See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/326246866

Optimal Wind Turbine Allocation and Network Reconfiguration for Enhancing

Resiliency of System after Major Faults Caused by Natural Disaster
Considering Uncertainty

Article in IET Renewable Power Generation · July 2018

DOI: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2018.5237

CITATIONS READS

37 527

4 authors:

Saman Nikkhah Kamran Jalilpoor

Newcastle University Shahid Beheshti University
26 PUBLICATIONS 440 CITATIONS 10 PUBLICATIONS 119 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ehsan Kianmehr Gevork B. Gharehpetian

Islamic Azad University, Iran, Doroud Amirkabir University of Technology
8 PUBLICATIONS 169 CITATIONS 1,049 PUBLICATIONS 18,634 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Accurate power sharing method in islanded AC microgrids View project

Dual Setting Directional Overcurrent Protection Coordination for Microgrids Considering Single Outage Contingency View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ehsan Kianmehr on 04 March 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 IET Renewable Power Generation

Research Article

Optimal wind turbine allocation and network ISSN 1752-1416

Received on 20th February 2018
Accepted on 5th July 2018
reconfiguration for enhancing resiliency of doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2018.5237
www.ietdl.org
system after major faults caused by natural
disaster considering uncertainty
Q1 Saman Nikkhah1 , Kamran Jalilpoor2, Ehsan Kianmehr3, Gevork B. Gharehpetian1
1Department of Electrical Engineering, Center of Excellence in Power Systems, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic),
Tehran, Iran
2Faculty of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
3Department of Electrical Engineering, Doroud Branch, Islamic Azad University, Doroud, Iran

E-mail: sanik@aut.ac.ir

Abstract: This study proposes a two-stage stochastic optimisation model for jointly wind turbine (WT) allocation and network
reconfiguration (NR) so as to increase the resiliency of distribution system in face of natural disasters. In this regard, in the first
level, a possibilistic-scenario method is proposed to select the line outage scenarios. The proposed model is capable with
distribution systems and considers different failure probabilities for system components subject to the intensity of natural
disaster in its associated zone. After selecting the line outage scenarios, in the second level, a multi-stage optimisation
framework is proposed for jointly NR and WT allocation in a multi-zone and multi-fault system, considering the uncertainty of
system load and wind power generation. This strategy makes an interconnection between NR and islanded WTs to increase the
resiliency of system and decreases the load shedding. Different economic objectives including, costs of load shedding and
power generation are considered in the model. In addition, hardening budget is taken into consideration for the transmission
lines, which is minimised during the optimisation process. The simulation results demonstrate the capability and necessity of
proposed resiliency-oriented method and prove the importance of hardening budgets.

Nomenclature cos φlag lag power factor of WTs

Y i j /ϕi j magnitude/angle of ijth element of system admittance
Indices and sets
matrix
i, j indices for system buses (P/Q)imax/min maximum/minimum active/reactive power of slack
m index for islands of WTs bus i
l index for transmission lines V imax/min maximum/minimum voltage at bus i
s index for scenarios PiWT, max maximum capacity of WT located at bus i
z index for system zones
IMAXi j maximum current flow between buses i and j
wt index for WTs
Nb set of system buses Ωb number of system buses
Nsub set of substation connecting the distribution network to the μsD percentage of available load demand at scenario s
main grid CzWT power generation cost of installing WT at zone z
Nl set of transmission lines ϑswind percentage of available wind power at scenario s
Ns set of all scenarios
πsT probability of total wind-load scenarios
Nwt set of WT installed buses
Nm set of islanded WTs πsload probability of load scenarios
Nz set of system zones πswind probability of wind power generation scenarios
VOLLi value of loss load of bus i
Parameters
Decision variables
PiD, s /QiD, s active/reactive power consumption of load connected
LS
to bus i at scenario s PiLS
, s /Qi, s
active/reactive load shedding of bus i at scenario s
D D average (expected) active/reactive power demand at
P̄i /Q̄i Pi, s /Qisub
sub
,s
active/reactive power injected from substation to bus i
bus i at scenario s
wcr critical weather event intensity PiWT WT active/reactive wind power production injected to bus i
, s /Qi, s
wco collapse weather event intensity at scenarios s
sub sub
gi j /bi j conductance/susceptance of line between buses i and Preff /Qreff active/reactive power injection of substation
j Pi j, s /Qi j, s active/reactive power flow limits of branch connecting
Csub cost of buying power from substation buses i to j at scenario s
probfail
l
failure probability of line l λi j binary variable for the line between buses i and j
probfail
z
failure probability of system components in zone z IiWT
,m
binary variable for modelling the location of WT
installed at bus i in its corresponding island m
V reff fixed voltage magnitude of system buses
H
δi, m binary variable for bus i of island m
Cline fixed hardening cost of power lines
IMi j, s imaginary current flow component of branch between
cos φlead lead power factor of WTs buses i and j at scenario s
IET Renew. Power Gener. 1
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2018
IRi j, s real current flow component of branch between buses i
and j at scenario s
V i, s /θi, s voltage magnitude/angle of bus i at scenario s
V ireff voltage magnitude of bus i
Functions
EClsh expected load shedding
ECsub expected cost of buying power from substation
ECwt expected cost of wind power generation
EHCtr expected hardening cost of power lines
of DSOQ2 Objective function of DSO
P(w) probability of failure
RLSl rated load shedding of line l
LSi value of load shedding of bus i
ZLSi, z zonal value of load curtailment of ith bus in zone z
1 Introduction
Recently, various issues such as technical, natural, and man-made
problems have caused severe contingency conditions for power
systems. However, among the mentioned problems, natural
disasters are highly uncertain events, which have caused significant
economic loses. In recent years, number of natural disaster
occurrence such as hurricanes, floods, earthquakes and other
extreme weather events have increased unprecedentedly and
resulted in severe power outages and blackouts, in such a way that
according to report of the U.S. department of energy's office of
electricity delivery and energy reliability, in 2013, extreme weather
events were the reason of 87% of power outages [1]. Furthermore,
according to the America's Congress studies in 2012, the cost of
power outages associated with weather events was estimated
around 25–70 billion dollars [2]. Therefore, the occurrence of
natural disasters is a prominent problem which can cause
irrecoverable loses such as human causalities. In such
circumstances, improving the resiliency of power system is a
fundamental action which can be taken into consideration to keep
the communication between power industry and costumers. In the
electric power systems, the system resiliency is defined as the
ability of network to prepare, survive, and rapidly recover in face
of unforeseen events [3]. Generally, assessment of system
resiliency is a continuous process that includes the responsiveness
of system before, during, and after any threats that endanger the
performances of system. One of important and viable solutions for
increasing the resiliency of power system is deployment of
distribution energy resources (DERs) which can operate in islanded
state. Such DERs have many advantages such as self-supply which
guaranties the delivery of power to the costumers in severe
contingency conditions and also have economic benefits for
customers who seek for cheap and affordable energy. Recently,
deployment of DERs in power system for the issue of resiliency
has been addressed in several research woks. In the following, the
important goals, techniques, and objectives that are mentioned by
these researches briefly reviewed and the novelties of this paper are
addressed.
Generally, different categories can be defined for the literatures
which focused on the problem of resiliency. One of these
categories is classification by topics. The main topics of studies
which focused on this problem can be broken down into five
groups, namely (a) load shedding [4–6], (b) demand response [7–
9], (c) load restoration [10–13], (d) hardening [14–16], and (e)
distributed energy resources [17–23].
(a) Load shedding: The aim of improving system resiliency is to
keep the lights on, before, during, and after any threats. This means
simply that the system operator tries its best to supply the loads as
much as possible with the lowest load curtailment. In this way,
different strategies have been proposed by researchers for
minimising system load shedding. The authors of [4] proposed a
dynamic load shedding strategy based on Markov decision process
in case of unavailability of upstream network to supply DER-based
islands and limited generation sources. Different schedules and
2 IET Renew. Power Gener.
strategies such as storage and adjustable loads are used by Khodaei
in [5] to minimise the load curtailment of microgrids. In [6], power
generation cost and energy supply are minimised in an electricity
and gas infrastructure. The authors identified the multiple faults
within the multiple energy network and applied the preventive
reinforcements to increase the resiliency of energy supply,
considering the interdependence between natural gas and electricity
infrastructure.
(b) Demand response: Mousavizadeh et al. [7] used the application
of demand side management for critical conditions to avoid
complete black out of corresponding islands of main network with
limited generation capacities. In [8], local energy assets and
demand response are combined in a demand management
programme to investigate the resiliency of microgrid. For this aim,
the authors introduced four resiliency indices to measure the
resiliency of power system after natural disasters. Demand
response is also used in [9] as a spinning reserve in face of cyber-
physical threats.
(c) Load restoration: After occurrence of natural disaster, it is vital
to restore the disconnected loads as quick as possible. A load
restoration strategy based on resilient distributed generation (DG)-
based islands is proposed in [10]. The authors adopted the NR to
enable more critical load pickup. Authors in [11] proposed a load
restoration strategy so as to enhance the economic performance of
network with DG-based islands, when generation capacity of
available generation sources is limited. Moreover, in [12], load
restoration is restricted by different operational and physical
constraints, stability of network, voltage, current, and frequency
limits for instance, considering the dynamic performance of DGs
as a crucial factor of restoration.
(d) Hardening: Due to the classification of [11], resiliency
strategies can be partitioned into hard and soft strategies.
Hardening strategy is one of the most important strategies which
makes system components robust in face of natural disasters. In
[13], different hardening techniques are included in tri-level
optimisation problem, aiming to minimise the load shedding and
hardening investment of distribution system with DG-based
islands. A targeted hardening strategy is proposed in [14], focusing
on reliability of system from different viewpoints in face of
hurricanes. Robust two-stage hardening strategy is solved via
Benders decomposition technique in [15], considering the line
outage strategy as a master problem.
(e) Distributed energy resources: When a severe weather event
occurs in a network, it is not possible to transform power from
main grid to the distribution system for several hours or days. In
such circumstances, DERs are efficient solution to deliver power to
the costumers. However, capacity of DERs is limited, and there is
need to use a suitable plan to cover system loads, especially the
critical ones. Chen [16], introduced a control strategy for load
pickup by controlling the state of automatic switches and DGs of
islands in a distribution network. In [17], given the vulnerability of
network components in face of critical conditions, self-sufficient
DG allocation scheme is designed in a severe contingency
condition. Thanks to the recent innovations in design and
development of electric vehicles, they can be used as alternative
solution in contingency conditions. In [18, 19], the gasoline of
electric vehicles is used as a source of power generation for a
residential customers in case of unavailability of power generation
from upstream network. Also, in [20], electric vehicle facilities are
utilised for load restoration in an innovative microgrid islanding
scheme. In [21], the behaviour of DERs and their lifeline are
remodelled for the case of extreme weather events. In [22], effect
of NR and DGs on voltage profile of distribution network
investigated, using particle swarm optimisation. Passivity-based
sliding-mode control is designed in [23], considering the
uncertainty of generator parameters which brought about by
temperature variation, wear-and-tear of the generator, measurement
errors of apparatus etc. A doubly fed induction generator-based
wind turbine (DFIG-WT) is adopted in [24] aiming to optimal
power extraction with a boosted fault ride-through capability. The
taxonomy of resiliency researches is summarised in Table 1.
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2018
 In the above literatures, sound results have obtained and
different frameworks have proposed to increase the resiliency of
power system. However, focusing on Table 1 and careful review of
this paper reveals the important aspects that has not considered or
has partly considered in the previous investigations. For instance,
hardening budgets of DGs and transmission lines have not been
considered in the objective functions to investigate the concept of
resiliency from economic viewpoint. Also, multi-stage and multi-
fault method in a multi-zone system with different failure
probabilities has not been proposed for the case of resilient WT
allocation and NR, considering the uncertainty. Furthermore, as
pointed in [25], networked DER-based islands are more efficient
than stand-alone ones, while the reviewed papers have focused on
isolated DER-based islands. Consequently, to address the above
shortcomings, this paper proposed a methodology to coordinate the
NR with WT allocation, considering different uncertainties. In this
way, at first, a possibilistic-scenario model is proposed for
selecting the outage scenarios. Then, a two-stage stochastic model
is introduced in a multi-zone and multi-fault system. In order to
investigate the effectiveness of model, it is solved in different
cases. Please note that although different kinds of DERs such as
energy storage systems and plug-in electric vehicle parking lots can
be installed in the system and its resiliency can be improved via
these new technologies, the focus of this paper is on the
coordinated role of the WTs and NR for enhancing the resiliency of
the distribution network and the effect of the uncertainty of demand
and wind power generation on different characteristics of system
such as load curtailment, in contingency condition. Generally, the
main contributions of this paper can be summarised as follows:
This paper is organised as follows: Section 2 presents the
different uncertainty of proposed model. Section 3 describes the
two-stage stochastic optimisation model and proposes
mathematical formulations for the problem. The method for
producing the line outage scenarios is introduced in Section 4.
Simulation results are presented in Section 5. Finally, Section 6
concludes the paper.
2 Uncertainty modelling
In this section, uncertainty of natural disaster, electric system loads,
and power generation of WTs is modelled as follows.
2.1 Probabilistic model of natural disaster
Generally, weather events are highly uncertain events and it is
difficult to predict them. Also, intensity of natural disaster is not
the same in different geographic zones. For instance, consider the
hurricane Katrina as one of the most well-known natural disasters
of the USA. As can be seen in Fig. 1 [26], the hurricane intensity
decays along its path. Moreover, due to the lack of information
about the influence of natural events on components of system,
stochastic models can be used to predict the outage of system
components [27]. In this study, in order to show the fragility of
system components to natural disaster, the distribution network is
divided into different zones correspond to the intensity of weather
event. Then, according to the path and intensity of natural disaster,
failure probability of each zone is obtained using failure probability
curve [28]

• Possibilistic-scenario model is proposed for line outage 0 w < wcr

scenarios, considering different failure probabilities for different P(ws) = P(w) wcr ≤ w < wco (1)
zones.
1 otherwise
• Hardening budget of WTs and power lines are included in the
objective functions. where P ws is the probability of failure as a function of weather
• Uncertainties of wind power generation, system demand and parameter at scenario s. Fig. 2 shows the failure probability of
natural disaster are taken into account. system component subject to the intensity of weather event.
• NR is coordinated with WT allocation so as to make
interconnection between reconfiguration of network and
2.2 Demand uncertainty
islanded WTs.
• Effect of different uncertainties on resiliency of distribution The stochastic nature of system demand requires an accurate model
system is investigated. to proceed with accurate operation and planning decision. A well-
utilised statistic model for characterisation of demand uncertainty

Table 1 Summary of resiliency-oriented studies based on different objectives and methodologies

Objective functions Models Uncertainties Configuration Test systems
Reference number OF1 OF2 OF3 OF4 M1 M2 M3 U1 U2 U3 R1 R2 T1 T2
[4] ✓ — — — — — — — ✓ ✓ ✓ — — ✓
[5] ✓ — — — — — ✓ — — — ✓ — — ✓
[6] ✓ ✓ — — — — — ✓ ✓ — ✓ — — ✓
[7] ✓ ✓ — — ✓ — ✓ — — — ✓ — — ✓
[8] ✓ — — — ✓ — ✓ — — ✓ ✓ — — ✓
[9] ✓ — — — — — ✓ — — — ✓ — ✓ —
[10] ✓ — — — — — ✓ — ✓ — — ✓ — ✓
[11] ✓ — — — — — ✓ — — — ✓ — — ✓
[12] ✓ — — — — — ✓ — — — ✓ — — ✓
[13] ✓ — — — — — ✓ — — — ✓ — — ✓
[14] ✓ — — — ✓ — ✓ ✓ — — ✓ — — ✓
[15] ✓ — — — ✓ — ✓ — — — ✓ — — ✓
[16] — ✓ — — — — ✓ ✓ — — ✓ — — ✓
[17] — ✓ ✓ — ✓ — — — ✓ ✓ ✓ — — ✓
[18] — — — — — — ✓ — — — ✓ — — ✓
[19] ✓ — ✓ — ✓ — — — — ✓ ✓ — — ✓
[20] — — ✓ — — — ✓ — — — ✓ — — ✓
[21] ✓ ✓ — — — — — — — — ✓ — — ✓
this paper ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ — ✓ — ✓
OF1, load shedding minimisation; OF2, thermal power generation cost; OF3, wind power generation cost; OF4, transmission lines hardening budget minimisation; M1, multi-stage;
M2, multi-zone; M3, multi-fault; U1, natural disaster; U2, system demand; U3, wind power generation; R1, initial; R2, optimal; T1, transmission system; T2, distribution system.

IET Renew. Power Gener. 3

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2018

Fig. 1 Evolution of hurricane Katrina [26]
Fig. 2 Failure probability curve of system components as a function of
weather event intensity [28]
Fig. 3 Proposed model for enhancing the resiliency of distribution system
could be based on normal probability density function. Assuming
the mean and variance to be known, in this study, the load
uncertainty is modelled via a methodology which is described in
details by Mohesni-Bonab [29].
2.3 Wind power generation uncertainty
In this study, wind energy is considered as a DGs' resource to
supply the system demand in critical conditions. On the other hand,
due to the uncertain nature of wind energy, power output of WTs is
modelled via a probabilistic formulation to deal with the stochastic
nature of wind power generation. The detailed explanation for
generating different scenarios of wind power generation has been
presented in [30].
4 IET Renew. Power Gener.
2.4 Combined wind-load scenarios
In this study, the whole set of wind power generation and load
scenarios are combined assuming the independent relation between
these two kinds of uncertainty as follows:
πsT = πswind × πsload (2)
2.5 Two-stage optimisation framework
The proposed stochastic formulation of this paper utilises a two-
stage optimisation methodology. In this regard, the decision
variables of the model are divided into two different groups,
namely (a) here and now and (b) wait and see [31]:
(a) Here and now variables: These variables are determined by the
decision maker, before realisation of uncertain parameters. In other
words, the value of here and now variables are scenario
independent. Indeed, these variables are determined in the first
stage of optimisation.
(b) Wait and see variables: These variables are scenario dependent
and change in different scenarios. These are the variables of second
stage of optimisation and determined after realisation of scenarios.
3 Problem formulation
In this section, the mathematical formulation of proposed model,
different physical and operational constraints of model are
expressed. In fact, this study is solved from viewpoint of
distribution system operator and planner using a multi-level
optimisation to increase the resiliency of the system prior to
occurrence of unexpected natural events. In the first level, the
problem is solved from viewpoint of the system planner and the
maximum damage is determined. The second level solves the
problem from system operator and planner standpoint, in which the
system planner minimises the hardening cost of WTs and power
lines and the system operator also minimises the costs of
purchasing power from WTs, main grid, and cost of load
curtailment. The proposed methodology is shown in Fig. 3.
3.1 Objective function
The overall objective function consists of different terms. This
problem is solved from viewpoints of DSO and system planner
min o f DSO = EClsh + ECsub + ECwt + EHCtr (3)
It is well-known fact that vital goal in increasing system resiliency
is minimising system load shedding. Consequently, the first term of
objective function is expected cost of load shedding (ECLS) which
is mathematically modelled as follows:
Nb Ns
EClsh = ∑ ∑ VOLLi × PiLSs × πsT , (4)
i=1s=1
where VOLLi is the price that should be paid to the costumers for
curtailment of their loads in contingency condition.
The second term in objective function is cost of purchasing
power from substation. This function is expressed as follows:
Ns Nsub
ECsub = ∑ ∑ Csub × Pisubs × πsT
, (5)
s=1i=1
The third term is cost of wind power generation. Generally, in
previous literatures which focused on allocation of DGs in the
network, hardening of DGs has not been considered and such
studies focused on allocation of DGs after natural disaster [16].
However, in planning of WT as a most popular kind of DGs, the
cost of hardening should be considered to make the WTs be
resistant in face of natural disaster. Based on the single point
operation of this study, this cost is included in wind power
generation, in such a way that different wind power generation cost
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2018
 is considered for different zones subject to the intensity of weather IMi j, s = gi j(V i, ssin θi, s − V j, ssin θ j, s)
event. This means that the system planner considers special budget (16)
+bi j(V j, scos θi, s − V j, scos θ j, s)
for the hardening of WTs which makes the power generation cost
of some zones be more than that of other zones. This cost is
modelled as follows: where (14) is the current magnitude of the line between buses i and
j in which the real and imaginary part of current are shown by (15)
Ns NWT Nz and (16), respectively.
ECwt = ∑ ∑ ∑ piWT T WT
s × πs × Cz , (6)
s=1i=1z=1 3.4 Load shedding constraints

The last term in the objective function is hardening cost of power In (8) and (9), load shedding is modelled as a virtual generation
lines. Due to the key role of power lines in transmission of power unit which is connected to bus i. It is well-known fact that
to the costumers, a special cost is needed for the hardening of this production level of this unit is equal to the load shedding at that
kind of system components bus. In this way, there is need to limit the active and reactive power
of these units to the loads connected to their corresponding buses
Ns NL as follows:
ECHtr = ∑ ∑ πsT × probfail H
l × Cline (7)
s=1l=1 ∀i ∈ Nb, s ∈ Ns

where probfail
l is the failure probability of the line l which is 0 ≤ PiLS D
, s ≤ Pi, s (17)
dependent on length of line and can has direct impact on failure of
lines. 0 ≤ QiLS D
, s ≤ Qi, s (18)

3.2 Power flow constraints 3.5 Radiality constraints

Q3 In the proposed approach, power flow constraints should be Due to the advantages of radial operation of distribution networks,
satisfied. These constraints are: the structure of system should remain radial in islands and main
network. For radial operation of network two conditions should be
∀i, j ∈ Nb, s ∈ Ns, λi j ∈ {0, 1} satisfied, namely, (a) the number of branches should be equal to the
number of buses minus one and (b) all of system buses should have
Pisub WT LS D
, s + Pi, s + Pi, s − Pi, s = ∑ (λi j × Pi j s)
, (8) a path to the WTs or substation. The first condition is formulated as
j follows:

Qisub WT D
, s + Qi, s − Qi, s = ∑ (λi j × Qi j s) , (9) ∑ λi j = 2 Ωb − 1 (19)
j i, j ∈ Nb

Nb
λi j = λ ji ∀i, j ∈ Nb (20)
Pi j, s = V i, s ∑ V j, sY i jcos(θi, s − θ j, s − ϕi j) (10)
j=1
The second condition is satisfied through power flow constraints. It
NB is worth nothing that in the islanded state of WTs, every load
Qi j, s = V i, s ∑ V j, sY i jsin(θi, s − θ j, s − ϕi j) (11) should be connected to the WT of its corresponding island and no
j=1 loop is observed.

D 3.6 Constraints on here and now variables

PiD, s = (0.01 × μsD) × P̄i (12)
This study deals with a two-stage optimisation model. To this end,
D
QiD, s = (0.01 × μsD) × Q̄i (13) some of variables are scenario independent. Subsequently, due to
the fact that after natural disaster distribution network is more
Constraints (8) and (9) show the active and reactive power balance likely to disconnected from upstream network, therefore, the
equations, respectively, whereas constraints (10) and (11) represent injected power of substation to the slack bus is considered to be a
the active and reactive power flow through the branches, scenario independent variable. Voltage magnitude of system buses
respectively. In the power balance equations, λi j is the decision is also considered as a first stage variable
variable which specifies the status of power line (from bus i to bus
j). Indeed, when the line Lij is optimally opened or is affected by Pisub sub
, s = Preff ∀i ∈ Nsub
(21)
natural disaster, the value of λi j is 0, otherwise, its value is 1. Also, 0 ∀i ∉ Nsub
(12) and (13) show the demand of system buses in different
scenarios. Q4
Qisub sub
, s = Qreff ∀i ∈ Nsub
3.3 Branches current limits (22)
0 ∀i ∉ Nsub
To preserve the system from the perspective of feeders, the current
which passed through the branches should be kept below the V i, s = V ireff ∀i ∈ Nb, s ∈ Ns (23)
specific limits, as follows:
min sub max
Psub ≤ Preff ≤ Psub (24)
∀i, j ∈ Nb, l ∈ Nl, s ∈ Ns
min sub max
Qsub ≤ Qreff ≤ Qsub (25)
λi j(IR2 i js + IM
2
i js
2
) ≤ IMAXij (14)

IRi j, s = gi j(V i, scos θi, s − V j, scos θ j, s) V imin ≤ V ireff ≤ V imax ∀i ∈ Nb (26)

(15)
−bi j(V j, ssin θi, s − V j, ssin θ j, s)

IET Renew. Power Gener. 5

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2018

Fig. 4 Flowchart of line outage scenarios selection
3.7 Islanding conditions and capacity of WTs
The aim of increasing system resiliency is to deliver power to the
loads after natural disaster as expenditure as possible. In other
words, this paper provides a resilient schedule which predicts the
vulnerable lines and supplies loads in the contingency conditions
by allocating the WTs in the affected areas and changing the
configuration of network to decrease load curtailment, due to the
limited generation capacity. In order to restore the disconnected
loads and feed them as much as possible, disconnected areas
should supplied by WTs. In this regard, each disconnected area
considered as an island which is energised by one WT. In this
study, due to the coordination of NR and WT allocation, the islands
connected together to decrease the number of WTs. Therefore, the
WTs installed at islands if there is no connection to other islands or
generation capacity of adjacent island will not support both islands.
In this way, a binary variable IiWT , m is defined and the mentioned
constraint is modelled as:
∑ IiWT
,m ≤ 1 (27)
m ∈ Nm
Furthermore, the power line Lij is belong to the island m, if the
value of λi j be 1 and both buses be in the area of island m. The first
condition is the necessary condition for the second condition. To
model the second condition, a binary variable δi, m is defined which
indicates either bus i is belong to island m (i.e. δi, m = 1) or not (i.e. modelling system [33] and solved with SBB solver [34].
δi, m = 0). For satisfaction of this condition, the following equality Q5
constraint needed to be satiated within island m
∑ δi, m = ∑ δ j, m = 1 (28)
m ∈ Nm m ∈ Nm
Due to the uncertain nature of wind energy, capacity of WTs is
uncertain parameter which should not exceed the available wind
capacity of each scenario. Subsequently, WTs' capacity is limited
through the following constraints
∀i ∈ Nwt, ∀s ∈ Ns, ∀m ∈ Nm
wind
0 ≤ piWT WT
, s ≤ Ii, m × (0.01 × ϑs ) × PiWT, max (29)
6 IET Renew. Power Gener.
WT
−tg(φlead) × PiWT WT
, s ≤ Qi, s ≤ tg(φlag) × Pi, s (30)
4 Procedure of line outage scenarios selection
In this section, a possibilistic-scenario-based method is introduced
which determines the line outage scenarios. This method considers
load uncertainty and priority, and failure probability for different
zones. Moreover, due to the fact that length of line is important
factor in disrupting it, this factor is taken into consideration in the
proposed methodology. A new index is proposed to combine the
ECLS and the failure probability of different zones. This index is
obtained by multiplying failure probability of the zone that line
outage occurred and ECLS of buses. It is worth mentioning that
failure probability of zone is specified for all components of the
zone and is different, while failure probability of line is especially
defined for each line. The rated values obtained for each line via
following procedure.
Step 1: Select first zone from associated geographical zones of
distribution network.
Step 2: Select a line to be disconnected in the selected zone.
Step 3: Solve the problem considering line outage at the selected
line, with the objectives of EClsh and ECsub minimisation.
Step 4: Calculate the value of load shedding for all buses as
follows:
Ns
LSi = ∑ PiLSs
, (31)
s=1
Step 5: Multiply the failure probability of the selected zone in LSi
as follows:
ZLSi, z = probfail
z × LSi (32)
Step 6: Select next line and repeat Steps 2–5 again, until all lines of
the zone are selected.
Step 7: Go to the next zone and repeat previous steps until all zones
of system are selected.
Step 8: Calculate the rated load shedding by multiplying failure
probability of line l in sum of load shedding of all busses caused by
outage of line as follows:
Nb Nz
RLSl = ∑ ∑ ZLSi z × probfail
l
, (33)
i=1z=1
Step 9: Select the worst line outages scenarios due to the amount of
RLSl.
The above algorithm is depicted in Fig. 4.
5 Case study and simulation results
The IEEE 33-bus distribution system is adopted in paper so as to
investigate the different aspects of proposed resiliency-oriented
WT allocation and NR scheme. The data of network is available in
[32]. The proposed model is mixed integer non-linear
programming problem which is implemented in general algebraic
5.1 Scenarios of line outage
In this section, the line outage scenarios are obtained, subject to the
uncertainty of system demand and different probability for weather
event in different zones of the network. The natural disaster model
is a probabilistic model, which is implemented on multi-zone
network. Since the probability and severity of natural disaster is
different subject to the path of it, the IEEE 33-bus distribution
system is divided into three zones with different failure
probabilities. In this way, assuming three intensity levels for
weather event along its path, the test system in its initial
configuration is divided into three zones, as it is depicted in Fig. 5.
As such, due to the intensity of weather event along its path, failure
probability of zones 1, 2, and 3 are assumed to be 0.6, 0.4, and 0.2,
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2018
respectively. In this study, number of buses that separated from
upstream network by failure of the line connected to each bus is
considered as a priority factor for the system buses. In this method,
number of disconnected buses validate the importance of a bus.
This method is specialised for the radial networks. Due to this
explanation, it is assumed VOLLi is 600 $/MWh for the most
important bus and is 200 $/MWh for the lowest important bus.
Also, it is changed in the interval [600, 200] for other buses. It is
assumed that the lines failure probability is between 0.1 and 0.4 for
shortest and tallest branches, respectively. Also, the linear
interpolation is used for obtaining other branches' failure
probability.
Due to the explanation of scenario generation for system
demand using normal probability density function, five scenarios
are generated for active and reactive demand of system. In this
method, normal probability density function of loads is divided
into five distinct areas considering the standard deviation to be 2%
of mean load. The average values of load in each scenario and
corresponding probability of each scenario are given in Table 2.
In order to find the worst line outage scenarios, the proposed
possibilistic-scenario model is implemented on the test system.
Each zone of system contains number of lines and the proposed
approach is used to select the line outage scenarios in each zone.
Based on the above procedure, value of RLS for all power lines of
system is given in Table 3. It is emphasised from this table that the
lines L12–13 (in zone 1), L5–6 and L27–28 (in zone 2), and L23–24 (in
zone 3) are the worst line outage scenarios, which have a
considerable effect on demand curtailment. It is worth nothing that
selection of two lines in zone 2 is because of high value of RLS in
these lines.
At the reset of this paper, the system is decomposed into five
islands correspond to the line outage of specified in the system, and
optimal location and size for the WTs of these islands are selected.
The capacity of each WT is 1 MW. Also, as it is aforementioned,
the network is reconfigured to connect the islands so as to increase
the performance of system.

5.2 Resilient WT allocation and NR

In this section, results obtained for resilient allocation of WTs and
NR is presented. This level is solved considering the uncertainty of
system demand and wind power generation. As stated, the demand
uncertainty and wind power uncertainty scenarios combined.
Table 4 shows the mixed wind-load scenarios. Cost of buying
power from substation is assumed to be 40 $/MWh. Also, to
include the hardening budget in the wind power generation cost,
the wind power generation costs of zones 1, 2, and 3 are assumed
to be 50, 45, and 40 $/MWh, respectively. The fixed hardening
budget of lines is assumed to be 10 $. It is worth mentioning that
the DSO has the authority to curtail system loads in contingency
conditions to control the system frequency. Also, it is assumed that
the installed WTs in the system have been equipped with DFIG
technologies [35] and they have the capability of contributing in
Fig. 5 IEEE 33-bus distribution system and its different zones with the the black start procedure.
failure probability of each zone At the following, to show the necessity and effectiveness of
proposed methodology, two cases for different states of network
are deployed as follows:
Table 2 Load scenarios and their corresponding
probabilities (A) The system is cut off from the upstream network: In this case,
islands are formed by the location of the faults and the model is
Scenario number μsD, % πsload solved with and without reconfiguration. The location of WTs and
s1 95 0.025 configuration of network is shown in Fig. 6. It should be noted that
s2 97 0.135 in Fig. 6a, without reconfiguration means that the network is in its
initial configuration. These results show the importance of NR in
s3 100 0.680
interconnecting DG-based islands. The value of objective function
s4 103 0.135 without and with reconfiguration is equal to 1613.61 and 1194.06
s5 105 0.025 $, respectively. The effect of NR is evident from this numbers.
Also, to show the value of injected wind power in this two states of

Table 3 RLS of system lines for selection of the line outage scenario
Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3
Li − j RLS Li − j RLS Li − j RLS
L11–12 4.45 L5–6 10.08 L1–2 3.28
L12–13 9.16 L6–7 8.46 L2–3 4.74
L13–14 5.41 L7–8 6.95 L3–4 4.03
L14–15 3.25 L8–9 6.27 L4–5 3.58
L15–16 2.91 L9–10 5.81 L2–19 1.00
L16–17 1.60 L10–11 2.58 L19–20 2.19
L17–18 2.02 L6–26 3.99 L20–21 0.83
L32–33 1.11 L26–27 4.30 L21–22 0.77
— — L27–28 8.56 L3–23 2.97
— — L28–29 7.52 L23–24 5.29
— — L29–30 5.12 L24–25 3.52
— — L30–31 5.81 — —
— — L31–32 2.65 — —

IET Renew. Power Gener. 7

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2018
network, two WT installed buses are arbitrary selected from each non-reconfigured network, respectively. This result shows more
state and their injected power to the grid is illustrated. Fig. 7 shows hardening cost for transmission lines in the reconfigured system.
the injected power of WTs installed at buses 14 and 15, (B) The substation supplies the system loads: In this case, it is
respectively for states (a) and (b) of Fig. 6. Observed that NR assumed the substation injects power to the grid. Same as previous
interconnects the islands and more wind power injected to the grid, case, the results obtained in two states, namely with
which cause lower load shedding. Also, due to Table 4 at which reconfiguration and without reconfiguration. Value of objective
available wind power in scenarios s1, s6, s11, s16, s21 is zero, any function and injected power of substation in all scenarios is
wind power is not injected to the grid. Hence, it can be concluded tabulated in Table 5. As aforementioned, the injected power of
from this figure, in the scenarios with no available wind power substation is scenario independent; therefore its value is the same
more load shedding is occurred; because there is no any generation for all scenarios. These results imply the importance of NR in
source in this scenario to cover the system demands. Also, sum of delivering power of substation from available branches in severe
load curtailment of all scenarios for the system buses is shown in contingency condition, and moreover, in decreasing the different
Fig. 8. Due to this figure, in the networked islands lower load costs of DSO. Location of WTs and configuration of network is
shedding is occurred. The figure for transmission lines' hardening depicted in Fig. 9. It can be seen from Fig. 9b that due to the high
cost (i.e. ECHtr) is 121.008 and 117.560 $ for the reconfigured and operation cost of zone 1 (because of hardening cost), any WT is not
installed in this zone. Instead, by changing the configuration of
network, the loads of this zone is supplied by available sources.
Table 4 Wind-load scenarios and their corresponding
probability
Output power of WT installed at bus 24 which is the same for
Scenario number μsD, % ϑsD, % πsT reconfigured and non-reconfigured network is shown in Fig. 10. It
s1 95 0.00 0.002 is worth mentioning that for the reconfigured network, only the
s2 95 12.87 0.005 WT of bus 24 injects power to the grid and output power of other
two WTs in this state of network is equal to zero. As indicated by
s3 95 49.37 0.010 this figure, coordination of NR and WT allocation has a
s4 95 86.83 0.005 considerable role in decreasing load curtailment when main grid
s5 95 100.00 0.003 supplies the system loads. In Fig. 11, sum of load curtailment of all
25 scenarios for network buses is depicted. As can be seen in this
s6 97 0.00 0.009
figure, in non-reconfigured network, considerable amount of load
s7 97 12.87 0.028 is curtailed at buses 24, and 25. The reason for this is that these
s8 97 49.37 0.055 buses are islanded in this state of network (see Fig. 9a) and
s9 97 86.83 0.027 generation capacity is limited. As can be seen in this figure, in
reconfigured network only 0.5 MW load is curtailed. Generally, it
s10 97 100.00 0.017 can be concluded from these figures that in a non-reconfigured
s11 100 0.00 0.047 networks more wind energy is injected to the grid, because the
s12 100 12.87 0.139 damaged lines have divided the grid into several islands and
therefore, the load of these WT-based islands has been provided via
s13 100 49.37 0.275
WTs of each island. Owing to this circumstances, to control the
s14 100 86.83 0.135 system frequency, the system experiences significant load
s15 100 100.00 0.083 curtailment as shown in Fig. 11. By contrast, in the reconfigured
s16 103 0.00 0.009
system, changing the status of power lines results in connection of
the islands and system loads are supplied through upstream
s17 103 12.87 0.028 network which has lower operation cost in comparison with that of
s18 103 49.37 0.055 wind power generation in zones 1 and 2. Also, in this case, the
s19 103 86.83 0.027 lower load shedding is occurred in comparison with that of the
non-reconfigured system.
s20 103 100.00 0.017
s21 105 0.00 0.002
6 Conclusion
s22 105 12.87 0.005
After occurrence of natural disaster, loads of impacted areas
s23 105 49.37 0.010 disconnected from main grid and there is need to make an
s24 105 86.83 0.005 alternative solution to supply power to the disconnected areas. In
s25 105 100.00 0.003 such circumstances, implementation of DERs will be more
important and viable solution. The aim of this paper is to provide

Fig. 6 Location of WTs within their islands

(a) Without, (b) With reconfiguration in State (A)

8 IET Renew. Power Gener.

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2018
Fig. 7 Injected wind power of buses 14 (without reconfiguration) and 15 (with reconfiguration) for all scenarios for State (A)

Fig. 8 Sum of load curtailment of all scenarios in system buses for State (A)

Table 5 Value of objective function and injected power of substation in State (B)
Scenario number OFDSO, $ Pisub
, s , MW

without reconfiguration 1102.28 0.9

with reconfiguration 127.13 4.1

Fig. 9 Location of WTs within their islands

(a) Without, (b) With reconfiguration for State (B)

resilient solution in case of major line outages after weather events
in the network. In this regard, the network is optimally
reconfigured, simultaneously, with the optimal allocation of WTs
IET Renew. Power Gener.
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2018
within their islands so as to enhance the performance of isolated
islands. In this methodology, each island energised by one WT
which is optimally allocated in the system. The number of islands
9
Fig. 10 Injected wind power of buses 24 for non-reconfigured and reconfigured network for State (B)
Fig. 11 Sum of load curtailment of all scenarios in system buses for State (B)
is dependent on the line outages in which the distribution network
is divided into different areas. At first, an algorithm is proposed for
selecting the line outage scenarios caused by the natural disaster.
The proposed model is possibilistic-scenario-based model which Q6 [2]
has considered different failure probability for the system lines
correspond to their associated zone. Then, a two-stage stochastic
optimisation approach is proposed for the resilient allocation of
WTs and NR after natural disaster with different economic
objectives. The uncertainty of wind power generation and system
demand are taken into account. The proposed method can help the
DSOs in case of resilient distribution system scheduling. It is worth
mentioning that the role of other kinds of DERs will be
investigated in future studies of the authors.
Generally, the following results can be drawn from simulation
results:
• Coordination of WT allocation and NR increase the
performance of WT-based islands.
• Hardening budget of WTs has an influence in installing WTs
from economic perspective.
• Coordination of NR and WT allocation decrease the load
curtailment in emergency condition.
• By hardening the line between substation and network and using
the topology reconfiguration, DSO can decrease the load
shedding and also costs of delivering power to the WT-based
islands; however, lines’ hardening cost is increased.
10
7 References
[1] ‘Economic benefits of increasing electric grid resilience to weather outages’,
Presidential Administration, USA, 2013
Campbell, R.J.: ‘Weather-related power outages and electric system
resiliency’. Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress,
Washington, DC, 2012
[3] Gholami, A., Aminifar, F., Shahidehpour, M.: ‘Front lines against the
darkness: enhancing the resilience of the electricity grid through microgrid
facilities’, IEEE Electrif. Mag., 2016, 4, pp. 18–24
[4] Gao, H., Chen, Y., Xu, Y., et al.: ‘Dynamic load shedding for an islanded
microgrid with limited generation resources’, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib.,
2016, 10, (12), pp. 2953–2961
[5] Khodaei, A.: ‘Resiliency-oriented microgrid optimal scheduling’, IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid, 2014, 5, (4), pp. 1584–1591
[6] Manshadi, S.D., Khodayar, M.E.: ‘Resilient operation of multiple energy
carrier microgrids’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2015, 6, (5), pp. 2283–2292
[7] 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
[8] Liu, X., Shahidehpour, M., Li, Z., et al.: ‘Microgrids for enhancing the power
grid resilience in extreme conditions’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2017, 8, (2),
pp. 589–597
[9] AlMajali, A., Viswanathan, A., Neuman, C.: ‘Resilience evaluation of
demand response as spinning reserve under cyber-physical threats’,
Electronics, 2017, 6, (1), pp. 1–14
[10] Ding, T., Lin, Y., Bie, Z., et al.: ‘A resilient microgrid formation strategy for
load restoration considering master-slave distributed generators and topology
reconfiguration’, Appl. Energy, 2017, 199, pp. 205–216
[11] 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
[12] Xu, Y., Liu, C.C., Schneider, K., et al.: ‘Microgrids for service restoration to
critical load in a resilient distribution system’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2016,
9, (1), pp. 426–437
IET Renew. Power Gener.
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2018
 [13] Ma, S., Chen, B., Wang, Z.: ‘Resilience enhancement strategy for distribution
systems under extreme weather events’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2017
Q7 [14] Salman, A.M., Li, Y., Stewart, M.G.: ‘Evaluating system reliability and
targeted hardening strategies of power distribution systems subjected to
hurricanes’, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 2015, 144, pp. 319–333
[15] Wang, X., Li, Z., Shahidehpour, M., et al.: ‘Robust line hardening strategies
for improving the resilience of distribution systems with variable renewable
resources’, IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, 2017
[16] Chen, C., Wang, J., Qiu, F., et al.: ‘Resilient distribution system by microgrids
formation after natural disasters’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2016, 7, (2), pp.
958–966
[17] Wang, Z., Wang, J.: ‘Self-healing resilient distribution systems based on
sectionalization into microgrids’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2015, 30, (6), pp.
3139–3149
[18] Rahimi, K., Davoudi, M.: ‘Electric vehicles for improving resilience of
distribution systems’, Sustain. Cities Soc., 2018, 36, pp. 246–256
[19] Gholami, A., Shekari, T., Aminifar, F., et al.: ‘Microgrid scheduling with
uncertainty: the quest for resilience’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2016, 7, (6),
pp. 2849–2858
[20] Shang, D.R.: ‘Pricing of emergency dynamic microgrid power service for
distribution resilience enhancement’, Energy Policy, 2017, 111, pp. 321–335
[21] Krishnamurthy, V., Kwasinski, A.: ‘Effects of power electronics, energy
storage, power distribution architecture, and lifeline dependencies on
microgrid resiliency during extreme events’, IEEE J. Emerging Sel. Top.
Power Electron., 2016, 4, (4), pp. 1310–1323
[22] Olamaei, J., Niknam, T., Gharehpetian, G.B.: ‘Application of particle swarm
optimization for distribution feeder reconfiguration considering distributed
generators’, Appl. Math. Comput., 2008, 201, pp. 575–586
[23] Yang, B., Yu, T., Shu, H., et al.: ‘Passivity-based sliding-mode control design
for optimal power extraction of a PMSG based variable speed wind turbine’,
Renew. Energy, 2018, 119, pp. 577–589
[24] Yang, B., Yu, T., Shu, H., et al.: ‘Robust sliding-mode control of wind energy
conversion systems for optimal power extraction via nonlinear perturbation
observers’, Appl. Energy, 2018, 210, pp. 711–723
IET Renew. Power Gener.
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2018
[25] Wang, Z., Shen, C., Xu, Y., et al.: ‘Risk-limiting load restoration for resilience
enhancement with intermittent energy resources’, arXiv2:1704.05411, 2017
[26] Hurricane Katrina 2005. Available at https://sites.google.com/a/mail.snu.edu/
earth-s-natural-disasters-online/e-n-d---spring-2012-online/bowie-courtney
[27] Lin, Y., Bie, Z.: ‘Tri-level optimal hardening plan for a resilient distribution
system considering reconfiguration and DG islanding’, Appl. Energy, 2017,
210, pp. 1266–1279
[28] Panteli, M., Mancarella, P., Trakas, D., et al.: ‘Metrics and quantification of
operational and infrastructure resilience in power systems’, IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., 2017, 32, (6), pp. 4732–4742
[29] Mohseni-Bonab, S.M., Rabiee, A., Mohammadi-Ivatloo, B.: ‘Voltage stability
constrained multi-objective optimal reactive power dispatch under load and
wind power uncertainties: a stochastic approach’, Renew. Energy, 2016, 85,
pp. 598–609
[30] Nikkhah, S., Rabiee, A.: ‘Optimal wind power generation investment,
considering voltage stability of power systems’, Renew. Energy, 2018, 115,
pp. 308–325
[31] Rabiee, A., Soroudi, A., Mohammadi-Ivatloo, B., et al.: ‘Corrective voltage
control scheme considering demand response and stochastic wind power’,
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2014, 29, (6), pp. 2965–2973
[32] Baran, M.E., Wu, F.F.: ‘Network reconfiguration in distribution systems for
loss reduction and load balancing’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1989, 4, (2),
pp. 1401–1407
[33] Soroudi, A.: ‘Power system optimization modeling in GAMS’ (Springer, 2017)
Q8 [34] Bussieck, R.M., Vigerske, S.: ‘MINLP solver software’, ‘Wiley Encyclopedia
of Operations Research and Management’ (2010)
Q9 [35] Yang, B., Jiang, L., Wang, L., et al.: ‘Nonlinear maximum power point
tracking control and modal analysis of DFIG based wind turbine’, Int. J.
Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2016, 74, pp. 429–436
11
IET-RPG20185237
Author Queries

Q Please make sure the supplied images are correct for both online (colour) and print (black and white). If changes are required
please supply corrected source files along with any other corrections needed for the paper.
Q1 Please confirm the inserted email id for the corresponding author.
Q2 Please expand the abbreviation DSO.
Q3 Please check the conditions above on Eqs. (8, 14, 17, 29) for correctness.
Q4 Equations have been renumbered from (21) to (33) as per style here and elsewhere in the text. Please check and confirm.
Q5 Please expand the abbreviation SBB.
Q6 Please provide author names or collaboration name in Ref. [1].
Q7 Please provide volume number, page range in Refs. [13, 15].
Q8 Please provide place of publisher in Ref. [33].
Q9 Please provide editor names. Publisher, place of publisher and page range in Ref. [34].

12 IET Renew. Power Gener.

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2018

View publication stats