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

net/publication/373775480

An Enhanced Tuna Swarm Algorithm for Optimizing FACTS and Wind Turbine
Allocation in Power Systems

Article in Electric Power Components and Systems · September 2023

DOI: 10.1080/15325008.2023.2237011

CITATIONS READS

2 141

4 authors, including:

Ayman Awad Mohamed Hosny

Aswan University Ministry of Electricity and Renewable Energy
18 PUBLICATIONS 96 CITATIONS 93 PUBLICATIONS 1,242 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Mohamed F. El-Naggar
Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University
51 PUBLICATIONS 735 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohamed F. El-Naggar on 25 September 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Electric Power Components and Systems

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uemp20

An Enhanced Tuna Swarm Algorithm for

Optimizing FACTS and Wind Turbine Allocation in
Power Systems

Ayman Awad, Salah Kamel, Mohamed H. Hassan & Mohamed F. Elnaggar

To cite this article: Ayman Awad, Salah Kamel, Mohamed H. Hassan & Mohamed F.
Elnaggar (2023): An Enhanced Tuna Swarm Algorithm for Optimizing FACTS and Wind
Turbine Allocation in Power Systems, Electric Power Components and Systems, DOI:
10.1080/15325008.2023.2237011

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15325008.2023.2237011

Published online: 08 Sep 2023.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uemp20
Electric Power Components and Systems, 0(0): 1–16, 2023
# 2023 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1532-5008 print / 1532-5016 online
DOI: 10.1080/15325008.2023.2237011

An Enhanced Tuna Swarm Algorithm for

Optimizing FACTS and Wind Turbine Allocation in
Power Systems
Ayman Awad,1 Salah Kamel,1 Mohamed H. Hassan,1 and Mohamed F.
Elnaggar2,3
1
Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Aswan University, Aswan, Egypt
2
Department of Electrical Engineering, College of Engineering, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, Saudi
Arabia
3
Department of Electrical Power and Machines Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Helwan University, Helwan, Egypt

CONTENTS
Abstract—The significance of FACTS devices has been
1. Introduction increasing as they have the ability to donate compensation for
power systems, making a significant impact on power system
2. Facts Devices
stability and power transfer issues. However, to optimize the
3. Modeling performance of these devices, it is important to carefully select
4. Problem Formulation their sizes and locations. This article aims to determine the
5. The Proposed Technique optimal size and location of several FACTS devices to achieve
two objectives: minimizing fuel costs and minimizing power
6. Test and Results losses. These objectives are solved one by one, then combined
7. Conclusions into a multi-objective function to minimize gross cost. An
References Enhanced Tuna Swarm Optimization is proposed to improve the
performance of the original version of Tuna Swarm Optimization.
The traditional Tuna swarm optimization is improved relying on
“high and low-velocity ratios” included in the Marine Predator
Algorithm. The main advantage of this approach is to avoid the
risk of the optimal value being trapped in local minima. The IEEE
30-bus standard system is used as a case study, with SVC, TCSC,
and TCPS installed as FACTS devices, and two wind turbines as
renewable resources penetration. Different optimization algorithms
are used, and a comparison is made to prove the superiority of the
proposed algorithm compared to the other tested algorithms.

Keywords: power systems, optimization, FACTS, power losses, fuel cost
Received 18 March 2023; accepted 8 July 2023
Address correspondence to Mohamed F. Elnaggar, Department of Electrical
Engineering, College of Engineering, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz
University, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia. E-mail: mfelnaggar@yahoo.com
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Motivation and Incitement
To ensure consistent electricity supply and accommodate new
grid connections, power system operators employ diverse tech-
niques, including FACTS devices that can control transmission
line parameters. Such devices enhance power transfer and load
capacity of the entire system by managing voltage magnitudes,
phase angles, and line impedances [1,2].
While installing FACTS devices is important for reaping
their benefits, it is crucial to determine their optimal sizing
and placement to ensure their maximum utilization. To

1
2 Electric Power Components and Systems, Vol. 0 (2023), No. 0
NOMENCLATURE
ABC-DE Artificial bee colony – differential evolution
APSO Adaptive particle swarm optimization
ETSO Enhanced tuna swarm optimization
FACTS Flexible AC transmission systems
GA Genetic algorithm
GBO Gradient based optimization
GOA Grasshopper optimization algorithm
GWO Grey wolf optimization
HHO Harris Hawk optimization
IMFO Improved moth flame optimization
LAPO Lightning attachment procedure optimization
LOA Lion optimization algorithm
MEEPSO Metaheuristic evolutionary particle swarm optimization
MLAPO Modified lightning attachment procedure optimization
MPA Marine predator algorithm
PSO Particle swarm optimization
solve the nonlinear problems related to this issue, various
optimization techniques were implemented for that pur-
pose. Such techniques have proven their ability to solve
nonlinear problems in each aspect in our daily life, includ-
ing the problems related to power systems. Such techniques
were inspired from natural activities, simulating biological
activities, like GOA [3], GWO [4], HHO [5], LOA [6],
and SSA [7]. Other optimization techniques are simulating
physical phenomena, like AEFA [8], RFO [9], LAPO [10],
SIO [11], and TEO [12]. From this concern, power system
researchers globally have explored various optimization
techniques for solving the issues of power systems, and of
course the optimal allocation of FACTS devices is one of
the main issues aimed by the researchers.
1.2. Literature Review
Various optimization techniques have been successfully
used to determine the optimal placement and sizing of
FACTS devices, resulting in improved power system
parameters such as voltage stability, power loss reduction,
and power flow regulation. Numerous studies have utilized
optimization techniques for this purpose. In Ref. [13], an
updated IMFO algorithm was introduced to enhance volt-
age stability and loadability of the IEEE 30 bus system,
mitigating the risk of voltage collapse by optimizing the
allocation of SVC and STATCOM. Reference [14]
explores the optimal positioning, sizing, and coordination
of SVC, TCSC, and UPFC to minimize power losses in
both the IEEE 14 bus and IEEE 30 bus systems using
whale optimization algorithm (WOA). The obtained results
are compared with those obtained using GA and PSO.
RFO Rain fall optimization
SIO Sonar inspired optimization
SSA Squirrel search algorithm
SSR Sub-synchronous resonance
STAT
COM Static synchronous compensator
SVC Static VAR compensator
TCSC Thyristor controlled series compensator
TCPS Thyristor controlled phase shifter
TCR Thyristor-controlled reactor
TEO Thermal exchange optimization
TLBO Teaching learning-based optimization
TSC Thyristor switched capacitor
TSO Tuna swarm optimization
UPFC Unified power flow controller
Reference [15] proposes the use of an ABC-DE hybrid
algorithm to determine the optimal placement and sizing of
UPFC, TCSC, and SVC to minimize voltage deviation,
losses, cost, and line loading index in the IEEE 30 bus sys-
tem. In reference [16], multiple algorithms are employed to
investigate the optimal location and sizing of TCSC, SVC,
and TCPS in the IEEE 14 bus system, aiming for fuel cost
reduction, and the outcomes of the algorithms are com-
pared. Reference [17] examines the optimal placement and
sizing of TCSC and SVC to enhance the voltage profile of
the IEEE 14 bus system using PSO combined with sensi-
tivity indices.
More studies are introduced, defining the optimal size
and location of SVC using TLBO for voltage profile
improvement and power losses reduction [18], and using
various algorithms for cost reduction [19,20]. Also, there
are a number of studies that defines the optimal size and
location of TCSC using the updated MEEPSO algorithm to
improve the loadability of the system [21], and using PSO
and APSO for power losses reduction [22,23]. Moreover,
more studies are investigating the optimal location and size
of SVC and TCSC for improving voltage profile using
PSO [24] and the updated MLAPO [25], for power losses
minimization using Eigen values structural analysis [26]
and for loadability improvement and installation cost mini-
mization using TLBO [27].
1.3. Contribution and Paper Organization
This study explores the optimal sizing and placement of
six FACTS devices in a modified IEEE 30 bus system,
which incorporates two wind turbines, to achieve various
 Awad et al.: An Enhanced Tuna Swarm Algorithm for Optimizing FACTS and Wind Turbine Allocation in Power Systems
objective functions: reducing power loss and minimizing
generation costs. Both of these objective functions are
solved solely, then they are combined as a multi objective
function optimization problem. A newly developed hybrid
optimization technique is proposed for achieving the
objective functions called Enhanced Tuna Swarm
Optimization (ETSO). The proposed technique is consid-
ered as an update to the traditional TSO algorithm [28],
and the outcomes of the proposed technique is compared
with the outcomes of TSO and GBO [29] for each object-
ive function. Figure 1 shows a schematic overview for the
achieved work in this article.
The article aims to:

Evaluate optimal power flow of the modified IEEE 30
bus system with FACTS devices integration.

Optimize the size and placement of multiple FACTS
devices to achieve different objective functions.

Investigate the ETSO hybrid optimization technique.

Compare the outcomes of different optimization
techniques.
The article is organized as follows: Section 2 provides a
literature review of the FACTS devices used, Section 3
presents their modeling, Section 4 introduces the problem
formulation, Section 5 describes the proposed algorithm,
Section 6 presents the results and discussion, and finally,
Section 7 concludes the article.
2. FACTS DEVICES
FACTS devices are a combination of conventional power
system components, such as transformers, resistors, capaci-
tors, and inductors, and power electronics components,
such as transistors and thyristors, used in power systems.
They provide control over voltage magnitude, transmission
line impedance, and phase angle between buses, which
enhances power flow and system performance. Integration
of FACTS devices in a power system can lead to various
FIGURE 1. Schematic diagram for optimization processes.
3
benefits, such as improved control over active and reactive
power flow, reduced network losses, increased loading cap-
ability, enhanced power quality and voltage profile,
improved system security and reliability, and decreased
power losses. This article utilizes three FACTS devices.
2.1. TCSC
TCSC is categorized as a series FACTS device, with a
structure comprising a series capacitor with parallel con-
nection with a TCR. The entire combination is connected
in series with the desired transmission line. This capacitor-
TCR combination provides a controllable capacitive react-
ance to the system in a smooth manner, as illustrated in
Figure 2.
Since power flow in a transmission line is influenced by
the line’s inductive reactance, the addition of capacitive
reactance through TCSC allows the system operator to
effectively cancel out a portion of the line’s inductive
reactance. As a result, the line’s total impedance is
reduced, thereby increasing its power transfer capacity. The
total reactance of the line can be depicted as follows
[30,31]:
XTotal ¼ XTL þ XTCSC (1)
XCTCSC XLTCSC ðaÞ XCTCSC
XTCSC ¼ ¼

XLTCSC ðaÞ  XCTCSC 1  XCTCSC =XLTCSC ðaÞ
XCTCSC
¼ (2)
1K
XCTCSC
K¼ (3)
XLTCSC ðaÞ
The transmission line’s reactance is denoted as XTL,
while XTCSC represents the reactance contributed to the
transmission line by TCSC. The capacitive reactance of
TCSC is represented by XCTCSC , while XLTCSC stands for the
inductive reactance of TCSC. The thyristor’s firing angle is
represented by a, and the compensation coefficient is repre-
sented by K.
FIGURE 2. TCSC schematic diagram.
4 Electric Power Components and Systems, Vol. 0 (2023), No. 0
By adjusting the firing angle a and the compensation
coefficient “K” as described in Eqs. (1)–(3), the operator
can manipulate the TCSC’s reactance that is delivered to
the transmission line. However, it is important to note that
the TCSC has three distinct modes of operation, as outlined
in [30,31]:

Blocked mode: In this mode, the thyristors remain
untriggered and the firing angle a is set to 180 . As a
result, no pulses activate the thyristor’s gate, rendering
the thyristors nonconductive. The TCSC’s reactance is
entirely capacitive, with XTCSC ¼ XCTCSC, and it func-
tions as a fixed series capacitor.

Bypass mode: Here, the thyristors are fully triggered
and current flow over them is continuous and sinus-
oidal, with a ¼ 90 . The reactor is completely operated
with the capacitor, and the TCSC acts as a series cap-
acitor shunted with a reactor. In this mode, the total
reactance of the TCSC is slightly inductive, as the
reactor’s susceptance is greater than the capacitor’s.
The primary goal of this mode is to safeguard the cap-
acitor against transient overcurrents of the line.

Control mode: In this mode, the thyristors are trig-
gered to deliver a controlled amount of inductive cur-
rent with the capacitive current of the capacitor. As a
result, the TCSC provides a controlled inductive or
capacitive reactance to the transmission line, depend-
ing on the firing angle (a), while considering the possi-
bility of SSR.
2.2. TCPS
A phase-shifting technique is utilized by TCPS, which is a
series FACTS device, to regulate load flow in a transmis-
sion line. By adjusting the voltage phase of bus “m” in
relation to bus “n,” active power flow control is achieved,
enhancing power system stability and reducing frequency
oscillations [32]. Figure 3 depicts a diagram illustrating
TCPS.
As depicted in Figure 3, TCPS can serve as a crucial
connection between two parts of a power system, where:
Vm ¼ jVm j/a
Vn ¼ jVn j/ða þ bÞ
and:
FIGURE 3. Schematic diagram of TCPS.
b¼ hþu (6)
where h represents the phase shift occurs due to the charac-
teristics of transmission line, and u represents the phase
shift delivered by TCPS.
2.3. SVC
The most commonly used shunt FACTS device is SVC,
which is capable of injecting current into the system at a
point of connection to control the voltage. It is utilized for
various purposes such as voltage regulation, voltage stabil-
ity restoration, transient stability maintenance, and reduc-
tion of power losses.
A shunt compensation device can be either a variable
impedance VAR compensator or a converter-based VAR
compensator. In the case of the SVC device, it is a variable
impedance VAR compensator that consists of a TCR in par-
allel with several TSCs. The TCR rating is slightly higher
than the rating of a single TSC, and together they allow for
smoothly controlled reactive power injection to regulate the
voltage magnitude [33]. Figure 4 depicts the schematic dia-
gram for an SVC with three TSCs and a TCR.
The effectiveness of SVC is determined by its total cap-
acitive rating, where:
Qcmax ¼ nQc (7)
where Qcmax is the total capacitive reactive power of SVC,
Qc is the capacitive reactive power delivered by a single
TSC, and n is the number of TSCs included in SVC.
To operate the SVC in capacitive mode, a single TSC is
activated, and the desired amount of capacitive reactive
(4)
(5)
FIGURE 4. Schematic diagram of SVC with 3 TSC and
a TCR.
 Awad et al.: An Enhanced Tuna Swarm Algorithm for Optimizing FACTS and Wind Turbine Allocation in Power Systems 5

power is adjusted by the TCR. If the required capacitive

reactive power exceeds the TSC rating, another TSC is Qba ¼ Va2 Gab  Va Vb Gab cos ðaa  ab Þ
turned on, and the TCR regulates the capacitive reactive þ Va Vb Bab sin ðaa  ab Þ (12)
power delivered to the system. This means that TSCs are
activated sequentially based on the desired amount of cap- where:
acitive reactive power, and the TCR controls the value of Rab
Gab ¼ 2
(13)
the capacitive reactive power supplied. This process can be R2ab þ ½ð1  k ÞXab 
expressed as:
Qcreq ¼ mQc þ QL ðhÞ (8) ð1  k ÞXab
Bab ¼ 2
(14)
where Qcreq is the required capacitive reactive power, m is R2ab þ ½ð1  k ÞXab 
the number of operating TSCs, Qc is the capacitive reactive where Va and Vb represent the voltage magnitudes at the
power delivered by a single TSC, QL is the inductive react- sending and receiving buses, respectively, while aa and ab
ive power produced by the TCR, and h is the firing angle are the corresponding phase angles. The conductance and
of the thyristors. susceptance of the transmission line that connects the two
To operate SVC in inductive mode, all TSCs are turned buses are denoted by Gab and Bab, respectively.
off while the TCR is active. The firing angles of the thyris-
tors are then adjusted to ensure that the TCR provides the
necessary inductive reactive power to the system. 3.2. TCPS
The TCPS is designed to modify the phase angle of a
transmission line while maintaining the voltage magnitude
3. MODELING
at a 1:1 ratio, as discussed in Section 2.2. The power flow
3.1. TCSC equation for a transmission line with TCPS can be obtained
TCSC‘s compensating reactance can be utilized for control- from the equivalent model illustrated in Figure 6 and the
ling the transmission line’s reactance. The desired react- phase shift generated by the TCPS, as discussed in Refs.
ance can be determined by adjusting the firing angle (a). [32,33]:
The overall transmission line reactance can be expressed in Va2 Gab
Pab ¼
terms of the compensation coefficient “K,” which is elabo- cos2 u
rated in Section 2.1. Figure 5 illustrates the equivalent Va Vb
model of TCSC.  ½Gab cos ðDH þ uÞ þ Bab sin ðDH þ uÞ
cos u
The power flow formulation for a transmission line with (15)
a TCSC can be expressed as follows [34,35]:
Pab ¼ Va2 Gab  Va Vb Gab cos ðaa  ab Þ Va2 Bab
Qab ¼
 Va Vb Bab sin ðaa  ab Þ (9) cos2 u
Va Vb
 ½Gab sin ðDH þ uÞ  Bab cos ðDH þ uÞ
Qab ¼ Va2 Bab þ Va Vb Gab cos ðaa  ab Þ cos u
(16)
 Va Vb Bab sin ðaa  ab Þ (10)

Pba ¼ Va2 Gab  Va Vb Gab cos ðaa  ab Þ

þ Va Vb Bab sin ðaa  ab Þ (11)

FIGURE 5. Modeling TCSC. FIGURE 6. Equivalent model of TCSC.

6 Electric Power Components and Systems, Vol. 0 (2023), No. 0

Vb2 Gab And, the delivered reactive power to the point of con-
Pba ¼
cos2 u nection can be expressed as:
Va Vb Qsvc ¼ Vi2 Bsvc (24)
 ½Gab cos ðDH þ uÞ þ Bab sin ðDH þ uÞ
cos u
(17)
4. PROBLEM FORMULATION
V 2 Bab
Qba ¼ b 2 The system under test comprises of four thermal generators,
cos u
two wind turbines (i.e., generators “5” and “11”), and six
Va Vb
 ½Gab sin ðDH þ uÞ  Bab cos ðDH þ uÞ FACTS devices distributed throughout the system, which
cos u
include two TCSCs, two TCPSs, and two SVCs. This informa-
(18)
tion was previously discussed in Section 1. To formulate the
where DH ¼ Ha  Hb. One can express the power, objective functions, the following can be considered:
both active and reactive, that is injected by the TCPS into
the transmission line [34,35]:
4.1. Cost of Generation and Power Losses Calculation
Pan ¼ Gab Va2 tan2 u 4.1.1 Cost of Generation. The cost of generation for the
 
 Va Vb tan u Gab sin ðDHÞ  Bab cos ðDHÞ (19) modified system, which includes two wind turbines, is the
sum of the costs of all generation units, including the wind
Qan ¼ Bab Va2 tan2 u turbines. Because of the unpredictability of wind turbine
 power output, the generation cost may be expressed as
þ Va Vb tan u Gab cos ðDHÞ þ Bab sin ðDHÞ (20)
[36]:
  X
nTG X
nwt
Pbn ¼ Va Vb tan u Gab sin ðDHÞ  Bab cos ðDHÞ (21) Gcost ¼ Gcost ðPTGi Þ þ ½Gcostwt j ðPwtsj Þ
i¼1 j¼1
 
Qbn ¼ Va Vb tan u Gab cos ðDHÞ þ Bab sin ðDHÞ (22) þ GcostRwtj ðPwtj  Pwtavj Þ þ GcostPwtj ðPwtavj  Pwtsj Þ
(25)
Gcost ðPTGi Þ represents the thermal generator’s generation
3.3. SVC
cost, Gcostwt j stands for the direct generation cost of the
In Section 2.3, it was clarified that the control of voltage at wind turbine, GcostRwtj stands for the wind turbine’s reserve
a coupling point can be achieved by the SVC through the cost, GcostPwtj stands for the penalty cost of underestimation
injection of reactive power with the use of the firing angle
associated with the wind turbine, nTG ¼ f1, 2, 8, 13g,
(h). This allows the SVC to be represented as a variable
and nwt ¼ f5, 11g:
susceptance, illustrated in Figure 7.
The direct cost associated with a wind turbine’s sched-
Calculating the susceptance of SVC as following [33]:
uled power can be determined using the following formula:
Bsvc ¼ BC þ BL ðhÞ (23)
Gcostwt j ðPwtsj Þ ¼ gwtj (26)

This formula involves the direct generation cost coeffi-

cient of wind turbine “j,” denoted by gwtj, and the sched-
uled power of the wind turbine, denoted by Pwtsj.
For a wind turbine, the reserve cost can be expressed as:
GcostRwtj ðPwtsj  Pwtavj Þ ¼ KRwtj ðPwtsj  Pwtavj Þ
ð Pwtrj
¼ KPwtj ðPwt  Pwtsj Þfwtj ðPwt ÞdPwt
Pwtsj

(27)
The equation includes KRwtj, which represents the reserve
FIGURE 7. Equivalent model of SVC. cost of wind turbine “j,” Pwtavj, which represents the power
 Awad et al.: An Enhanced Tuna Swarm Algorithm for Optimizing FACTS and Wind Turbine Allocation in Power Systems 7

that is available from wind turbine “j,” and fwtj(Pwt), which

depicts the probability density function of wind turbine. Qgen:a þ QTCPS:a þ QSVC:a
Xnb
Also, for a wind turbine, the penalty cost can be ¼ QDem:a þ Va 1 Vb Yab sin ðhab þ aa  ab Þ
expressed as:
8a 2 nb
GcostPwtj ðPwtavj  Pwtsj Þ ¼ KPwtj ðPwtavj  Pwtsj Þ
(33)
ð Pwtsj
¼ KPwtj ðPwtsj  Pwt Þfwtj Pwt dPwt Here, PTCPS:a and QTCPS:a denote the active and reactive
0
power that are delivered to bus “a” by TCPS, respectively,
(28) while QSVC:a represents the reactive power that is delivered
where Kpwtj is the coefficient of penalty cost for wind tur- to bus “a” by SVC. It should be noted that SVC does not
bine “j.” inject active power.

4.1.2. Power Losses. The expression of power losses can

be depicted as following: 4.3. Inequality Operating Constraints

X
nl h i The inequality constraints for the optimization process can
Plosses ¼ Gi ðabÞ Va2 þ Vb2 þ 2Va Vb cosðaa  ab Þ be represented as follows:
i¼1 min
Pgen:i  Pgen:i  Pgen:i
max
8i 2 ngen (34)
(29)
The conductance of the transmission line between buses
gen:i  Qgen:i  Qgen:i 8i 2 ngen
Qmin max
(35)
“a” and “b” is denoted by Gi(ab), while Va and Vb repre-
sent the voltages of buses “a” and “b,” respectively.
Additionally, aa and ab are the phase angles associated
min
Vgen:i  Vgen:i  Vgen:i
max
8i 2 ngen (36)
with buses “a” and “b,” respectively.
Equations (34)–(36) impose constraints on thermal and
wind generators and pertain to the generated power, volt-
4.2. Equality Operating Constraints age, and power output limits of generator “i.”
To achieve equilibrium in the optimization process, the fol- min
VLB:j  VLB:j  VLB:j
max
8j 2 nLB (37)
lowing constraints must be submitted:
Xnb
Pgen:a ¼ PDem:a þ Va 1 Vb Yab cos ðhab þ aa  ab Þ 8a 2 nb STL:k  STL:k
max
8K 2 nTL (38)
(30)
Equations (37) and (38) illustrate the security constraints
Xnb that apply to load buses and branches, where VLB:j is the
Qgen:a ¼ QDem:a þ Va 1
Vb Yab sin ðhab þ aa  ab Þ 8a voltage of load bus “j,” and STL:k is the total power trans-
2 nb ferred by transmission line “k.”
(31) Ttmin  Tt  Ttmax 8t 2 nt (39)
In Eqs. (30) and (31), Pgen:a represents the active gen- Transformer constraint can be expressed by Eq, (39),
erated power at bus “a,” PDem:a denotes the load demand where Tt is the transformer capacity limit.
at bus “a,” Qgen:a denotes the reactive generated power, min
kTCSC:x  kTCSC:x  kTCSC:x
max
8x 2 nTCSC (40)
QDem:a represents the load demand at bus “a,” h represents
the admittance of line “a–b,” and a represents the phase
angle associated with the line. By incorporating FACTS umin
TCPS:y  uTCPS:y  uTCPS:y 8y 2 nTCPS
max
(41)
devices into these equations:
SVC:z  QSVC:z  QSVC:z 8z 2 nSVC
Qmin max
Pgen:a þ PTCPS:a ¼ PDem:a (42)
Xnb
þ Va 1 Vb Yab cos ðhab þ aa  ab Þ 8a The limits of TCSC, TCPS, and SVC are expressed by
Eqs. (40)–(42) respectively, where kTCSC:x is the firing angle
2 nb of TCSC “x,” uTCPS:y is phase shift performed by TCPS “y,”
(32) and QSVC:z is the delivered reactive power by SVC “z.”
8 Electric Power Components and Systems, Vol. 0 (2023), No. 0

FIGURE 8. Flowchart of TSO.

5. THE PROPOSED TECHNIQUE drive it toward shallow water, a more favorable foraging
location. The mathematical expression for this strategy is
5.1. TSO Algorithm
as follows:
The TSO algorithm is based on the foraging behavior of
Xi ð t þ 1 Þ
tuna swarms. It employs two distinct foraging strategies, 8 
>  
namely spiral foraging and parabolic foraging, to create an >
> a : X ð t Þ þ b:Xbest ðtÞ  Xi ðtÞ þ a2 :Xi ðtÞ, i ¼ 1,
>
>
1 best
effective metaheuristic algorithm. The mathematical model >
<   
for the TSO algorithm is presented in this section as ¼ a : X ðtÞ þ b:Xbest ðtÞ  Xi ðtÞ þ a2 :Xi1 ðtÞ,
>
>
1 best
follows: >
> ,
>
>
: i ¼ 2, 3, ::::NP,
5.1.1. Initialization. Similar to other metaheuristic algo- t
rithms based on swarm intelligence, the TSO optimization if r and < (44)
tmax
process commences by randomly and uniformly generating
initial populations within the search space. Xi ðt þ 1Þ
8   
Xi ¼ lb þ r1 ðub  lbÞ, i ¼ 1, 2, ::::, n (43) >
< a1 : Xr and ðtÞ þ b:Xr and ðtÞ  Xi ðtÞ þ a2 :Xi ðtÞ, i ¼ 1,
¼    ,
>
: a1 : Xr and ðtÞ þ b:Xr and ðtÞ  Xi ðtÞ þ a2 :Xi1 ðtÞ, i ¼ 2, 3, ::::NP,
Here, lb, ub denote the lower and upper limits of the
search space, respectively. r1 refers to a random vector that t
if r and 
is uniformly distributed in the interval [0, 1], n represents tmax
the number of tuna populations.
t
a1 ¼ a þ ð1  aÞ: ,
5.1.2. Spiral Foraging. The spiral foraging mechanism of tmax
TSO is derived from the feeding behavior of tuna, which
involves them spiraling in the direction of their prey to
 Awad et al.: An Enhanced Tuna Swarm Algorithm for Optimizing FACTS and Wind Turbine Allocation in Power Systems 9

FIGURE 9. Flowchart of ETSO.

t in a way to surround the prey. This is achieved by using

a2 ¼ ð1  aÞ  ð1  aÞ: ,
tmax the following formulation:

b ¼ ebl : cos ð2pbÞ, Xi ðt þ 1Þ

8
>
> Xbest ðtÞ þ r and :ðXbest ðtÞ  Xi ðtÞÞ
t >
<
l ¼ e 3 þ ð1  a Þ: ,
tmax ¼ þ TF:p2 : ðXbest ðtÞ  Xi ðtÞÞ , if r and < 0:5,
>
>
In this equation, a1 and a2 are weight coefficients that >
:
TF:p2 :Xi ðtÞ , if r and < 0:5,
determine the degree to which individuals move toward the
(45)
optimal individual and the previous individual, respectively.
The constant b controls how far the tuna can follow the opti-
mal and previous individuals during the initial phase. t
denotes the current iteration, while tmax represents the max- t
t tmax
imum number of iterations. Finally, a is a random number p¼ 1 ,
tmax
that follows a uniform distribution over the interval [0, 1].

5.1.3. Parabolic Foraging. During the parabolic foraging where TF is a random no. equals 1 or 1.
strategy of the TSO algorithm, the tuna individuals swim Figure 8 shows the flowchart of TSO.
10 Electric Power Components and Systems, Vol. 0 (2023), No. 0

FIGURE 10. The modified IEEE 30-bus system.

 Awad et al.: An Enhanced Tuna Swarm Algorithm for Optimizing FACTS and Wind Turbine Allocation in Power Systems 11

Parameters Settings Parameters Settings Parameters Settimgs

VBus1 (p.u.) 1.0615 PG13 (MW) 12.0021 QSVC2 (MVAr) 4.5132

VBus2 (p.u.) 1.0452 TTC11 (p.u.) 0.9751 TCSC1Loc 35
VBus5 (p.u.) 1.0204 TTC12 (p.u.) 0.9048 TCSC2Loc 36
VBus8 (p.u.) 1.0217 TTC15 (p.u.) 0.9825 TCPS1Loc 17
VBus11 (p.u.) 1.0761 TTC36 (p.u.) 0.9371 TCPS2Loc 12
VBus13 (p.u.) 1.0695 TCSC1a (%) 47.93 SVC1Loc 21
PG2 (MW) 41.1434 TCSC2a (%) 42.22 SVC2Loc 17
PG5 (MW) 48.789 TCSC1u (deg.) 0.0934 GenCost ($/h) 807.2511
PG8 (MW) 10.0323 TCSC2u (deg.) 3.2023 PLoss (MW) 5.5997
PG11 (MW) 42.4702 QSVC1 (MVAr) 8.8888 Gross cost($/h) 1367.2
TABLE 1. ETSO optimized settings for optimization process 1.
The best values obtained are in bold.

iteration, while Maxit is the maximum iteration number. The

best position, denoted by E, is considered the fittest solution
and used to construct a matrix as shown below:
2 3
Xbt1:1    Xbt1:d
6 . . 7
E¼6 4 .. . . ... 7 5 (47)
Xbtn:1    Xbtn:d

Where, Xb denotes the best solution, which is copied n times

to create the E matrix. n denotes the number of search agents,
FIGURE 11. Convergence curve of optimization techni- whereas d denotes the number of dimensions.
ques for optimization process 1.
The second stage is the low-velocity ratio. This stage occurs
near the end of the optimization process, which is typically
5.2. ETSO Algorithm
associated with high exploitation capability. Levy is the best
An improvement has been made to the TSO algorithm,
approach for low-velocity ratios. The Levy flight is a random
which utilizes the "high and low-velocity ratios" concept
walk with a step size that follows a Levy distribution, which is
from the MPA [37] to avoid the risk of getting trapped in
used to balance the global exploration and local exploitation.
local optima. This enhancement involves two stages. The
first stage is referred to as the high-velocity ratio situation, 1
it > Maxit (48.1)
which can be represented as follows: 3
1
it < Maxit (46.1)  
3 ! !
S ¼ RL RL E  X i ðt Þ (48.2)
丣

 
! !
S ¼ RB E  RB Xi ðtÞ (46.2)
丣

Xi ðt þ 1Þ ¼ E þ P:CF S (48.3)
丣

!
Xi ðt þ 1Þ ¼ Xi ðtÞ þ P: RB S (46.3)
丣

The proposed ETSO algorithm incorporates the Levy

!
where RB is a vector of random integers with a Normal distri- method, which involves multiplying the previous position
bution that simulates Brownian motion. The notation by a Levy distribution and adding the step size to update
丣

denotes element-wise multiplication. The new position is
!
obtained by multiplying the previous position by RB , adding,
and then multiplying by a vector of random values uniformly
distributed in the range [0,1]. This condition is met during the
first third of iterations when the step size is large, indicating a
high degree of exploration. Here, it represents the current
the location. This method helps increase the chances of
escaping local optima. The flowchart of the ETSO algo-
rithm with this modification is shown in Figure 9, which
depicts the location of the high and low-velocity ratios
within the algorithm. This enhancement improves the
exploration capability of the ETSO algorithm.
12 Electric Power Components and Systems, Vol. 0 (2023), No. 0

Parameters Settings Parameters Settings Parameters Settimgs

VBus1 (p.u.) 1.0446 PG13 (MW) 39.7563 QSVC2 (MVAr) 6.7820

VBus2 (p.u.) 1.0385 TTC11 (p.u.) 1.0075 TCSC1Loc 40
VBus5 (p.u.) 1.0281 TTC12 (p.u.) 0.9680 TCSC2Loc 27
VBus8 (p.u.) 1.0334 TTC15 (p.u.) 1.0009 TCPS1Loc 26
VBus11 (p.u.) 1.0994 TTC36 (p.u.) 0.9514 TCPS2Loc 35
VBus13 (p.u.) 1.0661 TCSC1a (%) 30.83 SVC1Loc 24
PG2 (MW) 25.4672 TCSC2a (%) 25.44 SVC2Loc 19
PG5 (MW) 75.0 TCSC1u (deg.) 0.1147 GenCost ($/h) 929.027
PG8 (MW) 34.9932 TCSC2u (deg.) 3.7699 PLoss (MW) 1.8168
PG11 (MW) 60.0 QSVC1 (MVAr) 8.3359 Gross cost($/h) 1120.7
TABLE 2. ETSO optimized settings for optimization process 2.
The best values obtained are in bold.

Generation cost reduction

Power losses reduction.

Generation cost and power losses reduction, combined
as a multi-objective function.
The mentioned optimization processes were executed using
three different optimization techniques: TSO, GBO, and the
new proposed technique: ETSO. The population utilized in the
process is 100, and the iteration number is 200, where each
process was repeated for 20 times. The software executed such
processes is Matlab R2014a, and the utilized hardware is a lap-
FIGURE 12. Convergence curve of optimization techni-
top with Intel(R) core i3, 2.533 GHZ, 3 GB RAM.
ques for optimization process 2.

6. TEST AND RESULTS 6.1. Optimization Process 1: Generation Cost

The modified IEEE 30-bus system used in the study has
the typical schematic diagram of the traditional IEEE 30
bus system, and consists of 6 generators, 4 transformers,
30 load buses, and 41 transmission lines. However, the
thermal generators in buses 5 and 11 are replaced with
wind turbines, while the rest of the system’s thermal gener-
ators are kept without changes. Additionally, six FACTS
devices, including two TCSC, two TCPS, and two SVC,
were incorporated into the system, and their optimal sizes
and locations were investigated. The objective functions
were applied to this system, as described earlier. The sys-
tem’s schematic diagram is illustrated in Figure 10.
Therefore, this system has 27 parameters required to be
optimized, as following:

The voltages of generation buses: all the six
generators.

The active power generated by all generators exclud-
ing generator 1 due to the rule of bus1 as a slack bus.

The transformation ratio for each transformer.

The placement location for each FACTS device.

The settings of each FACTS device.
And the optimization processes applied to this system
include:
Reduction
In this process, the optimization took place, where the best
result was obtained by ETSO technique. Table 1 shows the
settings obtained by ETSO, and Figure 11 shows the con-
vergence curves for all optimization techniques.
It is obvious from Figure 11 the supremacy of ETSO with
respect to the other techniques. For TSO technique, it is
almost constant after the 100th iteration, while the other
techniques are slightly descending until the end of the itera-
tions, however, ETSO descending rate was faster than GBO.
6.2. Optimization Process 2: Power Losses Reduction
In the optimization process, the ETSO technique provided
the best result. Table 2 displays the settings obtained by
ETSO, while Figure 12 depicts the convergence curves for
all optimization techniques.
Figure 12 shows the supremacy of ETSO also with
respect to the other techniques. Although GBO technique
was leading the descending rate in the beginning, it almost
remained constant from the 60th iteration, while the other
techniques were keeping descending to the end of itera-
tions, and the superiority was for ETSO technique.
 Awad et al.: An Enhanced Tuna Swarm Algorithm for Optimizing FACTS and Wind Turbine Allocation in Power Systems 13

Parameters Settings Parameters Settings Parameters Settimgs

VBus1 (p.u.) 1.0573 PG13 (MW) 27.0602 QSVC2 (MVAr) 10.0

VBus2 (p.u.) 1.0523 TTC11 (p.u.) 1.0685 TCSC1Loc 40
VBus5 (p.u.) 1.0422 TTC12 (p.u.) 0.9052 TCSC2Loc 35
VBus8 (p.u.) 1.0458 TTC15 (p.u.) 1.0215 TCPS1Loc 8
VBus11 (p.u.) 1.0890 TTC36 (p.u.) 0.9807 TCPS2Loc 33
VBus13 (p.u.) 1.0764 TCSC1a (%) 14.94 SVC1Loc 20
PG2 (MW) 38.2209 TCSC2a (%) 33.81 SVC2Loc 24
PG5 (MW) 75.0 TCSC1u (deg.) 0.5388 GenCost ($/h) 918.7595
PG8 (MW) 35.0 TCSC2u (deg.) 2.7823 PLoss (MW) 1.8803
PG11 (MW) 59.9965 QSVC1 (MVAr) 6.2110 Gross cost($/h) 1106.8
TABLE 3. ETSO optimized settings for optimization process 3.
The best values obtained are in bold.

FIGURE 13. Convergence curve of optimization techniques for optimization process 3.

Optimization process 1 Optimization process 2 Optimization process 3

Optimization
techniques Gen. cost Power loss Gross cost Gen. cost Power loss Gross cost Gen. cost Power loss Gross cost

TSO 807.5923 5.7052 1378.1 938.4724 1.8971 1128.3 918.3528 1.9146 1109.8
GBO 807.3837 5.6059 1368.0 934.9506 1.8631 1120.4 914.5132 1.9467 1109.2
ETSO 807.2511 5.5997 1367.2 939.0272 1.8168 1120.7 918.7595 1.8802 1106.8
TABLE 4. Outcomes comparison for optimization techniques.
The best values obtained are in bold.

6.3. Optimization Process 3: Generation Cost and
Power Losses Reduction
During this process, an optimization was performed, and
the ETSO technique yielded the best result. The settings
obtained by the ETSO technique are presented in Table 3,
and the convergence curves for all optimization techniques
are depicted in Figure 13.
Again, ETSO proves its supremacy with respect to the
other techniques however it stayed constant almost from
100th iteration. TSO and GBO were keeping descending to
the end of iterations, however, the massive descending rate
of ETSO in the beginning overcame the other techniques.
Table 4 shows the best outcome for each technique in
the three optimization processes carried out. The table
14 Electric Power Components and Systems, Vol. 0 (2023), No. 0
shows that the outcomes of ETSO overcome the outcomes
of TSO and GBO with respect to the objective function
required by each optimization process.
7. CONCLUSIONS
This article has presented a novel optimization approach
for a modified IEEE 30-bus system that integrates wind
turbines and FACTS devices. The optimal placement and
size of six FACTS devices has been investigated, typically
two TCSC, two SVC, and two TCPS. The objective func-
tions aimed have been minimizing generation cost as a sin-
gle objective function, reducing power losses as a single
objective function, and minimizing both generation cost
and power losses as a multi objective function. The incorp-
oration of wind turbines imposed an additional stochastic
generation modeling sufficient for the nature of wind tur-
bines. Also, for calculating the gross cost according to the
requirements of the multi objective function optimization,
the power losses of the system were converted to add-
itional costs. An ETSO technique was proposed to improve
the performance of the original Tuna Swarm Optimization
by using “high and low-velocity ratios” based on the MPA
to avoid getting trapped in local minima. Although the
effectiveness of the other optimization techniques, the pro-
posed technique outperformed them in achieving the three
objective functions. In the first optimization process, the
best result yielded by ETSO was 806.2511 $/h, while the
best results yielded by TSO and GBO were 807.5923 $/h
and 807.3837 $/h respectively. On the other side, in the
second optimization process, the best result yielded by
ETSO was 1.8168 MW, while the best results yielded by
TSO and GBO were 1.8971 MW and 1.8631 MW respect-
ively. Finally, in the third optimization process, the best
result yielded by ETSO was 1106.8 $/h, while the best
results yielded by TSO and GBO were 1109.8 $/h and
1109.2 $/h respectively. Future work can explore the exten-
sion of the proposed technique to optimize more complex
systems using the same FACTS devices or incorporating
other devices like STATCOM and SSSC, and compare its
effectiveness with other recent techniques. Another
approach is to develop another hybridized optimization
technique with better characteristics and abilities for solv-
ing optimization problems.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors extend their appreciation to the Deputyship for
Research & Innovation, Ministry of Education in Saudi
Arabia, for funding this research work through the Project
Number (IF-PSAU-2021/01/18921).
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest
to report regarding the present study.
FUNDING
This research is funded by Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz
University, Grant Number IF-PSAU-2021/01/18921.
REFERENCES
[1] K. R. Padiyar, FACTS Controllers in Power Transmission
and Distribution. New Delhi: New Age International Ltd.,
2007
[2] A. S. Elansari, FACTS and HVDC Systems for Enhancing
Tie-Line Power Transfer Capability. Glasgow, UK:
University of Strathclyde, 2016
[3] S. Saremi, S. Mirjalili, and A. Lewis, “Grasshopper opti-
misation algorithm: theory and application,” Adv. Eng.
Softw., vol. 105, pp. 30–47, 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.adven-
gsoft.2017.01.004.
[4] S. Mirjalili, S. Mohammad Mirjalili, and A. Lewis, “Grey
wolf optimizer,” Adv. Eng. Softw., vol. 69, pp. 46–61, 2014.
10.1016/j.advengsoft.2013.12.007
[5] A. A. Heidari et al., “Harris Hawks optimization: algorithm
and applications,” Future Gener. Comput. Syst., vol. 97, pp.
849–872, 2019. 10.1016/j.future.2019.02.028
[6] M. Yazdani and F. Jolai, “Lion optimization algorithm
(LOA): a nature-inspired metaheuristic algorithm,” J.
Comput. Des. Eng., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 24–36, 2016. 10.
1016/j.jcde.2015.06.003
[7] M. Jain, V. Singh, and A. Rani, “A novel nature-inspired
algorithm for optimization: squirrel search algorithm,”
Swarm Evol. Comput., vol. 44, pp. 148–175, 2019. 10.
1016/j.swevo.2018.02.013
[8] Anita and A. Yadav, “AEFA: artificial electric field algo-
rithm for global optimization.” Swarm Evol. Comput. 48
(2019): 93–108. DOI: 10.1016/j.swevo.2019.03.013.
[9] S. H. A. Kaboli, J. Selvaraj, and N. A. Rahim, “Rain-fall
optimization algorithm: a population based algorithm for
solving constrained optimization problems,” J. Comput. Sci.,
vol. 19, pp. 31–42, 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.jocs.2016.12.010.
[10] A. F. Nematollahi, A. Rahiminejad, and B. Vahidi, “A novel
physical based meta-heuristic optimization method known as
lightning attachment procedure optimization,” Appl. Soft
Comput. vol. 59, pp. 596–621, 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.asoc.
2017.06.033.
[11] A. Tzanetos and G. Dounias, “A new metaheuristic method
for optimization: sonar inspired optimization,” Engineering
Applications of Neural Networks: 18th International
Conference, EANN 2017, Athens, Greece, August 25–27,
 Awad et al.: An Enhanced Tuna Swarm Algorithm for Optimizing FACTS and Wind Turbine Allocation in Power Systems
2017, Proceedings. Cham, Switzerland: Springer
International Publishing,
[12] A. Kaveh and A. Dadras, “A novel meta-heuristic optimiza-
tion algorithm: thermal exchange optimization,” Adv. Eng.
Softw., vol. 110, pp. 69–84, 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.adven-
gsoft.2017.03.014.
[13] M. A. Taher, “Load shedding reduction and loadability
enhancement of power system using shunt FACTS devices,”
J. Electr. Syst., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 121–140, 2021.
[14] M. Nadeem et al., “Optimal placement, sizing and coordin-
ation of FACTS devices in transmission network using
whale optimization algorithm,” Energies, vol. 13, no. 3, pp.
753, 2020. DOI: 10.3390/en13030753.
[15] J. Mahadevan, R. Rengaraj, and A. Bhuvanesh, “Application
of multi-objective hybrid artificial bee colony with differen-
tial evolution algorithm for optimal placement of micropro-
cessor based FACTS controllers,” Microprocess. Microsyst.,
pp. 104239, 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.micpro.2021.104239.
[16] M. H. Sulaiman and Z. Mustaffa, “Optimal placement and
sizing of FACTS devices for optimal power flow using
metaheuristic optimizers,” Results Control Optim, vol. 8, pp.
100145, 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.rico.2022.100145.
[17] M. Nadeem et al., “Optimal sizing and allocation of SVC
and TCSC in transmission network by combined sensitivity
index and PSO,” 2019 International Conference on Applied
and Engineering Mathematics (ICAEM). IEEE, 2019. DOI:
10.1109/ICAEM.2019.8853759.
[18] R. Verma and A. Rathore, “Optimal placement of facts device
considering voltage stability and losses using teaching learning
based optimization,” J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. B, vol. 102, no. 4,
pp. 771–776, 2021. DOI: 10.1007/s40031-021-00582-w.
[19] 
M. Calasan et al., “Optimal allocation of static var compen-
sators in electric power systems,” Energies, vol. 13, no. 12,
pp. 3219, 2020. DOI: 10.3390/en13123219.
[20] A. A. Shehata et al., “Optimal placement and sizing of
FACTS devices based on Autonomous Groups Particle
Swarm Optimization technique,” Arch. Electr. Eng., vol. 70,
no. 1, pp. 161–172, 2021.
[21] D. Gupta and S. K. Jain, “Available transfer capability enhance-
ment by FACTS devices using metaheuristic evolutionary par-
ticle swarm optimization (MEEPSO) technique,” Energies, vol.
14, no. 4, pp. 869, 2021. DOI: 10.3390/en14040869.
[22] M. B. Shafik et al., “Adaptive multi objective parallel seeker
optimization algorithm for incorporating TCSC devices into
optimal power flow framework,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp.
36934–36947, 2019. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2905266.
[23] M. M. Eladany, A. A. Eldesouky, and A. A. Sallam,
“Power system transient stability: an algorithm for assess-
ment and enhancement based on catastrophe theory and
FACTS devices,” IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 26424–26437,
2018. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2834906.
[24] A. N. Khan et al., “Ensuring reliable operation of electricity
grid by placement of FACTS devices for developing
countries,” Energies, vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 2283, 2021. DOI:
10.3390/en14082283.
[25] N. H. Khan et al., “A novel modified lightning attachment pro-
cedure optimization technique for optimal allocation of the
15
FACTS devices in power systems,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp.
47976–47997, 2021. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3059201.
[26] D. T. Long et al., “Optimal location of FACTS devices for
congestion management and loadability enhancement,” J.
Electr. Syst., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 579–594, 2017.
[27] M. El-Azab et al., “Allocation of FACTS devices using a
probabilistic multi-objective approach incorporating various
sources of uncertainty and dynamic line rating,” IEEE
Access, vol. 8, pp. 167647–167664, 2020. DOI: 10.1109/
ACCESS.2020.3023744.
[28] L. Xie et al., “Tuna swarm optimization: a novel swarm-
based metaheuristic algorithm for global optimization,”
Comput. Intell. Neurosci., vol. 2021, pp. 9210050, 2021.
DOI: 10.1155/2021/9210050.
[29] I. Ahmadianfar, O. Bozorg-Haddad, and X. Chu, “Gradient-
based optimizer: a new metaheuristic optimization algo-
rithm,” Inf. Sci., vol. 540, pp. 131–159, 2020. DOI: 10.
1016/j.ins.2020.06.037.
[30] N. G. Hingorani, L. Gyugyi, and M. El-Hawary,
Understanding FACTS: Concepts and Technology of
Flexible AC Transmission Systems, Vol. 2. Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley Online Library, 2000.
[31] B. Singh et al., “Introduction of FACTS controllers, a crit-
ical review,” Int. J. Rev. Comput., vol. 8, pp. 1–18, 2011.
[32] S. Dutta, P. K. Roy, and D. Nandi, Optimal location of TCSC
and TCPS using hybrid DE/CRO algorithm. Michael Faraday
IET Int. Summit, -13 September 2015, Kolkata, India, 2015, pp.
29–35.
[33] R. Benabid, M. Boudour, and M. A. Abido, “Optimal loca-
tion and setting of SVC and TCSC devices using non-domi-
nated sorting particle swarm optimization,” Electric Power
Syst. Res., vol. 79, no. 12, pp. 1668–1677, 2009. DOI: 10.
1016/j.epsr.2009.07.004.
[34] W. Ongsakul and P. Bhasaputra, “Optimal power flow with
FACTS devices by hybrid TS/SA approach,” Int. J. Elect.
Power Energy Syst., vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 851–857, 2002.
DOI: 10.1016/S0142-0615(02)00006-6.
[35] M. Basu, “Optimal power flow with FACTS devices using dif-
ferential evolution,” Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst., vol. 30,
no. 2, pp. 150–156, 2008. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijepes.2007.06.011.
[36] P. P. Biswas, P. Arora, R. Mallipeddi, P. N. Suganthan, and
B. K. Panigrahi, “Optimal placement and sizing of FACTS
devices for optimal power flow in a wind power integrated
electrical network,” Neural Comput. Applic., vol. 33, no. 12,
pp. 6753–6774, 2021. DOI: 10.1007/s00521-020-05453-x.
[37] A. Faramarzi, M. Heidarinejad, S. Mirjalili, and A. H.
Gandomi, “Marine predators algorithm: a nature-inspired
metaheuristic,” Expert Syst. Applic., vol. 152, pp. 113377,
2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113377.
BIOGRAPHIES
Ayman Awad received the Ph.D. degree from the
Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of
Engineering, Aswan University, in 2023. His research
interests include optimization algorithms, and renewable
energy resources.
16 Electric Power Components and Systems, Vol. 0 (2023), No. 0
Salah Kamel received the international Ph.D. degree from
the University of Jaen, Spain (Main), and Aalborg
University, Denmark (Host), in 2014. His research interests
include power system analysis and optimization, smart
grids, and renewable energy systems.
Mohamed H. Hassan received the jointly-supervised
Ph.D. degree from the Department of Electrical
Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Aswan University,
and the University of Jaen, Spain, in 2022. His research
interests include optimization techniques, power system
analysis, renewable energy, and smart grids.
View publication stats
Mohamed F. Elnaggar received the B.Sc., M.Sc., and
Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from Helwan
University, Egypt, in 1995, 2002, and 2009, respectively.
He was with the Department of Electrical Power and
Machines Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Helwan
University, from 1995 to 2013. Since 2013, he has been an
Assistant Professor with the Department of Electrical
Engineering, College of Engineering, Prince Sattam bin
Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia. His main research
interests include power system protection and switchgears,
power transformers operation, testing, renewable energy,
smart grids, and artificial intelligence.