IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution

Research Article

Using EVs as distributed energy resources for ISSN 1751-8687

Received on 16th October 2019

critical load restoration in resilient power

Revised 30th May 2020
Accepted on 4th June 2020
E-First on 7th July 2020
distribution systems doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2019.1561
www.ietdl.org

Hamidreza Momen1, Ahad Abessi1, Shahram Jadid1

1Department of Electrical Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
E-mail: jadid@iust.ac.ir

Abstract: Owing to the important role of the power system in modern societies, its resilience against natural disasters has
become a top priority for power system operators and planners. Moreover, in recent years, due to the increasing number and
severity of weather-related events, several operational solutions have been proposed to increase the resilience of power
systems. For instance, in the distribution part of power systems, dynamic micro-grid (MG) formation can enhance resilience by
means of distributed energy resources (DERs) when the main grid is unavailable. Following this concept, the capabilities of
electric vehicles (EVs) such as vehicle-to-grid make it possible to use the energy stored inside them to restore critical loads.
Therefore, the aggregation of EVs in the distribution system can be seen as a DER from the system operator viewpoint, and
operators can benefit from this limited energy resource in MG formation. This study uses two types of EV aggregation for this
purpose, i.e. a public parking lot and a residential parking. To improve system performance when using these resources, two
steps should be taken: (i) employing a master–slave control technique in each MG and (ii) using a demand-side management
programme.

Nomenclature IC tCL, i interruption cost of critical load (CL) i at time t

Indices and sets GC tDG, k generation cost of DG k at time t
Akt availability factor of master unit k
T set of timeslots
N set of the network nodes Ami, t availability factor of EV m, in node i
Ncritical_load set of the network nodes which critical loads located m, max
Pch maximum charging power of EV m
on them m, max maximum discharging power of EV m
Nslave set of the nodes which slave units located on them Pdch
Nmaster set of the nodes which master units located on them SOCm, max maximum allowed state of charge (SOC) of EV m
Nloop set of the nodes located in potential loop/mesh SOCm, min minimum allowed SOC of EV m
Nloop_DER set of the nodes located in potential loop/mesh and SOCinitial initial SOC of EV at arriving time
distributed energy resource (DER) installed on it or SOCfinal final SOC of EV at departure time
DER located on the radial part which connected to SOCmin, desired minimum desired SOC of EV
those nodes SOC of EV at time of restoration starting
set of the nodes whose node i is their parent node SOCtrs
Nki , children
ηch charging efficiency
Nki,,θchildren set of the nodes whose node i is their parent node
ηdch discharging efficiency
inside path θ
set of the parent nodes of node i inside path θ tm, arr arriving time of EV m
Nki,,θparent
tm, dep departure time of EV m
DG
Nmaster set of the nodes which distributed generation (DG)
located on them trs time of restoration start
PL set of the nodes which parking lot (PL) located on tre time of restoration end
Nmaster
them Δtm, arr time interval between trs and tm, arr
MEV i set of available electric vehicles (EVs) in node i Δt timeslot duration (e.g. one hour)
θ set of available paths from unit k to node i CAPK fuel reserve of unit k
ℵk , i i, t active load of node i at time t
B set of load control steps Pcritical
t index of timeslots i, t
Qcritical reactive load of node i at time t
i, j index of network nodes i, t , γ
Pcontrol amount of load control step in.node i at time t
θ index of restoration paths in loop
m index of EVs ri j resistance of branch between nodes i and j
γ index of load control steps xi j reactance of branch between nodes i and j
k index of network nodes which master units located
on them Variables
li binary variable indicating restoration status of node i
Parameters and constants
αik binary variable indicating restoration status of node i
Cnt , Cet EVs’ charging cost at time t, in the normal/ by unit k
emergency condition βik, θ binary variable indicating restoration status of node i
Rnt , Ret EVs’ discharging reward payment at time t, in the by unit k along path θ
normal/emergency condition

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3750-3761 3750
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
ργi, t binary variable indicating employing status of load islands. In [8], critical loads in distribution feeders and local loads
control step γ in node i were restored using MGs. Dynamic MG formation for load
pik, t active power injected in node i restoration from several DERs is used in [1, 5, 9–11]. The effect of
reactive power injected in node i tie switches on increasing restored loads was studied in [1, 5, 10,
qik, t
11]. The master–slave control technique was deployed in [1, 10] to
V ik, t voltage of node i use more than one resource in each formed MG and increase the
i, t
PSup supplied active power in node i number of restored loads. In [1], different resilience dimensions
i, t supplied reactive power in node i and associated indexes of each were also introduced.
QSup
Owing to increasing environmental concerns, the use of electric
pSt . Geni active power generation of the slave unit vehicles (EVs) is now the subject of intense interest. Moreover, the
qSt . Geni reactive power generation of the slave unit in node i aggregation of large numbers of EVs with capabilities of
active power injected in node i along path θ bidirectional power transfer has special advantages for the power
pik, ,θt
system. Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) and grid-to-vehicle are two
qik, ,θt reactive power injected in node i along path θ capabilities of EVs that enable them to participate in power system
k , i, t
Pcommon common active power generated/consumed in node i frequency regulation service [12–14], perform local voltage control
k, i, t common reactive power generated/consumed in node [15], and enhance power system reliability [16, 17]. During the
Qcommon
i outage, this ability can help to restore more critical loads by
voltage of node i along path θ employing EVs’ stored energy. The novel aspects employed in this
V ik, ,θt
study and other references are shown in Table 1.
m, t m, t
nch , nche binary variable indicating the charging status of EV Despite several technical studies on MG formation using
m, in normal or emergency condition
n
different resources such as diesel generators and deep-cycle
m, t
ndch m, t
, ndch binary variable indicating the discharging status of EV batteries, to the best of our knowledge, none of them has focused
m, in normal or emergency condition
n e
on the energy stored in EVs and their energy management
m, t m, t
Pch , Pche charging power of EV m, in a normal or emergency immediately after the incident. In the present study, we consider
condition
n
each EV parking as a distributed energy resource (PLs and
m, t
Pdch m, t
, Pdch discharging power of EV m, in a normal or emergency residential parking (RP) are considered). A master–slave control
condition
n e
technique and demand response programme are also implemented
SOCm
n
,t SOC of EV m, in a normal condition in this study. When considering EVs in resilience studies, many
m, t
SOCe SOC of EV m, in an emergency condition questions need to be answered, such as how can EV owners
participate in resilience improvement programmes after disasters?
How much battery capacity do they have before events? Also, what
1 Introduction are the incentives for EV owners? These questions are
In recent years, severe natural phenomena such as hurricanes, fundamentals in resilience studies and are beyond the scope of the
floods, and earthquakes have increased throughout the world and current study. The authors will answer these questions in another
led to an increase in the number of sustained power outages [1]. work in the near future. This study tries to evaluate the techno-
For instance, in 2012, Hurricane Sandy damaged a large portion of economic benefits of the EVs’ participation in MG formation. The
the power system, causing a power outage nearly 7.5 million main contributions of this study can be summarised as follows:
customers on the east coast of the United States for several weeks
[2]. In such incidents, the distribution part of the power system is • A resilient MG-forming model using PLs and RP as DERs is
more vulnerable than other parts. In another case, in 1998, about proposed to restore critical loads.
80% of therestoration costs due to hurricanes and tropical storms • A comprehensive formulation is proposed to employ load
were attributed to distribution and 20% to the transmission part of control capabilities and master–slave technique for effective
the power system [3]. To reduce the social and economic losses management of the system in critical situations.
caused by these incidents, improving the resilience of power • A novel method for load restoration in mesh networks is
systems has become an important concern for operators and presented.
planners. According to the classification in [4], four essential steps • Mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) is employed to solve
are possible: anticipate & prepare, resist & absorb, response & the proposed model.
adopt, and recovery. The last step is followed in the present study,
as well. The remainder of this paper is organised as follows: in Section 2,
With natural disasters, substations may be damaged, causing the stochastic modelling of EVs is performed as distributed energy
main grid to be disconnected from the distribution network and storage and comprehensive analysis of parking lots’ (PLs’)
unable to supply power. Hence, employing traditional approaches available energy to participate in load restoration in various
to restore the distribution system is not feasible [5]. However, in conditions is carried out. MG formation and EVs energy
recent years, due to the emergence of the smart grid and, as a management are formulated in Section 3. Simulation results are
result, the enhanced level of connectivity between information and presented in Section 4. The applicability of the model is discussed
communications, new approaches have been presented for the in Section 5. Finally, Section 6 concludes the paper.
restoration of power distribution systems. Among these
approaches, the use of distributed energy resources (DERs) and the
formation of micro-grids (MGs) are common. In the literature, 2 EVs available energy
several papers have reviewed these approaches. In [6, 7], heuristic In general, EV charging/discharging is classified under two modes,
and exhaustive search algorithms were used to get the optimal centralised charging/discharging (utilised in PLs) and distributed

Table 1 Comparison of employing the novel aspects in this study and other references
References [12–14] [15] [16, 17] [5] [10] [1] This paper
EVs capabilities voltage control ✓ ✓
frequency control ✓ ✓
emergency back up ✓ ✓
MG formation features using tie switches ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
employing the master–slave control technique ✓ ✓ ✓
using load control ✓ ✓
using EVs ✓

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3750-3761 3751
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
Table 2 Probability distribution of the stochastic parameters
EVs probabilistic parameter PDF of EVs in PL PDF of EVs in RP
car arrival time (tarr) Weibull (α = 0.9831, β = 16.8) truncated Gaussian distribution (TGD) (mean = 19, St.dev = 2, min = 16,
max = 1)
car departure time (tdep) Weibull (α = 80, β = 4.665) TGD (mean = 7, St.dev = 2, min = 5, max = 12)
initial SOC normal (μ = 50%, σ = 15%) TGD (mean = 75, St.dev = 25, min = 25, max = 95)
total number of arriving/departing EVs normal (μ = 20 cars, σ = 5 cars) normal (μ = 25 cars, σ = 5 cars)
from 7 to 23:59

the PL available energy associated with each is computed.

Calculation of available energy and power is discussed in the next
section. As they increase the computation burden, these scenarios
must be reduced by an appropriate scenario reduction method. In
this study, the ‘forward selection’ method is employed to reduce
the number of scenarios to a trackable set [21]. After reducing the
scenarios and creating their PDF and cumulative density function,
using a random sampling method explained in [17], one amount of
energy and as a result one scenario is selected for each PL. This
process is illustrated in Fig. 1, in which the sth scenario is selected
from ten scenarios reduced by the random sampling method. Then,
the selected energy and its related scenario are considered as the
input of the MG formation problem, discussed in Section 3.

Fig. 1 Schematic demonstration of random sampling from reduced
scenarios
Fig. 2 Energy profile of EVs for various scenarios
charging (utilised in residential garages). Regardless of the mode of
operation, providing various services to the grid requires EVs to be
organised by an aggregator. Each aggregator is an interface
between the power system operator and the availableEVs [18]. If
an incident occurs and the main grid fails to supply the distribution
system, according to requests from the control centre, aggregators
must provide information such as the amount of available energy
and power of vehicles participating in the V2G emergency
programme. For critical load restoration, the control centreuses this
information and other real-time data such as resource availability,
location of damaged remote-control switches, load forecasting
data, and distribution lines damaged due to the incident. MG
2.2 Parking available energy in each scenario
In the previous section, after the generation of early scenarios, the
amount of available parking energy is obtained for each scenario.
For this purpose, first, the charging scheduling of EVs is
determined [17]. So, we assumed that the charging scheduling
presented in [17] is implemented by each aggregator. The objective
of this scheduling is to minimise the total user cost, which includes
two terms in each hour: (i) the cost of energy consumed for
charging and (ii) the reward payment for discharging battery
energy. Once the problem's objective function is specified, the
charge/discharge behaviour of each EV can be modelled at
different times based on constraints (1) to (8). For each scenario,
the energy profiles of all EVs in 24 h are identified using the
charge scheduling formulation. Then, the amount of energy stored
in each battery at any time is determined. Here, the aggregators
must determine the amount of energy available to each EV in
accordance with a contract signed with each EV user specifying the
emergency SOC at departure. To do this, the aggregators consider
the amount of surplus energy over the final emergency SOC as the
available energy for each EV using (9). It is of note that in every
scenario, for EVs entering parking after the incident, their initial
SOC is used in (9) to calculate the energy available at the time of
the accident. Fig. 2 shows various situations that may occur for
each EV in our consideration. In this figure, EVs’ amount of stored
energy of EV at the start of restoration (trs) in the first and 10,000th
scenarios is higher than the initial SOC. In comparison, in the
second scenario, because EVs enter after the incident, their amount
of stored energy is equal to their initial SOC. Finally, in the third
scenario, because EVs depart before the incident, the amount of
energy available to them for restoration is 0
tm . dep

formation is performed by opening/closing available remote- Min: Obj F = ∑ t

Δt Pchn
Ct − Pdch
t
n
Rt (1)
control switches and sending control signals to each DER, so that it t = tm . arr

regulates its active and reactive generation power. Before

max
examining the method for calculating the EVs’ available energy,
t
0 ≤ Pchn
≤ Pch t
⋅ nchn
∀t ∈ T (2)
the random charging behaviour of EV users must be modelled.
max
t
0 ≤ Pdchn
≤ Pdch t
⋅ ndchn
∀t ∈ T (3)
2.1 Stochastic modelling of each EV as an energy storage
unit
SOCmin ≤ SOCtn ≤ SOCmax ∀t ∈ T (4)
One of the major challenges in modelling EVs is the uncertainty
involved in their various parameters such as plug-in time, the initial t
Pdch
state of charge (SOC), and departure time. To solve this problem, SOCtn+ 1 = SOCtn + Pch
t
ηch − n
Δt ∀t ∈ T (5)
first, the probability density functions (PDFs) of various EV
n
ηdch
parameters are extracted from [19, 20], as shown in Table 2. Next,
using Monte Carlo simulation, 10,000 scenarios are generated, and
t
nchn
t
+ ndchn
≤1 ∀t ∈ T (6)

3752 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3750-3761
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 SOCtnarr = SOCinitial (7)

t
SOCndep = SOCfinal (8)

E available = min {(SOCtrs − SOCmin, desired), Pdch

max
⋅ tm . dep − trs } (9)

As stated above and presented in (1), the objective function

consists of the cost term and reward term, the sum of which in all
time slots constitutes the total cost. Constraints (2)–(4) specify
limitations in charging rate, discharging rate, and SOC,
respectively. Binary variables ncht
n
and ndcht
n
are also used for
charging/discharging control each time. These variables are set to 1
for charging/discharging each EV and to 0 for not charging/
discharging. The SOC for each time is determined by (5).
Constraint (6) guarantees that no simultaneous charging and Fig. 3 Flowchart of the proposed model
discharging occurs. By (7) and (8), the initial SOC and user-desired
SOC are determined at the start and end of the charging process Table 3 Resilience matrix
time (tarr) and (tdep), respectively. Equation (9) determines the Plan and Absorb Recover Adapt
available energy that an EV can inject into the grid until departure prepare for
time. The maximum energy injected by each EV depends on physical protective — restore critical —
several factors, such as its maximum discharge power and parking measure loads
duration.
information EVs and — outage —
switches status management
3 MG formation formulation system (OMS)
In this section, the details of dynamic MG formation for critical communicate with
load restoration with various options such as EV participation and aggregators, DG
load control are examined. For this reason, topological and owners
electrical constraints of the distribution system are modelled. A cognitive maintenance increase EVs charging —
flowchart of the proposed model is shown in Fig. 3. Before the training awareness schedule
modelling, several assumptions were made in this research: social — prioritise recovery —
critical loads organisations
(i) Owing to the master–slave technique for controlling the DERs,
each MG must have only one unit with voltage and frequency
control capability (i.e. ‘master unit’) and other units in the MG (i.e. can be used to examine the capabilities of the MG formation
‘slave units’) must be in current control mode [10]. Similarly, in problem. Matrix cells are filled according to our approach of
this study, all distributed generations (DGs) act as master units, but restoring the critical loads using EVs and DGs. So, some of the
in the case of PLs, it is not just the frequency and voltage control matrix cells that are unrelated to our work are left blank.
capabilities that determine their choice as the master unit. As
previously mentioned, PLs can participate in frequency regulation 3.1 Topological constraints
service and control voltage by reactive power compensators.
However, given that each PL is an energy-limited resource, in Topological constraints, which guarantee the radial structure of
emergency conditions, PL energy may run out earlier than slave each formed MG and the restoration of loads in the loop, are
units. So, PL would be deployed as a master unit only as a last divided into three categories: (i) general connectivity constraints,
priority and only when other master units are not accessible. (ii) radial connectivity constraints, and (iii) mesh connectivity
(ii) Each PL has a backup battery bank for frequency regulation in constraints. Here, we use graph theory to examine how nodes
the times that the number of available EVs is very low [22]. connect to form an MG. First, the distribution network is defined as
(iii) There is a limited number of remote-control switches in the a graph, ‘Dis_graph (N,B)’, with N nodes and B branches, where
distribution system to opening/closing lines and loads. nodes are equivalent to buses and edges are equivalent to lines in
(iv) In restoration time, due to resource energy limits, loads may the distribution network. Before presenting constraints, it is
not fully be supplied at certain times; hence, the system operator necessary to define a set of variables for each node, depending on
can directly control loads based on demand response contracts [1]. its position in the network. Variable αik defined for all nodes
(v) The system operator can control the charging/discharge of each describes whether node i restored by the unit is located in node k or
EV at the restoration time. not. If node αik = 1, node i is restored by a unit located in node k
(vi) The types of resources selected as slave units are PLs or RP. and vice versa. Variable βik, θ defined for nodes belongs to loop/
(vii) The selected PL scenario and its associated parameters in mesh and describes whether node i restored by the unit is located in
Section 2 were used for modelling each EV constraint. node k and restoration path is θ. Fig. 4 shows each part of a
(viii) Since load forecasting errors almost always follow a normal network and different restoration paths in each part.
distribution with the forecasted value as mean and a standard
deviation proportional to the load value, uncertainty of hourly 3.1.1 General connectivity constraints: These constraints imply
consumed load is modelled based on the same procedure used in that each formed MG has one master unit with several slave units
Section 2 [16]. and loads depending on their remote control switches. Constraint
(ix) In the selected scenario for each PL, EVs that have available (10) guarantees the restoration of node i on which the master unit is
energy are selected for participating in restoration, and other EVs installed. Constraint (11) guarantees that each node i is connected
are ignored. to a non-critical load in the distribution system, which must be
(x) Residential load consumption at restoration time in the nodes restored at most by one master unit. Constraint (12) guarantees that
with RP is reduced from the available energy of the EVs at these each node i connected to the critical load in the distribution system
nodes. in regard to its switch status (li) is restored by one master unit. If li
= 1, the load must be restored and vice versa. Constraint (13)
The resilience matrix, which examines the proposed approach in guarantees that each node i in which the sth slave unit is installed
several aspects, is shown in Table 3. Each cell within the matrix

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3750-3761 3753
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
with regard to its switch status (si) can participate in restoration
with one master unit. If si = 1, the slave unit can participate in
restoration and vice versa. Constraint (14) indicates that if the line
between nodes i and j is damaged due to the incident, neither node
can be in one MG. Constraint (15) shows that if the remote control
switch between nodes i and j is damaged due to the incident, the
restoration status of nodes i and j must be the same
αik = 1 ∀i = k, k ∈ Nmaster
∑ αik ≤ 1 ∀i ∉ Ncritical_load
k ∈ Mmaster
∑ αik = li ∀i ∈ Ncritical_load
k ∈ Mmaster
∑ αik = si ∀i ∈ Nslave
k ∈ Mmaster
αik + αkj ≤ 1 ∀i ∈ N, j ∈ Nki , children, k ∈ Nmaster
αik − αkj ≤ 0 ∀i ∈ N, j ∈ Nki , children, k ∈ Nmaster
3.1.2 Radial connectivity constraint: Constraint (16) guarantees
that if node i, which does not belong to any loop/mesh, is restored
by unit k, then its parent node must be restored by the same unit
αkj − αik ≤ 0
∀i ∈ N, j ∈ Nki , children, i, j ∉ Nloop, k ∈ Nmaster
3.1.3 Mesh connectivity constraint: These constraints defined
for load restoration in potential loop or mesh. Constraint (17)
indicates that each node belonging to loop/mesh and restored by
unit k must be restored only through one path from unit k. Not
considered in this constraint are nodes in loop/mesh on which DER
is installed (e.g. node c) or nodes in loop/mesh that can be restored
by DER are out of the loop before other nodes in the loop (e.g.
nodes a and e). Constraint (18) guarantees that if each node
belongs to loop/mesh and if among different paths, path θ is
selected for its restoration by unit k, the variable αik must be set to 1
for all nodes in path θ. The number of restoration paths and set of
nodes for each restoration path can be determined by applying
‘Yen's k-shortest path’ algorithm [23]. For example, in Fig. 4, two
restoration paths are available to restore node {g}. The first path
consists of {h, a, b, c} nodes and the second one consists of {f, e, d,
c} nodes. These sets and number of restoration paths are obtained
by applying the source node {c} and sink node {g} to the
mentioned algorithm. Constraint (19) shows that some nodes in the
loop may restore using two paths, e.g. nodes {a, e} in Fig. 4. In the
case of these nodes, we cannot use constraint (17). For these nodes,
variable βik, θ depends on the same variable but in the children node
along path θ. For example, in Fig. 4, βe2, 1 depends on βd2 , 1 and βe2, 2
depends on β2f , 2
αik = ∑ βik, θ ∀i ∈ Nloop, i ∉ Nloop_DER, k ∈ Nmaster
θ
θ∈ ℵk, i
αkj
βik, θ ≤ ∑ i, θ
i, θ
j ∈ Nk, parent
Nk, parent
∀ i, j ∈ Nloop, θ ∈ ℵθk, i, k
βik, θ = βkj, θ
∀i ∈ Nloop_DER, θ ∈ ℵθk, i, j ∈ Nki,,θchildren, k ∈ Nmaster
3754
(10)
(11)
(12) Fig. 4 Illustrative example of node restoration in each structure (radial
and mesh)
(13) 3.2 Power flow constraints
For each formed MG, the amount of active and reactive power
(14) flowing in the lines, as well as the amplitude of the voltages in the
bus, shall be specified. For this reason, an appropriate power flow
(15) model must be provided. In this study, the simplified linearisation
of DistFlow equations was used for power flow modeling [24]. The
rationale for choosing this model in our study is the lower power
consumption of the network after contingency and consequently,
lower losses in distribution lines than normal conditions. The type
of power flow modelling is different for radial and mesh parts.
Load control for the active part of loads is considered at eight
levels. To completely interrupt each load, the associated variable of
(16) load switch (li) must be set to 0. In this model, load control is
applied to the reactive part of the load in accordance with the
power factor [1].
3.2.1 Power flow constraints for radial parts: Constraints (20)–
(23) are defined for each node in a distribution system that does not
belong to any loop/mesh, therefore, the active/reactive power
injected to each node is the sum of net consumed power of that
node and power consumed by its children nodes. Thus, according
to the master–slave control principles, based on which the
modelling is performed, the generation/consumption power of the
slave unit is added to the power flow equations of the node with
negative/positive sign as a constant term. Further details on the
master–slave control technique as well as how to use it in the
problem modelling are presented in the Appendix. Using constraint
(24), the voltage of each node in the radial part will be obtained.
The voltage of each DER is set to the reference value (V 0k).
3.2.2 Power flow constraints for loops: Constraints (25)–(27)
express the power flow in nodes belonging to loop/mesh. To obtain
power and voltage at the loop nodes, we first need to write power
flow along each path and then select one of the powers and
voltages by using constraints (28)–(30). In constraints (25)–(26),
there are two types of children nodes for each node: (i) children
nodes along path θ, which is denoted by set Nki,,θchildren; for instance,
in Fig. 4, node {a} is the children node of node {b} along path one.
(ii) Children node, which is common in each path and is
(17)
i, t
pik, t = αik × PSup + ∑ pkj , t − si ⋅ αik × pSi, t. Gen (20)
j∈ i
Nk,
children
(18)
∈ Nmaster
i, t
qik, t = αik × QSup + ∑ qkj , t − si ⋅ αik × qSi, t. Gen (21)
i
j ∈ Nk, children
B
(19) itγ
i, t i, t
∑ ργi t × Pcontrol (22)
, , ,
PSup = Pcritical −
γ=1
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3750-3761
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 B
itγ
3.3 Operational constraints
i, t
QSup i, t
= Qcritical − ∑ ρit γ × Pcontrol
,
, ,
× tan φi
γ=1 (23) These constraints represent operational limits in each formed MG,
such as voltage limits and energy limits of EVs. Since the use of
∀i ∉ Nloop, j ∈ Nki , children, k ∈ Nmaster , t ∈ T energy stored in the PLs due to changes in the amount of available
energy and power at different hours requires planning to control the
ri j ptj + xi jqtj charging/discharging of the EVs, it is necessary to define the
V ik, t − V kj , t =
V 0k (24) appropriate constraints for optimal utilisation of PLs and other
resources.
∀ i, j ∉ Nloop, j ∈ Nki , children, k ∈ Nmaster , t ∈ T Constraint (35) indicates that all voltages must be within the
allowed range. In this research, the maximum permissible variation
k , i, t
pik, ,θt = Pcommon + pkj,,θt × βkj, θ for the voltage is 5%. Constraints (36) and (37) guarantee that
(25) active/reactive power generation of DG units is within the allowed
∀i ∈ Nloop, θ ∈ ℵθk, i, j ∈ Nki,,θchildren, k ∈ Nmaster , t ∈ T range.
Owing to the failure and repair rate of the DGs, the power
k , i, t
qik, ,θt = Qcommon + qkj,,θt × βkj, θ electronic instruments, and the availability of accessing the EVs,
(26) the two energy resources are always different in terms of
∀i ∈ Nloop, θ ∈ ℵθk, i, j ∈ Nki,,θchildren, k ∈ Nmaster , t ∈ T availability in the MG formation problem. To model this
difference, the availability factor should be defined for each of
ri j ptj, θ + xi jqtj, θ these resources. In general, the problem should be modelled in
V ik, ,θt − V kj,,θt = such a way that resources with a high availability factor are used
V 0k (27) more than other resources in the restoration stage.
∀ i, j ∈ Nloop, j ∈ Nki,,θchildren, θ ∈ ℵθk, i, k ∈ Nmaster, t ∈ T This availability factor is defined for the master resources and is
shown in constraints (36) and (37). This factor is determined for
DERs based on their lifetime performance.
pik, t = ∑ βik, θ × pik, ,θt − τik, p Constraint (38) guarantees that the energy generation of each
θ∈ ℵθk, i (28) DG in the restoration time does not exceed the amount of DG fuel
reserve. Constraint (39) guarantees that at each time, at most one
∀i ∈ Nloop, θ ∈ ℵθk, i, k ∈ Nmaster, t ∈ T step of the load control block is used.
Constraints (41)–(44) indicate a relation between network
variables such as active/reactive power generation of the nodes in
qik, t = ∑ βik, θ × qik, ,θt − τik, q which the PL is located and the total power generation by all EVs
θ∈ ℵθk, i
(29) in that PL. For charging and discharging control of each EV in the
∀i ∈ Nloop, k ∈ Nmaster, t ∈ T PL at the emergency time, binary variables nch n, t
e
and ndch
n, t
e
are used,
respectively. These variables are set to 1 for charging/discharging
and 0 for not charging/discharging. In this study, it is assumed that
each EV charger has a power correction factor to regulate reactive
V ik, t = ∑ βik, θ × V ik, ,θt
power. Similarly, due to the non-linear relationship between the
θ ∈ ℵθk, i (30)
active, reactive, and apparent power of each battery in (40), to
∀i ∈ Nloop, ∀i ∉ NloopDER, k ∈ Nmaster , t ∈ T avoid using non-linear equations, we assume that the apparent
power of each EV is such that it can generate reactive power up to
50% of its active power (see constraints (42) and (44)) [26, 27].
τik, p = ∑ βik, θ − 1 × Pcommon
k, i, t Here, constraints (41) and (42) are for the master units, and
θ∈ ℵθk, i
(31) constraints (43) and (44) are for the slave units
∀i ∈ Nloop_DER, k ∈ Nmaster , t ∈ T
k , i, t
Qcommon i, t
= αik × QSup + ∑ qyk, t − si ⋅ αik × qSi, t. Gen
i
y ∈ Nk, (34)
τik, q = ∑ βik, θ − 1 × Qcommon
k , i, t common

θ ∈ ℵθk, i
(32) ∀i ∈ Nloop−DER, k ∈ Nmaster , t ∈ T
∀i ∈ Nloop_DER, k ∈ Nmaster , t ∈ T
0.95 × V 0k ≤ V ik, t ≤ 1.05 × V 0k ∀i ∈ N, k ∈ Nmaster , t ∈ T (35)

k , i, t
Pcommon i, t
= αik × PSup + ∑ pyk, t − si ⋅ αik × pSi, t. Gen 0 ≤ pkk, t ≤ Akt × pkmax DG
∀k ∈ Nmaster ,t ∈ T (36)
y∈ i
Nk, common
(33)
∀i ∈ Nloop_DER, k ∈ Nmaster , t ∈ T
DG
0 ≤ qkk, t ≤ Akt × qkmax ∀k ∈ Nmaster ,t ∈ T (37)

t = tre
denoted by set Nki , common; e.g. in Fig. 4, node {x} is the common DG
∑ pkk t ≤ ,
T × CAPK ∀k ∈ Nmaster (38)
children node of node {f}. Constraints (31) and (32) express that if t = trs
each node in the loop belongs to NloopDER, the nodes may be
restored through several paths. Therefore, if powers determined ∑ ρit γ ≤ 1 ∀i ∈ Ncritical_load, t ∈ T
from (25) and (26) are applied to (28) and (29), the common parts
, (39)
γ∈B
(i.e. injected power to common children nodes, load consumed in
that node, slave generation in that node) are computed several
(40)
max, accessable max 2
max 2

times and for each path. To solve this problem, the additional parts Qdch = Sdch − Pdch
must be eliminated. Variables τik, p and τik, q are used in (28) and (29) m, t
to eliminate additional parts of active and reactive power, Pdch
respectively. The common active/reactive power generated/
pkk, t = ∑ m, t
(ndch e
ηdch
e m, t m, t
− nch P × ηch)
e che
m∈ k
MEV (41)
consumed in each node determined by (33) and (34). Here, non-
PL
linear terms, given their non-linearity, are linearised by ‘Big M’ ∀k ∈ Nmaster , t∈ T
method [25].

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3750-3761 3755
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 m, t
Pdch pkk, t + ∑ αik × pSi, t. Gen = ∑ i, t
αik × PSup
qkk, t ≤ 0.5 × ∑ m, t
ndch e
ηdch
e m, t m, t
− nch P × ηch
e che i ∈ Nslave i ∈ Ncritical_load (54)
k
m ∈ MEV (42)
∀k ∈ Nmaster , t ∈ T
PL
∀k ∈ Nmaster , t∈ T
qkk, t + ∑ αik × qSi, t. Gen = ∑ i, t
αik × QSup
m, t
Pdch i ∈ Nslave i ∈ Ncritical_load (55)
pSi, t. Gen = ∑ m, t
ndch dch
e m, t m, t
− nch P × ηch
e che ∀k ∈ Nmaster , t ∈ T
(43)
e
i
m ∈ MEV
η
∀i ∈ Nslave, t ∈ T To evaluate the system performance after a power outage, the
‘resilience index’ has been used. This metric which is introduced in
m, t
Pdch [1], is the ratio of the supplied energy of the loads during the study
qSi, t. Gen ≤ 0.5 × ∑ m, t
ndch
ηdch
e m, t m, t
− nch P × ηch
e che
period to the total energy of the system loads and calculated using
(44)
e
m∈ i
MEV constraint (56)
∀i ∈ Nslave, t ∈ T i, t
∑t ∈ T ∑i ∈ Ncritical_load PSup × li
Resilience index = (56)
Constraints (45)–(47) indicate operational limits of charging/ i, t
∑t ∈ T ∑i ∈ Ncritical_load Pcritical × li
discharging power and SOC of each EV in restoration. The
availability factor for all EVs is also shown in constraints (45) and
3.4 Objective function
(46)
In general, in most of the resilience schemes two approaches are
m, t
0 ≤ Pche
m, max
≤ Ami, t × Pch m, t
⋅ nch e
used to determine the objective function.
(45)
k i PL
∀m ∈ MEV ∪ MEV, k ∈ Nmaster , i ∈ Nslave, t ∈ T (i) Technical approach: In this approach, maximum load
restoration and minimum use of demand response control blocks
m, t
0 ≤ Pdch m, max
≤ Ami, t × Pdch m, t
⋅ ndch are selected as objective functions. According to (57), after solving
e
the problem and maximising the supplied load, both of the
e
(46)
PL
mentioned objective functions are optimised. It is assumed that by
k i
∀m ∈ MEV ∪ MEV , k ∈ Nmaster , i ∈ Nslave, t ∈ T
providing appropriate incentive schemes by the network operator,
SOCm, min ≤ SOCm,t
e ≤ SOC
m, max economic aspects such as minimising the generation cost of the
(47) DGs and maximising the EV owner's profit are not a top priority. In
k i PL
∀m ∈ MEV ∪ MEV , k ∈ Nmaster , i ∈ Nslave, t ∈ T this approach, maximising the amount of supplied load is the top
priority
Constraints (48)–(50) describe the relation of SOC at each time slot
and determine the initial and final desired SOC. Constraint (51) Max: Obj F = ∑ ∑ i, t
PSup × li (57)
guarantees that charging and discharging does not occur t ∈ T i ∈ Ncritical_load
simultaneously (ii) Economic approach: In this approach, the system operator aims
to minimise the overall cost of the system and also maximise the
m, t
Pdch EV owner's profit when participating in the CLs restoration.
SOCm
e
, t+1
= SOCm ,t m, t ch
e + Pche η −
e
Δt (48) Therefore, the objective function consists of three terms; the first
ηdch
term is the CLs interruption cost, the second term is the generation
m, arr m, arr cost of the DGs, and the third term is the EV owner's cost
SOCm
e
, trs + Δt
= SOCm
n
, trs + Δt
(49)

SOCe
m, tm, dep
≥ SOCm, min_desired Min: Obj F = ∑ ∑ i, t
(Pcritical i, t
− PSup ) × IC t
CL, i
(50) t ∈ T i ∈ Ncritical_load
k i PL
∀m ∈ MEV ∪ MEV , k ∈ Nmaster , i ∈ Nslave, t ∈ T + ∑ pkk, t × GC t
DG, k
(58)
DG
k∈ Nmaster
m, t m, t
nche
+ ndch e
≤1
(51)
k
∀m ∈ MEV i
∪ MEV PL
, k ∈ Nmaster , i ∈ Nslave, t ∈ T +∑ ∑ m, t m, t
(nche che
m, t m, t
P × Ct − ndch P × Rt )
e dche
i ∈ N m ∈ MEV
i

Constraint (52) guarantees that no charging and discharging occurs

before the EVs arrived in the PL 4 Numerical results
trs + Δt m, arr In this section, we validate the proposed scheme using the IEEE
123-node test feeder (Fig. 5). The problem was modelled as a
∑ m, t
nche
+ m, t
ndch e
=0
MILP formulation in MATLAB R2015b and solved using CPLEX
t = trs
solver. To use CPLEX solver, MATLAB R2015b is linked with
PL
IBM ILOG CPLEX 12.6. The simulation was performed on a PC
k i
∀m ∈ MEV ∪ MEV∖ m tm, arr ≤ trs , k ∈ Nmaster , i ∈ Nslave, ∀t ∈ T
(52) with Intel Core i7-6500u@2.5 GHz processor and 8 GB of RAM.
To investigate the impact of EVs on the load restoration problem,
Constraint (53) guarantees that no charging and discharging occurs four case studies were designed. In each case study, it was assumed
after the EVs departure from the PL that the network consists of three DGs, 11 critical loads, and an
aggregator that provides the available energy of two PLs and three
tre RP. The locations and parameters of generation units and selected
∑ m, t
nch e
m, t
+ ndch e
=0 scenarios of EVs in the PLs and the modified critical loads are
t = tm, dep (53) given in Tables 4–6. The electricity tariff was extracted from [28],
k i PL and the daily profile of load factor extracted from [27]. Battery
∀m ∈ MEV ∪ MEV,k ∈ Nmaster ,i ∈ Nslave, t ∈ T
specifications of several commercially available EVs were selected
from [29] and listed in Table 7. The hourly generation cost of a DG
Constraints (54) and (55) guarantee a balance of power generation is $0.5/kWh and hourly interruption cost of the each CL is
and power consumption in each MG
3756 IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3750-3761
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 Table 7 Specifications of the EVs selected for the
simulation
Type of arriving/ Battery capacity, Charging power,
departing EV kWh kW
1 62 6.6
2 79.5 11.5
3 60 7.2
4 40 6.6
5 38.3 7.2
6 100 11
7 50 11
8 62 11.5

Fig. 5 IEEE 123-node test system

Table 4 DG parameters
DG Node Pmax, kW Qmax, kVar CAP, kWh
1 44 129.52 89.02 919.12
2 60 101.63 152.89 550.23
3 86 92.63 54.56 895.29

Table 5 Arrival/departure of EVs in each PL during the day

Parking Node Number of EVs arrival/departure in the
selected scenario
PL-1 4 24
PL-2 26 19
RP1 12 23
RP2 24 31
RP3 450 25
Fig. 6 Formed MGs in case study 1

Table 6 Location and the maximum amount of modified outage duration in all cases is assumed to be 11 h. According to
critical loads consumption in the selected scenario [31], most outages last <24 h. Therefore, 11 h is a logical duration
outage in typical disasters.
Node Pmax, kW Qmax, kVar
9 78.6 18.6 4.1 Case study 1
17 29.32 14.34
27 66.97 36.94 In this case, it is assumed that the incident occurs in midday at
16:00, parking operates normally before the incident occurs, and
30 61.2 30.37
charging/discharging is controlled by the aggregator according to
37 18.21 31.6 the electricity tariff. In this case, the technical approach is
46 42.5 27.9 considered in selecting the objective function. The formed MG in
66 30.5 25.9 this case study is shown in Fig. 6. As predicted and shown in
94 30.12 21.3 Fig. 7a, the supplied load is increased substantially during the early
87 40.1 66.84 hours when using EVs for restoration. As we approach the end of
79 21.84 63.78 the restoration time, the participating percentage of EVs in PLs is
reduced due to EVs leaving the PL. Generally, when resources
101 50.56 19.87
(EVs’ batteries) are available for a limited time, the problem is
solved in a way that limited access resources charge other
resources which their presence is longer. For example, in Fig. 7b,
$10/kWh [30]. Also, it is assumed that the probability of the in the first two hours, the RP charging rate in MG-1 is much higher
presence of any type in the PLs is the same. In cases 1 and 2, the than the other hours, because, after the incident, which happened at
impact of the EVs penetration rate and different charging modes of 16:00, these EVs have more time than the EVs in PL. So, in the
EV on the amount of the supplied loads are investigated, PLs, EVs that want to leave in the next few hours and probably
respectively. In case 3, the impact of the PLs participation on the have a high amount of stored energy, discharged for supplying
number of supplied loads in the distribution system is investigated. loads and charging the EVs that have recently entered RP and need
As mentioned in the above section, the purpose of designing case to stay for a long time. Moreover, as shown in Figs. 7c and d, using
studies 1–3 is based on studying the technical aspects of EVs’ load control in the nodes, and also increasing EVs rate of
participation, and it is assumed that due to the implementation of penetration, the supplied load in the restoration stage is improved
appropriate incentive plans and the high importance of existing considerably. The resilience index when using and non-using of the
loads, there are no economic restrictions on the available energy of EVs is 0.82 and 0.56, respectively. As a result and as expected EVs
the EVs and DGs. In case 4, the economic benefits of EVs’ participation improve the system resilience after the outage.
participation are considered in selecting the objective function. The
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3750-3761 3757
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020

Fig. 7 Comparison of different situations in case study 1
(a) Hourly supplied load, (b) Generation and supplied load profiles in MG-1, (c)
Comparison of the total supplied load when using or not using load control, (d)
Comparison of the total supplied load in different EVs rate of penetration
4.2 Case study 2
In this case, the impact of charge scheduling of EVs under normal
operation and before the incident on the amount of load supplied in
3758
restoration time is investigated. For this purpose, the simulation
was performed with three EVs charging modes: controlled
charging with V2G and with cost minimisation objective (mode I);
controlled charging without V2G and uniform charging during
charging period (mode II); uncontrolled charging without V2G and
with a maximum charging power (mode III). In this case, to show
the impact of the charging scheduling, the time of the incident is
assumed to be 21:00. It is of note that the energy available in PLs
at this time is considered 0 due to the absence of EVs. Moreover, in
this case, the technical approach is considered in selecting the
objective function. The amount of available energy of each RP
under three charging modes is given in Table 8. As can be seen, the
amount of energy available in the first mode is the lowest among
the three modes. This minimum level of energy is explained by the
fact that in the first mode, the energy price is high in the hours
leading up to the incident so that the EVs will not be charged
during these hours and will discharge their stored energy as much
as possible. In the two first modes, the formed MGs are the same as
case study 1, but in mode III, it is different. Figs. 8a and b show the
results of the MGs formation under operation in mode III and a
comparison of the supplied loads in the three different charging
modes, respectively. The resilience index in this case and for three
charging modes is 0.84, 0.87, and 0.95, respectively.
4.3 Case study 3
In this case, it is assumed that the incident causes extensive
damage to the network, leads to several distribution lines to be out
of service, and thus PL1, PL2, and RP1 will not have access to
DGs (master units). Under these conditions, PL with the
capabilities mentioned in Section 2 can operate as the master unit
and control frequency and voltage for a limited duration. In this
case, the incident occurred at 11:00, and lines 13–18, 23–25, and
52–53 are at fault. The MG formation results are shown in Fig. 9a.
As shown in Figs. 9b and c, under this condition, PL-1 and PL-2
supply their local loads for 8 and 6 h, respectively. Obviously, these
conditions would not be met in the absence of PLs, which is able to
control the frequency and voltage locally. As seen in Fig. 9b, in
contrast to case study 1, in this case, because the rate of EVs
leaving the house is higher than PLs at early hours after hour 11,
these EVs discharged in the early hours of restoration to charging
the EVs in PL and in the next hours this energy will be discharged
from the PL to supply MGs’ loads.
4.4 Case study 4
In this case, the MGs formation, DGs generation dispatch and
charge/discharge scheduling of the EVs at the outage duration are
optimised according to the technical constraints to obtain the best
economic plan for restoring the CLs and maximising the EV
owner's profit. It is assumed that the incident occurred at 21:00,
and the aggregator uses the uniform charge/discharge scheduling
(mode II) before the event. In this case, the formed MGs are the
same as case study 1. To show the impact of considering the
economic approach, a comparison has been made between the
various parameters of the formed MG-2 in the case of using the
economic objective function (economic approach) and using the
technical objective function (technical approach) (see Fig. 10). As
can be seen in Fig. 10a, discharge power of the EVs is increased in
economic approach, and since the supplied load is almost equal in
the both approaches, the generation power of the DGs is decreased
in the early hours in economic approach (see Fig. 10b). The
simulation results show that, in the formed MG-2, if the economic
approach is considered, about 45 kWh of generation energy of the
DGs is reduced and about 54 kWh is added to the energy
discharged from EVs. Since DGs are considered as master units in
the grid; reducing fuel consumption of these energy resources, in
the long-term outages is beneficial to the system. The economic
parameters such as CLs’ interruption cost, DGs’ generation cost,
and EV owner's profit in the case of using the economic objective
function and using the technical objective function are shown in
Table 9. The simulation results show that the economic approach
can increase the participation of the EVs in the CLs restoration. In
general, by considering the economic approach, the amount of
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3750-3761
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
Table 8 Available energy of RP in each charging mode
Parking ID Charging mode
Mode I, kWh Mode II, kWh Mode III, kWh
RP1 119.5 228.7 414.5
RP2 163.4 315.5 531.7
RP3 141.9 195.7 420.7

Fig. 8 Figures of case study 2

(a) Formed MGs in charging mode III, (b) Comparison of the total supplied load in
each charging mode
discharged power from the RP has increased by about 230 kWh,
and the EV owner's profit has increased by $41. The load supplied
in the economic approach is just 28 kWh less than the technical
one. The results show that the reduction of DGs’ generation in
economic approach is considerably compensated by the increase in
EVs’ discharged energy.
5 Discussion
The performance of the presented approach is evaluated based on
the amount of restored load in the power outage. The comparisons
Fig. 9 Figures of case study 3
(a) Formed MGs, (b) Charging/discharging and supplied load profiles in MG-1, (c)
Charging/discharging and supplied load profiles in MG-2
made in the previous sections show the impact of the participation
and non-participation of the EVs as well as the employment of
different modes of charging on the amount of restored loads.
Moreover, the economic benefits of the EVs participation in MG
formation and load restoration for the EV owners and system's
operator is evaluated in Section 4.4.
In this study, we focus on the techno-economic benefits of the
EVs participation in MG formation in the mesh network by
designing various case studies. We introduce the resilience

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3750-3761 3759
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020

Fig. 10 Comparison of considering a different approach in case study 4
(a) Charge/discharge power of RP3, (b) Generation power of DG-2
Table 9 Economic results of the simulation under
considering a technical and economical approach
Technical Economic
approach approach
total interruption cost of CLs, $ 12,450 12,730
total generation cost of DGs, $ 1128 996
EV owners’ profit, $ 164 207
improvement method for weather-based disasters, and general
behaviour of EVs owner is that they want to be at their home and
do not go out in harsh situation (weather-based disasters). So, the
travelling cost is not considered in this study. It is to be noted that
in some disasters, the severity of event is very high and in those
occasions, people usually leave their living place before disaster
start. However, as explained earlier, the number of these kinds of
disasters is very low and we can assume that in those occasions
people usually have tendency to be at their home. In practice, after
receiving weather forecast information and determining the
charging scheduling for the EVs, which participated in the V2G
emergency programme, a large number of EVs stay in the PL in the
early hours of the incident until conditions return to normal.
Therefore, EVs have the considerable available energy for injecting
into the grid due to the use of charging modes II and III. However,
we have assumed in this study that EVs behave normally. This
assumption makes us consider the worst-case scenario, in terms of
available energy, at the restoration time. Therefore, the authors
believe that the available energy is higher than the value stated in
the presented case studies.
On the other hand, the restoration of the critical loads through
the MG formation is done in the context of the smart grid.
Important aspects of the smart grid used in the MG formation
problem are: (i) the two-way communication between remote
control switches and outage management system, (ii) monitoring of
3760
DGs’ power outputs and the power consumption by critical loads
through smart metering, and (iii) providing the means of enabling
the development and use of V2G technologies.
6 Conclusion
In this study, we attempted to restore critical loads through
dynamic MG formation using EV PLs and DGs after a natural
disaster. To do this optimally, several factors are required; e.g. the
use of a proper control method to coordinate resources within each
MG, the use of load control to assist the operator in enhancing
system performance in the restoration stage, and the use of load
restoration method in the mesh network. We satisfied all three
cases using the master–slave control method, applying load control
blocks and employing a novel proposed method for restoration in
the mesh grid, respectively. It is demonstrated that the use of EVs
increases the supplied load on restoration time significantly. In
particular, when there are PLs and RP in the formed MG, at any
given hour of the day that incident occurs, it can be expected that
the MG will be able to use significant energy from discharging
EVs to supply its loads. According to the resilience index, the use
of EVs in the MG formation problem has increased the energy
supplied to the critical loads by ∼45%. However, as has been
shown in case study 2 and previously stated, the use of proper
charge scheduling before the power outage, as a preventive
approach of enhancing the resilience, can increase the energy
supplied to the critical loads by up to 70%. Another advantage of
using PLs is that in the case that the damage of the network is very
severe, and access to DGs is not possible. It was shown that each
PL with frequency and voltage control capability could supply
local loads under such conditions. In this study, the uncertainty of
EVs and loads were modelled by the random sampling method.
Moreover, in case study 4, it was concluded that using the
economic approach in the objective function increases the
participation of EVs in the load restoration, and also reduces the
fuel consumption of the DGs.
7 References
[1] Mousavizadeh, S., Haghifam, M.R., Shariatkhah, M.H.: ‘A linear two-stage
method for resiliency analysis in distribution systems considering renewable
energy and demand response resources’, Appl. Energy, 2018, 211, pp. 443–
460
[2] Che, L., Khodayar, M., Shahidehpour, M.: ‘Only connect: MGs for
distribution system restoration’, IEEE Power Energy Mag., 2014, 12, (1), pp.
70–81
[3] Brown, R.: ‘Cost-benefit analysis of the deployment of utility infrastructure
upgrades and storm hardening programs prepared for: table of contents’,
Satell. Commun., 2009, 3021, pp. 919–961
[4] Bie, Z., Lin, Y., Li, G., et al.: ‘Battling the extreme: a study on the power
system resilience’, Proc. IEEE, 2017, 105, (7), pp. 1253–1266
[5] Poudel, S., Dubey, A.: ‘Critical load restoration using distributed energy
resources for resilient power distribution system’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
2019, 34, (1), pp. 52–63
[6] Li, J., Ma, X.Y., Liu, C.C., et al.: ‘Distribution system restoration with MGs
using spanning tree search’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2014, 29, (6), pp.
3021–3029
[7] Zhang, M., Chen, J.: ‘Islanding and scheduling of power distribution systems
with distributed generation’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2014, 30, (6), pp.
3120–3129
[8] Gao, H., Chen, Y., Xu, Y., et al.: ‘Resilience-oriented critical load restoration
using MGs in distribution systems’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2016, 7, (6), pp.
2837–2848
[9] Chen, C., Wang, J., Qiu, F., et al.: ‘Resilient distribution system by MGs
formation after natural disasters’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2016, 7, (2), pp.
958–966
[10] Ding, T., Lin, Y., Bie, Z., et al.: ‘A resilient MG formation strategy for load
restoration considering master slave distributed generators and topology
reconfiguration’, Appl. Energy, 2017, 199, pp. 205–216
[11] Zadsar, M., Haghifam, M.R., Larimi, S.M.M.: ‘Approach for self-healing
resilient operation of active distribution network with MG’, IET Gener.
Transm. Distrib., 2017, 11, (18), pp. 4633–4643
[12] Han, S., Soo, H.H., Sezaki, K.: ‘Design of an optimal aggregator for vehicle-
to-grid regulation service’. Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conf. (ISGT
2010), Gothenburg, Sweden, 2010, vol. 1, pp. 65–72
[13] Mu, Y., Wu, J., Ekanayake, J., et al.: ‘Primary frequency response from
electric vehicles in the Great Britain power system’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,
2013, 4, (2), pp. 1142–1150
[14] Liu, H., Hu, Z., Song, Y., et al.: ‘Decentralized vehicle-to-grid control for
primary frequency regulation considering charging demands’, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., 2013, 28, (3), pp. 3480–3489
IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3750-3761
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
[15] Wu, C., Mohsenian-Rad, H., Huang, J., et al.: ‘PEV-based combined
frequency and voltage regulation for smart grid’. 2012 IEEE PES Innovative
Smart Grid Technologies (ISGT 2012), Washington, DC, USA, 2012
[16] Xu, N.Z., Chung, C.Y.: ‘Reliability evaluation of distribution systems
including vehicle-to-home and vehicle-to-grid’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
2016, 31, (1), pp. 759–768
[17] Farzin, H., Fotuhi-Firuzabad, M., Moeini-Aghtaie, M.: ‘Reliability studies of
modern distribution systems integrated with renewable generation and
parking lots’, IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, 2017, 8, (1), pp. 431–440
[18] Liu, Z., Wang, D., Jia, H., et al.: ‘Aggregation and bidirectional charging
power control of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles: generation system adequacy
analysis’, IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, 2015, 6, (2), pp. 325–335
[19] Guner, S., Ozdemir, A.: ‘Stochastic energy storage capacity model of EV
parking lots’, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2017, 11, (7), pp. 1754–1761
[20] Vagropoulos, S.I., Bakirtzis, A.G.: ‘Optimal bidding strategy for electric
vehicle aggregators in electricity markets’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2013,
28, (4), pp. 4031–4041
[21] Conejo, A.J., Carrión, M., Morales, J.M.: ‘Decision making under uncertainty
in electricity markets’ (Springer, USA, 2010)
[22] Wu, C., Mohsenian-Rad, H., Huang, J.: ‘Vehicle-to-aggregator interaction
game’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2012, 3, (1), pp. 434–442
[23] Yen, J.Y.: ‘Finding the K shortest loopless paths in a network’, Manage. Sci.,
1971, 17, (11), pp. 712–716
[24] Yeh, H.G., Gayme, D.F., Low, S.H.: ‘Adaptive VAR control for distribution
circuits with photovoltaic generators’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2012, 27, (3),
pp. 1656–1663
[25] Winston, W.L., Venkataramanan, M., Goldberg, J.B.: ‘Introduction to
mathematical programming’ (Thomson/Brooks/Cole Duxbury, Pacific Grove,
CA, 2003)
[26] Abessi, A., Vahidinasab, V., Ghazizadeh, M.S.: ‘Centralized support Fig. 11 Information flow in master–save control technique
distributed voltage control by using end-users as reactive power support’,
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2016, 7, (1), pp. 178–188
[27] Abessi, A., Zakariazadeh, A., Vahidinasab, V., et al.: ‘End-user participation
in a collaborative distributed voltage control and demand response
programme’, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2018, 12, (12), pp. 3079–3085
[28] Moeini-Aghtaie, M., Abbaspour, A., Fotuhi-Firuzabad, M.: ‘Online
multicriteria framework for charging management of PHEVs’, IEEE Trans.
Veh. Technol., 2014, 63, (7), pp. 3028–3037
[29] ‘evspecifications’. Available at https://www.evspecifications.com, accessed 3
September 2019
[30] Yao, S., Wang, P., Zhao, T.: ‘Transportable energy storage for more resilient
distribution systems with multiple microgrids’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,
2019, 10, (3), pp. 3331–3341
[31] Wang, Y., Chen, C., Wang, J., et al.: ‘Research on resilience of power systems
under natural disasters – a review’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2016, 31, (2),
pp. 1604–1613
[32] Tenti, P., Caldognetto, T.: ‘Master/slave power-based control of low-voltage
microgrids’ (Elsevier Inc., UK, 2017)
[33] Fusheng, L., Ruisheng, L., Fengquan, Z.: ‘Composition and classification of
the microgrid’ (Academic Press, 2016) Fig. 12 Power flow in the node on which the slave unit is located

8 Appendix
One of the most commonly control strategies, which is used for a
small MG is master–slave technique. In this technique, different
resources in the MG are controlled with different modes (in the
island operation, one generation unit act as a master unit and uses
U/f control, and other generation units act as slave units and use
P/Q control). It should be noted that in the grid-connected mode all
generation units use P/Q control. The master unit controller keeps
the bus voltage constant, and has the ability to respond fast to the
load fluctuations. Therefore, master unit can control the voltage
and frequency of the MG. On the other hand, the slave units act as
current driven source and follow the voltage and frequency of the
MG. The slave units control their output power by following the
current pattern, which is sent from the master unit. Therefore, the
master unit is responsible for coordination of slave units in the MG
[32, 33]. As shown in Fig. 11, after formation of the MGs, the
master controller receive measurement data such as voltage of the
buses, current of the lines, available active and reactive power of
the slave units, and load consumption data. Then the master
controller sends two types of control commands: (i) voltage and
frequency set point for master unit-1 to control the voltage and
frequency of the MG-1 (set point for U/f control), and (ii) current
set point as power leveling signal for slave unit-1 to adjust the
power balance in the MG-1 (set point for P/Q control).
The following are considered in the utilisation of master–slave
control technique in the MG formation problem:
(i) Since the voltage of the master units is controlled, the voltage of
these units is always constant and equal to the base value. On the
other hand, the voltage of the slave units can vary in the
permissible range (±5%).
(ii) Since the output power of the slave units is controlled, a new
term added to the power flow equations in the nodes, in which
slave units are located at each hour. This term is the hourly
constant active/reactive power injected to the mentioned nodes by
slave units. When the slave units generate the active/reactive
power, this term is considered with a negative sign (see Fig. 12),
and when the slave units consumed the active/reactive power, this
term is considered with a positive sign in the equation and slave
units act as loads (see Fig. 12). For example, if the slave unit is a
PL, in charging mode of the PL, the related sign is positive and in
the discharging mode, the related sign is negative.

IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 18, pp. 3750-3761 3761
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020