3,
pp. 2140–2151, May 2018.
[11] M. R. Sarker, M. A. Ortega-Vazquez, and D. S. Kirschen, “Optimal
coordination and scheduling of demand response via monetary incentives,”
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 1341–1352, May 2015.
[12] Z. Wang and S. Wang, “Grid power peak shaving and valley filling
using vehicle-to-grid systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 28, no. 3,
pp. 1822–1829, Jul. 2013.
[13] M. Shinwari, A. Youssef, and W. Hamouda, “A water-filling based schedul-
ing algorithm for the smart grid,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 3, no. 2,
pp. 710–719, Jun. 2012.
[14] K. Zhou and L. Cai, “A dynamic water-filling method for real-time hvac
load control based on model predictive control,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 1405–1414, May 2015.
[15] Y. Mou, H. Xing, Z. Lin, and M. Fu, “Decentralized optimal demand-side
management for phev charging in a smart grid,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,
vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 726–736, Mar. 2015.
[16] N. Chen, C. W. Tan, and T. Q. S. Quek, “Electric vehicle charging in smart
grid: Optimality and valley-filling algorithms,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal
Process., vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 1073–1083, Dec. 2014.
[17] M. Liu, P. Phanivong, and D. Callaway, “Electric vehicle charging control
in residential distribution network: A decentralized event-driven realiza-
tion,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Decis. Control, 2017, pp. 214–219.
[18] W. Liu, Q. Wu, F. Wen, and J. Øtergaard, “Day-ahead congestion man-
agement in distribution systems through household demand response and
distribution congestion prices,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 5, no. 6,
pp. 2739–2747, Nov. 2014.
[19] S. Huang, Q. Wu, S. S. Oren, R. Li, and Z. Liu, “Distribution locational
marginal pricing through quadratic programming for congestion manage-
ment in distribution networks,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 30, no. 4,
pp. 2170–2178, Jul. 2015.
[20] S. Hanif, H. B. Gooi, T. Massier, T. Hamacher, and T. Reindl, “Distributed
congestion management of distribution grids under robust flexible build-
ings operations,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 4600–4613,
2017.
[21] R. Ciavarella, M. Somma, G. Graditi, and M. Valenti, “Congestion man-
agement in distribution grid networks through active power control of
flexible distributed energy resources,” in Proc. PowerTech, 2019, pp. 1–6.
[22] M. Attar, A. Supponen, and S. Repo, “Distribution system congestion
management through local flexibility market,” in Proc. CIRED Berlin
Workshop, 2020, pp. 769–772.
[23] H. Khomami, R. Fonteijn, and D. Geelen, “Flexibility market design for
congestion management in smart distribution grids: The dutch demon-
stration of the interflex project,” in Proc. IEEE PES Innov. Smart Grid
Technol., 2020, pp. 1191–1195.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Raghu Engineering College - Visakhapatnam. Downloaded on July 11,2023 at 09:58:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, VOL. 38, NO. 4, JULY 2023
[24] S. Deb, A. K. Goswami, R. L. Chetri, and R. Roy, “Congestion man-
agement considering plug-in electric vehicle charging coordination in
distribution system,” in Proc. 4th Biennial Int. Conf. Nascent Technol.
Eng., 2021, pp. 1–5.
[25] S. Huang, Q. Wu, Z. Liu, and H. Zhao, “Sensitivity analysis of dy-
namic tariff method for congestion management in distribution net-
works,” in Proc. IEEE Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meeting, 2015,
pp. 1–6.
[26] A. Ramos, “Aggregators and retailers in electricity markets: Roles and
conflicts,” in Deliverable 8.5 Energy Storage Deployment Handbook.
STORY H2020 Project, 2020, ch. 3.
[27] “Day-ahead market high level design,” Independent Electricity System
Operator, 2019.
[28] T. Abergel, “Heat pumps,” Int. Energy Agency (IEA), 2021.
[29] A. D. Belegundu and T. R. Chandrupatla, Optimization Concepts and
Applications in Engineering, 2nd ed. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ.
Press, 2011.
[30] L. He, H. Ishibuchi, A. Trivedi, H. Wang, Y. Nan, and D. Srinivasan,
“A survey of normalization methods in multiobjective evolutionary algo-
rithms,” IEEE Trans. Evol. Computation, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 1028–1048,
Dec. 2021.
[31] A. Ghane-Kanafi and E. Khorram, “A new scalarization method for finding
the efficient frontier in non-convex multi-objective problems,” Appl. Math.
Modelling, vol. 39, no. 23, pp. 7483–7498, 2015.
[32] M. R. Hamouda, M. E. Nassar, and M. M. A. Salama, “A novel energy
trading framework using adapted blockchain technology,” IEEE Trans.
Smart Grid, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 2165–2175, May 2021.
[33] Federal Highway Admin., “2017 national household travel survey,” U. S.
Dept. Transp., Washington, DC, USA, 2017.
[34] Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology, “JCGM 100: Evaluation of mea-
surement data: Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement,”
JCGM, 2008.
[35] M. Baran and F. Wu, “Network reconfiguration in distribution systems for
loss reduction and load balancing,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 4, no. 2,
pp. 1401–1407, Apr. 1989.
[36] GAMS Development Corporation, “General algebraic modeling system
(GAMS) release 24.2.1,” Washington, DC, USA, 2013.
Omniyah Gul M Khan (Graduate Student Mem-
ber, IEEE) received the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees in
electrical engineering from the American University
of Sharjah, Sharjah, U.A.E, in 2008 and 2010, re-
spectively. She is currently working toward the Ph.D.
degree from the Electrical and Computer Engineering
Department, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON,
Canada. Her research interests include demand side
management, cyber security of distribution systems,
and artificial intelligence.
Amr Youssef (Senior Member, IEEE) received the
B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees from Cairo University,
Cairo, Egypt, in 1990 and 1993, respectively, and
the Ph.D. degree from Queens University, Kingston,
ON, Canada, in 1997. He was with Nortel Networks,
Ottawa, ON, Canada, the Center for Applied Crypto-
graphic Research, University of Waterloo, IBM, and
also with Cairo University. He is currently a Professor
with the Concordia Institute for Information Systems
Engineering, Concordia University, Montreal, QC,
Canada. He has authored more than 240 referred
journal and conference publications in areas related to his research interests. His
research interests include information security, cyber-physical systems security,
and wireless communications. Dr. Youssef was with about 75 technical program
committees of cryptography and data security conferences. He was also the
Co/Chair of Africacrypt 2010, Africacrypt 2020, conference selected areas in
cryptography, SAC 2014, SAC 2006, and SAC 2001.
KHAN et al.: ROBUST MULTI-OBJECTIVE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT IN DISTRIBUTION NETWORK 3579

Magdy Salama (Life Fellow, IEEE) received the
B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees in electrical engineering
from Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt, in 1971 and
1973 respectively, and the Ph.D. degree from the
University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada, in
1977. He is currently a Professor with the Department
of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University
of Waterloo. He has consulted widely with govern-
mental agencies and the electrical industry. His re-
search interests include the operation and control of
distribution systems, smart microgrids, power quality
monitoring and mitigation, asset management, and electromagnetics. He is a
Registered Professional Engineer with the Province of Ontario, Canada.
Ehab F. El-Saadany (Fellow, IEEE) was born in
Cairo, Egypt, in 1964. He received the B.Sc. and
M.Sc. degrees in electrical engineering from Ain
Shams University, Cairo, Egypt, in 1986 and 1990,
respectively, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engi-
neering from the University of Waterloo, Waterloo
ON, Canada, in 1998. He was a Professor with ECE
Department, University of Waterloo, till 2019. He is
currently a Professor with Electrical and Computer
Engineering Department and the Director of the Ad-
vanced Power and Energy Research Center, Khalifa
University, Abu Dhabi, UAE. His research interests include smart-grid operation
and control, microgrids, self healing, power quality, distributed generation,
power electronics interfacing, and mechatronics. He is also a Registered Profes-
sional Engineer with the Province of Ontario, Canada.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Raghu Engineering College - Visakhapatnam. Downloaded on July 11,2023 at 09:58:38 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.